ArticleEndocrine2025
Intranasal pramlintide matches intraperitoneal effects on food intake and gastric emptying in mice.
Article in Endocrine, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePramlintide is an amylin analog developed as a complementary treatment for diabetes. However, it requires several subcutaneous injections, reducing patients' adherence. Since the intranasal route might be an alternative for drug administration, we evaluated whether intranasal pramlintide treatment exerts comparable actions with intraperitoneal administration.
methodsAdult male Swiss mice were submitted to a refeeding test in a dose-response study with intraperitoneal (PRAM i.p.) or intranasal (PRAM i.n.) pramlintide administration. Intraperitoneal liraglutide served as a positive control (LIRA). Then, the selected dose was administered to analyze gastric emptying after an acute exposure. We also evaluated an 8-day treatment (once daily) to determine food intake and body mass. Blood glucose and plasma triacylglycerides were measured on the euthanasia day.
resultsIn the refeeding test, the anorexigenic dose for the PRAM i.p. or LIRA i.p groups was 200 µg/kg and 400 µg/kg, respectively. The PRAM i.n. group (200 µg/kg) exhibited a trend for that. The reduction in gastric emptying occurred for all treated groups compared with their respective controls (vehicle-treated). Neither the PRAM i.p. nor the PRAM i.n. groups exhibited reduced body mass and food intake in the subchronic experiment. No impact on biochemical parameters was observed regardless of the route of pramlintide administration.
conclusionAlthough intranasal pramlintide is not comparable in magnitude to intraperitoneal administration at an equivalent administered dose, our evidence corroborates the development of novel intranasal formulations destined to overpass the bioavailability issue and potentially serve as an alternative route.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40169506What 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.