This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Acetylcholine does in the body
To obtain miosis of the iris in seconds after delivery of the lens in cataract surgery, in penetrating keratoplasty, iridectomy, and other anterior segment surgery where rapid miosis may be required.
From the FDA-approved label: Acetylcholine is a naturally occurring neurohormone which mediates nerve impulse transmission at all cholinergic sites involving somatic and autonomic nerves. After release from the nerve ending, acetylcholine is rapidly inactivated by the enzyme acetylcholinesterase by hydrolysis to acetic acid and choline. Direct application of acetylcholine to the iris will cause rapid miosis of short duration. Topical ocular instillation of acetylcholine to the intact eye causes no discernible response as cholinesterase destroys the molecule more rapidly than it can penetrate the cornea.
Why people take it. To obtain miosis of the iris in seconds after delivery of the lens in cataract surgery, in penetrating keratoplasty, iridectomy, and other anterior segment surgery where rapid miosis may be required.
What happened in people
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Not recorded.
Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · N9YNS0M02X · read 2026-08-29
The supplement label database classes it as non-nutrient/non-botanical, under the name Acetylcholine.
The use the label states, quoted from it. No plain-language version of this sentence has been written.
The use the label states, quoted from it. It is written for a clinician, not for a reader without medical training.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 158 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 29 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Blood sugar
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved1 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Blood sugar
microvascular insulin mediated dilation
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
1 registered test measure.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
SARS-COV2 seroconversion between W0 and W19 after randomization
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04583410
How many people
1633
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Ophthalmic
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
all cause mortality (cardiac vs. non-cardiac)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00921856
How many people
1000
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Ophthalmic
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Incidence of Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) Following Dosing With AXS-05
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04039022
How many people
876
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Ophthalmic
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Safety and Tolerability of EVP-6124 or Placebo in Subjects with Schizophrenia
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01714713
How many people
830
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Ophthalmic
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change from Baseline in the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) to Day 182
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01716975
How many people
767
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Ophthalmic
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change from Baseline in the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) to Day 182
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01714661
How many people
753
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Ophthalmic
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.3 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in C. elegans (roundworm), Drosophila (fruit fly), Rat, Dog. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (26)
amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli
forearm blood flow after tetraethylammonium administration
vascular endothelial function
cardiac output
apelin mediated vasodilatation
endothelial dysfunction
baseline systolic diastolic and mean blood pressures
baseline sympathetic nerve activity
vascular conductance
installation of the heartphone application
functional sympatholysis
endothelium dependent vasodilation
endothelium independent vasodilation
aortic stiffness
endothelial cell er stress marker atf6
endothelial cell er stress marker perk
endothelial cell er stress marker ire1
endothelial cell er stress marker chop
endothelial cell er stress marker grp78
endothelial cell er stress marker gadd34
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
For temporary relief of symptoms including dizziness, chest congestion, cough, fatigue, rash, itching, headache and poor memory. **These statements are based upon homeopathic principles. They have not been reviewed by the Food and Drug Administration.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “Safety and effectiveness in pediatric patients have not been established.”
US prescribing information · e701ef07-9499-4b56-931f-f4eb3eedbe24 · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Prescription only
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Ophthalmic
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as for solution, liquid, given by the ophthalmic, oral route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Reports sent to a regulator
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Acetylcholine appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 61 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Ophthalmic
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
188 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as non-nutrient/non-botanical, other combinations and vitamin.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and qualified health claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (12)
Q1
What did Acetylcholine's largest trial (174 people) and its longest (13 years) measure?
174 people in Acetylcholine's largest registered study, 13 years in its longest registered window, measuring Maternal biomarkers of choline status. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
12 na, 9 phase1, 8 early phase1, 8 phase2, 5 na or unstated; NCT00152724; 2008-11. Last human test completed 2021, NCT03738943.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Acetylcholine was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
na
12
phase1
9
early phase1
8
phase2
8
na or unstated
5
Last recorded human testNCT03738943
2021-06-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From C. elegans to human: where has Acetylcholine shown lifespan?
Interpretation Maternal biomarkers of choline status — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
C. elegans
lifespan
Drosophila
mechanism-only
rat
mechanism-only
dog
mechanism-only
humanNCT01127022
biomarker; Maternal biomarkers of choline status; 40
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
8 of Acetylcholine's trials stopped: safety, futility/efficacy, accrual/recruitment, funding/business, other?
safety (1), futility/efficacy (1), accrual/recruitment (2), funding/business (2) and other (2): Acetylcholine's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
"Limited clinical staff"; 8 of 40 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00166166
terminated; "Limited clinical staff"
NCT01075776
withdrawn; "Lack of funding"
NCT01848301
terminated; "loss of funding"
NCT03446612
terminated; "The study is terminated due to feasibility in recruitment."
NCT03953326
terminated; "Futility in recruitment"
NCT03972683
withdrawn; "no participants enrolled"
2 further recorded trials
NCT04001647
terminated; "IRB approval has been withdrawn"
NCT04777383
terminated; "The study was terminated prematurely due to insufficient operational resources to continue trial conduct and completion. The decision was unrelated to safety concerns or study outcomes."
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Acetylcholine used Miochol-E, 10mg/ml, Bausch and Lomb — over how long?
More Acetylcholine was worse in human: at what point?
U-shaped in human: "The decrement pattern is typically "U-shaped" in MG caused by acetylcholine receptor antibodies (AChR-MG) but is less well described in MG caused by muscle-specific kinase antibodies (MuSK-MG)." Europe PMC · dose-response search · 2026-07-15
5 recorded sentences naming Acetylcholine; U-shaped, dose-response, biphasic
Show the evidence
U-shapedPMID 40743586
"The decrement pattern is typically "U-shaped" in MG caused by acetylcholine receptor antibodies (AChR-MG) but is less well described in MG caused by muscle-specific kinase antibodies (MuSK-MG)."
dose-responsePMID 42457096
"Comprehensive tissue characterization was achieved by generating dose-response curves for relevant reference compounds including phenylephrine, acetylcholine, serotonin and gallopamil."
biphasic
PMID 42198811
"The response of arteries (pre-contracted with phenylephrine) to acetylcholine was biphasic, and the dilator phase of this ICA response of the HFD rats in the absence of a blocker and inhibitors was almost 3-fold less compared to the control, amounting to -8.0±1.5 vs -21.6±7.1% (p<0.05)."
PMID 41660041
"Computational docking and biochemical assays further demonstrate that ephedrine engages the vesicular acetylcholine transporter and tyrosine hydroxylase with high affinity, triggering excitotoxic cascades and biphasic neurochemical dysregulation that manifest as anxiety-like phenotypes and cognitive impairments."
dose-responsePMID 41973537
"We performed <i>1</i>) dose-response studies with GLP-1 (7-36) at hypoglycemia; <i>2</i>) studies with GLP-1 (7-36) with and without blockage of somatostatin (SST) activity (with SST receptor antagonists); <i>3</i>) and <i>4</i>) dose-response experiments with acetylcholine at euglycemia and studies under hypoglycemia; and <i>5</i>) finally, we studied the role of cholinergic signaling for…"
recorded 2026-07-15 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Could one person measure Acetylcholine's effect on amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli?
Amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli: measured in Acetylcholine's trials.
Interpretation amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli; 2026-09-01
forearm blood flow after tetraethylammonium administration; 2026-09-01
vascular endothelial function; 2026-09-01
cardiac output; 2026-09-01
apelin mediated vasodilatation; 2026-09-01
endothelial dysfunction; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
baseline systolic diastolic and mean blood pressures; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
baseline sympathetic nerve activity; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
flow mediated dilation; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
vascular conductance; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
installation of the heartphone application; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
functional sympatholysis; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelium dependent vasodilation; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelium independent vasodilation; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
aortic stiffness; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelial cell er stress marker atf6; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelial cell er stress marker perk; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelial cell er stress marker ire1; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelial cell er stress marker chop; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
endothelial cell er stress marker grp78; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
20
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
0; NCT01075776; NA; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q7
Which of amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli, aortic stiffness and apelin mediated vasodilatation did Acetylcholine's trials measure?
amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli, aortic stiffness and apelin mediated vasodilatation lead 29 outcome terms across Acetylcholine's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
Interpretation cardiac output, apelin mediated vasodilatation, endothelial dysfunction, baseline systolic diastolic and mean blood pressures, baseline sympathetic nerve activity and flow mediated dilation follow.
Show the evidence
amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli
1
forearm blood flow after tetraethylammonium administration
1
vascular endothelial function
1
cardiac output
1
apelin mediated vasodilatation
1
endothelial dysfunction
1
14 more recorded rows
baseline systolic diastolic and mean blood pressures
1
baseline sympathetic nerve activity
1
flow mediated dilation
1
vascular conductance
1
installation of the heartphone application
1
functional sympatholysis
1
endothelium dependent vasodilation
1
endothelium independent vasodilation
1
aortic stiffness
1
endothelial cell er stress marker atf6
1
endothelial cell er stress marker perk
1
endothelial cell er stress marker ire1
1
endothelial cell er stress marker chop
1
endothelial cell er stress marker grp78
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which of Acetylcholine's 8 ongoing trials reports first?
Compare microvascular function in women with low and high frequency hot flashes; microvascular endothelial function; latest 2031-12
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05193968
"Hot Flashes and Neurovascular Function in Women"; n 120; "Compare microvascular function in women with low and high frequency hot flashes"; 2026-12
NCT05653973
"Prenatal Aspirin and Postpartum Vascular Function"; n 60; "microvascular endothelial function"; 2027-07-30
NCT05946785
"Oxidative Stress in Microvascular Dysfunction Following Gestational Diabetes"; n 28; "microvascular acetylcholine-mediated dilation"; 2027-06-01
NCT05946798
"Role of NADPH Oxidase in Microvascular Dysfunction Following GDM"; n 40; "microvascular acetylcholine-mediated dilation"; 2028-06-01
NCT06043310
"Estrogen and Microvascular Function"; n 45; "Change in blood vessel dilation"; 2031-12
NCT06443151
"Role of Endothelial Function in SCI CVD Risk"; n 60; "Endothelium-dependent vasodilation"; 2027-03-30
2 further recorded trials
NCT06499844
"Comparing Approaches to Assess Nitric Oxide-dependent Cutaneous Vasodilation"; n 56; "Microvascular blood flow response to acetylcholine"; 2026-09
NCT06520982
"Early Neurovascular Adaptations in Aging Women"; n 64; "Magnitude of forearm blood flow"; 2028-06-30
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which 19 trials of Acetylcholine posted no result?
Posted no result
19 of 19 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00004697, NCT00009581, NCT00001870, NCT00076414, NCT00250185 and NCT00072826, and 13 more
Completion dates
oldest 1999-03; newest 2021-06-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00004697
1999-03
NCT00009581
2003-01
NCT00001870
2004-12
NCT00076414
2005-09
NCT00250185
2007-06-09
NCT00072826
2007-08-24
13 further recorded trials
NCT00152724
2008-11
NCT00453531
2009-02-11
NCT00901719
2010-05
NCT01125943
2011-11
NCT01127022
2011-12
NCT01137656
2013-09
NCT00508989
2015-12-24
NCT03312140
2017-02-08
NCT02123069
2018-03-01
NCT02987465
2018-05-21
NCT03462017
2018-12-22
NCT04918563
2021-05-15
NCT03738943
2021-06-01
Q10
At the median, Acetylcholine's trials enrolled 30.5 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
30.5
Largest enrolment
174
Registered trials counted
40
Q11
What do 61 spontaneous reports say about Acetylcholine — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Acetylcholine appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 61 reaction mentions were counted: iritis 10; macular oedema 10; corneal oedema 9; corneal opacity 9. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1184 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
iritis
10
macular oedema
10
corneal oedema
9
corneal opacity
9
hyphaema
6
pharmaceutical product complaint
5
4 more recorded rows
intraocular pressure increased
4
toxic anterior segment syndrome
4
conjunctival bleb
2
corneal decompensation
2
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
What is recorded about Acetylcholine and AMPK?
"Experimental studies indicate that EA can influence CAP-related mechanisms, including α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR)-mediated inhibition of NF-κB/NLRP3-related inflammatory signaling, and may also regulate AMPK-SIRT1-PGC-1α-associated metabolic pathways." — where Acetylcholine and AMPK appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-06-05
"Experimental studies indicate that EA can influence CAP-related mechanisms, including α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR)-mediated inhibition of NF-κB/NLRP3-related inflammatory signaling, and may also regulate AMPK-SIRT1-PGC-1α-associated metabolic pathways."
sirtuin
PMID 42328360
"Experimental studies indicate that EA can influence CAP-related mechanisms, including α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR)-mediated inhibition of NF-κB/NLRP3-related inflammatory signaling, and may also regulate AMPK-SIRT1-PGC-1α-associated metabolic pathways."
PMID 36797299
"Here we find that, independent of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, low-dose nicotine can restore the age-related decline of NAMPT activity through SIRT1 binding and subsequent deacetylation of NAMPT, thus increasing NAD<sup>+</sup> synthesis. <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET imaging revealed that nicotine is also capable of efficiently inhibiting glucose hypermetabolism in aging male mice."
NAD+PMID 36797299
"Here we find that, independent of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, low-dose nicotine can restore the age-related decline of NAMPT activity through SIRT1 binding and subsequent deacetylation of NAMPT, thus increasing NAD<sup>+</sup> synthesis. <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET imaging revealed that nicotine is also capable of efficiently inhibiting glucose hypermetabolism in aging male mice."
senolyticPMID 41143747
"Endothelial function [carotid artery endothelium-dependent dilation (EDD) to increasing concentrations of acetylcholine] and associated mechanisms were assessed in young adult p16-3MR mice [which allow for genetic-based clearance of senescent cells with ganciclovir (GCV)] injected with Doxo and subsequently treated with GCV or ABT263 (senolytic)."
autophagyPMID 35720225
"The overexpression of muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 positively regulated migration and invasion in tumor cells as well as the activation of autophagy."
mTORPMID 35720225
"Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 was highly correlated with Atg5 and activated the AMPK/mTOR signaling pathway."
AMPKPMID 35720225
"Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 was highly correlated with Atg5 and activated the AMPK/mTOR signaling pathway."
autophagyPMID 35720225
"Autophagy is activated in prostate cancer cells and the activation of muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 positively regulates autophagy in prostate cancer cells."
6 more recorded rows
mTORPMID 35720225
"Moreover, muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 induces autophagy-mediated cell migration and invasion by targeting Atg5 in prostate cancer cells via AMPK/mTOR pathway, which uncovered that regulating muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1, identified in this study, can be a promising solution for treating prostate cancer."
AMPKPMID 35720225
"Moreover, muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 induces autophagy-mediated cell migration and invasion by targeting Atg5 in prostate cancer cells via AMPK/mTOR pathway, which uncovered that regulating muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1, identified in this study, can be a promising solution for treating prostate cancer."
autophagyPMID 35720225
"Moreover, muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 induces autophagy-mediated cell migration and invasion by targeting Atg5 in prostate cancer cells via AMPK/mTOR pathway, which uncovered that regulating muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1, identified in this study, can be a promising solution for treating prostate cancer."
sirtuinPMID 35883777
"High glucose exposure impaired acetylcholine-induced endothelium-dependent relaxations, down-regulated NO bioavailability and the AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK)/Sirtuin 1 (SIRT1)/endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) pathway, increased endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and oxidative stress, which were reversed by TMS treatment."
NAD+PMID 40609619
"The in vitro study revealed that N<sub>2</sub>O significantly inhibited acetylcholine (ACh)-induced AD and NAd release from cultured cells, while a high concentration did not affect excess KCl-induced AD and NAd release, suggesting that N<sub>2</sub>O interfered with the process between the activation of ACh receptors and opening of voltage-operated Ca<sup>2+</sup> channels in the plasma membrane."
senolytic
"Endothelial function (carotid artery endothelium-dependent dilation [EDD] to increasing concentrations of acetylcholine) and associated mechanisms were assessed in young adult p16-3MR mice (which allow for genetic-based clearance of senescent cells with ganciclovir [GCV]) injected with Doxo and subsequently treated with GCV or ABT263 (senolytic)."
recorded 2026-06-05 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 9 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.