Trial reportNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2008
Effects of ursodeoxycholic acid on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous and oral midazolam in healthy volunteers.
Trial report in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction of Pharmacokinetics for CYP3A4-Metabolized Drugs in Pediatrics and Geriatrics Using Dynamic Age-Dependent Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Models.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Effects of ursodeoxycholic acid on rilpivirine plasma trough concentrations: a case report.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal and in vitro studies suggest that ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) can induce cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) expression and enhance its activities. On the other hand, Becquemont et al. demonstrated that UDCA had no influence on intestinal CYP3A activities. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of UDCA on the intestinal and hepatic CYP3A activities by administration of midazolam (MDZ), as a specific probe for CYP3A activity, in humans. This was a randomized, open-label, crossover study with two phases in 14 healthy volunteers. The volunteers received UDCA (300 mg/day) or placebo orally for 9 days. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous MDZ (5 microg/kg) and oral MDZ (15 microg/kg) were assessed on days 8 and 9, respectively. The pharmacodynamics of MDZ was estimated by measuring peak saccadic velocity, postural away length, critical fusion flicker frequency, and visual analogue scale. UDCA did not affect the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of intravenous and oral MDZ administrations. Our study suggests that the clinical dosage of UDCA could not affect both hepatic and intestinal CYP3A activities and that the drug interaction between UDCA and substrates for CYP3A is unlikely in humans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.