Has gelatide been evaluated in randomized clinical trials for weight loss efficacy and safety?

1. Absence of gelatide from the supplied clinical‑trial reporting

A systematic review and several trial reports in the supplied material catalog randomized, placebo‑controlled and head‑to‑head trials of agents like tirzepatide and semaglutide in adults without diabetes, but none of the sources mention a compound called "gelatide" or present randomized clinical‑trial data for it ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Because every factual assertion must be traceable to the provided sources, the correct reading of these documents is that gelatide does not appear in the indexed trial reports and meta‑analyses available in this set ^{[1] [2]}.

2. What the supplied evidence does document: multiple randomized trials for other peptide therapies

By contrast, tirzepatide has been the subject of phase 3 randomized trials (SURMOUNT series) and head‑to‑head studies versus semaglutide showing superior average weight loss in some experiments, and systematic reviews/meta‑analyses of tirzepatide RCTs in people without diabetes are explicitly reported ^{[1] [5] [2]}. Semaglutide similarly has large randomized trials (for example, a 68‑week trial and STEP/SELECT programs) that evaluated efficacy and safety for weight management in adults without diabetes ^{[3] [6] [7]}.

3. Early‑phase and industry programs illustrate where a candidate like “gelatide” would show up — and it doesn’t

The supplied Amgen and other press materials summarize phase 1–3 programs for agents (e.g., MariTide, mazdutide) and include ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers and trial designs when studies are underway or completed; these documents show the usual pathway — phase 1 PK/tolerability, then randomized phase 2/3 trials — by which new peptides enter the randomized‑trial literature ^{[4] [8]}. If gelatide had reached randomized testing, one would expect similar trial registration, press reporting, or inclusion in systematic reviews; none of the supplied materials include such a trail for a compound by that name ^{[1] [4] [8]}. That absence in the reporting set is notable but does not replace a comprehensive registry search.

4. Alternative explanations and limitations in the available reporting

A plausible alternative is that gelatide is an investigational name, an early preclinical candidate, a regional brand name, or simply not indexed in the selected sources; the supplied corpus is focused on tirzepatide, semaglutide, MariTide/MariTide‑type programs and related trials and may not be exhaustive across all registries or proprietary pipelines ^{[1] [4] [2]}. The correct, evidence‑bound conclusion from these documents is therefore limited: the provided sources do not show randomized clinical‑trial evaluation of gelatide, but they do not permit a universal negative beyond the scope of the materials furnished.

5. Implications for readers and next investigative steps

For a definitive answer beyond this reporting, standard next steps would be to search ClinicalTrials.gov, major registries, company pipelines, and peer‑reviewed databases for the name "gelatide" and plausible synonyms or developmental codes; meanwhile, the supplied evidence confirms robust randomized‑trial evaluation for tirzepatide and semaglutide as comparator context for any future trials of a new peptide ^{[9] [1] [3] [2]}. Until such registry or peer‑reviewed trial evidence for gelatide appears, the responsible journalistic statement is that gelatide has not been documented in the provided randomized clinical‑trial literature for weight‑loss efficacy or safety ^{[1] [2]}.