This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Glibenclamide does in the body
Type 2 diabetes — the strongest and longest-acting of the old sulfonylurea tablets
Insulin-producing cells sit quietly because potassium leaks out of them through an open gate. When blood sugar rises the cell burns it, the gate shuts, and insulin is released. Glyburide jams that gate shut chemically, so insulin comes out whether or not there is sugar to justify it. It grips harder and stays longer than the other drugs of its type, and the liver turns it into breakdown products that do the same thing.
What happened in people
An 83% greater risk of at least one hypoglycaemic episode than other sulfonylureas across 21 randomised trials (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.49)
✎ 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 recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
That glyburide reduces heart attacks or strokes — its own label states no study has conclusively established macrovascular risk reduction for this or any antidiabetic drug
Where it acts
Pancreatic islet beta cell plasma membrane, and the ATP-sensitive potassium channels of cardiac and vascular smooth muscle
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
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 · SX6K58TVWC · 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.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 115 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.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
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.
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 40 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Blood sugar
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved5 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.
Endurance
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
…Waiting for a reviewer1 registered performance measure of this kind.
∅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.
Cholesterol
∅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
walking distance during a standardized 6 minute walk test
Cholesterol
triglyceride levels post standardised fat tolerance test
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
5 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.
Fourteen primary maternal and fetal outcomes comparing glibenclamide or metformin against insulin or against each other in gestational diabetes requiring drug treatment
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
Balsells 2015 meta-analysis in gestational diabetes (NCT01998113)
How many people
2509
Study design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomised controlled trials
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Against insulin: birth weight +109 g (95% CI 35.9 to 181); macrosomia risk ratio 2.62 (95% CI 1.35 to 5.08); neonatal hypoglycaemia risk ratio 2.04 (95% CI 1.30 to 3.20)
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
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. The conclusion reverses the 404-woman randomised trial that established the practice: the reviewers state glibenclamide is clearly inferior to both insulin and metformin and should not be used where either is available.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations
Interval reported. 95% CI 35
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Achievement of the desired level of glycaemic control
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Langer 2000 glyburide against insulin in gestational diabetes
How many people
404
Study design
Randomised controlled trial, 11 to 33 weeks of gestation to delivery
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Mean blood glucose during treatment 105 mg/dL in both arms (P = 0.99); no significant difference in any reported neonatal outcome
Repeated elsewhere
Failed to Replicate
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. Macrosomia was 7% against 4% and neonatal hypoglycaemia 9% against 6% — differences the trial was not powered to detect and which reached significance when pooled with fourteen later trials.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Glycaemic control after transfer from insulin to sulfonylurea in patients with KCNJ11 mutations
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Pearson 2006 sulfonylurea transfer in Kir6.2 neonatal diabetes (NCT00334711)
How many people
49
Study design
Prospective consecutive-series transfer study with in vitro channel assay, 1 year
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
P < 0.001 for a fall in HbA1c from 8.1% to 6.4% at 12 weeks; 44 of 49 patients (90%) discontinued insulin
Repeated elsewhere
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. Not a randomised trial and not blinded; the authors describe safety as established only in the short term. Five patients did not come off insulin, and that subgroup is small.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Any diabetes-related endpoint, diabetes-related death and all-cause mortality for intensive control against conventional dietary policy
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
UKPDS 33, glibenclamide arm
How many people
3867
Study design
Randomised controlled trial of glycaemic policy, median 10 years
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
P = 0.029 for a 12% reduction in any diabetes-related endpoint; P = 0.0099 for a 25% reduction in microvascular endpoints; P = 0.34 and P = 0.44 for diabetes-related death and all-cause mortality
Repeated elsewhere
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. Major hypoglycaemia was 1.4% per year on glibenclamide against 0.7% on conventional treatment. No macrovascular benefit was demonstrated.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
RNAWiki holds 4 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 dayEvidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.1 registered measure of this kind.
■Measured performanceEvidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.1 registered measure of this kind.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.10 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 Mouse, Rat, Dog. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it 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
Glibenclamide
What a person takes: Oral tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations.
The measurement behind this step
Glyburide is practically insoluble in water, so particle size determines how much reaches the blood. Two presentations are marketed with the same generic name and different bioavailability: a conventional tablet and a micronised tablet sold as Glynase PresTab. They are not interchangeable milligram for milligram, and confusing them is a substitution error rather than a therapeutic choice.
Getting in
Absorbed slowly, peaking at about four hours
The drug is practically insoluble in water, so how fast it dissolves decides how fast it works. Meaningful levels appear within an hour, peak around four, and are still detectable a full day later.
╌╌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 label reports significant absorption within one hour, peak drug levels at about four hours and low but detectable levels at twenty-four hours. Dissolution is rate-limiting, which is why the micronised presentation is not bioequivalent to the conventional tablet milligram for milligram.
It grips the potassium gate harder than the other drugs in its class
Like every sulfonylurea it binds the handle sitting on the beta cell potassium gate. Unlike the others, it binds more tightly, lets go more slowly, and also grips the versions of that handle found in the heart and blood vessels.
╌╌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
Glyburide binds SUR1 with higher affinity and slower off-rate than glipizide or tolbutamide, and lacks the SUR1-over-SUR2 selectivity of the newer agents. The chloro-methoxybenzamide head group is responsible for both properties.
The gate shuts, the cell depolarises, calcium enters
With potassium no longer leaking out, charge builds inside the cell. Voltage-gated calcium channels open, calcium rushes in, and the stored packets of insulin fuse with the cell surface and empty.
╌╌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
Channel closure removes the resting potassium conductance and depolarises the beta cell toward the L-type calcium channel threshold. Rising cytosolic calcium triggers SNARE-mediated exocytosis of docked insulin granules — the same final step glucose metabolism normally reaches by raising the ATP-to-ADP ratio.
The liver makes breakdown products that do the same thing
Most drugs are switched off by the liver. Glyburide is converted into hydroxylated products that still lower blood sugar, and the kidney has to clear them. If kidney function is poor they build up.
╌╌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
Hepatic hydroxylation yields 4-trans-hydroxy and 3-cis-hydroxy metabolites that retain hypoglycaemic activity and depend on renal elimination. The label warns that renal or hepatic insufficiency may cause elevated glyburide levels and that hepatic impairment additionally reduces gluconeogenic capacity — two independent routes to the same event.
Blood sugar falls, and keeps falling for longer than on other sulfonylureas
Insulin drives glucose into muscle and fat and shuts the liver down. Because the release was not conditional on blood sugar and the drug lingers, the fall continues past the point where it is useful.
──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
This is the mechanistic origin of the measured excess: 83% more hypoglycaemia than other sulfonylureas across 21 randomised trials, and 16.6 serious episodes per 1,000 person-years in adults over 65 — the highest of six agents compared in the same cohort.
In one rare disease, this exact mechanism is the cure
Some babies are born with a mutation that jams that potassium gate permanently open, so glucose can never trigger insulin. A drug that shuts the gate chemically bypasses the broken switch entirely.
──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
Activating KCNJ11 mutations prevent ATP-dependent channel closure, which is why the affected beta cell cannot respond to glucose. Sulfonylureas close the channel by an ATP-independent route. In 49 consecutive patients, 44 discontinued insulin and HbA1c fell from 8.1% to 6.4% at 12 weeks. The degree of channel block measured in Xenopus oocytes predicted the clinical response.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 6 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.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
flow mediated dilation
hba1c
glycosylated hemoglobin at week 26
hemoglobin a1c at week 24
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c after 24 weeks of treatment
assessed for glucose control
blood glucose
triglyceride levels post standardised fat tolerance test
basal hepatic glucose production
blood glucose level
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
walking distance during a standardized 6 minute walk test
hospitalization for incident heart failure
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 (28)
newborn birth weight
beta cell function c peptide auc
time from randomization to the primary action
a1c values
amplitude glycemic excursion
oxidative stress
progression of congestive heart failure
myocardial blood flow regulation
catecholamines
hypoglycemic events
rate and extend of absorption
adverse events and serious adverse events
rate of enrollment
improving the renal function
study drug dosage in pregnancy
edema
adverse events
glycemic variability
women willing to be randomised
fetal growth
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How long anything takes
Nine different lengths of time that get confused with each other. None of them is worked out from another.
Before anything is noticed.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before a test result moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before performance moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
How long the result was watched.No finished study window is recorded for a study that tested this substance.
How long people took it.How long people actually took it is not stored. The study window is not the same thing.
How long people were followed.Follow-up length is not stored separately. It is never read off the study window, which would be a different thing.
How fast the body clears it. 10 hours hours
Read from the label, which states: “The decrease of glyburide in the serum of normal healthy individuals is biphasic; the terminal half-life is about 10 hours.”
How long effects linger.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Beyond the studies. Nothing is recorded about the long term.
The longest finished study sets the edge of what anyone measured.
A study window is not how long people took it, and neither is how long they were followed. Where RNAWiki holds only one of the three, it shows one.
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.
Adults with type 2 diabetes, usually after metformin, and disproportionately those for whom price is the binding constraint. Its use in pregnancy has fallen sharply since 2015. In a rare genetic form of diabetes diagnosed before six months of age it is the treatment of choice.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “Safety and effectiveness in pediatric patients have not been established.”
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Elderly patients are particularly susceptible to the hypoglycemic action of glucose lowering drugs.”
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Teratogenic Effects Pregnancy Category B Reproduction studies have been performed in rats and rabbits at doses up to 500 times the human dose and have revealed no evidence of impaired fertility or harm to the fetus due to glyburide.”
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Although it is not known whether glyburide is excreted in human milk, some sulfonylurea drugs are known to be excreted in human milk.”
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
The gestational diabetes indication: a 404-woman randomised trial concluded glyburide was a clinically effective alternative to insulin, and a 15-trial meta-analysis in 2,509 women concluded it should not be used where insulin or metformin is available
UKPDS 33 showed no significant reduction in diabetes-related death or all-cause mortality, at the cost of doubling major hypoglycaemia against dietary management
The class-wide 1970 UGDP cardiovascular mortality warning still sits at the top of the label, unresolved by any trial of glyburide itself
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 tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations
✎ 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
Glyburide is practically insoluble in water, so particle size determines how much reaches the blood. Two presentations are marketed with the same generic name and different bioavailability: a conventional tablet and a micronised tablet sold as Glynase PresTab. They are not interchangeable milligram for milligram, and confusing them is a substitution error rather than a therapeutic choice.
✎ 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◇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
Hypoglycaemia is the defining risk, is mechanistic rather than idiosyncratic, and is measurably greater than for other sulfonylureas. Renal or hepatic impairment raises drug and active-metabolite levels; hepatic impairment separately reduces the capacity to make glucose. The label notes hypoglycaemia may be hard to recognise in older people and in those on beta-blockers, and is more likely with deficient calorie intake, prolonged exercise, alcohol or multiple glucose-lowering drugs. Weight gain occurs. A mild diuresis and rare disulfiram-like reactions are described on the label. The class-wide special warning on increased cardiovascular mortality, derived from the 1970 UGDP tolbutamide trial, applies.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
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.
Glibenclamide appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 1484 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (10)
hypoglycaemia — 706 reaction mentions
lactic acidosis — 113 reaction mentions
fall — 104 reaction mentions
dizziness — 98 reaction mentions
drug interaction — 93 reaction mentions
acute kidney injury — 76 reaction mentions
blood glucose decreased — 76 reaction mentions
toxicity to various agents — 75 reaction mentions
renal failure acute — 73 reaction mentions
blood glucose increased — 70 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
Oral tablet, in conventional and micronised particle-size presentations
✎ 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
Two presentations are marketed with the same generic name and different bioavailability: a conventional tablet and a micronised tablet sold as Glynase PresTab. They are not interchangeable milligram for milligram, and confusing them is a substitution error rather than a therapeutic choice.
✎ 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 which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
100 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 67 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 71335-2771 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as powder, tablet and tablet, film coated, taken oral.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 71335-2771 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is sulfonylurea compounds [cs] and sulfonylurea [epc].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 71335-2771 · read 2026-08-29
56 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 37 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-29
Glyburide is oral at HOW SUPPLIED Glyburide tablets USP, 1.25 mg are white, round, bi-convex, compressed tablets engraved with N horizontal bisect 342 on one side and 1.25 on the other side., recorded as fda label in effect 2015-05-31 in the United States.
US prescribing information · a56f100f-0f42-4188-81ab-04644b824040 · read 2026-08-30
Recorded price in US: 0.06385–0.06741 USD per one unit as the pricing file counts it — a tablet, capsule, patch or single item, across 27 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 Glibenclamide 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 glyburide reduces heart attacks or strokes — its own label states no study has conclusively established macrovascular risk reduction for this or any antidiabetic drug
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 the absence of a cardiovascular signal in the meta-analysis is reassurance — the risk ratios of 0.84 for events and 0.87 for death come from trials not designed for those endpoints, with confidence intervals that include meaningful harm
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 undetectable cord-serum drug levels mean no fetal effect — the 2000 trial reported exactly that, and the pooled fetal outcomes fifteen years later were worse than insulin anyway
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 the micronised and conventional tablets are interchangeable milligram for milligram — they are not bioequivalent
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 Glibenclamide 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.
Across 21 randomised trials it caused 83% more hypoglycaemia than its own class
In plain words
Someone gathered every randomised trial that compared glyburide directly against another drug that squeezes insulin out of the pancreas, and counted low blood sugar episodes. Glyburide caused about half again as many as the comparators, and nearly twice as many as other sulfonylureas.
What was measured
Relative risk of at least one hypoglycaemic episode, cardiovascular events, death and weight, glyburide against other secretagogues and other sulfonylureas
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Gangji and colleagues searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane and three trial registers from 1966 to 2005, reviewed 1,806 titles in duplicate and identified 21 parallel randomised trials of glyburide monotherapy against another secretagogue or insulin in type 2 diabetes. Glyburide carried a 52% greater risk of at least one hypoglycaemic episode than other secretagogues (relative risk 1.52, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.92) and an 83% greater risk than other sulfonylureas (1.83, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.49). It was not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events (0.84, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.26), death (0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.07) or end-of-trial weight (weighted mean difference 1.69 kg, 95% CI -0.41 to 3.80). The authors record that reporting in the original trials was suboptimal, loss to follow-up exceeded 20% in some, and major hypoglycaemia specifically was infrequently reported — so the excess is established for hypoglycaemia in general and is imprecise for the severe episodes that matter most.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
It had the highest serious-hypoglycaemia rate of six sulfonylureas in older adults
In plain words
A study of nearly 14,000 people over 65 counted episodes of low blood sugar severe enough to require a hospital. Glyburide had the highest rate of the six drugs examined, at about five times the rate of the lowest.
What was measured
Crude serious-hypoglycaemia rate per 1,000 person-years by individual sulfonylurea, and adjusted relative risk against glipizide, in adults aged 65 and over
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Shorr and colleagues followed 13,963 Tennessee Medicaid enrollees aged 65 or over prescribed one of six sulfonylureas between 1985 and 1989, identifying 255 first episodes of serious hypoglycaemia — hospitalisation, emergency admission or death with neuroglycopenic or autonomic symptoms and a concomitant blood glucose below 2.8 mmol/L — during 20,715 person-years of use. The crude rate per 1,000 person-years was 16.6 for glyburide (95% CI 13.2 to 19.9), the highest of the six, against 3.5 for tolbutamide (95% CI 1.2 to 5.9), the lowest. Glyburide users did not differ from chlorpropamide users, historically the class outlier for hypoglycaemia. Among second-generation agents the adjusted relative risk for glyburide against glipizide was 1.9 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.9), holding in every stratum defined by gender, race, nursing-home residence, dose and duration. This is an observational cohort and prescribing was not randomised.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A 404-woman trial made it standard in pregnancy; a 2,509-woman analysis reversed that
In plain words
In 2000 a randomised trial concluded glyburide was a clinically effective alternative to insulin in gestational diabetes, and it became widely used. In 2015 a pooled analysis of fifteen randomised trials found babies born heavier, more than twice as much macrosomia and twice as much newborn low blood sugar, and concluded the drug should not be used if insulin or metformin was available.
What was measured
Mean birth weight difference, macrosomia risk ratio and neonatal hypoglycaemia risk ratio against insulin, pooled across 15 randomised trials in 2,509 women
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Langer and colleagues randomised 404 women with singleton pregnancies and gestational diabetes requiring treatment, between 11 and 33 weeks, to glyburide or insulin. Mean blood glucose during treatment was 105 mg/dL in both arms (p=0.99); 8 women on glyburide (4%) required insulin; there were no significant differences in large-for-gestational-age infants (12% against 13%), macrosomia (7% against 4%), lung complications, neonatal hypoglycaemia (9% against 6%), NICU admission or fetal anomalies, and glyburide was not detected in the cord serum of any infant. The authors concluded glyburide was a clinically effective alternative. Balsells and colleagues then pooled 15 randomised articles totalling 2,509 subjects, searched to May 2014. Against insulin, glibenclamide produced a mean birth weight difference of 109 g (95% CI 35.9 to 181), a macrosomia risk ratio of 2.62 (95% CI 1.35 to 5.08) and a neonatal hypoglycaemia risk ratio of 2.04 (95% CI 1.30 to 3.20). Against metformin it produced 209 g more birth weight, 3.0 times the macrosomia and 2.3 times the large-for-gestational-age rate. Their conclusion is unambiguous: "glibenclamide is clearly inferior to both insulin and metformin", and it "should not be used for the treatment of women with gestational diabetes if insulin or metformin is available."
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
In babies with a specific channel mutation, it replaced insulin entirely
In plain words
Diabetes diagnosed before six months of age is usually caused by a mutation that jams the same potassium gate this drug closes, permanently open. Of 49 patients switched from insulin to a sulfonylurea, 44 stopped insulin altogether and their average blood sugar improved.
What was measured
Proportion of patients discontinuing insulin, and change in HbA1c at 12 weeks and one year, in 49 consecutive patients with Kir6.2 mutations
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Heterozygous activating mutations in KCNJ11, which encodes the Kir6.2 subunit of the ATP-sensitive potassium channel, cause 30 to 58% of diabetes diagnosed under six months of age. The channel fails to close in response to rising intracellular ATP, so glucose cannot trigger insulin release. Sulfonylureas close the channel by an ATP-independent route, which is precisely the step the mutation has broken. Pearson and colleagues assessed 49 consecutive patients with Kir6.2 mutations given appropriate sulfonylurea doses: 44 (90%) successfully discontinued insulin. HbA1c fell from 8.1% before treatment to 6.4% after 12 weeks (p<0.001), and the improvement was sustained at one year. The extent of tolbutamide blockade of mutant channels in Xenopus oocytes predicted the response seen in patients. Insulin secretion was more strongly stimulated by oral glucose or a mixed meal than by intravenous glucose, and exogenous glucagon increased insulin secretion only in the presence of sulfonylureas.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The label states no drug in this field has conclusively reduced macrovascular risk
In plain words
The precautions section of the glyburide label says plainly that no clinical study has established conclusive evidence that this drug — or any diabetes drug — reduces the risk of heart attacks and strokes. That sentence has been on the label for decades.
What was measured
That lowering HbA1c with glyburide reduces heart attacks and strokes — the label states no study has conclusively established this for any antidiabetic drug, and the pooled randomised estimate straddles no effect
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The PRECAUTIONS section of the glyburide label opens: "Macrovascular Outcomes: There have been no clinical studies establishing conclusive evidence of macrovascular risk reduction with glyburide tablets or any other anti-diabetic drug." The same label carries the class-wide special warning on increased risk of cardiovascular mortality derived from the University Group Diabetes Program, an 823-patient trial of tolbutamide reported in 1970 and extended to the class by chemical analogy. The randomised evidence that exists is neutral rather than reassuring: the Gangji meta-analysis found a cardiovascular event risk ratio of 0.84 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.26) and a death risk ratio of 0.87 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.07) against other secretagogues, both compatible with no difference in either direction, from trials not designed or powered for those endpoints. Glyburide has never had a dedicated cardiovascular outcome trial.
Source
FDA prescribing information for glyburide tablets USP, PRECAUTIONS (Macrovascular Outcomes) and WARNINGS; Gangji AS et al., Diabetes Care 2007;30:389-394
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
In UKPDS, glibenclamide doubled major hypoglycaemia and moved no hard endpoint
In plain words
The largest and longest trial of tight control in type 2 diabetes used glibenclamide as one of its intensive treatments. It doubled the rate of severe low blood sugar against dietary management, prevented eye and kidney damage, and did not significantly reduce deaths.
What was measured
Annual rate of major hypoglycaemic episodes by agent, and relative risk reductions for aggregate diabetes-related endpoints and mortality at ten years
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
UKPDS 33 randomised 3,867 newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes to intensive control with a sulphonylurea (chlorpropamide, glibenclamide or glipizide) or insulin, or conventional dietary policy, and followed them a median of ten years. Median HbA1c was 7.0% intensive against 7.9% conventional. Major hypoglycaemic episodes per year were 0.7% on conventional treatment, 1.0% on chlorpropamide, 1.4% on glibenclamide and 1.8% on insulin. Intensive treatment reduced any diabetes-related endpoint by 12% (95% CI 1 to 21, p=0.029), driven by a 25% reduction in microvascular endpoints (95% CI 7 to 40, p=0.0099); diabetes-related death fell 10% (95% CI -11 to 27, p=0.34) and all-cause mortality 6% (95% CI -10 to 20, p=0.44), neither significant. There was no difference in the three aggregate endpoints between chlorpropamide, glibenclamide and insulin. Mean weight gain in the intensive group was 2.9 kg (p<0.001).
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
3 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.
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.
The most potent and longest-acting of the second-generation sulfonylureas, which closes the beta-cell potassium channel to force insulin release and produces 83% more hypoglycaemia than other sulfonylureas across 21 randomised trials — a drug that a 2,509-woman meta-analysis concluded should not be used in gestational diabetes if insulin or metformin is available, and that simultaneously allowed 44 of 49 patients with Kir6.2 neonatal diabetes to stop insulin altogether.
Recorded evidence blocks (13)
Q1
What did Glibenclamide's largest trial (1499650 people) and its longest (20 years) measure?
1499650 people in Glibenclamide's largest registered study, 20 years in its longest registered window, measuring plasma glucagon concentrations during insulin induced hypoglycemia with and without glibenclamide pretreatment. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
24 phase4, 23 phase1, 19 phase3, 18 phase2, 11 na, 6 na or unstated, 1 early phase1; NCT00965991; 2023-08; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2023, NCT03029702.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Glibenclamide 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
phase4
24
phase1
23
phase3
19
phase2
18
na
11
na or unstated
6
2 more recorded rows
early phase1
1
Last recorded human testNCT03029702
2023-08-31
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From mouse to human: where has Glibenclamide shown lifespan?
Interpretation plasma glucagon concentrations during insulin induced hypoglycemia with and without glibenclamide pretreatment — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
mouse
mechanism-only
rat
lifespan
dog
mechanism-only
humanNCT00515801
biomarker; plasma glucagon concentrations during insulin induced hypoglycemia with and without glibenclamide pretreatment; 94
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
14 of Glibenclamide's trials stopped: safety, accrual/recruitment, other?
"Active Duty principle investigator currently deployed"; 14 of 94 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00160485
withdrawn; "Active Duty principle investigator currently deployed"
NCT00255541
terminated; "The development program has been terminated"
NCT00267683
terminated; "This trial was terminated due to low recruitment"
NCT00521820
terminated; "Higher incidence of hospitalization for congestive heart failure in pioglitazone-treated subjects compared to glyburide treated subjects."
NCT00759720
terminated; "Potential hepatic safety signal"
NCT01029795
terminated; "Terminated due to nonclinical safety findings"
8 further recorded trials
NCT01947699
withdrawn; "PI decided to withdrawal study before recruitment started"
NCT02460874
terminated; "Slow accrual"
NCT02524379
terminated; "Principal investigator has left the university; there were not enough participants to analyze the data."
NCT02726490
terminated; "Lack of Recruitment"
NCT02864953
terminated; "Early completed to operational challenges and other strategic considerations, not for efficacy or safety reasons"
NCT03078725
withdrawn; "Research was competing with other projects in the department, and no patients were recruited."
NCT03954041
terminated; "Early completed due to strategic considerations, not for efficacy or safety reasons."
NCT05910554
withdrawn; "Many of sarcoidosis patients in this area already taking metformin"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Glibenclamide used Glyburide and Metformin Hydrochloride Tablets 5 mg/500 mg — over how long?
Human studies of Glibenclamide used "Glyburide and Metformin Hydrochloride Tablets 5 mg/500 mg". ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
4 recorded entries; human; also "Glibenclamide 5 mg", "Glibenclamide 5Mg Tablet", "GlyBURIDE 2.5 MG Oral Tablet"
Show the evidence
human
NCT00864734
Glyburide and Metformin Hydrochloride Tablets 5 mg/500 mg
NCT02919345
Glibenclamide 5 mg
NCT03089333
Glibenclamide 5Mg Tablet
NCT06589141
GlyBURIDE 2.5 MG Oral Tablet
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Glibenclamide's half-life is 10 hours — which schedules were studied?
10 hours, the half-life Glibenclamide's label states. openfda-label · 524eec41-37ee-419a-b7a1-d23e888ae6ab · 2026-08-30
Show the evidence
half life
10 hours hours; The decrease of glyburide in the serum of normal healthy individuals is biphasic; the terminal half-life is about 10 hours.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Could one person measure Glibenclamide's effect on flow mediated dilation?
Flow mediated dilation: measured in Glibenclamide's trials.
Interpretation flow mediated dilation is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
flow mediated dilation; 2026-09-01
newborn birth weight; 2026-09-01
beta cell function c peptide auc; 2026-09-01
hba1c; 2026-09-01
time from randomization to the primary action; 2026-09-01
glycosylated hemoglobin at week 26; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
hemoglobin a1c at week 24; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
a1c values; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c after 24 weeks of treatment; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
amplitude glycemic excursion; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
oxidative stress; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
walking distance during a standardized 6 minute walk test; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
progression of congestive heart failure; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
myocardial blood flow regulation; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
catecholamines; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
hypoglycemic events; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
rate and extend of absorption; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
assessed for glucose control; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
adverse events and serious adverse events; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
blood glucose; 2026-09-01
half life
2026-09-04; halfLife; hours; 10 hours; 2026-08-30
human trials at or under30
38
smallest human trial
0; NCT00160485; PHASE4; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q7
Which of a1c values, adverse events and adverse events and serious adverse events did Glibenclamide's trials measure?
a1c values, adverse events and adverse events and serious adverse events lead 40 outcome terms across Glibenclamide's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
hba1c, time from randomization to the primary action, glycosylated hemoglobin at week 26, hemoglobin a1c at week 24, a1c values and glycosylated haemoglobin a1c after 24 weeks of treatment follow.
Show the evidence
flow mediated dilation
1
newborn birth weight
1
beta cell function c peptide auc
1
hba1c
1
time from randomization to the primary action
1
glycosylated hemoglobin at week 26
1
14 more recorded rows
hemoglobin a1c at week 24
1
a1c values
1
glycosylated haemoglobin a1c after 24 weeks of treatment
1
amplitude glycemic excursion
1
oxidative stress
1
walking distance during a standardized 6 minute walk test
1
progression of congestive heart failure
1
myocardial blood flow regulation
1
catecholamines
1
hypoglycemic events
1
rate and extend of absorption
1
assessed for glucose control
1
adverse events and serious adverse events
1
blood glucose
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which of Glibenclamide's 4 ongoing trials reports first?
MACE; Rate of recruitment of patients with tSCI within the specified time window.; latest 2029-09-01
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT05220917
"Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Four Second Line Pharmacological Strategies in Type 2 Diabetes Study"; n 781430; "MACE"; 2027-09-30
NCT05426681
"Spinal Cord Injury Neuroprotection With Glyburide"; n 12; "Rate of recruitment of patients with tSCI within the specified time window."; 2028-05
NCT05687500
"Oral Glibenclamide in Preterm Infants With Hyperglycaemia (GALOP)"; n 35; "Blood glucose control"; 2026-04-30
NCT07221799
"OER Glibenclamide for Neuropathic Pain in Multiple Sclerosis"; n 10; "Cmax"; 2029-09-01
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which 48 trials of Glibenclamide posted no result?
Posted no result
48 of 48 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00864734, NCT00865241, NCT00521742, NCT01698931, NCT01605773 and NCT00035542, and 42 more
Completion dates
oldest 2002-11; newest 2023-05-28
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00864734
2002-11
NCT00865241
2002-11
NCT00521742
2003-01
NCT01698931
2003-03-06
NCT01605773
2003-03-13
NCT00035542
2003-10
14 further recorded trials
NCT00865436
2004-04
NCT00046462
2004-12
NCT00184821
2005-05
NCT00494312
2005-06
NCT00279045
2006-06-19
NCT00549874
2006-11
NCT00388986
2007-07
NCT01733108
2008-09
NCT00417729
2009-01
NCT01145534
2009-10
NCT01132703
2010-05-07
NCT00608179
2010-12
NCT00770835
2011-05
NCT00451620
2011-09
Q10
At the median, Glibenclamide's trials enrolled 38 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
38
Largest enrolment
1499650
Registered trials counted
93
Q11
What do 1484 spontaneous reports say about Glibenclamide — 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.
Glibenclamide appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 1484 reaction mentions were counted: hypoglycaemia 706; lactic acidosis 113; fall 104; dizziness 98. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL472 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
hypoglycaemia
706
lactic acidosis
113
fall
104
dizziness
98
drug interaction
93
acute kidney injury
76
4 more recorded rows
blood glucose decreased
76
toxicity to various agents
75
renal failure acute
73
blood glucose increased
70
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
Was Glibenclamide studied with fasting?
fasting is named in Glibenclamide's label sentences: "Women with at least two abnormal values on a 3-hour, 100-g oral glucose tolerance test according to National Diabetes Data Group criteria and fasting values less than 105 mg/dL between 24 and 30 weeks of gestation were randomized to blinded glyburide or placebo study drug." openfda-label+europepmc · 2015-08-01
1 recorded statement; fasting
Show the evidence
fasting
Women with at least two abnormal values on a 3-hour, 100-g oral glucose tolerance test according to National Diabetes Data Group criteria and fasting values less than 105 mg/dL between 24 and 30 weeks of gestation were randomized to blinded glyburide or placebo study drug.
recorded 2015-08-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q13
What is recorded about Glibenclamide and AMPK?
"Herein, we showed that glibenclamide promoted insulin release and further activated autophagy through the adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) activated protein kinase (AMPK) pathway in MIN-6 cells." — where Glibenclamide and AMPK appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2024-11-16
"Herein, we showed that glibenclamide promoted insulin release and further activated autophagy through the adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) activated protein kinase (AMPK) pathway in MIN-6 cells."
autophagy
PMID 31511772
"Herein, we showed that glibenclamide promoted insulin release and further activated autophagy through the adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) activated protein kinase (AMPK) pathway in MIN-6 cells."
PMID 31511772
"Inhibition of autophagy with autophagy inhibitor 3-methyladenine (3-MA) potentiated the secretory function of glibenclamide further."
mTORPMID 31511772
"These results suggest that glibenclamide-induced autophagy plays an inhibitory role in promoting insulin secretion by activating the AMPK pathway instead of altering the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)."
AMPKPMID 31511772
"These results suggest that glibenclamide-induced autophagy plays an inhibitory role in promoting insulin secretion by activating the AMPK pathway instead of altering the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)."
autophagyPMID 31511772
"These results suggest that glibenclamide-induced autophagy plays an inhibitory role in promoting insulin secretion by activating the AMPK pathway instead of altering the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)."
AMPKPMID 39512202
"This study suggests that therapies aimed at reducing mitochondrial iron levels may effectively inhibit colon tumor growth, particularly in patients with low PINK1 expression.<b>Abbreviation</b>: ANOVA: analysis of variance; APC: adenomatous polyposis coli; cAMP: cyclic adenosine monophosphate; CDX2: caudal type homeobox 2; CGAS: cyclic GMP-AMP synthase; CRC: colorectal cancer; DNA:…"
mTORPMID 34170496
"STS was administered to the isolated perfused rat heart through Kreb's Heinselit buffer before ischemia (precondition: SIPC) and reperfusion (postcondition: SPOC) in the presence and absence of the PI3K, mTOR, and mPTP signaling pathway inhibitors (wortmannin, rapamycin, and glibenclamide respectively)."
sirtuinPMID 21896928
"To delineate the pathway(s) by which MBH resveratrol modulates hepatic glucose production, we silenced hypothalamic SIRT1 expression using a short hairpin RNA (shRNA) inhibited the hypothalamic ATP-sensitive potassium (K(ATP)) channel with glibenclamide, or selectively transected the hepatic branch of the vagus nerve while infusing resveratrol centrally."
recorded 2024-11-16 · 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.