ArticlePain research & management2026
Exploratory Antinociceptive and Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Dittrichia viscosa Extracts: HPLC-PDA Fingerprinting, Preliminary Acute Tolerability, ADMET Prediction, and Docking-Based Prioritization.
Article in Pain research & management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present exploratory study examined a hydroethanolic extract (HEE) and an ethyl-acetate-derived fraction operationally termed the polyphenolic fraction (PF) of Dittrichia viscosa by combining HPLC-PDA fingerprinting, acute nociception and inflammation models, a 72-h acute oral tolerability screen of HEE, and in silico prioritization. The HPLC-PDA fingerprint of HEE contained 31 peaks. Because the available analytical record did not support validated absolute quantification, platform-exported values are reported only as relative chromatographic abundance. The larger peaks included p-coumaric acid (7.20%), caffeic acid (5.11%), a putative caffeic acid-O-hexoside dimer (4.55%), a putative isorhamnetin-O-hexoside (3.57%), a putative hydroxybenzoic acid hexoside (3.25%), and apigenin (3.23%); six annotations were standard-supported, whereas the remaining assignments were putative. In rats (n = 5/group), every treatment-control comparison in the writhing and formalin models was significant in the summary-statistic Dunnett reanalysis (adjusted p < 0.0001). PF at 100 mg/kg produced 59.5% writhing inhibition and mean differences versus vehicle of -38.46 s (95% CI -40.42 to -36.50) and -23.00 s (95% CI -24.45 to -21.55) in the early and late formalin phases, respectively. In the carrageenan model, significant differences occurred mainly at 6 h; PF at 100 mg/kg differed from vehicle by -0.24 cm (95% CI -0.34 to -0.14; adjusted p = 0.0002). Percentage inhibition values are descriptive. No mortality or overt clinical signs were observed after HEE doses up to 4000 mg/kg during 72 h, which constitutes preliminary acute tolerability evidence for HEE only. Predicted ADMET outputs and AutoDock Vina scores prioritized candidate ligands but do not establish exposure, safety, target inhibition, or causal contribution to the extract-level effects. These exploratory findings support further preclinical investigation, subject to chemical confirmation, raw-data-based longitudinal statistics, direct target assays, and guideline-compliant safety studies.
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.