This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Cabergoline does in the body
Hyperprolactinemic disorders, either idiopathic or due to pituitary adenomas
From the FDA-approved label: The secretion of prolactin by the anterior pituitary is mainly under hypothalmic inhibitory control, likely exerted through release of dopamine by tuberoinfundibular neurons. Cabergoline is a long-acting dopamine receptor agonist with a high affinity for D 2 receptors. Results of in vitro studies demonstrate that cabergoline exerts a direct inhibitory effect on the secretion of prolactin by rat pituitary lactotrophs. Cabergoline decreased serum prolactin levels in reserpinized rats. Receptor-binding studies indicate that cabergoline has low affinity for dopamine D 1 , α 1 - and α 2 -adrenergic, and 5-HT 1 - and 5-HT 2 -serotonin receptors.
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 · LL60K9J05T · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C26H37N5O2, weighing 451.6.
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · read 2026-08-30
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 120 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.
Biomarker
A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.
Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.
What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.
A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.
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.
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 32 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
Body weight
∅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 moved2 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.
Sleep
∅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.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅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.
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.
Pain
∅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.
…Waiting for a reviewer1 registered symptom measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅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.
Fertility and sexual health
∅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
Body weight
body weight; body mass index
Sleep
sleep efficiency
Blood sugar
insulin sensitivity
Pain
worst pain over the last month
Fertility and sexual health
serum testosterone
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
2 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.
Health-Related Quality of Life
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04107480
How many people
880
Study design
Phase 4
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. Oral
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
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Evaluate the changes from baseline to W24 in motor symptoms (UPDRS Section III).
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00605683
How many people
679
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. Oral
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
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
The percentage of subjects whose serum PRL levels returned to normal
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07124221
How many people
382
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. Oral
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
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change from baseline in the total score of the International RLS Study Group Rating Scale (IRLSSG-RS)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00625547
How many people
361
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. Oral
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
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Proportion of Participants With Breast Symptoms 4 Days After Abortion or Pregnancy Loss
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07492160
How many people
348
Study design
Phase 2
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. Oral
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
PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Incidence of Adverse Events to Evaluate Long Term Safety Data
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01794793
How many people
337
Study design
Phase 4
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. Oral
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
PubChem PUG-REST · 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 eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.1 registered measure of this kind. No reviewed result.
□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 lifeEvidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.1 registered measure of this kind.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.7 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.
□AnimalsNo evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
■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.
worst pain over the last month
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
insulin sensitivity
body weight
body mass index
serum testosterone
serum luteinizing hormone
whose serum prl levels returned to normal
blood pressure
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
remission
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 (23)
sleep efficiency
rate and extent of absorption
severity of ohss in two groups
complete response at 8 months
pregnancy rate
size of mature follicles
clinical pregnancy
tumor shrinkage
mature follicles
visual analogue scale
evaluation of breast status
breast palpation
survey 1st day of including in the study
resistive index
monthly migraine days
ovulation rate
who discontinue pes due to traes
aes/saes
pulse rate
respiratory rate
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.
Cabergoline tablets are an ergot derivative indicated for the treatment of hyperprolactinemic disorders, either idiopathic or due to pituitary adenomas in adults. Limitations of Use Avoid use of cabergoline tablets for the inhibition or suppression of postpartum physiologic lactation because of the risk of serious adverse reactions [see Warnings and Precautions (5.4) ].
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 of cabergoline tablets in pediatric patients have not been established.”
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies of cabergoline tablets did not include sufficient numbers of patients 65 years of age and older to determine whether they respond differently from younger adult patients.”
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary If conception occurs during cabergoline tablets therapy, discontinue cabergoline tablets if the risks to the mother or fetus outweigh the benefits to the mother.”
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary Cabergoline tablets is not recommended in postpartum women who are breastfeeding or who are planning to breastfeed.”
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “The use of cabergoline tablets in patients with severe hepatic impairment (HI) (Child-Pugh C) is not recommended.”
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · 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
Oral
✎ 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 tablet, given by the 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.
Cabergoline appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 564 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
Oral
✎ 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
20 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 20 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 40016-011 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as powder and tablet, taken oral.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 40016-011 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is ergolines [cs] and ergot derivative [epc].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 40016-011 · read 2026-08-29
13 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 13 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 275a6a25-c3c9-4258-a610-0b00752517f7 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 275a6a25-c3c9-4258-a610-0b00752517f7 · read 2026-08-29
CABERGOLINE is oral at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS Tablets: 0.5 mg, white, oval shaped, beveled edge tablets, debossed 'c' and 'l' on one side with deep scoring, and the other side is plain., recorded as fda label in effect 2026-06-22 in the United States.
US prescribing information · 8562f94f-a59a-4893-aefc-ea6547b01e92 · read 2026-08-30
Recorded price in US: 1.34552 USD per one unit as the pricing file counts it — a tablet, capsule, patch or single item, across 7 priced products whose strengths and pack forms differ, as of 2026-08-26, paid by retail pharmacies buying the product, as surveyed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It is not a list price, an insurance price, or what anyone pays at a counter..
Recorded source · 2026-08-26 · read 2026-08-28
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Cabergoline studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Cabergoline are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
How many documents were read
13 documents were read for this substance.
RNAWiki source record
8 of them state the same halfLife, and they agree.
RNAWiki source record
5 of them state the same proteinBinding, and they agree.
RNAWiki source record
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
LL60K9J05T
RxNorm concept
199703
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✗ Not passed
Safety mode resolved
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
11 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA020664, approved 19961223 to PFIZER.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
6 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.
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 (13)
Q1
What did Cabergoline's largest trial (679 people) and its longest (14 years) measure?
679 people in Cabergoline's largest registered study, 14 years in its longest registered window, measuring Concentrations of follicular fluid AMH. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
20 phase2, 18 phase3, 12 na, 9 phase4, 6 phase1, 3 na or unstated, 2 early phase1; NCT02288962; 2028-12; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2026, NCT03928288.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Cabergoline 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
phase2
20
phase3
18
na
12
phase4
9
phase1
6
na or unstated
3
2 more recorded rows
early phase1
2
Last recorded human testNCT03928288
2026-01-14
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
Cabergoline was tested only in human — what did it show?
Could one person measure Cabergoline's effect on sleep efficiency?
Sleep efficiency: measured in Cabergoline's trials.
Interpretation sleep efficiency is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
sleep efficiency; 2026-09-01
rate and extent of absorption; 2026-09-01
insulin sensitivity; 2026-09-01
severity of ohss in two groups; 2026-09-01
complete response at 8 months; 2026-09-01
body weight; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
pregnancy rate; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
worst pain over the last month; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
size of mature follicles; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
clinical pregnancy; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
tumor shrinkage; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
mature follicles; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
visual analogue scale; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
evaluation of breast status; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
breast palpation; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
survey 1st day of including in the study; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
body mass index; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
serum testosterone; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
serum luteinizing hormone; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
resistive index; 2026-09-01
half life
2026-09-04; halfLife; 2026-06-30
human trials at or under30
14
smallest human trial
0; NCT00699530; NA_OR_UNSTATED; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q6
Which of aes/saes, blood pressure and body mass index did Cabergoline's trials measure?
aes/saes, blood pressure and body mass index lead 32 outcome terms across Cabergoline's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
severity of ohss in two groups, complete response at 8 months, body weight, pregnancy rate, worst pain over the last month and size of mature follicles follow.
Show the evidence
sleep efficiency
1
rate and extent of absorption
1
insulin sensitivity
1
severity of ohss in two groups
1
complete response at 8 months
1
body weight
1
14 more recorded rows
pregnancy rate
1
worst pain over the last month
1
size of mature follicles
1
clinical pregnancy
1
tumor shrinkage
1
mature follicles
1
visual analogue scale
1
evaluation of breast status
1
breast palpation
1
survey 1st day of including in the study
1
body mass index
1
serum testosterone
1
serum luteinizing hormone
1
resistive index
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Which of Cabergoline's 13 ongoing trials reports first?
change in tumour volume during the main study of two years; breast symptoms; latest 2033-03-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT02288962
"Dopamine Agonist Treatment of Non-functioning Pituitary Adenomas"; n 60; "change in tumour volume during the main study of two years"; 2028-12
NCT06123026
"Pharmacological Inhibition of Lactation After 16 to 20 Week Abortion"; n 200; "breast symptoms"; 2024-06-30
NCT07034859
"Cabergoline in the Management of Nonfunctioning Pituitary Adenoma"; n 30; "Proportions of tumor shrinkage after 48 week-treatment"; 2028-12-31
NCT07043322
"Clinical Study to Evaluate Efficacy of Cabergoline to Coasting in Reducing the Incidence of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome"; n 150; "Occurrence and severity of OHSS"; 2026-11-20
NCT07045935
"Metabolic Outcomes in Patients With Prolactinomas Under Dopamine Agonist Treatment"; n 60; "2-hour post-oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) plasma glucose levels"; 2029-12-31
NCT07072910
"Cabergoline for Episodic Migraine"; n 150; "Change in Monthly Migraine Days (MMD)"; 2028-09-01
7 further recorded trials
NCT07124221
"A Phase III Clinical Study of Cabergoline Tablets Compared With Bromocriptine Mesylate Tablets"; n 382; "The percentage of subjects whose serum PRL levels returned to normal"; 2026-12-30
NCT07255911
"Cabergoline & Letrozole Versus Letrozole in Ovulation Induction in PCOS"; n 72; "Ovulation Rate"; 2026-06-30
NCT07386080
"Carbergoline for Antipsychotic Induced Hyperprolactinemia."; n 146; "Total score on the PANSS (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale)"; 2029-05-01
NCT07463235
"Safety and Potency of a High Cabergoline Dosage in Microprolactinomas"; n 70; "Remission"; 2029-12-20
NCT07492160
"Efficacy of Cabergoline in Inhibiting Lactation and Alleviating Breast Symptoms"; n 348; "Proportion of Participants With Breast Symptoms 4 Days After Abortion or Pregnancy Loss"; 2028-04
NCT07568574
"Impact of Medically Supervised Performance-Enhancing Substances (PES) on Elite Athletes"; n 60; "The incidence and severity of Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), including adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), as assessed by the study physicians from baseline to 5.5 years after enrollment."; 2033-03-01
NCT07732387
"A Study to Assess the Safety, Tolerability and Pharmacokinetics of Viaca (Sildenafil + Cabergoline) Compared With Sildenafil and Cabergoline"; n 30; "Participants with AEs/SAEs"; 2026-09-19
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which running trial of Cabergoline could settle insulin sensitivity?
NCT07045935 measures 2-hour post-oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) plasma glucose levels, reading out 2029-12-31.
1 open trial; n 60; "Metabolic Outcomes in Patients With Prolactinomas Under Dopamine Agonist Treatment"
Show the evidence
TrialNCT07045935
"Metabolic Outcomes in Patients With Prolactinomas Under Dopamine Agonist Treatment"; n 60; "2-hour post-oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) plasma glucose levels"; 2029-12-31
Q9
Which 27 trials of Cabergoline posted no result?
Posted no result
27 of 27 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00652873, NCT00653055, NCT00627003, NCT00033111, NCT00625547 and NCT00440258, and 21 more
Completion dates
oldest 2001-12; newest 2024-05-10
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00652873
2001-12
NCT00653055
2001-12
NCT00627003
2003-05
NCT00033111
2004-04
NCT00625547
2004-12
NCT00440258
2006-07
14 further recorded trials
NCT00129181
2007-01
NCT00460616
2007-09
NCT01014793
2008-12
NCT00153972
2009-01
NCT01569256
2009-03
NCT01530490
2010-09
NCT01395602
2011-07
NCT01651364
2011-10
NCT00605683
2012-03
NCT01009567
2013-07
NCT02134249
2015-10
NCT02271360
2015-12
NCT01535859
2016-06
NCT03473613
2017-04-15
Q10
At the median, Cabergoline's trials enrolled 71 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
71
Largest enrolment
679
Registered trials counted
62
Q11
What do 564 spontaneous reports say about Cabergoline — 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.
Cabergoline appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 564 reaction mentions were counted: mitral valve incompetence 82; aortic valve incompetence 81; cardiac valve disease 70; pleural effusion 62. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1201087 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
mitral valve incompetence
82
aortic valve incompetence
81
cardiac valve disease
70
pleural effusion
62
cerebrospinal fluid leakage
52
hallucination
46
4 more recorded rows
cardiac failure
45
abortion spontaneous
43
pathological gambling
42
tricuspid valve incompetence
41
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
Was Cabergoline studied with fasting?
fasting is named in Cabergoline's label sentences: "The fasting blood sugar levels were significantly different between placebo and cabergoline groups after 3 months of treatment (P = 0.004)." openfda-label+europepmc · 2016-10-01
1 recorded statement; fasting
Show the evidence
fasting
The fasting blood sugar levels were significantly different between placebo and cabergoline groups after 3 months of treatment (P = 0.004).
recorded 2016-10-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q13
What is recorded about Cabergoline and IGF-1?
"In non-irradiated patients, cabergoline normalises IGF-1 in around one-third and achieves both IGF-1 and GH targets in approximately one out of ten cases." — where Cabergoline and IGF-1 appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2024-01-17
IGF-1, mTOR; PMID 38231133, 35721701, 30624667
Show the evidence
IGF-1PMID 38231133
"In non-irradiated patients, cabergoline normalises IGF-1 in around one-third and achieves both IGF-1 and GH targets in approximately one out of ten cases."
mTOR
"The co-administration of cabergoline might improve mTOR inhibitors antitumoural activity, paving the way for a potential combined therapy in β-arrestin 2 expressing NF-PitNETs or other PitNETs resistant to conventional treatments."
PMID 35721701
"The co-administration of cabergoline might improve mTOR inhibitor antitumoral activity, paving the way for a potential combined therapy in β-arrestin 2-expressing NF-PitNETs or other PitNETs resistant to conventional treatments."
PMID 30624667
"In in vitro studies in murine mammosomatotroph tumor GH3 cells, we observed that both the dopamine agonist cabergoline and the mTOR inhibitor everolimus inhibited GH3 cell proliferation and PRL secretion as single agents, and the synergistic effect was noted with combination treatment only on inhibition of PRL secretion but not proliferation."
recorded 2024-01-17 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · 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 · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ 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: 10 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.