The SURMOUNT Series Compared: What SURMOUNT-1 Through SURMOUNT-4 Together Reveal About Tirzepatide for Weight Management

By
Published Updated Last reviewed
GLP-1 medication and metabolic health image for The SURMOUNT Series Compared: What SURMOUNT-1 Through SURMOUNT-4 Together Reveal About Tirzepatide for Weight Management

At a Glance

At a glance

| Trial | N (randomized to drug) | Population | Key dose(s) | Follow-up | Primary endpoint | Primary result (15 mg arm) | Dropout rate (active arm) | Key adverse events | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | SURMOUNT-1 (Jastreboff 2022) | 2,539 (tirzepatide arms) | Adults with BMI ≥30, or ≥27 with ≥1 weight-related comorbidity; no T2D | 5 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg weekly | 72 weeks | % change in body weight from baseline | −20.9% | ~15% | Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea (~4 to 5% discontinuation for GI AEs) | | SURMOUNT-2 (Garvey 2023) | 938 (tirzepatide arms) | Adults with BMI ≥27 and T2D (A1c 7 to 10%) | 10 mg, 15 mg weekly | 72 weeks | % change in body weight from baseline | −15.7% | ~16% | Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea; mild hypoglycemia (no severe events) | | SURMOUNT-3 (Wadden 2023) | 579 (tirzepatide, post lead-in) | Adults with BMI ≥30 or ≥27 with comorbidity; no T2D; completed 12-week intensive lifestyle lead-in | 10 mg, 15 mg weekly | 72 weeks after randomization (84 weeks total) | % change in body weight from lead-in baseline | −26.0% from lead-in start; −18.4% from randomization | ~18% | Similar GI profile to SURMOUNT-1 | | SURMOUNT-4 (Aronne 2024) | 670 (randomized to placebo withdrawal) | Adults with BMI ≥30 or ≥27 with comorbidity; no T2D; completed 36-week open-label tirzepatide lead-in | Withdrawal to placebo vs. continuation at 10 or 15 mg | 52 weeks post-randomization (88 weeks total) | % change in body weight from randomization to week 88 | Continuers: −5.5% further; Withdrawers: +14.8% regain | ~14% (continuation arm) | Regain group: expected reversal of metabolic improvements |

Population Differences: Who Was Enrolled and Why It Matters

The four trials enrolled meaningfully different groups, and understanding those differences is the most important step before applying any single trial's numbers to a clinical question.

SURMOUNT-1 set the broadest non-diabetic obesity benchmark. Participants had a mean baseline BMI of approximately 38 kg/m² and no diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. Comorbidities were common but not required; about 94% of participants did not have T2D, and roughly one-third had prediabetes. This makes SURMOUNT-1 the reference standard for tirzepatide efficacy in the population most likely to be offered treatment under current FDA labeling for obesity pharmacotherapy.

SURMOUNT-2 deliberately required T2D (A1c 7.0 to 10.0%), producing a group with meaningfully different physiology. Baseline BMI was lower on average (approximately 35 kg/m²), and participants were already on background antidiabetic therapy. The weight loss achieved at 15 mg (−15.7%) was roughly 5 percentage points below SURMOUNT-1. This gap is not a signal that the drug "works less." People with T2D have blunted appetite-suppression responses to incretin-based therapies and greater counterregulatory mechanisms opposing fat loss. The SURMOUNT-2 authors explicitly caution against direct cross-trial comparisons given the population differences, a caution we echo here.

SURMOUNT-3 introduced a 12-week intensive lifestyle intervention before randomization. That lead-in was not trivial. Participants lost an average of 6.9% of body weight during the run-in alone, through a structured program of meal replacement, physical activity coaching, and caloric restriction. Only those who completed the lead-in and met adherence thresholds were randomized. This enrollment filter produces a population that is, by definition, more motivated and more adherent than the general population seeking pharmacotherapy. The resulting headline number (−26.0% from original baseline) is the largest weight-loss figure in the SURMOUNT program, but it cannot be attributed to tirzepatide alone and cannot be expected in routine clinical practice without a comparable lead-in structure.

SURMOUNT-4 was the most methodologically unusual. All participants first completed a 36-week open-label tirzepatide phase (losing a mean of 20.9% of body weight) and were then randomized to continue tirzepatide or switch to placebo. Enrolling only those who had already responded and tolerated the drug further selected a population predisposed to benefit. Any estimate of regain rates from this trial may therefore underestimate regain in a real-world population that includes partial responders and those who discontinue due to side effects.

Methodology Differences: Design Choices That Shape the Numbers

Comparator and Blinding

All four trials used subcutaneous placebo as the comparator, and all were double-blind after randomization. No active comparator (such as semaglutide) was included in any SURMOUNT trial, which limits direct head-to-head inference against other GLP-1 receptor agonists. The FDA has noted that cross-agent comparisons require dedicated randomized trials.

Run-In and Lead-In Structures

SURMOUNT-1 and SURMOUNT-2 had no active lead-in. Participants went directly from screening to randomization. SURMOUNT-3 had a 12-week lifestyle lead-in before randomization, creating a "super-responder" filter. SURMOUNT-4 had a 36-week open-label drug lead-in before randomization. The practical effect is that each successive trial's active-arm result builds on a progressively more selected starting point, making the four primary endpoints non-comparable on a simple percentage basis.

Primary Endpoint Definition

SURMOUNT-1 and SURMOUNT-2 defined the primary endpoint as percent change in body weight from baseline at 72 weeks, measured under an estimand that treated all randomized participants (including those who discontinued early) through a treatment-policy approach. SURMOUNT-3 used a similar estimand but referenced the lead-in baseline rather than the randomization baseline as its co-primary. SURMOUNT-4 used change from the randomization visit (i.e., after 36 weeks of open-label treatment) as the reference, so the headline numbers measure divergence from a post-treatment baseline, not from the participants' original body weight. Each choice is methodologically defensible, but readers must track which baseline is being referenced.

Statistical Approach

All trials used mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) as the primary analysis, which is standard practice for longitudinal weight-loss trials and consistent with FDA guidance on obesity drug development. Secondary endpoints included responder analyses (proportion achieving ≥5%, ≥10%, ≥15%, and ≥20% weight loss), cardiometabolic outcomes, and in SURMOUNT-2, glycemic outcomes.

Results, Matched: Head-to-Head on Shared Endpoints

Mean Weight Loss

| Endpoint | SURMOUNT-1 (15 mg) | SURMOUNT-2 (15 mg) | SURMOUNT-3 (15 mg, from randomization) | SURMOUNT-4 (continuation vs. withdrawal) | |---|---|---|---|---| | Mean % weight change from trial baseline | −20.9% | −15.7% | −18.4% (from randomization); −26.0% (from lead-in baseline) | Continuers: additional −5.5%; Withdrawers: +14.8% regain | | ≥5% responders | 91% | 86% | ~96% | N/A (all had already responded) | | ≥15% responders | 57% | 40% | ~70% | N/A | | ≥20% responders | 37% | 25% | ~56% | N/A |

These numbers tell a consistent directional story. Higher doses produce more weight loss. Absence of T2D is associated with larger responses. Prior lifestyle intervention and pharmacotherapy further amplify response, at least on an intention-to-treat basis.

The Diabetic vs. Non-Diabetic Response Gap

The approximately 5 percentage-point gap between SURMOUNT-1 and SURMOUNT-2 at the 15 mg dose is one of the most clinically important findings across the series. It is consistent with data from the SURPASS program (tirzepatide in T2D for glycemic control), where weight loss was also attenuated relative to non-diabetic populations, and with semaglutide's STEP-2 data in T2D showing a similar pattern. The mechanism is not fully established, but hyperinsulinemia, altered GIP receptor sensitivity in the setting of chronic T2D, and compensatory hepatic glucose output are all candidate contributors. Clinicians should set realistic weight-loss targets for patients with T2D rather than using SURMOUNT-1 figures as a benchmark.

Maintenance vs. Regain on Discontinuation

SURMOUNT-4 provides the clearest data on what happens when the drug is stopped. After 36 weeks of tirzepatide-induced weight loss (mean 20.9%), participants randomized to placebo regained a mean of 14.8% of body weight over 52 weeks. Participants who continued tirzepatide lost an additional 5.5%. The net difference at week 88 was approximately 20 percentage points in body weight between the two groups. Cardiometabolic improvements (lower blood pressure, improved lipids, reduced waist circumference) also partially reversed in the withdrawal group, consistent with the position stated in Obesity Society guidelines that obesity is a chronic disease requiring long-term treatment. The regain was not complete: withdrawers did not fully return to their original weight at 52 weeks post-randomization, but the trajectory was continuing upward at the trial's end, suggesting full return to baseline was plausible with longer follow-up.

Composition of Weight Loss: Lean vs. Fat Mass

This is the area of greatest disagreement across the SURMOUNT reports, largely because lean mass data were not uniformly collected or reported as a primary outcome in any of the four trials. SURMOUNT-1 included exploratory dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) data in a substudy, suggesting that a meaningful proportion (roughly 30 to 40%) of the total weight lost was lean mass, a finding consistent with earlier tirzepatide mechanistic work and analogous observations with semaglutide. SURMOUNT-2, SURMOUNT-3, and SURMOUNT-4 did not publish primary DXA substudy analyses in their main reports, making cross-trial comparison on body composition incomplete. The lack of consistent body-composition endpoints across the SURMOUNT series is, in our view, one of the program's most significant methodological gaps.

What the Trials Together Do and Do Not Establish

What they establish:

The SURMOUNT series together establish, with high confidence, that tirzepatide at 10 to 15 mg weekly produces clinically meaningful weight loss across a spectrum of obesity-related phenotypes, including those with T2D, those without T2D, and those who have first undergone structured lifestyle intervention. The dose-response relationship is consistent and reproducible. The drug's effect on cardiometabolic surrogates (blood pressure, triglycerides, fasting glucose, waist circumference) tracks closely with weight loss. Most critically, SURMOUNT-4 establishes that weight loss does not persist after discontinuation in most patients, making this a long-term treatment rather than a short course.

What they do not establish:

The series does not establish cardiovascular event reduction for the obesity indication. The SURMOUNT-CVObesity trial is ongoing, and until those data are available, the cardiovascular benefit seen with semaglutide in SELECT cannot be assumed to translate to tirzepatide in the same population. The trials also do not establish optimal sequencing (drug before lifestyle, lifestyle before drug, or concurrent), because SURMOUNT-3's lead-in was a specific structured program not easily replicated in clinical practice. The series does not resolve the lean-mass question with enough rigor to guide clinical decisions about resistance training co-prescription, protein intake targets, or dose modulation to minimize muscle loss. Finally, no SURMOUNT trial has a follow-up beyond 88 weeks, leaving long-term durability and late-emerging adverse effects unmeasured.

Outstanding Questions for the Next Trial

  1. Cardiovascular outcomes in non-diabetic obesity. The SURMOUNT-CVObesity trial is the most consequential pending dataset. Without it, prescribers cannot confidently extend the SELECT cardiovascular benefit to tirzepatide-treated patients with obesity but without T2D.

  2. Optimal discontinuation strategy. Should patients taper rather than stop abruptly? Is there a minimum effective maintenance dose lower than 10 mg that preserves most weight loss while reducing side-effect burden and cost? SURMOUNT-4's binary stop/continue design cannot answer this.

  3. Lean mass preservation. A dedicated, adequately powered DXA substudy comparing tirzepatide with and without structured resistance training, across the full BMI range and across T2D status, is needed before any guideline can make evidence-based recommendations on co-prescription of exercise or protein supplementation.

  4. Sequential therapy and re-treatment. After weight regain following discontinuation, does re-initiating tirzepatide restore the original response magnitude and speed? SURMOUNT-4 randomized to stop or continue but did not include a re-start arm.

  5. Adolescent populations and long-term safety. Early-phase data in adolescents with obesity are emerging, but no SURMOUNT trial enrolled participants under 18. Growth, bone density, and reproductive effects over multi-year exposure remain unstudied in this population.

Frequently asked questions

›
›
›
›

References

  1. 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. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35658024/

  2. Garvey WT, Frias JP, Jastreboff AM, et al. Tirzepatide once weekly for the treatment of obesity in people with type 2 diabetes (SURMOUNT-2). Lancet. 2023;402(10402):613, 626. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37331373/

  3. Wadden TA, Chao AM, Machineni S, et al. Tirzepatide after intensive lifestyle intervention in adults with overweight or obesity: the SURMOUNT-3 phase 3 trial. Nat Med. 2023;29(11):2799, 2807. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37907674/

  4. 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. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2814876

  5. Frías JP, Davies MJ, Rosenstock J, et al. Tirzepatide versus semaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SURPASS-2). N Engl J Med. 2021;385(6):503, 515. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34170647/

  6. Davies M, Færch L, Jeppesen OK, et al. Semaglutide 2·4 mg once a week in adults with overweight or obesity, and type 2 diabetes (STEP 2). Lancet. 2021;397(10278):971, 984. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33567185/

  7. Lincoff AM, Brown-Frandsen K, Colhoun HM, et al. Semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in obesity without diabetes (SELECT). N Engl J Med. 2023;389(24):2221, 2232. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37952131/

  8. Rubino DM, Greenway FL, Khalid U, et al. Effect of weekly subcutaneous semaglutide vs daily liraglutide on body weight in adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes. JAMA. 2022;327(2):138, 150. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35015074/

  9. Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Calanna S, et al. Once-weekly semaglutide in adults with overweight or obesity (STEP 1). N Engl J Med. 2021;384(11):989, 1002. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33567185/

  10. Apovian CM, Aronne LJ, Bessesen DH, et al. Pharmacological management of obesity: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(2):342, 362. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25590212/

  11. Garvey WT, Mechanick JI, Brett EM, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology comprehensive clinical practice guidelines for medical care of patients with obesity. Endocr Pract. 2016;22(Suppl 3):1, 203. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27219496/

  12. Tchang BG, Aras M, Kumar RB, Aronne LJ. Pharmacologic treatment of overweight and obesity in adults. In: Endotext. Updated 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25905200/

  13. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Drug trials snapshot: Zepbound (tirzepatide). 2023. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/drug-trials-snapshot-zepbound

  14. Obesity Society. Clinical practice statement on obesity pharmacotherapy. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36286734/

  15. Bikou A, Dermiki-Gkana F, Penteris M, Konstantinidi M, Papakonstantinou E. Effects of semaglutide on lean mass: a systematic review. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2023;48:556, 563. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37120000/