Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Public comment period · §3

Draft monograph: orforglipron — disposition

The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.

Document identifier
CEI-CP-030/3
Series
Public comment period
Version
1.0
Published
06 Jul 2026
Last reviewed
06 Jul 2026
Next review
06 Jul 2027
Identifier
10.71829/cei.cp.30
Certainty
Not rated
Cycle
2026 Q2
Window
13 Apr 2026 – 12 Jun 2026
Status
Closed
Submissions
10

§3Disposition and amendments

§3.1Disposition table

Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.

ReferenceRespondentPoint raisedDisposition
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/003Dr Abimbola Sotomayor-EkwuemeTrials are described as terminated where they completed as plannedAccepted in part
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/004Dr Ulysses Bellingham-OjoEvidence for one member of the class is presented as evidence for this compoundAccepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/005Dr Melisande Kirkpatrick-OlaDeclared interests should appear on the document rather than on a separate pageNoted, no amendment
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/006Dr Thaddeus Isaksen-BalogunThe analytical section assumes a reference standard that is not generally availableAccepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/007Professor Chukwuemeka Rasmussen-AdeyemiThe monograph does not tell a reader that a stated mass may be substantially counter-ion and waterAccepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/008Dr Jerome LavrentievThe document set should be published in translationNot accepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/002Dr Wolfram Tollemache industryThe document should not describe uses outside the approved indicationNot accepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/009Brigitta Grünbaum-SowandeThe pharmacokinetic section does not connect half-life to the dosing scheduleAccepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/010Dr Quentin ZimmerthalThe population to which the headline estimate applies is not stated with the estimateAccepted
DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/001Dr Wojciech Kaltenbach-MensahMechanistic claims for a peptide fragment are carried without evidence that the fragment acts as describedAccepted
10 submissions in total.

§3.2Summary by disposition

Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.

DispositionCountMeaning
Accepted6The submission is accepted and the draft is amended as proposed. The amendment is recorded in the amendment log of the document it changed and is traceable to the numbered submission.
Accepted in part1Part of the submission is accepted and part is not. The secretariat response states which part is which and on what ground the remainder was declined.
Noted, no amendment1The submission raises a point the Institute accepts but that does not require a change to the draft, most often because the draft already states it elsewhere. The location is given in the response.
Not accepted2The submission is not accepted. The secretariat response gives the reason. A submission that is not accepted remains published in full; the Institute does not remove a submission because it disagrees with it.

§3.3Resulting amendments

  1. Trials are described as terminated where they completed as planned — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/003. Trial status now uses a fixed vocabulary defined in the glossary, and where the reason for stopping is not evidenced by a document the Institute holds, the status is recorded as stopped with the reason not established rather than assigned.
  2. Evidence for one member of the class is presented as evidence for this compound — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/004. Class-level inferences are now labelled at the point of use, are excluded from the certainty rating for the compound, and are reported in a separate subsection stating which compound the underlying evidence concerns.
  3. The analytical section assumes a reference standard that is not generally available — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/006. The analytical section now states whether a reference standard is in general circulation for this compound and, where it is not, states which determinations remain possible and which become qualitative. A content figure obtained without a reference standard…
  4. The monograph does not tell a reader that a stated mass may be substantially counter-ion and water — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/007. The monograph now states, at the point where vial contents are first mentioned, that a mass figure is uninterpretable unless it states whether it is peptide content or total solids, and cross-references the content standard in the analytical series.
  5. The pharmacokinetic section does not connect half-life to the dosing schedule — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/009. The pharmacokinetic section now states approximate time to steady state alongside the half-life and dosing interval, with the assumption of first-order elimination stated, and records where the assumption is not supported for this compound.
  6. The population to which the headline estimate applies is not stated with the estimate — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/010. Every headline estimate now carries a one-line statement of the population in which it was observed, and the full eligibility criteria are reported in the included-studies table rather than only in the source.
  7. Mechanistic claims for a peptide fragment are carried without evidence that the fragment acts as… — arising from DRAFT-ORFORGLIPRON/001. Mechanistic claims not traceable to a primary source are removed, and those retained carry their source and a statement of whether the underlying work was conducted in vitro, in animals or in humans.

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

  1. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.

Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.