Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32316581›Full record

SynthesisNutrients2020

Efficacy and Safety of Polaprezinc (Zinc Compound) on Zinc Deficiency: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials Using Individual Patient Data.

Kei Furihata, Masaru Tsuchikawa, Takaki Miwa, Yuji Naito, Koji Oba, Masafumi Sakagami

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. A review for non-antibiotic treatment ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Kei FurihataBiostatistics, Data Science, Clinical Administration, Zeria Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 10-11, Nihonbashi Kobuna-cho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-8351, Japan.
Masaru TsuchikawaBiostatistics, Data Science, Clinical Administration, Zeria Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 10-11, Nihonbashi Kobuna-cho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-8351, Japan.
Takaki MiwaDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Kanazawa Medical University, 1-1 Daigaku, Uchinada, Ishikawa 920-0293, Japan.
Yuji NaitoDepartment of Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Science, 465 Kajii-chi, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Koji ObaDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan.
Masafumi SakagamiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, Japan.
Zeria Pharmaceutical (Japan) · JPHyogo Medical University · JPKanazawa Medical University · JPKyoto Prefectural University of Medicine · JPThe University of Tokyo · JP

Funding

Zeria Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Zinc intake is recommended for zinc deficiency. In clinical practice, polaprezinc has been used as a zinc replacement therapy for zinc deficiency. However, the efficacy of polaprezinc has not been established. To confirm the efficacy on zinc deficiency of polaprezinc and provide additional information on an appropriate regimen, we conducted a systematic review using individual patient data (IPD). We searched PubMed, the Japanese database Ichushi, and the database owned by the marketing authorization holder of polaprezinc. Randomized placebo-controlled trials that reported the serum zinc concentration were eligible. The mean difference of the change from baseline in serum zinc concentration was estimated using a fixed-effects model. The linear dose-response relationship and the subgroup effects were also assessed. Out of 54 unique randomized clinical trials (RCTs), four studies met the eligibility criteria, and we could access IPD for all of them. All three doses of polaprezinc (75 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg) and the placebo group were examined. The dose-combined overall polaprezinc increased the change from baseline by a mean of 9.08 µg/dL (95% confidence interval: 5.46, 12.70; heterogeneity: I2 = 0.61%) compared to the placebo. A significant dose-response relationship was confirmed (p < 0.001). Baseline serum zinc concentration was considered an effect modifier in polaprezinc 300 mg. All doses of polaprezinc were tolerable, but a dose-response relationship with adverse events (AEs) was observed in gastrointestinal disorders. The dose of 300 mg may be useful among patients with baseline serum zinc concentration of less than 70 µg/dL, and 150 mg for 70 µg/dL or more.

Indexed as

CarnosineDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansMaleOrganometallic CompoundsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSafetyTreatment OutcomeZincZinc CompoundsCarnosineOrganometallic CompoundspolaprezincZincZinc CompoundsIPD meta-analysispolaprezincserum zinc concentrationsystematic reviewzinc deficiencyzinc L-carnosine

Identifiers

PMID32316581
PMCPMC7230469
OpenAlexW3016503623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.