This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Cocaine does in the body
Numbing the inside of the nose during procedures or surgery.
Dopamine is released into the gap between nerve cells and then pumped back for reuse. Cocaine plugs that pump, so dopamine piles up in the gap — most consequentially in the reward circuitry, where the signal is normally a brief pulse and becomes a sustained flood. Separately and independently, cocaine blocks the sodium channels that nerves use to fire at all, which is why painting it on a mucous membrane makes that membrane numb. The medical use is entirely the second property; everything else about the drug is the first.
What happened in people
Heart-attack risk was about 24 times the person’s usual risk during the hour after use.
✓ Reviewed first-read answer
Where this came from
A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.
A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
No approved treatment for cocaine dependence has emerged after four decades of studies.
Where it acts
Nasal mucosa for the approved indication; dopaminergic terminals of the nucleus accumbens and striatum for the systemic effect
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · I5Y540LHVR · read 2026-08-29
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.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 116 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.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
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 27 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
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.
∅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.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Pain
total number of controlled analgesic pump activations
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.
— 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.
Relative risk of acute myocardial infarction onset in the 60 minutes following cocaine use
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Determinants of Myocardial Infarction Onset Study, cocaine analysis
How many people
3946
Study design
Case-crossover epidemiological study
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Relative risk 23.7 (95% CI 8.5 to 66.3) in the hour after use
Repeated elsewhere
Partially Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Nine exposed cases out of 3,946 interviews, which is what produces the very wide confidence interval; the case-crossover design nonetheless removes between-person confounding by construction.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Topical nasal solution, 4% cocaine hydrochloride, applied to the mucous membrane
Interval reported. 95% CI 8
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Drugs@FDA: NUMBRINO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209575, approved 10 January 2020 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cf… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 1 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 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.9 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 Drosophila (fruit fly), Mouse, Rat. 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 changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Cocaine
What a person takes: Topical nasal solution, 4% cocaine hydrochloride, applied to the mucous membrane.
The measurement behind this step
The approved product is a solution applied directly to the nasal mucosa before a procedure. The drug's own vasoconstriction limits its systemic absorption and simultaneously reduces bleeding in the surgical field, which is the property that has kept it in use despite the regulatory burden of a Schedule II listing.
Getting in
Applied to a mucous membrane, insufflated, injected or smoked
Medically it is dabbed onto the lining of the nose. Recreationally the salt is snorted or injected and the free base is smoked, which is far faster.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
The approved product is a 4% cocaine hydrochloride solution applied topically to nasal mucosa. Cocaine's own vasoconstrictor action limits its systemic absorption from that route. Smoked free base and intravenous administration produce peak brain concentrations within seconds.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Reaching the cell
Enters the brain quickly and is destroyed quickly
It crosses into the brain fast and is broken down fast — the plasma half-life is under an hour, which is why the effect is short and repeated dosing is the pattern.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Rapid blood-brain barrier penetration; plasma half-life of roughly 40 to 60 minutes with hydrolysis by plasma and hepatic esterases to benzoylecgonine and ecgonine methyl ester. In the presence of ethanol, transesterification yields cocaethylene, which is active and longer-lived.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What it acts on
Blocks the dopamine transporter, and the noradrenaline and serotonin ones too
It plugs the pump that clears dopamine from the synapse. Dopamine accumulates where it would normally have been cleared within milliseconds.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Competitive blockade of DAT, NET and SERT. Reinforcement tracks striatal DAT occupancy and its rate of rise. Noradrenaline transporter blockade drives the cardiovascular effects: tachycardia, hypertension and coronary vasoconstriction.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
The change it makes
Separately, sodium channels stop conducting
The second, unrelated action: nerves cannot fire where the drug is applied. That is the numbing, and it is the only reason there is an approved product.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Use-dependent block of voltage-gated sodium channels as an ester-type local anaesthetic. In cardiac tissue the same sodium-channel block contributes to QRS widening and arrhythmia at high systemic concentrations — the local-anaesthetic property becoming a cardiac toxicity.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What that does for a person
Mucosal anaesthesia with a dry field, or a 24-fold spike in infarction risk
On a nasal membrane: numbness and less bleeding, which is why surgeons use it. Systemically: a short, sharp rise in heart attack risk that fades within the hour.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Approved endpoint is mucosal anaesthesia for nasal procedures. Systemic effects measured in the epidemiology: 23.7-fold elevation of myocardial infarction risk in the first 60 minutes (95% CI 8.5 to 66.3), driven by coronary vasoconstriction, tachycardia, hypertension and increased platelet aggregation on top of accelerated atherosclerosis in chronic users.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
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.
stimulated and non stimulated craving
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
blood pressure
heart rate
heart rate blood pressure
instantaneous heart rate and heart rate variability
peak plasma concentration
area under the plasma concentration versus time curve
changes in blood pressure
maximum observed plasma concentration
time to maximum observed plasma concentration
Meaningful
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 (17)
physiological measures
biochemical
behavioral
subjective
psychological effects
skin blood flow
coronary blood flow
subjective effects
food intake
total number of controlled analgesic pump activations
reinforcing effects
subjective effects change from baseline over 60 minutes
physical examination
electrocardiogram
incidence of adverse events
core temperature
incidence of treatment emergent adverse events
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.
Medically: adults undergoing diagnostic procedures or surgery on or through the nasal cavity, where the drug's simultaneous vasoconstriction is a practical advantage over other local anaesthetics. Otherwise: a large recreational population, using material of unknown purity that is frequently adulterated with levamisole.
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 NUMBRINO in pediatric patients under the age of 18 have not been established.”
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Of the 802 subjects in the two Phase 3 studies with NUMBRINO 13 subjects (1.6%) were age 65 and older, and one subject (0.1%) was 75 years of age or older.”
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary There are no available data on the use of NUMBRINO in pregnant women to identify a drug-associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage or adverse maternal or fetal outcomes.”
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary Based on case reports in published literature, cocaine is present in human milk at widely varying concentrations.”
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “According to literature, cocaine is eliminated predominantly by metabolism in humans.”
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced kidney function, the label states: “According to literature, cocaine is eliminated predominantly by metabolism in humans, with little excreted unchanged in the urine.”
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
Every candidate pharmacotherapy for cocaine use disorder tested over four decades, including dopamine agonists, disulfiram, modafinil, topiramate and an anti-cocaine vaccine
Levamisole itself was withdrawn from the US market as a medicine, in part over agranulocytosis — the same toxicity it now causes as a cocaine adulterant
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
Topical nasal solution, 4% cocaine hydrochloride, applied to the mucous membrane
✎ 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
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S2, S6.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
The approved product is a solution applied directly to the nasal mucosa before a procedure.
✎ 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. The rest of the recorded wording: The drug's own vasoconstriction limits its systemic absorption and simultaneously reduces bleeding in the surgical field, which is the property that has kept it in use despite the regulatory burden of a Schedule II listing.
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◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
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.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
The nasal solution's labelling covers hypertension and cardiovascular risk, with contraindications relating to blood pressure, and carries a warning that the product contains a Schedule II substance with high potential for abuse, misuse and diversion. Systemically, cocaine produces tachycardia, hypertension, coronary vasoconstriction and increased platelet aggregation; the measured consequence is a 23.7-fold elevation of myocardial infarction risk in the first hour after use, falling rapidly thereafter. At high systemic concentrations sodium-channel block produces QRS widening and arrhythmia. Chronic intranasal use causes mucosal atrophy and septal perforation through repeated vasoconstriction. Levamisole adulteration of the illicit supply causes agranulocytosis, which is a hazard of the supply rather than of the molecule.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
Drugs@FDA: GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution 4%, NDA 209963, approved 14 December 2017 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.c… · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
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.
Cocaine appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 2978 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (10)
drug abuse — 718 reaction mentions
toxicity to various agents — 403 reaction mentions
hypotension — 386 reaction mentions
coma — 277 reaction mentions
anaphylactic reaction — 228 reaction mentions
somnolence — 214 reaction mentions
bradycardia — 190 reaction mentions
drug dependence — 190 reaction mentions
tachycardia — 189 reaction mentions
cardiac arrest — 183 reaction mentions
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
Topical nasal solution, 4% cocaine hydrochloride, applied to the mucous membrane
✎ 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
A recorded note compares this form with the others that are sold. It is kept below, word for word.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
The recorded note, unchanged: The drug's own vasoconstriction limits its systemic absorption and simultaneously reduces bleeding in the surgical field, which is the property that has kept it in use despite the regulatory burden of a Schedule II listing.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
7 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 7 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 81665-301 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as powder and solution, taken nasal and topical.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 81665-301 · read 2026-08-29
4 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 4 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-29
NUMBRINO is topical at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS NUMBRINO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution is a clear, blue-green solution provided in a concentration of 4% (40 mg/mL)., recorded as fda label in effect 2026-01-12 in the United States.
US prescribing information · d724b5b4-6654-4bf5-9eed-e2c7943084ed · read 2026-08-30
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.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Cocaine 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
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a Schedule II listing implies no accepted medical use — cocaine has two current approvals
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That topical 4% mucosal application carries the reinforcing liability of recreational insufflation; the label assumes it and no study has measured it
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That levamisole is added to potentiate cocaine — the aminorex metabolism that would support it has been shown in horses, not humans
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
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 Cocaine 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.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
Myocardial infarction risk rose 23.7-fold in the hour after use
In plain words
In a study of 3,946 heart attack patients, the risk of a heart attack in the hour after using cocaine was about twenty-four times baseline, and it fell away quickly after that.
What was measured
Relative risk of acute myocardial infarction onset in the 60 minutes after cocaine use, case-crossover
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Determinants of Myocardial Infarction Onset Study: 3,946 patients with acute myocardial infarction, including 1,282 women, interviewed on average four days after infarction. Thirty-eight (1%) reported cocaine use in the prior year and nine reported use within the 60 minutes preceding symptom onset. Using a case-crossover design with self-matched controls, the risk of myocardial infarction onset was elevated 23.7-fold over baseline (95% CI 8.5 to 66.3) in the 60 minutes after cocaine use, decreasing rapidly thereafter. Cocaine users in the cohort were younger (mean 44 versus 61 years), more likely male and far more likely to be current smokers. The wide confidence interval reflects nine exposed cases; the case-crossover design removes between-person confounding by construction, because each patient is his own control.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Two nasal anaesthetic products approved in the last decade, both Schedule II
In plain words
The FDA approved a 4% cocaine nasal solution in December 2017 and another in January 2020, for numbing the inside of the nose during procedures.
What was measured
Existence and date of current FDA approvals for cocaine hydrochloride
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Goprelto, cocaine hydrochloride nasal solution 4%, was approved on 14 December 2017 under NDA 209963. Numbrino, also cocaine hydrochloride nasal solution 4%, was approved on 10 January 2020 under NDA 209575. The labelled indication is induction of local anaesthesia of the mucous membranes when performing diagnostic procedures and surgeries on or through the nasal cavities in adults. Both labels state that the product contains cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance with a high potential for abuse, and carry warnings about misuse, abuse and diversion. This is the concrete answer to the common assumption that a scheduled drug is one nobody has found a use for: cocaine is in the same schedule as morphine and oxycodone, which is the schedule for substances with accepted medical use and high abuse potential, and it has current approvals.
Source
Drugs@FDA NDA 209963 (GOPRELTO, 14 December 2017) and NDA 209575 (NUMBRINO, 10 January 2020); NUMBRINO prescribing information sections 1 and 9.1
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Levamisole in the supply causes agranulocytosis, and nobody knows why it is there
In plain words
A veterinary and former human medicine turns up in a large share of street cocaine. It can wipe out white blood cells. The reason it is added has never been established.
What was measured
Presence of levamisole in seized cocaine and reported agranulocytosis in exposed users
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Levamisole has been found as an adulterant in street cocaine at high prevalence, and case reports link it to agranulocytosis in cocaine users. Agranulocytosis is a known hazard of therapeutic levamisole and contributed to its withdrawal from the US market; levamisole had been an FDA-approved immunomodulator, chemotherapy adjuvant and anthelmintic. The purpose of the adulteration is unresolved. One hypothesis rests on the metabolism of levamisole to aminorex — an amphetamine-like compound with abuse potential — but that conversion has been demonstrated in racehorses and not reported in humans. So the adulterant is documented, its haematological toxicity is documented, and the motive for its presence remains, in the authors' word, an enigma.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
No approved medication for cocaine use disorder, after four decades of trials
In plain words
Opioid dependence has methadone and buprenorphine. Alcohol has three approved drugs. Cocaine has none, and it is not for want of trying.
What was measured
Number of FDA-approved pharmacotherapies for cocaine use disorder as of this audit: zero
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
There is no FDA-approved pharmacotherapy for cocaine use disorder. Candidate agents tested in randomised trials over four decades include dopamine agonists and partial agonists, disulfiram, modafinil, topiramate, bupropion, N-acetylcysteine, and an anti-cocaine vaccine; none has produced a replicated effect large and consistent enough to support an approval. The interventions with the most consistent randomised evidence are behavioural — contingency management in particular. The absence is informative rather than merely disappointing: opioid substitution works because a receptor agonist can occupy the same site with a slower onset, and there is no comparable substitution strategy for a reuptake blocker whose reinforcing effect depends on the rate of transporter occupancy.
Source
Absence of any approved product for cocaine use disorder in Drugs@FDA; the only current cocaine approvals are the two nasal anaesthetics
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The rate of arrival, not the amount, is what makes a route reinforcing
In plain words
Chewed coca leaf, insufflated powder and smoked freebase are the same molecule. They differ in how fast the drug reaches the brain, and that difference is the addiction liability.
What was measured
That a topical mucosal application of 4% cocaine solution carries the same reinforcing liability as recreational insufflation of the same salt — the schedule assumes it, the pharmacokinetics do not support it, and no study has measured it
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Cocaine's reinforcing effect tracks the rate of rise of striatal dopamine transporter occupancy rather than the peak concentration alone. Smoked free base and intravenous injection produce brain concentrations within seconds; insufflated hydrochloride takes minutes because it must cross the nasal mucosa and because cocaine's own vasoconstriction limits its absorption; oral or buccal coca leaf takes far longer still and reaches much lower concentrations. The same relationship explains why the approved nasal product, applied topically at low concentration to a vasoconstricted mucosa, has a very different abuse profile from the same salt insufflated recreationally — the label still classifies it as Schedule II with a high potential for abuse, which is the appropriately cautious position rather than a measured equivalence.
Source
NUMBRINO prescribing information, sections 5.1 and 9; pharmacokinetics of topical mucosal application versus insufflation
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
caution
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Cocaine plus alcohol makes a third drug
In plain words
Taken together, the liver joins cocaine and alcohol into cocaethylene, which is itself active, lasts longer than cocaine, and is more cardiotoxic.
What was measured
Formation and detection of cocaethylene when cocaine and ethanol are co-administered
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
In the presence of ethanol, hepatic carboxylesterase transesterifies cocaine to cocaethylene (benzoylecgonine ethyl ester). Cocaethylene is an active dopamine transporter blocker with a longer plasma half-life than cocaine and greater cardiotoxicity in animal models, and it is detectable in blood and urine only when the two drugs were used together — which makes it a specific analytical marker for concurrent use. Because cocaine and alcohol are commonly used together, this is not an exotic interaction; it is the ordinary case, and it means the pharmacokinetics measured for cocaine alone understate the duration of exposure in the usual real-world pattern.
Source
Forensic toxicology of cocaethylene as summarised in the analytical literature; the analyte is standard in cocaine confirmation panels
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
How many documents were read
2 documents were read for this substance.
RNAWiki source record
2 of them state the same volumeOfDistribution, and they agree.
RNAWiki source record
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
I5Y540LHVR
CAS registry number
50-36-2
PubChem compound
446220
ChEMBL
CHEMBL370805
ChEBI
27958
RxNorm concept
2653
EMA substance identifier
100000079767
European Chemicals Agency number
200-032-7
DrugBank
DB00907
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: Reviewed first-read answer.
✗ 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
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S2, S6.
✓ 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
2 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA209963, approved 20171214 to LXO IRELAND.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
4 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.
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.
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.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A Schedule II drug with two nasal-anaesthetic products approved since 2017, a measured 23.7-fold increase in myocardial infarction risk in the hour after use, and no approved pharmacotherapy for dependence on it after four decades of trials.
Recorded evidence blocks (12)
Q2
What did Cocaine's largest trial (92 people) and its longest (7.2 years) measure?
92 people in Cocaine's largest registered study, 7.2 years in its longest registered window, measuring Maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of Cocaine, (-)Ecgonine methyl ester and RBP-8000. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
22 phase1, 10 early phase1, 6 phase2, 4 na, 2 phase4, 1 na or unstated, 1 phase3; NCT01978457; 2019-12. Last human test completed 2025, NCT04296006.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Cocaine 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
phase1
22
early phase1
10
phase2
6
na
4
phase4
2
na or unstated
1
2 more recorded rows
phase3
1
Last recorded human testNCT04296006
2025-02-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
From Drosophila to human: where has Cocaine shown lifespan?
9 recorded entries; human; also "Cocaine 10mg", "Cocaine 20mg", "Cocaine 40mg"
Show the evidence
human
NCT00656357
Cocaine 10mg
NCT00656357
Cocaine 20mg
NCT00656357
Cocaine 40mg
NCT01717703
1% chocolate milk
NCT01778010
Cocaine 0 mg
NCT01778010
Cocaine 12 mg
3 more recorded rows
humanNCT01778010
Cocaine 25 mg
humanNCT01778010
Cocaine 50 mg
humanNCT05334056
Cocaine 4%
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which of area under the plasma concentration versus time curve, behavioral and biochemical did Cocaine's trials measure?
area under the plasma concentration versus time curve, behavioral and biochemical lead 27 outcome terms across Cocaine's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
Interpretation subjective, psychological effects, stimulated and non stimulated craving, blood pressure, heart rate and skin blood flow follow.
Show the evidence
physiological measures
1
biochemical
1
behavioral
1
subjective
1
psychological effects
1
stimulated and non stimulated craving
1
14 more recorded rows
blood pressure
1
heart rate
1
skin blood flow
1
coronary blood flow
1
subjective effects
1
food intake
1
heart rate blood pressure
1
total number of controlled analgesic pump activations
1
instantaneous heart rate and heart rate variability
1
reinforcing effects
1
subjective effects change from baseline over 60 minutes
1
peak plasma concentration
1
area under the plasma concentration versus time curve
1
changes in blood pressure
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Which of Cocaine's 3 ongoing trials reports first?
Changes in Blood pressure; 24-hour remission rate of acute esophageal impaction; latest 2028-02-28
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04792034
"Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability Study of GOPRELTO® Nasal Solution and NUMBRINO™ Nasal Solution"; n 40; "Changes in Blood pressure"; 2027-12-31
NCT06652620
"Cola Ingestion for Esophageal Bolus Impaction"; n 50; "24-hour remission rate of acute esophageal impaction"; 2026-12-31
NCT07086794
"Cocaine and Pentoxifylline (BED IN 47)"; n 30; "Reinforcing Effects of Cocaine"; 2028-02-28
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which 18 trials of Cocaine posted no result?
Posted no result
18 of 18 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00000290, NCT00000292, NCT00000315, NCT00000316, NCT00451230 and NCT00656357, and 12 more
Completion dates
oldest 2001-12; newest 2023-05-27
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00000290
2001-12
NCT00000292
2001-12
NCT00000315
2001-12
NCT00000316
2001-12
NCT00451230
2005-06
NCT00656357
2009-05
12 further recorded trials
NCT01224847
2009-11
NCT01717703
2012-01
NCT01846481
2013-06
NCT01978431
2014-05
NCT02018263
2014-06
NCT01851473
2015-10-07
NCT02775955
2016-10
NCT02302976
2018-08-01
NCT02538744
2018-08-21
NCT03519022
2019-05-31
NCT02239913
2019-09
NCT05334056
2023-05-27
Q9
At the median, Cocaine's trials enrolled 15 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
15
Largest enrolment
92
Registered trials counted
43
Q10
What do 2978 spontaneous reports say about Cocaine — 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.
Cocaine appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 2978 reaction mentions were counted: drug abuse 718; toxicity to various agents 403; hypotension 386; coma 277. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL370805 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
drug abuse
718
toxicity to various agents
403
hypotension
386
coma
277
anaphylactic reaction
228
somnolence
214
4 more recorded rows
bradycardia
190
drug dependence
190
tachycardia
189
cardiac arrest
183
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q11
Cocaine and CYP3A4: shared by which compounds?
CYP3A4 appear in Cocaine's recorded interaction sentences, 1 in all. openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-08-30
Interpretation pharmacokinetics
Show the evidence
CYP3A4pharmacokinetics
Cocaine is N-demethylated by the CYP3A4 enzyme system to produce the active metabolite, norcocaine.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
Was Cocaine studied with fasting and exercise?
fasting and exercise are named in Cocaine's label sentences: "For subjects with available fasting data from the baseline visit of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial, inflammatory markers were investigated as predictors of psychopathology and cognition in patients with and without comorbid marijuana or…" openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-08-30
2 recorded statements; fasting, exercise
Show the evidence
fasting
For subjects with available fasting data from the baseline visit of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial, inflammatory markers were investigated as predictors of psychopathology and cognition in patients with and without comorbid marijuana or cocaine use, using linear regression models controlling for potential confounding factors.
exercise
This prospective, naturalistic, non-randomized longitudinal study included 37 inpatients with crack cocaine use disorder classified into an exercise group (EG, n = 21) or non-exercise group (NEG, n = 16) based on participation in the institutional exercise program.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q13
What is recorded about Cocaine and sirtuin?
"A recent study published in Experimental Neurology by Cen group demonstrated that NAMPT contributes to cocaine reward through sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) signaling in the brain ventral tegmental area." — where Cocaine and sirtuin appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2025-08-22
"A recent study published in Experimental Neurology by Cen group demonstrated that NAMPT contributes to cocaine reward through sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) signaling in the brain ventral tegmental area."
NAD+PMID 31993108
"A recent study published in Experimental Neurology by Cen group demonstrated that NAMPT contributes to cocaine reward through sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) signaling in the brain ventral tegmental area."
sirtuinPMID 31993108
"Thus, targeting NAMPT/SIRT1 signaling pathway may provide a promising therapeutic strategy against cocaine addiction."
NAD+PMID 31993108
"Thus, targeting NAMPT/SIRT1 signaling pathway may provide a promising therapeutic strategy against cocaine addiction."
mTORPMID 40850562
"Previously, we reported that the mTOR inhibitor Everolimus dose-dependently blocks incubated cocaine-seeking and reverses incubation-related changes in mTOR activation in the prelimbic (PL) subregion of the prefrontal cortex (PFC)."
NAD+PMID 29753648
"Intraperitoneal or intra-VTA injection of FK866, a specific inhibitor of NAMPT, significantly attenuated cocaine reward."
2 more recorded rows
sirtuinPMID 29753648
"Interestingly, the inhibitory effect of FK866 on cocaine reward was significantly weakened in Sirt1 midbrain conditional knockout mice."
mTORPMID 38878971
"These results indicate that miR-181a is involved in neuronal structural plasticity induced by reinstatement of cocaine CPP, possibly through the activation of the mTOR signaling pathway."
AMPK
"Previous studies demonstrated region-specific responsiv-ity of adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) to repeated cocaine."
"These data inform our understanding of AMPK activation dynamics in subcellular com-partments and provide additional support for repurposing metformin for cocaine use disorder."
PMID 38069180
"Previous studies demonstrated region-specific responsivity of adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) to repeated cocaine exposure."
mTORPMID 37804867
"In addition, the E2-mediated increases in cocaine-induced CPP are associated with increased activation of ERK1/2 and mTOR proteins in the nucleus accumbens, dorsal striatum, and ventral tegmental area."
autophagy
PMID 38160532
"Neuro2a cells following seven days of repeated exposure to cocaine (0, 600, 800, 1000 μM) showed apoptosis-irrelevant cell death, dysregulated autophagy, activation of atypical endoplasmic reticulum stress response, increased saturated and unsaturated fatty acid synthesis, and disrupted lipid metabolism."
PMID 37148425
"The present study investigated the combinatorial effects of HIV-Tat, cocaine, and cART on autophagy and NLRP3 inflammasome activation."
PMID 37148425
"This study thus underscores the cooperative effects of HIV Tat, cocaine, and cART in exacerbating microglial activation involving dysregulated autophagy and activation of the NLRP3 inflammasome signaling."
recorded 2025-08-22 · 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: 11 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.