What published clinical data exist for any drug named gelatide, and where can those studies be accessed?
Executive summary
A targeted review of the supplied reporting finds no published clinical data for any drug or investigational product explicitly named “gelatide” in the provided sources; instead the literature is rich with studies of gelatin-based carriers, microspheres, nanoparticles and gelatin-containing formulations, with clinical reports focused on gelatin solutions and gelatin-based embolic agents rather than a product called “gelatide” [1] [2] [3]. For investigators seeking clinical access points, the available clinical and translational data on gelatin as a drug-delivery material can be read in open repositories (PMC, PubMed) and trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov), but a discrete “gelatide” clinical program does not appear in the assembled reporting [2] [4] [5] [6].
1. What was actually searched and what the sources show
The assembled sources center on gelatin as a biomaterial—reviews and mini‑reviews cataloguing preclinical work, early clinical reports of gelatin microspheres and colloids, and multiple database entries for gelatin formulations—but none of the items in the provided set names or describes a therapeutic called “gelatide,” indicating the available reporting addresses gelatin platforms rather than a drug with that proprietary name [2] [1] [7].
2. Clinical data that do exist for gelatin-based products (not “gelatide”)
Clinical publications and trial records document gelatin-containing or gelatin‑based products: phase I/clinical experience with gelatin‑derived embolic agents (trisacryl gelatin microspheres) used in uterine artery embolization and reported outcomes such as pain reduction and menorrhagia control [1] [2], controlled‑volume gelatin colloids evaluated for plasma expansion in intensive care settings [8], and investigational gelatin conjugates or gelatin‑nanoparticle carriers tested in translational oncology work reported in PMC and PubMed articles [4] [9] [7].
3. Where to access those published studies and trial records
Open‑access review articles and primary articles on gelatin platforms are available on PubMed Central and PubMed (for example the MDPI review and its PMC mirror, and Frontiers and NCBI articles summarized here) which cover both preclinical and the limited clinical work to date [1] [2] [7] [4]. Registered clinical trials and study descriptions for gelatin formulations appear in ClinicalTrials.gov entries (examples in the provided reporting include NCT00002367, NCT02040480 and an investigational doxycycline nanoparticle trial NCT06809829) and specific journal reports on gelatin colloids and embolic microspheres are retrievable via PubMed/PMC links cited in the reviews [5] [6] [10] [8]. Drug‑centric reference resources (DrugBank) summarize regulatory status and uses of gelatin and note FDA actions related to gelatin in certain intravenous products [3].
4. How the evidence relates to the question “gelatide”
Because the reporting catalogues gelatin as a class of materials and product components (microspheres, nanoparticles, colloids, capsule shells) rather than naming “gelatide,” no specific clinical trials, phase results, or published pharmacology are attributable to a product of that name within the supplied sources; therefore asserting clinical data for “gelatide” would exceed what these sources support [2] [1] [3]. If “gelatide” is a trade name, local brand, or a newly coined term, that entity either is not represented in the provided dataset or lacks published clinical reporting in these sources.
5. Caveats, alternative interpretations and next steps for verification
An alternative possibility is that “gelatide” is an emerging commercial name not captured in these specific reports or that relevant clinical documents exist outside the supplied set (regulatory filings, non‑indexed conference abstracts, industry press releases); confirming its existence requires broader searches of regulatory databases, company press materials, clinical trial registries beyond the supplied entries, and patent filings, because the present reporting reliably documents gelatin research but does not substitute for exhaustive public‑record searches for a named product [2] [3] [1]. Hidden agendas in some reviews favor promoting gelatin platforms as “clinical ready,” and reviewers and vendors may conflate material‑level success (biocompatibility, microsphere performance) with an approved drug entity—readers should distinguish platform literature from evidence for a specific marketed or investigational drug name [1] [2].