Enicepatide
vs Retatrutide.
Compare enicepatide and retatrutide by dual versus triple receptor design, Phase 2 and Phase 3 results, trial duration, safety context, and approval status.
What is the difference?
Enicepatide and retatrutide are different investigational once-weekly obesity drugs, and no head-to-head trial has compared them. Enicepatide, formerly CT-388, activates GLP-1 and GIP receptors. Retatrutide activates those receptors plus the glucagon receptor. Enicepatide has sponsor-reported 48-week Phase 2 results and two recruiting Phase 3 ENITH trials. Retatrutide has Phase 3 TRIUMPH results from separate populations and longer study periods. Their headline percentages use different placebo adjustments, estimands, durations, doses, and trial designs, so they cannot establish a winner. Neither drug is FDA approved or a legitimate retail product.
See the useful differences first.
Start with identity, current US status, trial coverage, and the evidence relationship. Then carry the exact pair into a country-aware workspace without losing either record.
Enicepatide
Investigational - not FDA approved
- Route
- Once-weekly subcutaneous injection
- Registry
- 8 matched NCT records
- Sponsor
- Roche / Carmot Therapeutics
Retatrutide
Investigational - not FDA approved
- Route
- Once-weekly subcutaneous injection
- Registry
- 34 matched NCT records
- Sponsor
- Eli Lilly and Company
Enicepatide vs Retatrutide: how direct is the evidence?
No participant in the cited sources was randomized between Enicepatide and Retatrutide. Identity, mechanism, route, trial design, and regulatory status can be compared. Subtracting percentages from separate studies would create a treatment effect the evidence did not test.
Enicepatide
Signal-biased GLP-1 + GIP receptor dual agonist
- Route
- Once-weekly subcutaneous injection
- Stage
- Phase 3 ENITH program recruiting
- Status
- Investigational - not FDA approved
Two evidence records, no shared randomization.
Treat percentages as separate source records. Do not subtract them, divide them into weekly rates, or use the larger value to name a winner.
No randomized head-to-head trialRetatrutide
GIP + GLP-1 + glucagon receptor agonist
- Route
- Once-weekly subcutaneous injection
- Stage
- Phase 3 program reporting results
- Status
- Investigational - not FDA approved
The current exact-intervention dataset contains 268 unique NCT records across 13 tracked investigational programs. Counts describe registry coverage, not comparative evidence strength.
matched NCT records
- Recruiting
- 4
- Results posted
- 0
- Recruiting site observations
- 339
matched NCT records
- Recruiting
- 2
- Results posted
- 2
- Recruiting site observations
- 450
Compare the named molecules, active components, sponsors, and receptor strategies.
Compare the studied route, frequency, development phase, and exact program record.
Compare exact approvals, applications, and investigational status in the jurisdiction being checked.
Treat percentages as separate source records. Do not subtract them, divide them into weekly rates, or use the larger value to name a winner.
Use only adverse-event evidence reported for the cited protocol. Separate studies cannot establish which program is safer.
No group result, receptor count, route, approval milestone, or chart position predicts the best choice for one person.
Check both programs in the same market.
Approval, trial activity, product registration, pharmacy rules, and seller authority are country specific. Open both records before treating a status from one market as valid in another.
Enicepatide
Signal-biased GLP-1 + GIP receptor dual agonist
- Route
- Once-weekly subcutaneous injection
- Stage
- Phase 3 ENITH program recruiting
- Status
- Investigational - not FDA approved
- Featured trial anchors
- NCT06525935 · NCT07351045 · NCT07351058 · NCT04838405
Retatrutide
GIP + GLP-1 + glucagon receptor agonist
- Route
- Once-weekly subcutaneous injection
- Stage
- Phase 3 program reporting results
- Status
- Investigational - not FDA approved
- Featured trial anchors
- NCT05929066 · NCT05931367 · NCT05882045
Compare the field, then read the limit.
The comparison matters because both use GLP-1 and GIP biology while retatrutide adds glucagon activity. Quick summaries often turn that extra receptor into a potency claim or place enicepatide's placebo-adjusted Phase 2 percentage beside retatrutide's unadjusted Phase 3 mean change. A responsible comparison must keep the result definition, trial phase, duration, population, placebo response, and regulatory milestone attached to each program.
| Field | Enicepatide | Retatrutide | How to interpret it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Receptor design | GLP-1 and GIP receptor dual agonist | GIP, GLP-1, and glucagon receptor triple agonist | The glucagon receptor distinguishes retatrutide, but receptor count cannot establish clinical superiority or individual response. |
| Current evidence anchor | Completed 48-week Phase 2 CT388-103 study | Phase 3 TRIUMPH obesity studies reporting results | Different development phases and trial designs answer different questions and should not be flattened into one ranking. |
| Treatment-regimen result | 18.3% placebo-adjusted at week 48 for the highest tested dose | 25.0% mean change at week 80 for 12 mg in TRIUMPH-1 | The estimand label is similar, but placebo adjustment and separate randomization prevent a direct subtraction or winner claim. |
| Phase 3 status | ENITH-1 and ENITH-2 recruiting, with outcomes not yet available | TRIUMPH program active and reporting Phase 3 outcomes | Recruiting status and reported results are different milestones, and neither one is marketing approval. |
| Current access status | Investigational and not FDA approved | Investigational and not FDA approved | Neither name identifies an approved pharmacy product, prescribing instruction, retail price, or verified online supply route. |
Why the headline numbers do not name a winner.
Roche reported 22.5% placebo-adjusted weight loss at week 48 for the highest enicepatide dose under the efficacy estimand and 18.3% under the treatment-regimen estimand. Lilly reported 28.3% mean weight loss at week 80 for the 12 mg retatrutide group under an efficacy estimand and 25.0% under the treatment-regimen estimand in TRIUMPH-1. These are not matching numerical measures: one set is placebo-adjusted and the other is the treatment-group change in a different randomized trial. No direct comparative effect can be calculated from them.
Keep the comparison honest.
- 01
Separate placebo-adjusted effects from treatment-group mean change before comparing any headline percentage.
- 02
Keep Phase 2 enicepatide evidence and Phase 3 retatrutide evidence attached to their exact trial, duration, dose, population, and estimand.
- 03
Do not infer that an online vial is sponsor clinical material or that a recruiting Phase 3 program creates an approved treatment route.
A country-specific approval, clinical trial, or matching name does not authenticate an online product or establish access elsewhere. This page contains no treatment recommendation, buying route, personal-use protocol, or affiliate link.
Open the safety and status guide →