ArticleSAGE open medicine2025
A multicenter, postmarketing surveillance of elobixibat in patients with chronic constipation in Japan: A final analysis report.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Elobixibat for Chronic Constipation Assessed by Rectal Ultrasonography: A Retrospective Observational Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Postmarketing surveillance of elobixibat for patients with chronic constipation and concomitant schizophrenia or depression in Japan.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Elobixibat Improves Stool/Gas Distribution and Fecal Bile Acids in Older Adults With Chronic Constipation.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: An interim analysis of postmarketing surveillance reported the safety and efficacy of elobixibat, a laxative medication that inhibits the ileal bile acid transporter, at 4 weeks in approximately 1000 patients with chronic constipation in Japan. However, its long-term safety and efficacy in elderly patients remain unclear. This study aimed to conclude and report the final analysis of postmarketing surveillance, including 52-week safety and efficacy profiles in a clinical practice setting, using approximately 3000 patients. Methods: The overall survey period spanned from June 2018 to May 2022. Observation periods were set at 4 weeks (4-week treatment period) and 52 weeks (52-week treatment period). Adverse drug reactions and efficacy outcomes, including defecation frequency, Bristol Stool Form Scale scores, and patient satisfaction, were analyzed. Results: The 4-week safety analysis set included 3638 patients with a mean age of 70.8 years, and 73.7% were aged ⩾65 years. Most patients (62.5%) were treated with elobixibat alone, while the rest received concomitant laxatives. In total, 231 patients (6.35%) experienced adverse drug reactions, with gastrointestinal disorders (6.02%) such as diarrhea (3.35%) and abdominal pain (2.06%), being the most common adverse drug reaction. The adverse drug reaction incidence in elderly patients aged ⩾65, ⩾75, and ⩾85 years was 5.49%, 4.85%, and 2.80%, respectively. In the 52-week treatment period, adverse drug reaction incidence was 5.40% (71/1315 patients), similar to that in the 4-week treatment period. Regarding efficacy, defecation frequency and Bristol Stool Form Scale scores significantly improved from week 2 onward, regardless of the age group and administration timing (before breakfast, lunch, or dinner). Most patients reported satisfaction from week 2 onward (6.0%, 66.9%, 78.6%, and 90.4% at baseline, weeks 2, 4, and 52, respectively). Conclusion: This study confirmed the long-term safety and efficacy of elobixibat in patients with chronic constipation, including many elderly ones, in routine clinical practice.
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.