ArticlePharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparative Investigation of pH-Dependent Availability of Pancreatic Enzyme Preparations In Vitro.
Article in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to compare different pancreatic enzyme preparations (PEPs) available in Germany regarding particle geometry and size, and to evaluate enzyme activity under physiologically relevant conditions in vitro. Pancreatic endocrine insufficiency is characterized by deficiency of pancreatic enzymes resulting in maldigestion. It is orally treated by pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. The formulations differ in their physical properties and enzyme release behavior, potentially resulting in inconsistent dosages and poor interchangeability of products. A total of 25 products were analyzed for particle size and number of particles per capsule. Enzyme activities of lipase, amylase, and protease were measured by digestion of olive oil emulsion, starch, and casein, respectively. To analyze enzyme release, gastric environments were simulated by incubating PEPs at pH 1, 4, or 5. Duodenal conditions were simulated by subsequent incubation at pH 6. Regarding physical properties and enzyme release kinetics, considerable differences between different PEPs were found. Furthermore, compared to the label claim, excess lipase activity was observed for most products, reaching up to 148%. These in vitro results suggest poor interchangeability of PEPs, potentially explained by physical and release characteristics. Physicians and patients should be aware of the potential gap between label claims and the real-life performance of different PEPs.
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.