Trial reportGut and liver2018
Efficacy and Safety of UI05MSP015CT in Functional Dyspepsia: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Gut and liver, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- DA-9701 for Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome: A Randomized Pilot Study.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Article
- Postbiotic Potential of Heat-KilledJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Clinical Trial: Efficacy of Mosapride Controlled-release and Nortriptyline in Patients With Functional Dyspepsia: A Multicenter, Double-placebo, Double-blinded, Randomized Controlled, Parallel Clinical Study.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024Article
- Efficacy and Safety of DWJ1252 Compared With Gasmotin Treatment: Once Met 3 Times Tablets.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2021Article
- Beneficial Potential ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Microbiota: a novel regulator of pain.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2020Review
- Clinical Practice Guidelines for Functional Dyspepsia in Korea.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 19 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a controlled release, once-daily formulation of mosapride (UI05MSP015CT) in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). Methods: Patients with FD were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either UI05MSP015CT (15 mg once a day, study group) or mosapride (5 mg three times a day, control group) and corresponding placebo for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in the gastrointestinal symptom score (GIS) evaluated at enrollment and after 4 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in the Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K), rate of satisfactory symptom relief, and rate of adverse events. Results: A total of 138 patients were enrolled (female, 73.9%; mean age, 44.0±15.4 years). After excluding patients who violated the study protocol, 59 and 58 patients from the study and control groups, respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. No difference was observed in drug compliance between the control and study groups (97.07%±4.52% vs 96.85%±6.05%, p=0.870). Changes in GIS scores were -9.69±6.44 and -10.01±5.92 in the study and control groups. The mean difference in GIS change between groups was 0.33 (95% confidence interval, -1.75 to 2.41), demonstrating non-inferiority of UI-05MSP015CT (p=0.755). The rate of satisfactory symptom relief was not different between the study and control groups (39.0% vs 56.9%, p=0.053). No differences in change in NDI-K score (14.3 vs 16.9, p=0.263) or rates of adverse events (12.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.062) were observed between the study and control groups. Conclusions: Once-daily mosapride is not inferior to conventional mosapride in efficacy and is safe in patients with FD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.