ArticleClinical and translational science2023
Rethinking, reducing, and refining the classical oral tyramine challenge test of monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Identification and Biogenic Amine Production Capacity ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Hazardous Interactions Between Food, Herbs, and Drugs in the First Stage of Biotransformation: Case Reports of Adverse Drug Interactions in Humans.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Rethinking, reducing, and refining the classical oral tyramine challenge test of monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The oral tyramine challenge evaluates the safety of novel monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors when taken with tyramine-containing food or drinks. In its current design, it comprises an extensive series of tyramine escalation steps until a blood pressure threshold is met. Due to the high variation in tyramine bioavailability, and thereby in blood pressure effect, this classical design has various limitations, including safety concerns. Based on data from a previously performed tyramine challenge study, the present study explored a reduced new design that escalates up to 400 mg, and evaluates the dose to a tyramine peak plasma concentration of ≥10 ng/mL, instead of a dose up to 800 mg, and to a blood pressure change of ≥30 mm Hg. Tested by trial simulation, the new design proves more efficient than the classical design in terms of better identifying tyramine sensitivity of test and reference treatments and reducing false-positive and false-negative rates in estimating tyramine sensitivity by more than 10-fold. Since it escalates over a lower tyramine dose range, the new design reduces risk to subjects associated with tyramine-induced blood pressure excursions, is less demanding for study participants, and is more efficient. By its focus on tyramine bioavailability as the primary concern for novel MAO inhibitors, the new tyramine challenge study provides better answers in a simplified and safer design compared with the classical design in trial simulation, warranting its use in future clinical studies.
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.