What clinical trials, if any, exist for Gelatide or its exact proprietary formula?

1. What the sources actually document about “gelatin” in trials

Multiple industry and scientific sources describe gelatin’s long history as a pharmaceutical excipient and as the material for hard and soft capsules used in clinical work — Gelita and other suppliers present gelatin as indispensable for capsules and related applications ^[3], and textbooks and reviews explain gelatin’s biodegradability, film‑forming properties and regulatory acceptance that underpin its frequent use in clinical contexts ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Evidence of clinical trials that involve gelatin‑based products (but not Gelatide)

There are published clinical trials that used gelatin capsules as the delivery vehicle or evaluated gelatin‑containing delivery systems; for example, a double‑blind randomized safety trial administered freeze‑dried lactobacilli in gelatin capsules vaginally (PubMed trial) ^[4], and reviews note that gelatin‑based microspheres and other drug‑delivery systems have reached clinical evaluation though such work is described as still early stage ^[2]. Industry capsule products explicitly marketed for double‑blind clinical trials (ACGcaps™, DBcaps®, PCcaps®) indicate widespread adoption of gelatin shells in study formulations, but these are packaging/delivery platforms rather than investigational active formulations themselves ^{[5] [6] [7]}.

3. Why absence of “Gelatide” in the reporting matters

None of the supplied pages mention a branded therapeutic or investigational product named Gelatide or specify an exact proprietary composition called Gelatide; the material focus is on gelatin as a class of excipient and on capsule manufacturers and delivery technologies ^{[5] [8] [9]}. Because the reporting provided centers on suppliers, formulation science, and gelatin-based delivery formats rather than product‑level clinical registrations, it cannot be used to assert that Gelatide has undergone clinical trials.

4. How one would verify clinical trials for a proprietary formula like Gelatide

To confirm whether a proprietary formula has been clinically tested requires searching clinical trial registries and peer‑reviewed publications for the exact product name, sponsoring company, or active ingredient list; the supplied material instead points investigators to capsule manufacturers and gelatin delivery research, not registry entries for a Gelatide product ^{[6] [10]}. The reporting shows relevant precedents — e.g., using hard gelatin capsules in Phase I studies and early formulation trials — which explains why a company could test a gelatin‑containing proprietary product, but no source here documents that specific step for Gelatide ^[10].

5. Potential sources of confusion and the agendas behind them

Commercial pages from capsule makers and gelatin suppliers naturally promote the versatility and trial‑friendliness of their products ^{[5] [6] [3]}, which can create the impression that many gelatin‑branded products have clinical evidence; however, marketing of capsule shells or branded supply services is not the same as clinical evidence for a proprietary therapeutic. Scientific reviews caution that gelatin‑based drug‑delivery systems are promising but still early in clinical evaluation, a caveat that temper marketing narratives ^[2].

6. Bottom line — what can and cannot be concluded from the provided reporting

From the supplied documents it is accurate to conclude that gelatin is extensively used in clinical and preclinical work and that gelatin‑based delivery systems have entered some clinical evaluations, but there is no documentation here of any clinical trial of a product explicitly named “Gelatide” or of an “exact proprietary formula” under that name; the sources simply do not provide that product‑level evidence ^{[1] [4] [2]}. Any definitive statement about Gelatide’s trial history would require registry or publication records that are not included in the provided reporting.