Trial reportResearch and reports in urology2026
Fucoidan from
Trial report in Research and reports in urology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) is a common non-malignant prostate enlargement that contributes to bladder outlet obstruction and lower urinary tract symptoms in men as they age. Patients and Methods: In this 90-day study, ninety-five men aged 45-80 years with clinically and radiologically confirmed moderate BPH [International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) between 8-19] were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either Results: By day 60, the UPF group showed significant improvement in total IPSS score compared to placebo (p=0.0234), with further improvements by day 90 (p=0.0015). The mean reduction in total IPSS score from baseline to day 90 was -3.40 in the UPF group versus -0.93 in the placebo group. Voiding (p=0.0006) and storage (p=0.0150), sub-scores improved significantly by day 90 in the UPF group. Quality of life related to urinary symptoms improved continuously by day 60 and 90 (both p<0.05 vs placebo). A higher proportion of UPF-treated participants achieved MCID ≥2 (60.0%) and ≥3 points (51.1%) compared to placebo (42.2% and 28.9%), with statistical significance for ≥3 points (p=0.0314) at day 90. Urinary flow rate improved and PVR decreased in both groups; however, between-group differences, including PSA, were not statistically significant. Importantly, UPF was well tolerated. Conclusion: UPF supplementation was associated with statistically and clinically significant IPSS improvement, including voiding and storage composite scores, and enhanced prostate-related quality of life when compared to placebo. Secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between groups, and the duration (90 days) limits long-term interpretation. UPF appears safe and potentially beneficial for managing moderate BPH symptoms.
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.