Trial reportClinical and translational science2016
A Novel Method for Studying the Pharmacokinetics of [(14) C]Umeclidinium After Application to the Axilla or Palm of Healthy Male Subjects.
Trial report in Clinical and translational science, 2016. 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.
- Systemic Tofacitinib Concentrations in Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis Treated With 2% Tofacitinib Ointment and Application to Pediatric Study Planning.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2019Trial
- Hyperhidrosis: A Review of Recent Advances in Treatment with Topical Anticholinergics.Dermatology and therapy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Umeclidinium (UMEC), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist approved for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), was investigated for primary hyperhidrosis as topical therapy. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of a single dose of [(14) C]UMEC applied to either unoccluded axilla (UA), occluded axilla (OA), or occluded palm (OP) of healthy males. After 8 h the formulation was removed. [(14) C]UMEC plasma concentrations (Cp) were quantified by accelerator mass spectrometry. Occlusion increased systemic exposure by 3.8-fold. Due to UMEC absorption-limited pharmacokinetics, Cp data from the OA were combined with intravenous data from a phase I study. The data were described by a two-compartment population model with sequential zero and first-order absorption and linear elimination. Simulated systemic exposure following q.d. doses to axilla was similar to the exposure from the inhaled therapy, suggesting that systemic safety following dermal administration can be bridged to the inhaled program, and offering the potential for a reduced number of studies and/or subjects.
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.