Skip to content
Aminoscope
Head-to-head

Amycretin vs Cagrilintide

Two Novo Nordisk amylin plays at opposite ends of the pipeline: one folds amylin and GLP-1 into a single molecule, the other is amylin alone.

Amycretin

Clinical data

A unimolecular GLP-1 and amylin receptor co-agonist, oral and subcutaneous versions in early trials; a promising Phase 1/2 signal but still years from an approval decision.

Full Amycretin evidence review

Cagrilintide

Clinical data

A long-acting amylin analog with real Phase 2 monotherapy weight-loss data; its main clinical role is as the amylin half of CagriSema, and on its own it remains investigational.

Full Cagrilintide evidence review

Side by side

 AmycretinCagrilintide
Marketed forWeight lossWeight loss
Evidence gradeClinical dataClinical data
FamilyGLP-1 / incretinGLP-1 / incretin
Regulatory statusInvestigationalInvestigational
How it's obtainedResearch-onlyResearch-only
Key human sourceFirst-in-human Phase 1b/2a, 2025Phase 2 monotherapy RCT, Lancet 2021

marks a row where the two differ. Evidence grades come from our evidence matrix, which grades each molecule on the human data for the use it is marketed for.

Our verdict

Both are investigational and neither can be prescribed. Amycretin (INN zenagamtide) is a unimolecular GLP-1 and amylin receptor co-agonist and posted much the larger number — about 24.3% mean weight loss at 36 weeks on 60 mg subcutaneous versus roughly 1% on placebo — but that came from a phase 1b/2a study in only 125 people, which is a dose-finding and safety trial rather than an efficacy result, and its oral phase 1 measured weight only as an exploratory endpoint over 12 weeks. Cagrilintide is a long-acting amylin analog and nothing else; its 26-week phase 2 produced dose-dependent weight loss that exceeded placebo and, at top doses, beat a liraglutide comparator — a more mature standalone record, but a smaller effect. The framing that matters is that cagrilintide’s main clinical role is as the amylin half of CagriSema rather than a monotherapy, while amycretin’s headline is early enough that a phase 3 program will decide whether it means anything.

Amycretin fits if

You are tracking the unimolecular co-agonist approach and want the largest early signal, understanding that a 125-person phase 1b/2a is a starting point and not a result.

Cagrilintide fits if

You want the cleaner mechanistic question — what amylin does on its own, separate from GLP-1 — and the phase 2 monotherapy data that actually addresses it.

Related comparisons