ArticlePloS one2021
Genistein as a dietary supplement; formulation, analysis and pharmacokinetics study.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genistein Reduces Anxiety-like Behavior During Metestrus-Diestrus Phase Without Changing Estradiol or Progesterone Levels in Wistar Rats.Metabolites · 2025Article
- An Updated Review Summarizing the Pharmaceutical Efficacy of Genistein and its Nanoformulations in Ovarian Carcinoma.Current pharmaceutical design · 2025Review
- Effects of Isoflavone Intake on Energy Requirement, Satiety, and Body Composition of Neutered Adult Cats.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Predicting Pharmacokinetics of Active Constituents inPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Inhibition of αNutrients · 2022Article
- Navigating Calcium and Reactive Oxygen Species by Natural Flavones for the Treatment of Heart Failure.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to improve and optimize the formulation of Genistein in capsules in order to result in a better pharmacokinetic profile comparing to existing commercial products. In order to do this, five different formulations of Genistein capsules were developed and examined by reviewing their disintegration and dissolution properties. Furthermore, flowability of the powder along with potent incompatibilities between Genistein and its excipients were monitored through their thermal properties. The final formulation of Genistein was quantified using HPLC analysis and then its stability was evaluated thoroughly in real time and accelerated conditions. Finally, with the target to have a product with actual results, in vitro and in vivo studies were conducted. The final product proved to have better results in disintegration and dissolution. Moreover, R.G.C.C.'s capsules exhibited enhanced action in human cell lines as well as impressive pharmacokinetic results in animal models. The in vitro results showed an advantage of the R.G.C.C. product compared to the commercial one, whereas its maximum concertation in vivo was determined 34% higher than the commercial one.
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.