ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2015
A comparison of linaclotide and lubiprostone dosing regimens on ion transport responses in human colonic mucosa.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2015. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ClC-2 Chloride Channel Activator, Lubiprostone, Improves Intestinal Barrier Function in Biopsies from Crohn's Disease but Not Ulcerative Colitis Patients.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Functional Disorders: Slow-Transit Constipation.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Linaclotide, a synthetic guanylyl cyclase C (GC-C) agonist, and the prostone analog, Lubiprostone, are approved to manage chronic idiopathic constipation and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. Lubiprostone also protects intestinal mucosal barrier function in ischemia. GC-C signaling regulates local fluid balance and other components of intestinal mucosal homeostasis including epithelial barrier function. The aim of this study was to compare if select dosing regimens differentially affect linaclotide and lubiprostone modulation of ion transport and barrier properties of normal human colonic mucosa. Normal sigmoid colon biopsies from healthy subjects were mounted in Ussing chambers. Tissues were treated with linaclotide, lubiprostone, or vehicle to determine effects on short-circuit current (I sc). Subsequent I sc responses to the cAMP agonist, forskolin, and the calcium agonist, carbachol, were also measured to assess if either drug caused desensitization. Barrier properties were assessed by measuring transepithelial electrical resistance. I sc responses to linaclotide and lubiprostone were significantly higher than vehicle control when administered bilaterally or to the mucosal side only. Single versus cumulative concentrations of linaclotide showed differences in efficacy while cumulative but not single dosing caused desensitization to forskolin. Lubiprostone reduced forskolin responses under all conditions. Linaclotide and lubiprostone exerted a positive effect on TER that was dependent on the dosing regimen. Linaclotide and lubiprostone increase ion transport responses across normal human colon but linaclotide displays increased sensitivity to the dosing regimen used. These findings may have implications for dosing protocols of these agents in patients with constipation.
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.