Trial reportJournal of Korean medical science2017
A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Multi-Center Therapeutic Confirmatory Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Avanafil in Korean Patients with Erectile Dysfunction.
Trial report in Journal of Korean medical science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02477436 (A Randomized, Placebo Controlled, Double Blind, Multicenter Therapeutic Exploratory Clinical Study for the Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Avanafil in the Patients With Erectile Dysfunction), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
A Randomized, Placebo Controlled, Double Blind, Multicenter Therapeutic Exploratory Clinical Study for the Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Avanafil in the Patients With Erectile Dysfunction
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Placebo Responses Among Men With Erectile Dysfunction Enrolled in Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitor Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2020Pooled it
- Avanafil for the Treatment of men With Erectile Dysfunction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.American journal of men's healthPooled it
- Efficacy and safety of avanafil as compared with sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction: A randomized, double blind, multicenter clinical trial.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2022Trial
- A Bioequivalence Study of Avanafil in Healthy Chinese Male Subjects Under Fasting and Fed Conditions: Results of a Randomized, Open-Label, Single-Dose, 2-Sequence, 2-Period Crossover Study.Clinical pharmacology in drug development · 2021Trial
- 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
- 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
- Efficacy and Safety of Avanafil in Chinese Subjects With Erectile Dysfunction: A Multi-Center, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Clinical Trial.Sexual medicine · 2021Article
- Effects of the Phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) Inhibitors, Avanafil and Zaprinast, on Bone Remodeling and Oxidative Damage in a Rat Model of Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis.Medical science monitor basic research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted with 158 subjects who were randomized to placebo or avanafil 50, 100, and 200 mg on demand for 8 weeks to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of avanafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in Korean men. The primary outcome was the erectile function (EF) domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included changes in the scores of IIEF questions 3 and 4 (IIEF Q3, Q4) from baseline, changes in all domain scores in the IIEF from baseline, Sexual Encounter Profile questions 2-5 (SEP2-5), the Global Efficacy Assessment Question (GEAQ), and the number of subjects whose EF domain score at the 8th week visit was ≥ 26. After 8 weeks of treatment, the dose groups except avanafil 50 mg scored significantly higher on the IIEF-EF domain from baseline than the placebo group. The changes from baseline in the avanafil group in IIEF Q3 (all doses) and Q4 (200 mg alone) were higher than the placebo group. The differences between avanafil and placebo groups were significant in SEP2 (100 and 200 mg) and SEP3-5 (200 mg). The differences in the GEAQ "Yes" response were also significant in the avanafil 100 and 200 mg groups. Regarding the ratio of normal EF at the end of the study, avanafil 200 mg differed significantly from the placebo. Most treatment-associated adverse events were mild and resolved spontaneously. This is a clinical trial study and was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02477436).
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.