ArticleCureus2024
Pharmacokinetics of Siddha Antidiabetic Polyherbal Formulation Madhumega Chooranam in Healthy Volunteers.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Madhumega Chooranam (MMC), a traditional Siddha polyherbal formulation, is used for diabetes management. Understanding its pharmacokinetics is crucial for evaluating its efficacy and safety in clinical practice. This study aimed to assess the pharmacokinetics of gallic acid, a key component of MMC. Methodology Ten healthy volunteers were selected based on their willingness to participate and the absence of significant clinical conditions, including liver, kidney, heart, peripheral nerve disorders, or allergies. During the screening phase, participants with abnormal laboratory results in blood chemistry, hematology, or urine analysis were excluded. All participants provided written informed consent before the initiation of the study. Participants were administered a single oral dose of 6 g of MMC. Blood samples were collected at predetermined intervals over 24 hours to estimate gallic acid content used as a pharmacokinetic marker. Results Gallic acid concentration peaked in some participants' plasma samples at varying intervals post-administration, indicating individual differences in absorption and metabolism. In contrast, no gallic acid peaks were detected in the plasma samples of three participants, suggesting potential variability in metabolic response or rapid clearance. Conclusions The study's findings underscore the complexity of MMC's pharmacokinetics, influenced by individual metabolic and genetic factors. Additionally, this research highlights the need for an interdisciplinary approach, integrating traditional medicine with modern pharmacogenomics and gut microbiota studies, to fully understand Siddha formulations' pharmacokinetics and therapeutic potential. Future studies should focus on larger sample sizes and consider genetic and dietary factors to enhance the understanding of MMC's efficacy and safety in diverse populations.
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.