Trial reportResearch and reports in urology2026
Comparative Evaluation of Three Cranberry Formulations in Women with Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections: An Observational Study.
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. It is linked to trial NCT04962971 (Comparative Observational Study Evaluating the Urinary Comfort Related to Cystitis Symptoms Episodes and the Satisfaction of Women Following the Consumption of 3 Cranberry Extracts), which is not on this 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.
Comparative Observational Study Evaluating the Urinary Comfort Related to Cystitis Symptoms Episodes and the Satisfaction of Women Following the Consumption of 3 Cranberry Extracts
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Although cranberry supplementation has been investigated for recurrent UTI prevention with heterogeneous demonstrations, direct comparisons of putative active compositions remain scarce. The present study aimed to compare three cranberry formulations differing in composition and PACs (Proanthocyanidins) profiles on recurrent UTI episodes, urinary symptoms and quality of life in women with recurrent UTIs. Patients and Methods: Three extracts differing in the sources of their fruits, extraction process, solubility, and composition were characterized (40SD, 40G, and FG). A total of 219 women aged 18 to 65 years with recurrent UTI episodes were enrolled in an observational, comparative, open-label, parallel clinical study and allocated to receive one of three treatments for 6 months. Posology was standardized to provide equivalent amounts of PACs, and endpoints were assessed at baseline and after 6 months. Results: Extract characterization differed notably for organic acids, fibre, monomeric phenolic compounds, soluble and oligomeric forms of PACs, and the degree of polymerization. All three extracts significantly improved urinary comfort (VAS, 53.8 ± 16.2 → 80.9 ± 25.6; p < 0.001), symptomatic episodes (frequency: 2.9 → 0.8; p < 0.001; duration: 2.7 → 0.7 days; p < 0.001), global symptom intensity assessed using the ACSS, global quality of life assessed using the SF-Qualiveen, and psychosocial impact questionnaire scores, with no significant differences between groups. However, the 40G group showed a significantly greater improvement in ACSS-Differential scores (symptoms related to adjacent organs) during cystitis-like episodes, complementary ACSS items (eg, burden on daily activities), the "Fears" domain of SF-Qualiveen, and earlier onset of significant effects in these questionnaires. Conclusion: The standardization of posology based on total PACs (162 mg/day, including insoluble polymeric forms) rather than soluble oligomeric PACs (36 mg/day, BL-DMAC) appears relevant for the improvement of UTIs and related symptoms. Treatment with an extract (40G) with a specific ratio of insoluble/soluble fruit parts and, consequently, a distinct PACs profile resulted in greater improvements. Trial Registration: NCT04962971.
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.