ReviewTherapeutics and clinical risk management2014
Avanafil for erectile dysfunction in elderly and younger adults: differential pharmacology and clinical utility.
Review in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A Pragmatic Approach to Sexual Health in Movement Disorders.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Review
- Role of interaction mode of phenanthrene derivatives as selective PDE5 inhibitors using molecular dynamics simulations and quantum chemical calculations.Molecular diversity · 2025Article
- From Oral to Sublingual: A Redefined Avanafil Tablet with a Breakthrough in Bioavailability and First-Pass Metabolism Avoidance.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Article
- Avanafil use in patients with erectile dysfunction and co-morbidities: Clinical insights from multiple aetiologies - A case series.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2025Article
- A real-world pilot study assessing treatment satisfaction with avanafil in patients with erectile dysfunction.Sexual medicine · 2024Article
- Incorporating sodium deoxycholate endorsed the buccal administration of avanafil to heighten the bioavailability and duration of action.Drug delivery and translational research · 2023Article
- The Efficacy and Safety of Avanafil During a Treatment of Male Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2023Review
- Formulation and Optimization of Avanafil Biodegradable Polymeric Nanoparticles: A Single-Dose Clinical Pharmacokinetic Evaluation.Pharmaceutics · 2020Article
- Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors: back and forward from cardiac indications.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2016Review
- Clinical and preclinical treatment of urologic diseases with phosphodiesterase isoenzymes 5 inhibitors: an update.Asian journal of andrologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The treatment modalities of erectile dysfunction range from oral pharmacotherapy to intracavernosal injections, intraurethral pellets, vacuum erectile devices, and the surgical option of penile prosthesis insertion. Oral phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors still remain the preferred treatment for patients since they are the least invasive, not to mention that they can be prescribed by non-urologists. Due to these factors, there has been development of newer drugs with fewer side effects. This is a review of the second generation phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, avanafil, looking into its pharmacology as well as its clinical utility. Avanafil's faster onset and shorter duration of action has made it preferred as compared to other PDE5 inhibitors for patients with multiple comorbidities.
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.