This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Rimonabant does in the body
They act on a receptor that, among other things, makes food more rewarding and increases appetite.
The body makes its own cannabis-like signalling molecules. Rimonabant blocked that receptor, so eating became less compelling and people lost weight. The same receptor is involved in mood, and blocking it made a substantial minority of people depressed or anxious. The two effects come from the same action and could not be separated.
Why people take it. Formerly used in Europe as a weight-loss tablet.
What happened in people
Average weight loss was about 4.7 kilograms greater than with a dummy treatment after one year.
✓ Reviewed first-read answer
Where this came from
A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.
A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
A large study found no reduction in heart attacks or strokes and more serious mood problems.
Where it acts
Hypothalamic and mesolimbic CB1 receptors; also adipocyte and hepatic CB1
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · RML78EN3XE · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C22H21Cl3N4O, weighing 463.8.
PubChem record · 104850 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
A person wrote this explanation into the record, with the studies named in the path below.
A reviewer approved this sentence against this exact record and its sources.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 94 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 15 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Body weight
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved2 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Blood sugar
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved2 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Mood
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
…Waiting for a reviewer2 registered symptom measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Pain
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
…Waiting for a reviewer1 registered symptom measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Body weight
body weight; body weight from baseline to week 24
Blood sugar
glycemic measure hba1c; hba1c
Mood
beck depression inventory; hospital anxiety and depression scale
Pain
pain numeric rating scale
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
2 registered test measure.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Weight change from baseline after one year of treatment, intention to treat (pooled figure below is the four-trial meta-analysis population)
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
RIO-Europe
How many people
4105
Study design
Phase 3 randomised placebo-controlled trial
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
-6.6 kg on 20 mg versus -1.8 kg on placebo, P < 0.001; pooled placebo-adjusted 4.7 kg (95% CI 4.1 to 5.3)
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Depressed mood was an exclusion criterion, so the trial population was selected against the risk that later ended the drug. The published interpretation described tolerability as "mild and transient".
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, once daily (5 and 20 mg)
Interval reported. 95% CI 4
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
CRESCENDO — Comprehensive Rimonabant Evaluation Study of Cardiovascular Endpoints and Outcomes (NCT00263042) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke, centrally adjudicated
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
CRESCENDO (NCT00263042)
How many people
18695
Study design
Phase 3 cardiovascular outcomes trial
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Hazard ratio 0.97 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.12), P = 0.68
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Terminated early at a mean 13.8 months on regulatory concern about suicide. Serious psychiatric side effects 2.5% versus 1.3%; four suicides on rimonabant against one on placebo.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, once daily (5 and 20 mg)
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
CRESCENDO — Comprehensive Rimonabant Evaluation Study of Cardiovascular Endpoints and Outcomes (NCT00263042) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 2 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.0 registered measures of this kind. 1 written-up study measured this and did not show a benefit.
■What a body can do day to dayEvidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.1 registered measure of this kind.
■Measured performanceEvidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.1 registered measure of this kind.
■Symptoms and quality of lifeEvidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.3 registered measures of this kind.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.4 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in C. elegans (roundworm), Mouse, Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Rimonabant
What a person takes: Oral tablet, once daily (5 and 20 mg).
The measurement behind this step
Once-daily oral tablet taken with a reduced-calorie diet. Highly lipophilic with substantial brain penetration, which is both the source of the appetite effect and the reason the psychiatric liability could not be engineered away without changing the molecule.
Getting in
A once-daily 20 mg tablet
One tablet a day alongside a reduced-calorie diet.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Oral once-daily dosing at 5 or 20 mg. Highly lipophilic with a long half-life and extensive hepatic metabolism, principally by CYP3A4 and amidohydrolase.
It passes readily into brain tissue, which is where the appetite effect comes from and also where the mood problem comes from.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
High blood-brain barrier penetration reaching hypothalamic and mesolimbic CB1 populations. Peripheral CB1 in adipose tissue, liver and skeletal muscle is also engaged, which is the basis of the current interest in peripherally restricted successors.
It occupies the receptor that the body's own cannabis-like molecules use, and pushes it below its resting level of activity rather than simply blocking it.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Selective CB1 inverse agonism: it displaces anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol from the orthosteric site and additionally suppresses constitutive CB1 activity, raising basal cAMP above the unliganded baseline in CB1-expressing cells.
Food reward falls — and so does mood, in a minority
Eating becomes less rewarding and appetite drops. The same receptor is part of the system that regulates mood, so a substantial minority became depressed or anxious.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Reduced endocannabinoid tone in hypothalamic feeding circuits and mesolimbic reward pathways lowers energy intake; peripheral CB1 blockade improves adipocyte and hepatic lipid handling, which is why HDL and triglycerides moved more than weight alone would predict. The same loss of endocannabinoid tone in limbic circuits is the accepted explanation for the depression and anxiety.
Weight falls; cardiovascular events do not; psychiatric events rise
Weight loss was real and repeated. Heart attacks and strokes were unchanged. Serious psychiatric events roughly doubled.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Measured endpoints: 4.7 kg placebo-adjusted weight loss at one year across four trials; composite cardiovascular hazard ratio 0.97 (0.84 to 1.12) in 18,695 patients; serious psychiatric side effects 2.5% versus 1.3%; four suicides against one.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
beck depression inventory
hospital anxiety and depression scale
pain numeric rating scale
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
body weight
glycemic measure hba1c
body weight from baseline to week 24
hba1c
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
6 min walking test
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (7)
atheroma volume
responding to treatment
brief psychiatric rating scale total
iowa gambling task
carotid intima media thickness progression/regression
adverse events
modified ashworth scale
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Nobody. It was marketed in Europe and in some fifty other countries between 2006 and late 2008, and was never available in the United States.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
CRESCENDO missed its primary endpoint outright and was terminated early for psychiatric harm
European marketing suspended 13 November 2008 and the authorisation withdrawn 16 January 2009, 28 months after approval
Never approved in the United States
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment.
On this record: One tablet a day alongside a reduced-calorie diet.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (9)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Withdrawn
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Oral tablet, once daily (5 and 20 mg)
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S8.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Once-daily oral tablet taken with a reduced-calorie diet. Highly lipophilic with substantial brain penetration, which is both the source of the appetite effect and the reason the psychiatric liability could not be engineered away without changing the molecule.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Suspended and withdrawn in Europe in 2008 and 2009 for psychiatric adverse events including depression, anxiety and suicide. The measured harms are an odds ratio of 2.5 for depressive-mood discontinuation and 3.0 for anxiety discontinuation in pooled trials, serious psychiatric side effects in 2.5% versus 1.3% of 18,695 patients, and four suicides against one. Gastrointestinal events occurred in 33% versus 22%.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Rimonabant appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 135 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear∅Nothing found in the sources checked
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Oral tablet, once daily (5 and 20 mg)
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Highly lipophilic with substantial brain penetration, which is both the source of the appetite effect and the reason the psychiatric liability could not be engineered away without changing the molecule.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine, withdrawn medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Rimonabant studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That improvements in weight, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and insulin resistance would produce fewer cardiovascular events
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That "generally well tolerated with mild and transient side effects" in a one-year registration trial described the safety profile of the marketed drug
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Rimonabant are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
RIO-Europe: 6.6 kg lost at one year on 20 mg against 1.8 kg on placebo
In plain words
In the European registration trial, patients on the full dose lost about six and a half kilograms in a year against under two on placebo, with better waist, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides.
What was measured
Weight change from baseline at one year, intention to treat
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Patients with BMI at least 30 kg/m2, or above 27 kg/m2 with treated or untreated dyslipidaemia or hypertension, randomised double-blind to placebo, rimonabant 5 mg or rimonabant 20 mg once daily on a 600 kcal/day deficit diet. Weight change at one year in the intention-to-treat population was -6.6 kg (SD 7.2) on 20 mg (p<0.001 versus placebo), -3.4 kg (SD 5.7) on 5 mg (p=0.002), and -1.8 kg (SD 6.4) on placebo. Significantly more patients on 20 mg achieved 5% and 10% weight loss (both p<0.001), with greater improvements in waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome prevalence. The paper described rimonabant as "generally well tolerated with mild and transient side effects".
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Meta-analysis: 4.7 kg placebo-adjusted weight loss, and a number needed to harm of 25
In plain words
Pooling four trials in 4,105 people, the drug produced 4.7 kilograms more weight loss than placebo. It also produced one extra adverse event for every twenty-five people treated.
What was measured
Placebo-adjusted weight reduction at one year and number needed to harm
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Christensen et al. pooled four double-blind randomised controlled trials of rimonabant 20 mg daily against placebo, 4,105 participants, searched to July 2007. Placebo-adjusted weight reduction at one year was 4.7 kg (95% CI 4.1 to 5.3, p<0.0001). Adverse events were significantly more common on rimonabant (OR 1.4, p=0.0007, number needed to harm 25, 95% CI 17 to 58) and serious adverse events 1.4 times more common (OR 1.4, p=0.03, NNH 59, 95% CI 27 to 830).
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Depression discontinuation was 2.5 times more likely — in trials that excluded depressed patients
In plain words
People on the drug were two and a half times more likely to stop it because of depressed mood. That happened even though anyone with depression had been kept out of the trials to begin with.
What was measured
Odds ratio for treatment discontinuation due to depressive mood disorders and anxiety
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
In the same pooled analysis, patients given rimonabant were 2.5 times more likely to discontinue treatment because of depressive mood disorders (OR 2.5, p=0.01, number needed to harm 49, 95% CI 19 to 316), and anxiety caused significantly more discontinuation on rimonabant than placebo (OR 3.0, p=0.03, NNH 166, 95% CI 47 to 3,716). The authors flag the crucial qualifier themselves: this occurred "despite depressed mood being an exclusion criterion in these trials", so the trial populations were selected to under-represent exactly the risk that materialised. They coupled the finding to the contemporaneous FDA determination of increased suicide risk during rimonabant treatment.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
CRESCENDO: no cardiovascular benefit, hazard ratio 0.97, and the trial was stopped
In plain words
The 18,695-patient trial that was supposed to prove the drug prevented heart attacks and strokes found no difference at all, and was halted early because regulators in three countries were concerned about suicides.
What was measured
Composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke, centrally adjudicated
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
Double-blind, placebo-controlled, 974 hospitals in 42 countries, 18,695 patients with manifest or increased risk of vascular disease randomised to rimonabant 20 mg (n=9,381) or placebo (n=9,314). At a mean follow-up of 13.8 months (95% CI 13.6 to 14.0) the trial was prematurely discontinued because of concerns raised by health regulatory authorities in three countries about suicide in patients receiving rimonabant. At trial close on 6 November 2008 the composite primary endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke had occurred in 364 (3.9%) on rimonabant and 375 (4.0%) on placebo, hazard ratio 0.97 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.12, p=0.68). Gastrointestinal events 33% versus 22%, neuropsychiatric events 32% versus 21%, serious psychiatric side effects 232 (2.5%) versus 120 (1.3%). Four patients on rimonabant and one on placebo died by suicide.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Metabolic surrogates moved. The endpoint they were standing in for did not
In plain words
Weight, waist, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and insulin resistance all improved. When the trial finally measured heart attacks and strokes directly, the result was exactly nothing.
What was measured
That improvement in weight, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and insulin resistance would translate into fewer cardiovascular events
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
RIO-Europe reported significant improvements against placebo in waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome prevalence alongside the weight result, and the drug was authorised in Europe on that basis in June 2006. CRESCENDO tested the endpoint those surrogates were proxies for, in 18,695 patients at elevated vascular risk, and returned a hazard ratio of 0.97 (0.84 to 1.12). The surrogate improvements were real measurements; the inference that they carried a cardiovascular benefit was not supported when tested. Topol and colleagues drew the general lesson explicitly: a drug marketed for weight loss but tested for cardiovascular outcomes turned out to have a level of serious neuropsychiatric effect that regulators judged unacceptable.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Authorised June 2006, suspended November 2008, withdrawn January 2009
In plain words
Europe licensed the drug and then took it off the market twenty-eight months later. The United States never approved it at all.
What was measured
Not recorded
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The European Commission granted marketing authorisation for Acomplia on 19 June 2006 as an adjunct to diet and exercise in obese patients or overweight patients with associated risk factors. Marketing was suspended on 13 November 2008. Sanofi-Aventis then withdrew the authorisation on 16 January 2009, stating that no additional clinical data would become available to lift the suspension following the decision to discontinue the rimonabant clinical development programme in all indications. The United States never approved the drug; Christensen et al. cite the contemporaneous FDA finding of increased suicide risk during rimonabant treatment.
Source
European Medicines Agency, Acomplia (rimonabant) EPAR — authorisation 19 June 2006, suspension 13 November 2008, withdrawal 16 January 2009
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The first trial called it "generally well tolerated". The pooled data did not agree
In plain words
The registration trial described side effects as mild and transient. Two years later, pooling four trials showed one extra adverse event per twenty-five treated and two and a half times the depression dropout.
What was measured
That "generally well tolerated with mild and transient side effects" in a one-year trial with depression excluded described the drug's safety profile in the population that would receive it
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
RIO-Europe's published interpretation described rimonabant as "generally well tolerated with mild and transient side effects". The characterisation was not fabricated — it reflected what a single one-year trial with depressed mood as an exclusion criterion could see. What it could not see was the pooled signal: OR 1.4 for any adverse event with a number needed to harm of 25, OR 2.5 for depressive-mood discontinuation, OR 3.0 for anxiety discontinuation, and ultimately serious psychiatric events at 2.5% versus 1.3% in 18,695 patients. The gap between the two statements is the gap between a registration trial's power for safety and its power for efficacy, which are never the same number.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
5 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A cannabinoid CB1 receptor blocker that produced 4.7 kg more weight loss than placebo at one year and doubled the rate of depressive-mood discontinuation, and whose 18,695-patient outcome trial was terminated early with a hazard ratio of 0.97 and four suicides against one.
Recorded evidence blocks (9)
Q2
What did Rimonabant's largest trial (18695 people) and its longest (5.1 years) measure?
18695 people in Rimonabant's largest registered study, 5.1 years in its longest registered window, measuring HDL cholesterol and TG plasma levels over a period of one year. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
35 phase3, 6 phase2, 2 phase1, 2 phase4, 1 na; NCT00734123; 2013-05; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2022, NCT05398913.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Rimonabant was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
phase3
35
phase2
6
phase1
2
phase4
2
na
1
Last recorded human testNCT05398913
2022-06-07
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
From C. elegans to human: where has Rimonabant shown lifespan?
"Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"; 19 of 45 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00228176
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00263042
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00325650
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00405808
terminated; "EMEA recommendation to suspend Acomplia marketing authorisation"
NCT00408148
terminated; "Company decision has been taken in light of recent demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00412698
terminated; "Company decision has been taken in light of recent demands by certain national health authorities"
13 further recorded trials
NCT00434096
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00449605
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00458081
terminated; "Company decision has been taken in light of recent demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00478595
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00478972
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00547118
terminated; "Withdrawn due to medication withdrawal from the EMEA"
NCT00576667
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00577148
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00584389
terminated; "Suspension of licence for rimonabant by European Medicines Agency"
NCT00603109
terminated; "Drug side effects leading to premature stop"
NCT00678483
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00690456
terminated; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
NCT00754689
withdrawn; "Company decision taken in light of demands by certain national health authorities"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Which of 6 min walking test, adverse events and atheroma volume did Rimonabant's trials measure?
6 min walking test, adverse events and atheroma volume lead 15 outcome terms across Rimonabant's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
body weight from baseline to week 24, hba1c, responding to treatment, brief psychiatric rating scale total, iowa gambling task and carotid intima media thickness progression/regression follow.
Show the evidence
body weight
1
atheroma volume
1
glycemic measure hba1c
1
body weight from baseline to week 24
1
hba1c
1
responding to treatment
1
9 more recorded rows
brief psychiatric rating scale total
1
iowa gambling task
1
carotid intima media thickness progression/regression
1
adverse events
1
6 min walking test
1
beck depression inventory
1
hospital anxiety and depression scale
1
modified ashworth scale
1
pain numeric rating scale
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which 23 trials of Rimonabant posted no result?
Posted no result
23 of 23 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00358228, NCT00464165, NCT00029835, NCT00029861, NCT00029848 and NCT00386061, and 17 more
Completion dates
oldest 2003-08; newest 2022-06-07
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00358228
2003-08
NCT00464165
2003-10
NCT00029835
2003-11
NCT00029861
2004-04
NCT00029848
2004-05
NCT00386061
2004-06
14 further recorded trials
NCT00464256
2004-11
NCT00481923
2005-04
NCT00458718
2005-07
NCT00481975
2005-08
NCT00459173
2005-09
NCT00459004
2006-04
NCT00257257
2006-06
NCT00239967
2007-02
NCT00075205
2007-03-15
NCT00325546
2007-04
NCT00288236
2007-07
NCT00124332
2007-10
NCT00299325
2008-07
NCT00636766
2009-01
Q7
At the median, Rimonabant's trials enrolled 430.5 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
430.5
Largest enrolment
18695
Registered trials counted
44
Q8
What do 135 spontaneous reports say about Rimonabant — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Rimonabant appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 135 reaction mentions were counted: hypertension 15; pyrexia 15; weight increased 15; fear of eating 14. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL111 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
hypertension
15
pyrexia
15
weight increased
15
fear of eating
14
atrial fibrillation
13
back pain
13
4 more recorded rows
dehydration
13
nausea
13
dyspepsia
12
gastrooesophageal reflux disease
12
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Was Rimonabant studied with fasting, caloric restriction and exercise?
fasting, caloric restriction and exercise are named in Rimonabant's label sentences: "Rimonabant 20 mg produced significantly greater improvements than placebo in waist circumference, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, fasting glucose and insulin levels, insulin resistance, and metabolic syndrome prevalence." openfda-label+europepmc · 2016-11-16
3 recorded statements; fasting, caloric restriction, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
Rimonabant 20 mg produced significantly greater improvements than placebo in waist circumference, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, fasting glucose and insulin levels, insulin resistance, and metabolic syndrome prevalence.
caloric restriction
An ample experimental program named RIO (Rimonabant In Obesity) involved about 6600 obese or overweight patients to identify the effects of rimonabant in weight loss and associated cardiometabolic abnormalities, over and beyond a caloric restriction of 600 kcal in the treatment and placebo arms.
exercise
Mice were then placed on a normal diet and were randomized to the following groups with n=12 mice for 6 more weeks: 1) Control (Co) - no intervention; 2) Exercise (Ex) - exercise training on treadmill; 3) Rimonabant (Ri) - oral administration of rimonabant (10 mg/kg/day); or 4) Rimonabant+Exercise (RiEx) - combination of Ri and Ex groups treatment.
recorded 2016-11-16 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q10
What is recorded about Rimonabant and autophagy?
"Whether or not the modulation of the autophagic response following HIR injury is involved in the hepatoprotective effect of the cannabinoid receptor 1(CB1R) antagonist rimonabant remains elusive and is the aim of the current study." — where Rimonabant and autophagy appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2021-09-15
"Whether or not the modulation of the autophagic response following HIR injury is involved in the hepatoprotective effect of the cannabinoid receptor 1(CB1R) antagonist rimonabant remains elusive and is the aim of the current study."
mTOR
PMID 34536742
"Rimonabant modulated the expression of p62, Beclin-1, and LC3, down-regulated CB1R, and dcreased pERK1/2, PI3K, Akt, and mTOR activities."
PMID 34536742
"The current study suggests that rimonabant can protect the liver from IR injury at least in part by inducing autophagy, probably by modulating ERK- and/or PI3K/AKT-mTOR signaling."
autophagyPMID 34536742
"The current study suggests that rimonabant can protect the liver from IR injury at least in part by inducing autophagy, probably by modulating ERK- and/or PI3K/AKT-mTOR signaling."
mTORPMID 30506571
"Feeding C57BL/6J mice a high-fat diet (HFD) inhibited hepatic Sirt1/mTORC2/Akt signaling, and the inhibition was reversed by rimonabant or JD5037 in wild-type but not liver-specific Sirt1<sup>-/-</sup> (Sirt1-LKO) mice, to levels observed in hepatocyte-specific CB<sub>1</sub> R<sup>-/-</sup> mice."
sirtuinPMID 30506571
"Feeding C57BL/6J mice a high-fat diet (HFD) inhibited hepatic Sirt1/mTORC2/Akt signaling, and the inhibition was reversed by rimonabant or JD5037 in wild-type but not liver-specific Sirt1<sup>-/-</sup> (Sirt1-LKO) mice, to levels observed in hepatocyte-specific CB<sub>1</sub> R<sup>-/-</sup> mice."
AMPK
PMID 31522677
"Rimonabant slightly stimulated β-oxidation of long-chain fatty acids in cultured rat myocytes overexpressing glucose transporter isoform 4, as well as activated phosphorylation of adenosine monophosphate-dependent protein kinase (AMPK) in primary rat hepatocytes upon long-term incubation."
PMID 30460698
"Finally, AMPK phosphorylation/activation and VASP phosphorylation are significantly reduced by SR141716, the specific inhibitor of type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1)."
autophagyPMID 25066892
"Pharmacological inhibition of CB1 activity using Rimonabant likewise caused an elevated autophagic flux, which was independent of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1, a major switch in the control of canonical autophagy."
AMPKPMID 19008231
"Amelioration of insulin resistance in the ob/ob mice was attributed to the decrease of glucose production and activation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) in the liver induced by rimonabant but not to increased glucose uptake by the skeletal muscle."
recorded 2021-09-15 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 8 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.