Put the study population before the headline
The SELECT paper, published in 2023, enrolled 17,604 adults aged 45 or older with established cardiovascular disease, BMI of at least 27 and no history of diabetes. It compared weekly injectable semaglutide with placebo. Those entry criteria define the question being studied; they are not a self-prescribing checklist.
A reader without established cardiovascular disease is asking a different question from the one this trial directly tested. A useful evidence review names that gap instead of quietly expanding the result to all people seeking weight loss. Similarity in one feature, such as BMI, does not make two populations interchangeable.
The outcome was an event, not a scale reading
In its March 8, 2024 approval announcement, FDA described the outcome as major cardiovascular events: cardiovascular death, heart attack and stroke. Events occurred in 6.5% of the Wegovy group and 8% of the placebo group. Both groups also received standard medical care and lifestyle counseling.
That is a different endpoint from a percentage of body weight lost. A headline that swaps the two changes the question. Before sharing a study summary, ask what was measured, in whom, against which comparator and over what period. Our weight-loss estimate explainer covers another common source of confusion.
Keep the event rates beside the relative result
The paper reported a hazard ratio of 0.80 and mean follow-up of 39.8 months. The rounded event proportions reported by FDA differ by 1.5 percentage points. A hazard ratio uses event timing; it is not simply the subtraction of two percentages. The risk-number guide explains how to read both without treating them as competing answers.
Neither number predicts whether a particular person will have an event. Your starting risk and medical circumstances matter. Reporting the absolute difference also does not make the treatment effect trivial: it makes the scale and setting of the finding easier to examine.
Read discontinuation and funding alongside benefit
The SELECT paper reported adverse events leading to permanent treatment discontinuation in 16.6% of the semaglutide group and 8.2% of the placebo group. Novo Nordisk funded the trial. Those details belong in an evidence review, alongside the efficacy result, rather than being omitted from a favorable headline.
Discontinuation is not the same endpoint as a cardiovascular event, and the figures should not be subtracted from one another to invent a net-benefit score. The practical question for a clinician is how the evidence, risks, tolerability and alternatives fit a patient. This article does not make that individualized judgment.
The product boundary still matters
FDA’s 2024 action concerned Wegovy injection for the stated cardiovascular indication. It was not approval of every product described online as semaglutide, nor evidence that a specific telehealth service reproduces the trial result. FDA’s compounded-drug guidance states that compounded GLP-1 drugs are not FDA-approved.
Our assessment is that SELECT is consequential evidence for a defined population and outcome, with important limits on extrapolation. The CoreAge Rx placement on this page is paid promotion; SELECT did not evaluate that service or its compounded preparations. Use our headline-checking guide to keep the study, approval date and commercial message distinct.
Common questions
Is this a new trial published in September 2026?
No. This is a newly published explainer of the 2023 SELECT paper and FDA’s March 2024 cardiovascular approval announcement.
Does SELECT prove that compounded semaglutide has the same benefit?
No. The trial does not establish equivalent outcomes for compounded preparations or for an individual telehealth provider.
Sources and fact-checking
Sources checked 2026-09-24. Company pages document their own published terms; government and research sources provide context. This is a review of published information, not a hands-on service test or a clinical evaluation. Prices and availability can change.