Stopping weight-loss injections: avoiding the yo-yo effect
After stopping the prescription-only GLP-1 medications semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy) or tirzepatide (Mounjaro), appetite often returns, and much of the weight can be regained without supporting measures. This is physiology, not weak willpower. What the RCT data show, why your body defends a weight, and which foundations can cushion the yo-yo effect.
Many people experience for the first time with a weight-loss injection what it feels like to have quiet in their head, when the constant hunger fades. And then comes the fear behind the question: what happens when I stop? The honest answer from the studies is: without a plan, much of the weight often returns. But with the yo-yo effect it is not the medication that is the problem, it is the lack of a strategy. The body defends its former weight through hunger, satiety and energy expenditure. Those who understand this stop being ashamed of the yo-yo effect and start building the foundations: muscle, satiety from real food, sleep, medical guidance. That is exactly what this text is about.
This spoke walks through what happens physiologically when stopping GLP-1 medications such as semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro). We look at the data from the large studies, understand why hunger returns and why the body defends a weight, and set out which foundations can cushion the regain. How the injection actually acts is covered by its own spoke, as are the side effects and muscle loss. One note upfront, because it often gets lost: Wegovy (active substance semaglutide) and Mounjaro (active substance tirzepatide) are approved in Germany for weight management. Ozempic contains the same active substance as Wegovy, but it is approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Using it for weight loss is off-label use, that is, use outside the approval. That means an extended duty to inform, as a rule no reimbursement, and it can take the medication away from people with diabetes. All three are prescription-only. This text explains connections, it is not a sourcing and not a dosing guide and does not replace medical advice.
The moment the quiet ends
Imagine you have gone months, for the first time in years, without persistent hunger. Eating was no longer a fight. Then treatment ends, for whatever reason, and week by week the appetite returns. Many people describe exactly this, and many then blame themselves. They think they simply did not stick with it.
This self-blame is understandable, but it aims at the wrong place. The returning hunger is not a character flaw. It is a biological response. The active substance boosted an endogenous satiety. When it is gone, so is that boost. And beneath that lies a second layer: after any weight loss, the hormones that control hunger and satiety shift.
The yo-yo effect after stopping is not proof that you failed. It is proof that your body works, just in a direction you do not want right now. It defends a weight it has stored as normal. The task is not to summon more discipline, but to guide this defense wisely.
What the studies really show about stopping
Documented by randomized withdrawal trials, that is the important preface here. The question of what happens after stopping is well studied, and the results are remarkably consistent. One limit of the data belongs right here: STEP 1, STEP 4 and SURMOUNT-4 excluded people with diabetes. So the figures apply to people with overweight or obesity without diabetes. If you receive the substance as a diabetes therapy, the situation is a different one. Then blood sugar can also rise again after stopping, and the remaining medication has to be adjusted and monitored. That is one more reason not to decide about stopping on your own. Let us start with semaglutide, the active substance behind Ozempic and Wegovy.
One year after stopping semaglutide
Exploratory extension, n=327 John Wilding and colleagues followed a subset of the STEP 1 trial in Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism (2022) for a year beyond the end of treatment. After 68 weeks the semaglutide participants had lost an average of 17.3 percent of body weight. When medication and accompanying lifestyle program ended together, they regained about two thirds by week 120, on average 11.6 percentage points, leaving a net loss of 5.6 percent. The improved cardiometabolic values also moved back toward baseline. The authors concluded: obesity is chronic, and ongoing treatment is usually needed to maintain the improvements. One classification belongs with this: the extension observed a subgroup drawn from part of the study sites, and the authors expressly describe all analyses of the extension as exploratory. It therefore delivers a clear signal, not a formal proof. The actual burden of proof is carried by the randomized withdrawal designs STEP 4 and SURMOUNT-4.
Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Davies M, et al. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2022;24(8):1553-1564. doi:10.1111/dom.14725 · PMID: 35441470
The STEP 1 extension has a limitation: here medication and lifestyle program ended at the same time. A cleaner separation comes from a so-called withdrawal design, in which everyone is treated first and then, by chance, either continues treatment or switches to placebo. That is STEP 4.
Continue or stop: the direct comparison
RCT, n=803 Domenica Rubino and colleagues randomized participants in JAMA (2021) after a 20-week semaglutide run-in. One group continued semaglutide, the other switched to placebo, both with lifestyle support. From week 20 to 68 the semaglutide group lost a further 7.9 percent of body weight. The placebo group gained 6.9 percent. The difference was 14.8 percentage points. The groups differed only in whether treatment was continued or ended, both continued to receive lifestyle support. That makes the study a strong indication that stopping can reverse the direction. Two limitations belong with this: only the 803 of 902 people (89.0 percent) who tolerated and reached the maintenance dose were randomized, so the group studied is preselected for good tolerability. And the same paper reports gastrointestinal events in 49.1 percent under semaglutide versus 26.1 percent under placebo.
Rubino D, Abrahamsson N, Davies M, et al. JAMA. 2021;325(14):1414-1425. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.3224 · PMID: 33755728
And tirzepatide, the active substance behind Mounjaro? The same pattern, in the corresponding study even more pronounced.
Stopping tirzepatide: 14 percent regained
RCT, n=670 Louis Aronne and colleagues reported on SURMOUNT-4 in JAMA (2024). After 36 weeks of open tirzepatide treatment with an average weight loss of 20.9 percent, participants were randomized. From week 36 to 88 the tirzepatide group lost a further 5.5 percent, while those who switched to placebo regained 14.0 percent. The difference was 19.4 percentage points. 89.5 percent of those who continued maintained at least 80 percent of their loss, compared with only 16.6 percent under placebo. So with tirzepatide too, stopping can lead to a substantial regain. Two points from the same paper belong with this: people with diabetes were excluded, and it names mostly mild to moderate gastrointestinal events as the most common adverse events.
Aronne LJ, Sattar N, Horn DB, et al. JAMA. 2024;331(1):38-48. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.24945 · PMID: 38078870
And now you know why the field increasingly classifies obesity as a chronic condition. Not to frighten you, but to shift the focus: away from the question "how many more times do I have to pull this off?", toward "how do I build a sustainable foundation?".
Why your body defends a weight
To understand the yo-yo effect, it helps to look briefly under the hood. Why does the body defend a higher weight at all? And why does willpower so often fall short against it?
Documented by human data is the first building block: the hormones. Priya Sumithran and colleagues showed in the New England Journal of Medicine (2011) that after a diet the appetite-regulating hormones remain shifted. Ghrelin, the hunger hormone, was elevated. Leptin and PYY, which signal satiety, were reduced. And subjective hunger was measurably increased. The key point: this shift was still there a year later. So the body does not just sound the alarm briefly and then settle. It holds the alarm.
Hunger after weight loss stays biologically anchored
Clinical study, n=50 Sumithran and colleagues guided 50 overweight people through a 10-week program with strong calorie reduction and measured the appetite-regulating hormones before, right after, and one year after the weight loss. A year later ghrelin was still elevated and leptin, PYY and other satiety signals still reduced, accompanied by persistently increased hunger. Their conclusion: the hormonal changes that push toward regain do not return to baseline on their own after diet-induced loss.
Sumithran P, Prendergast LA, Delbridge E, et al. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(17):1597-1604. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1105816 · PMID: 22029981
The second building block is energy expenditure. After major weight loss, resting energy expenditure can fall more than the new, lower weight alone would explain. This effect is called metabolic adaptation. A frequently cited follow-up of participants from a well-known TV weight-loss show made this strikingly visible.
Resting metabolism can stay permanently lower
Follow-up study, n=14 Erin Fothergill and colleagues measured resting energy expenditure and body composition in Obesity (2016) in participants six years after an intensive weight-loss competition. On average they had regained 41 kg of the lost weight. Nonetheless their resting energy expenditure was about 704 kcal per day below baseline, and metabolic adaptation was around minus 499 kcal per day. So the body used considerably less energy than would have been expected from body composition and age. These data come from an extreme weight-loss situation and cannot be transferred one to one, but they show how stubborn the counter-regulation can be. Important for the classification: the weight regained was not statistically correlated with the extent of metabolic adaptation (r = minus 0.1, P = 0.75). So the paper documents that the adaptation can persist for a long time, not that it drives the regain.
Fothergill E, Guo J, Howard L, et al. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016;24(8):1612-1619. doi:10.1002/oby.21538 · PMID: 27136388
Mechanistically plausible and summarized in a recent review is the third building block: the concept of a set point. Jonathan Purnell and Carel Le Roux described in the Journal of Internal Medicine (2025) how the body regulates its fat mass around a certain set point, much like a thermostat holds a temperature. In obesity this set point could be higher, among other things through leptin resistance. Effective therapies could lower the set point. When the therapy ends, the old regulation patterns could return, and the body could steer back toward its higher target. The authors themselves stress that this is a theoretical framework whose evidence base still has to be built.
Nervous system
Satiety signals from the gut reach the brain. GLP-1 medications amplify this pathway. When the active substance is gone, the system signals more hunger again, because the amplification is missing.
Hormonal system
Ghrelin up, leptin and PYY down: after weight loss this appetite-promoting constellation persists for a long time (Sumithran 2011). Hormonally, the body pushes back toward the old weight.
Metabolism
Resting energy expenditure can fall more than the new weight alone would explain (metabolic adaptation). Less muscle can lower it further. Whether that really drives the regain is open: in Fothergill, the weight regained was not statistically correlated with the extent of this adaptation.
Set-point regulation
The body could defend a fat mass like a thermostat (Purnell and Le Roux 2025). Therapy could lower the set point, and stopping could let the old patterns return. The authors expressly call this a theoretical framework.
"Once I have lost weight, my body should just hold the new weight." That does not match what physiology shows. The body tends to treat weight loss more like a deficit to be corrected than like a target state that has been reached. That is why holding requires active foundations, it does not happen by itself.
Muscle, the often overlooked factor
One point often gets too little attention with weight-loss injections: part of the weight loss affects not only fat but also fat-free mass, which includes muscle. This is directly relevant to the yo-yo effect, because muscle is metabolically active. Less muscle tends to mean lower energy expenditure, and that can favor a regain after stopping.
Over a quarter of the loss is fat-free mass
Review Konstantinos Stefanakis, Christos Mantzoros and colleagues summarized in Metabolism (2024) that under obesity therapy, similar to after bariatric surgery, typically over 25 percent of the weight loss comes from fat-free mass, including skeletal muscle. They emphasize that the loss of muscle can lower resting energy expenditure and, over the long term, increase susceptibility to sarcopenic obesity. Preserving muscle, for example through adequate protein and resistance training, is therefore an important building block, especially in older people.
Stefanakis K, Kokkorakis M, Mantzoros CS. Metabolism. 2024;161:156057. doi:10.1016/j.metabol.2024.156057 · PMID: 39481534
And now you know why "just eat less" so often backfires after stopping. Those who built or preserved no muscle during treatment start with a lower expenditure into a phase in which the appetite is just returning. The details on muscle loss are covered by its own spoke.
Not the medication, the missing strategy
At this point a clarification matters to me, because the topic often splits into two camps. Some celebrate the weight-loss injection as a miracle cure, others condemn it as unnatural. Both fall short.
The efficacy is clearly documented. In STEP 1 (Wilding 2021, New England Journal of Medicine) semaglutide led to an average weight loss of 14.9 percent versus 2.4 percent under placebo. In SURMOUNT-1 (Jastreboff 2022, also NEJM) tirzepatide reached up to 20.9 percent depending on the dose. These medications can be effective for weight, and their mechanism acts on an endogenous satiety signal, GLP-1, which your gut releases anyway. That does not make them harmless.
The same studies also report the other side, and it belongs here just as much. In STEP 4, gastrointestinal events occurred in 49.1 percent of those treated versus 26.1 percent under placebo; in STEP 1, nausea and diarrhea were the most common adverse effects, and 4.5 percent discontinued treatment because of them. Gallstones, inflammation of the pancreas and delayed gastric emptying are described less often, and the last of these can matter before operations and anesthesia. These medications must not be used, among other situations, with certain thyroid tumors in personal or family history, with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2, and in pregnancy and while breastfeeding. I deliberately say nothing here about dosing. Which risks count for you is set out in the prescribing information for your product and belongs in a medical conversation, not in a blog.
The yo-yo effect is not an argument against the weight-loss injection. It is an argument against stopping without a plan. The medication can open a door by lowering the constant hunger and thereby creating space to build new habits. Whether that space is used co-determines what remains after stopping. The injection does not replace the foundations, it can enable them.
From my perspective as a physician with a focus on integrative medicine, the interesting question is therefore not "injection yes or no", but "for whom, in what framework, with what support". An effective tool, embedded in nutrition, muscle building, sleep and root-cause work, is something different from an injection without context. Conventional medicine provides the tool and the evidence, which is important and good. What an integrative view can add is the work on the foundations that are meant to carry the success.
What can cushion the yo-yo effect
Let us turn to action. First an honest note: whether structured support programs meaningfully reduce the regain after stopping has not yet been proven in large randomized trials. Current reviews describe it more as a sensible, physiologically grounded direction. So I give you directions here, not recipes. The concrete implementation belongs in an individual, medically guided consultation.
From pharmacological to carried satiety
Narrative review Lidia Lasik and Natalia Ukleja-Sokołowska described in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences (2026) mechanisms of regain after stopping GLP-1 and GLP-1/GIP medications and possible stabilization strategies. As drivers they name adaptive thermogenesis, the shift of the hunger-satiety axis (ghrelin up, leptin down) and the loss of fat-free mass. As clinical priorities they name preserving muscle mass (adequate protein, resistance training), a high nutrient density of the diet, a stable blood-sugar response after meals, and enough fermentable fiber. Their guiding idea: the transition from a pharmacologically produced satiety to a satiety carried by nutritional quality and preserved muscle mass. The authors themselves emphasize that this is a concept still to be confirmed in prospective studies.
Lasik L, Ukleja-Sokołowska N. Int J Mol Sci. 2026;27(11):4658. doi:10.3390/ijms27114658 · PMID: 42278190
Build foundations early, not only when stopping
The time under treatment, when hunger is quieter, can be used to build muscle, practice a satiating diet and stabilize sleep. Those who look for these foundations only when stopping start late. Adequate protein contributes to maintaining muscle mass, resistance training can support this effect and thereby also help sustain energy expenditure.
Rely on satiety from real food
Protein, fiber and unprocessed foods can satiate for longer and can influence the blood-sugar course after a meal more favorably. This is exactly the direction the review by Lasik and Ukleja-Sokołowska describes, expressly as a concept that still has to be confirmed in prospective studies. This is the satiety that can remain when the pharmacological satiety falls away. It is about the quality and hormonal effect of food, not only about less quantity.
Have the stopping guided medically
Whether, when and how stopping makes sense belongs in the consultation. A guided transition with a plan for muscle, nutrition and, where appropriate, a long-term perspective is something different from an abrupt end. These medications are prescription-only.
One reason for stopping comes up particularly often in the consultation: the wish to have a child. These medications should not be used in pregnancy and while breastfeeding, and a lead time before a planned pregnancy is provided for when stopping. For tirzepatide it is also described that the effectiveness of the pill can be impaired, so additional contraception may be needed. If you are pregnant, breastfeeding or planning a pregnancy, please raise this early in your practice before you change anything yourself. The precise requirements are set out in the prescribing information for your product.
It is not about a number on the scale
It is about building a body that can carry satiety itself again. The injection can be a tool on this path. The path itself runs through muscle, real food, sleep and calm in the nervous system. That is work, but it is the kind of work that lasts.
Semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro) are prescription-only medications. They belong in medical care, as does the decision about stopping. Do not stop these medications on your own or abruptly without discussing it with your physician. They are not free of risk: gastrointestinal complaints such as nausea and diarrhea are in the foreground, while gallstones, inflammation of the pancreas and delayed gastric emptying are described less often, the last of which can matter before operations and anesthesia. Contraindications exist, among others, with certain thyroid tumors in personal or family history, with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2, and in pregnancy and while breastfeeding. Separate requirements apply for children and adolescents, in kidney and liver disease, and in older people with muscle loss. If you have sudden, severe abdominal pain during or after therapy, please seek medical help immediately, in an emergency via 112. If you receive the substance as a diabetes therapy, blood sugar can also rise again after stopping, and the remaining medication has to be adjusted and monitored. This text serves to inform about connections and does not replace a medical examination, diagnosis or advice. It is not a sourcing and not a dosing guide. The complete information on risks and contraindications is set out in the prescribing information for your product. For questions about your therapy, side effects or a planned stopping, please turn to your treating practice.
Common questions about stopping the weight-loss injection
Will I automatically regain weight after stopping the weight-loss injection?
Not automatically, but without supporting measures a significant regain is likely. In the STEP 1 extension (Wilding 2022), participants regained about two thirds of their lost weight one year after stopping semaglutide, on average 11.6 of 17.3 percentage points. In this extension both the medication and the accompanying lifestyle program ended at the same time. The reason lies in physiology: appetite returns, and the body defends its former weight. This is not weak willpower. Whether medical guidance measurably cushions the regain has not been examined in large randomized trials so far. The direction is physiologically grounded: muscle, satiety from real food and sleep are the factors that could still carry once the pharmacological satiety falls away. A guided transition with a plan is therefore more plausible than an abrupt end, but nothing can be promised with it.
Why does hunger come back so strongly after stopping?
GLP-1 medications such as semaglutide or tirzepatide act through an endogenous satiety mechanism. When the active substance is removed, this boost to satiety also disappears. In addition, the appetite-regulating hormones are shifted after any weight loss. Sumithran 2011 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed that after diet-induced weight loss, ghrelin remains elevated and leptin as well as PYY remain reduced, even one year later, accompanied by measurably more subjective hunger. So the hunger is biologically driven, not just in your head.
What do the studies say about stopping Ozempic and Wegovy (semaglutide)?
Two key studies. The STEP 1 extension (Wilding 2022) followed 327 participants for a year beyond the end of treatment and found a regain of about two thirds of the loss. STEP 4 (Rubino 2021 in JAMA) used a clean withdrawal design: after 20 weeks of semaglutide, participants were randomized. Those who continued semaglutide lost a further 7.9 percent of body weight. Those who switched to placebo gained 6.9 percent. The difference of 14.8 percentage points shows that stopping can reverse the direction. Two limitations belong with this: in STEP 4 only the 89.0 percent who tolerated and reached the maintenance dose were randomized, and the STEP 1 extension was an exploratory follow-up of a subgroup, so a signal and not a formal proof.
Does this also apply to Mounjaro (tirzepatide)?
Yes, the pattern is the same, in SURMOUNT-4 (Aronne 2024 in JAMA) even more pronounced. After 36 weeks of tirzepatide with an average weight loss of 20.9 percent, participants were randomized. Those who switched to placebo regained 14.0 percent over the following 52 weeks. Those who continued treatment lost a further 5.5 percent. 89.5 percent of those who continued maintained at least 80 percent of their loss, compared with only 16.6 percent in the placebo group. So with tirzepatide too, unsupported stopping is a risk for the yo-yo effect. People with diabetes were excluded from this trial, and it names mostly mild to moderate gastrointestinal events as the most common adverse events.
Is the yo-yo effect my fault or weak willpower?
No. The regain after stopping is largely physiologically driven. Purnell and Le Roux 2025 in the Journal of Internal Medicine describe a model for this, the fat-mass set point: the body could defend a certain fat-mass level via hunger, satiety and energy expenditure. Effective obesity therapies could lower this set point, and after stopping the old regulation patterns could return. The authors themselves stress that this is a theoretical framework whose evidence base still has to be built. Fothergill 2016 also showed that resting energy expenditure can remain permanently lower after major weight loss. This is largely biology and not a lack of discipline. That does not mean behavior plays no role, it means you are working against a biological counter-regulation and not against yourself.
Can I ever stop the weight-loss injection at all?
That decision belongs in a medical consultation, not in a blog. In the studies, obesity is classified as a chronic condition in which long-term treatment can be sensible for many people. Whether and how stopping is an option for you depends on your course, your goals, your body composition and any comorbidities. These medications are prescription-only and belong in medical care. One particularly common reason for stopping is the wish to have a child: these medications should not be used in pregnancy and while breastfeeding, and a lead time before a planned pregnancy is provided for. Stopping on your own without a plan can increase the risk of a rapid regain.
Do I also lose muscle with the weight-loss injection?
Part of the weight loss affects fat-free mass, which includes muscle. Stefanakis 2024 in Metabolism summarizes that typically over 25 percent of the weight loss under obesity therapy comes from fat-free mass, similar to after bariatric surgery. This is relevant to the yo-yo effect: less muscle can mean lower energy expenditure, which could favor a regain after stopping. That is why preserving muscle through adequate protein and resistance training is a central lever. More on this in the spoke on muscle loss.
What can I do to cushion the yo-yo effect?
The direction is set out by several reviews, such as Lasik 2026 in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences. Core idea: the transition from a pharmacologically produced satiety to a satiety carried by nutrition and muscle. Concrete directions, not recipes: build and preserve muscle early (protein, resistance training), rely on nutritional quality and satiety (protein, fiber, unprocessed foods), keep blood sugar stable, sleep enough. And: have the stopping guided medically rather than attempting it alone. The exact implementation belongs in an individual consultation. As an effective stopping strategy this has not been proven in large randomized trials so far, it is a physiologically grounded direction.
Does this mean the weight-loss injection is bad?
No. The efficacy on weight and metabolism is clearly documented in large RCTs, for example in STEP 1 (Wilding 2021) and SURMOUNT-1 (Jastreboff 2022). GLP-1 medications can be effective for weight, and they are neither a miracle cure nor a villain. They are not free of risk: gastrointestinal complaints are common, gallstones, inflammation of the pancreas and delayed gastric emptying are described less often, and there are contraindications. The problem with the yo-yo effect is not the medication itself, but the lack of a strategy when stopping. Whether a treatment is an option for you, and with what benefit-risk balance, belongs in a medical conversation, not in a blog.
How quickly does the weight come back after stopping?
This is individual and the study figures are averages. In STEP 4 the gain in the placebo group showed over the 48 weeks after randomization, in SURMOUNT-4 over 52 weeks. Typically the regain sets in as appetite returns, that is, when the satiety boost of the active substance fades. How strong and how fast it would be for you cannot be stated across the board. That is why an individual, medically guided plan is more sensible than an abrupt end.
Connections to other topics
The mechanism behind semaglutide and tirzepatide: how GLP-1 amplifies satiety and why this is not an unnatural intervention. The basis for understanding stopping.
Nausea, digestion and what to watch for. A realistic look at the unwanted effects, beyond hype and panic.
Why part of the weight loss is muscle, what that means for expenditure and how to protect muscle. Central to protecting against the yo-yo effect.
Why your body defends a weight: leptin, insulin and the fat-mass set point. The hormonal foundation beneath the yo-yo effect.
Sources and further reading
- Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Davies M, et al. Weight regain and cardiometabolic effects after withdrawal of semaglutide: The STEP 1 trial extension. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2022;24(8):1553-1564. doi:10.1111/dom.14725 · PMID: 35441470 [RCT-Extension, all analyses exploratory]
- Rubino D, Abrahamsson N, Davies M, et al. Effect of Continued Weekly Subcutaneous Semaglutide vs Placebo on Weight Loss Maintenance in Adults With Overweight or Obesity: The STEP 4 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2021;325(14):1414-1425. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.3224 · PMID: 33755728 [RCT]
- Aronne LJ, Sattar N, Horn DB, et al. Continued Treatment With Tirzepatide for Maintenance of Weight Reduction in Adults With Obesity: The SURMOUNT-4 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2024;331(1):38-48. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.24945 · PMID: 38078870 [RCT]
- Sumithran P, Prendergast LA, Delbridge E, et al. Long-term persistence of hormonal adaptations to weight loss. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(17):1597-1604. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1105816 · PMID: 22029981 [Cohort, single-arm intervention study, no randomization, no control group]
- Fothergill E, Guo J, Howard L, et al. Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after "The Biggest Loser" competition. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016;24(8):1612-1619. doi:10.1002/oby.21538 · PMID: 27136388 [Cohort]
- Purnell JQ, Le Roux CW. Metabolic and appetitive regulation of adipocyte mass during treatment of obesity. J Intern Med. 2025;299(1):66-78. doi:10.1111/joim.70045 · PMID: 41268722 [Mechanism Review]
- Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Calanna S, et al. Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adults with Overweight or Obesity. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(11):989-1002. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2032183 · PMID: 33567185 [RCT]
- Jastreboff AM, Aronne LJ, Ahmad NN, et al. Tirzepatide Once Weekly for the Treatment of Obesity. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(3):205-216. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2206038 · PMID: 35658024 [RCT]
- Stefanakis K, Kokkorakis M, Mantzoros CS. The impact of weight loss on fat-free mass, muscle, bone and hematopoiesis health. Metabolism. 2024;161:156057. doi:10.1016/j.metabol.2024.156057 · PMID: 39481534 [Review]
- Lasik L, Ukleja-Sokołowska N. Restoring Satiety After GLP-1/GIP Pharmacotherapy: Metabolic Stability, Diet Quality, and the Gut Microbiota. Int J Mol Sci. 2026;27(11):4658. doi:10.3390/ijms27114658 · PMID: 42278190 [Review]