ArticleRSC advances2024
Synthesis and mutagenic risk of avanafil's potential genotoxic impurities.
Article in RSC advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the technical route for the synthesis of avanafil, 1-ethyl-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbamyldiimide hydrochloride (EDCI) and 1-hydroxybenzotriazole (HOBT) are used as reactive acid-amine binding agents. HOBT contains trace amounts of hydrazine residue, and there is a risk of introducing potentially mutagenic impurities with hydrazide-containing structures. The potentially genotoxic impurities E (Imp-E) and F (Imp-F) of avanafil with altering hydrazide-structure were synthesized by chemical method; subsequently, the impurities were evaluated and classified according to ICH M7 guidelines. Two complementary quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) evaluation systems (Derek and Sarah) based on expert rules and statistics were used to preliminarily predict the genotoxicity of Imp-E and Imp-F, and the prediction result of E was suspected to be positive. In the Ames test of Imp-E and Imp-F, in the dose range of 62.5-1000 μg per plate, with or without the presence of metabolic activation system S9, the number of revertant colonies did not exceed 2 times the number of colonies in the solvent control group and did not show a dose-response relationship, and the test results were negative. Imp-E and Imp-F were determined to be negative for genotoxicity, which could be controlled as class 5 in ICH M7, that is, non mutagenic impurity.
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.