ArticleCureus2024
A Single Ascending-Dose Study of the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of the Novel Respiratory Stimulant ENA-001.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting the Carotid Body Function With Big-KPharmacology research & perspectives · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Need for Pharmacologic Targets and Therapeutics for Postoperative Respiratory Depression and Pulmonary Complications in Veterinary Medicine.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- ENA-001 Reverses Xylazine/Fentanyl Combination-Induced Respiratory Depression in Rats: A Qualitative Pilot Study.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background ENA-001 (formerly known as GAL-021) is a novel, first-in-class respiratory stimulant. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, plus safety and tolerability, were assessed in a randomized, single-center study of healthy volunteers. Methodology This four-period study was designed to test continuous two-hour intravenous infusion regimens of ENA-001 at doses of 0.96, 1.44, and 1.92 mg/kg/hour versus placebo. Each participant received four infusions with a seven-day minimum washout between them: one infusion each of the three doses of ENA-001 and one placebo. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters were assessed and adverse events were recorded. Results A total of 17 participants completed the study. ENA-001 was generally safe and well tolerated over the dose range studied (0.96 to 1.92 mg/kg/hour). ENA-001 was able to drive hyperventilation in a dose-dependent manner in healthy participants. Increases in ventilation due to ENA-001 were not associated with like-magnitude blood pressure response. ENA-001-stimulated decreases in ETCO
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.