Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38443633›Full record

Trial reportPharmaceutical research2024

Clinical Investigation of Large Volume Subcutaneous Delivery up to 25 mL for Lean and Non-Lean Subjects.

Xiangnan Dang, Han Shih, Rakesh Sharma, Daneen T Angwin-Kaerner, Kathleen Lin, Shiven Kapur, Nagarajan R Thyagarajapuram, Galen H Shi, David S Collins

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pharmaceutical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
18.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Xiangnan DangEli Lilly and Company, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02142, United States of America.
Han ShihEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Technology Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46221, United States of America. hannie.shih@lilly.com.
Rakesh SharmaEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Capability Center India, Bangalore, 560103, Karnataka, India.
Daneen T Angwin-KaernerEli Lilly and Company, Louisville, Colorado, 80027, United States of America.
Kathleen LinEli Lilly and Company, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02142, United States of America.
Shiven KapurEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Technology Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46221, United States of America.
Nagarajan R ThyagarajapuramEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Capability Center India, Bangalore, 560103, Karnataka, India.
Galen H ShiEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Technology Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46221, United States of America.
David S CollinsEli Lilly and Company, Lilly Technology Center, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46221, United States of America.
Eli Lilly (United States) · USEli Lilly (India) · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the clinical feasibility and tolerability of large volume subcutaneous delivery at different injection depths for lean and non-lean subjects.

methodsA single-center, randomized, subject-blinded, crossover study in 62 healthy subjects was conducted to evaluate delivery of a 10-cP solution containing hyaluronic acid. Subjects were separated into lean and non-lean cohort by SC thickness. A syringe pump was used to study the effect of different volumes (5, 12, 25 mL) of a viscous placebo solution and needle lengths (6, 9 and 12 mm) delivered at 0.5 mL/min.

resultsAcross all treatments, injection sites were observed to have negligible leakage, ~34 kPa of back pressure, and VAS of mild pain with higher pain from needle insertion than during injection. While mild to moderate erythema was the most frequently reported ISR and edema was most prominent for 25 mL injections, all ISRs were resolved within 4 hours post injection. Subjects were unbothered by ISRs across all treatments and rated them as low distress scores (average 1.0-1.5 out of 6).

conclusionSC injection of 25 mL is feasible and tolerable using a low-pain formulation for abdomen injection irrespective of subcutaneous thickness and injection depths at a delivery rate of 0.5 mL/min.

Indexed as

PainSubcutaneous TissueCross-Over StudiesHumansInjections, Subcutaneousinjection depthinjection site paininjection site reactionslarge volume subcutaneous injectionpatient preference

Identifiers

PMID38443633
OpenAlexW4392453043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.