ReviewClinical medicine insights. Gastroenterology2012
Lubiprostone for the treatment of adult women with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation.
Review in Clinical medicine insights. Gastroenterology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Clinical response to linaclotide at week 4 predicts sustained response in irritable bowel syndrome with constipation and improvements in digestive and extra-digestive symptoms.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Luminally Acting Agents for Constipation Treatment: A Review Based on Literatures and Patents.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017Review
- Lubiprostone in constipation: clinical evidence and place in therapy.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) affects approximately 5% of the population in western countries. The majority of those afflicted are women. Symptoms are often detrimental to the individual's quality of life and incur high healthcare costs to society. There is no evidence to support changes in lifestyle, laxatives or over the counter supplements. Tegaserod appeared to have promising results but was promptly removed from the market due to adverse cardiovascular events. In 2008, lubiprostone (Amitiza) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of women with IBS-C. It is thought to selectively activate type 2 chloride channels in the apical membrane of the intestinal epithelial cells leading to chloride secretion. As result, sodium and water are passively secreted generating peristalsis and laxation, without stimulating gastrointestinal smooth muscle. Several trials with predominantly female patients have shown it to be effective in the treatment of IBS-C. Overall lubiprostone was safe, well tolerated and associated with mostly benign side effects. Nausea and diarrhea were the most commonly reported. Though there are no head to head comparisons with other pharmacological agents, it is our opinion that lubiprostone should be tried as a first line pharmacotherapy for women with IBS-C at a dose of 8 μg BID. Thus far, lubiprostone offers a welcome approach to our narrow therapeutic armamentarium. Further understanding of its mechanism of action may provide additional insight into the pathophysiology of IBS-C.
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.