ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence assessment of two prucalopride formulations in healthy Chinese women: a randomized, open-label, two-period, two-sequence, self-crossover study.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) bioequivalence of generic and branded prucalopride formulations. Methods: Twenty-four healthy female subjects were enrolled in both fasted and fed trials, with each subject receiving either the test (generic) or reference (branded) formulation after an overnight fast. Blood samples were collected up to 72 h post-administration. Plasma concentrations of prucalopride were quantified using ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS), and the corresponding PK parameters were subsequently calculated. Clinical safety data were monitored throughout the trial period. Results: All 24 subjects completed both the fasted and fed trials. No significant differences were found in the PK data between the test and reference formulations for either the fasted or fed states. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test of T Conclusion: The generic and branded prucalopride tablets were bioequivalent in terms of PK parameters and demonstrated no clinically relevant differences in safety outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/clinicaltrials.prosearch.dhtml, identifier CTR20232669.
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.