Skip to content
RNAWiki

Lauromacrogol 400

  • Prescription medicine
  • Given by a clinician
  • Identity checked
  • Sources last checked 2026-09-04

This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.

What Lauromacrogol 400 does in the body

Asclera ® (polidocanol) is indicated to sclerose uncomplicated spider veins (varicose veins ≤1 mm in diameter) and uncomplicated reticular veins (varicose veins 1 to 3 mm in diameter) in the lower extremity.

From the FDA-approved label: VARITHENA is a drug/device combination product that generates injectable foam. The injectable foam is composed of a liquid and gas phase, both of which are necessary to have its therapeutic effect. VARITHENA is intended to act as follows: (1) the foam displaces blood from the vein to be treated, and (2) the polidocanol then scleroses the endothelium. The active pharmaceutical ingredient of VARITHENA is polidocanol, a non-ionic surfactant sclerosing agent. The hydrophobic pole of the polidocanol molecule attaches to the lipid cell membrane of the venous endothelium, resulting in disruption of the osmotic barrier, destruction of the venous endothelium, and vasospasm.

Why people take it. Asclera ® (polidocanol) is indicated to sclerose uncomplicated spider veins (varicose veins ≤1 mm in diameter) and uncomplicated reticular veins (varicose veins 1 to 3 mm in diameter) in the lower extremity.

What happened in people

RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.

A fixed RNAWiki sentence

Where this came from

Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.

No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.

No source is stored against this line.

The limit that matters most

Not recorded.

Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.

What the registries record it as

  • The substance registry classes this as polymer.

    FDA substance registry · 0AWH8BFG9A · read 2026-08-29

Where each sentence above came from

The use the label states, quoted from it. No plain-language version of this sentence has been written.

The use the label states, quoted from it. It is written for a clinician, not for a reader without medical training.

No statement of the main limit is recorded.

The four opening statements run to 179 words.

Words this page uses

Four words worth knowing first

Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.

Biomarker

A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.

Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.

What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.

A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.

Placebo

A placebo is a dummy treatment given so the real one can be compared with it.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

A placebo is like a blank control in an experiment.

Where that stops being true. A blank does nothing. People given a placebo often do get better.

What people get wrong. A placebo effect is read as imaginary. The improvement is measured and real.

An inactive intervention matched in appearance to the test intervention, used to control for non-specific effects.

Comparator

A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.

A picture of it, and where the picture fails

It is like the other runner in a race.

Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.

What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.

The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.

What happened in peopleRead 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.

the condition of bleeding、perianal pruritus 、the degree of prolapse of internal hemorrhoids and the influence of internal hemorrhoids by self-assessment.

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT04398823
How many people
700
Study design
Phase 4
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Intravenous

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Recurrence rate and complications after venous surgery. Duplex ultrasound and clinical evaluation.

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT00621062
How many people
540
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Intravenous

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Change in Appearance of Telangiectasia and Reticular Veins Assessed by the Physician and Patient Global Assessment Scale

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT07162844
How many people
508
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Intravenous

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

photographic evaluation of the presence or absence of skin hyperpigmentation after foam sclerotherapy

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT04203043
How many people
338
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Intravenous

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Change in Patient-reported Symptoms of Varicose Veins (VVSymQ Score)

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT01072877
How many people
279
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Intravenous

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

ablation rate of uterine fibroids

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT07754877
How many people
248
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.

The limits of this study, and where it came from

Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.

How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.

Form and route. Intravenous

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.

What is missing or unclearRead 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.

  • VARITHENA (polidocanol injectable foam) is indicated for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins, accessory saphenous veins, and visible varicosities of the great saphenous vein (GSV) system above and below the knee. VARITHENA improves the symptoms of superficial venous incompetence and the appearance of visible varicosities.

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: “The safety and effectiveness of Asclera in pediatric patients have not been established.”

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · read 2026-08-30

  • On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies of Asclera did not include sufficient numbers of subjects aged 65 and over to determine whether they respond differently from younger subjects.”

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · read 2026-08-30

  • On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary The available data from case reports on use of polidocanol-containing products, including ASCLERA, in pregnant women have not identified any drug-associated risk for major birth defects, miscarriage, or adverse maternal or fetal outcomes.”

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · read 2026-08-30

  • On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There are no data on the presence of polidocanol in human milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effects on milk production.”

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · read 2026-08-30

Where the result stopped carrying

  • This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
  • It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.

RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.

What it would be like to takeRead 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 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 (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
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 takeRead 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

Given by a clinician

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

Intravenous

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

The form and route recorded on this substance.

No source is stored against this line.

Who oversees it

RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.

Quoted from a source

Where this came from

Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.

No register row and no identity class settled the question.

No source is stored against this line.

What is in the pack

Sold as solution, injection, solution, given by the intravenous route.

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.

No source is stored against this line.

Where it is registered

Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.

Counted from records

Where this came from

A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.

Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.

No source is stored against this line.

Why people stop

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.

No source is stored against this line.

What it would be like to takeNothing found in the sources checked

What can go wrong

Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.

Nothing found in the sources checked

No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.

The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.

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 unclearRead 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

Intravenous

Source-linked record

Where this came from

A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.

The form used in the studies cited on this page.

No source is stored against this line.

What is sold

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.

No source is stored against this line.

What is recorded as being sold

  • 6 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 6 of them contain it and nothing else.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 57821-011 · read 2026-08-29

  • They are sold as injection, solution and liquid, taken intravenous.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 57821-011 · read 2026-08-29

  • The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is sclerosing activity [moa], sclerosing agent [epc] and vascular sclerosing activity [pe].

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 57821-011 · read 2026-08-29

  • 2 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 2 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · read 2026-08-29

  • Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · read 2026-08-29

  • Asclera is intravenous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS Asclera (polidocanol) is an injection for intravenous use and is available as follows: • 0.5% [10 mg/2 mL (5 mg/mL)] solution in 2 mL single-dose glass ampule • 1% [20 mg/2 mL (10 mg/mL)] so…, recorded as fda label in effect 2025-07-16 in the United States.

    US prescribing information · bb1f342b-5352-4059-a0b2-e60fd652fd28 · 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 takeRead 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 Lauromacrogol 400 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 unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What nobody knows yet

Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.

How much did people take in the studies?

The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.

Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.

What would answer it

A stored source that records 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 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 Lauromacrogol 400 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 peopleRead 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.

Where else this substance is registered

FDA substance identifier (UNII)
0AWH8BFG9A
RxNorm concept
968173

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: Quoted from a stored source.

  • Not passed

    Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence

    No registered study is classified as testing this substance.

  • Passed

    No internal keys in reader text

    enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page

  • Not passed

    Safety mode resolved

    No register row and no identity class settled the question.

  • Passed

    Canonical metadata present

    slug and display name present

What is missing or unclearRead 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 NDA021201, approved 20100330 to CHEMISCH FBRK KRSSLR.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA021201 · read 2026-08-29

  • Marketing status on the register: discontinued and prescription.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA021201 · read 2026-08-29

  • The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20100601.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 57821-011 · read 2026-08-29

What is missing or unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What to learn next

Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.

This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.

What is not here

9 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 was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • How close this is to real life — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
  • What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.

The record as stored

The full record, for auditing

Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.

Recorded evidence blocks (8)

On the Lauromacrogol 400 label: indicated for what?

"VARITHENA (polidocanol injectable foam) is indicated for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins, accessory saphenous veins, and visible varicosities of the great saphenous vein (GSV) system above and below the knee. VARITHENA improves the symptoms of superficial venous incompetence and the appearance of…": indications and usage on Lauromacrogol 400's label. DailyMed label · dfd6b4a0-b0dc-11e2-9e96-0800200c9a66 · 2026-08-07

15 registered trials of Lauromacrogol 400 — at which phases?

Registered studies posting no result
10 of 15

15 registered studies of Lauromacrogol 400: 7 phase4, 3 phase2, 2 na or unstated, 2 phase1, 1 na. CLINICALTRIALS_SNAPSHOT · 2026-09-01

186 with a PubMed record

Show the evidence
  • phase4
    7
  • phase2
    3
  • na or unstated
    2
  • phase1
    2
  • na
    1
  • completed
    7
4 more recorded rows
  • unknown
    3
  • terminated
    2
  • withdrawn
    2
  • not yet recruiting
    1

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

3 of Lauromacrogol 400's trials stopped: accrual/recruitment, other?

accrual/recruitment (2) and other (1): Lauromacrogol 400's stop wording, clustered. CLINICALTRIALS_SNAPSHOT · 2026-09-01

"Poor enrollment"; 3 of 15 registered studies

Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT02988063
    withdrawn; "Poor enrollment"
  • NCT03754140
    withdrawn; "Unable to identify eligible patients within planned timeframe"
  • NCT05312970
    terminated; "Enrollment challenges and a difficult insurance coverage landscape"

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Lauromacrogol 400's half-life is 102 to 153 minutes — which schedules were studied?

102 to 153 minutes, the half-life Lauromacrogol 400's label states: "Mean terminal elimination half-life (t 1/2 ) ranged from 102 to 153 minutes, with most plasma samples below the limit of quantitation (BLQ) at the end of the 8-hour collection period." DailyMed label · dfd6b4a0-b0dc-11e2-9e96-0800200c9a66 · 2026-08-07

Show the evidence
  • half life pharmacokinetics
    102 to 153 minutes; Mean terminal elimination half-life (t 1/2 ) ranged from 102 to 153 minutes, with most plasma samples below the limit of quantitation (BLQ) at the end of the 8-hour collection period.

recorded 2026-08-07 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which one trial of Lauromacrogol 400 posted no result?

Posted no result
1 of 1 completed trials
Registrations
NCT04258761
Completion dates
oldest 2022-08-31
Show the evidence
  • Trial NCT04258761
    2022-08-31

At the median, Lauromacrogol 400's trials enrolled 30 people — anything larger?

Median enrolment
30
Largest enrolment
2000
Registered trials counted
15

What do 215 spontaneous reports say about Lauromacrogol 400 — 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.

Lauromacrogol 400 appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 215 reaction mentions were counted: deep vein thrombosis 98; pain 24; skin discolouration 20; injection site pain 17. FAERS via Open Targets · CHEMBL6067961 · 2026-06-24

Show the evidence
  • deep vein thrombosis
    98
  • pain
    24
  • skin discolouration
    20
  • injection site pain
    17
  • swelling
    14
  • erythema
    12
4 more recorded rows
  • pulmonary embolism
    10
  • blister
    8
  • cardiac arrest
    6
  • injection site urticaria
    6

recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which 10 reactions does Lauromacrogol 400's label not list?

blister, cardiac arrest and deep vein thrombosis and 7 more reported for Lauromacrogol 400, absent from its label. FAERS via Open Targets · CHEMBL6067961 · 2026-06-24

3 label terms; 10 reported and unlisted; dfd6b4a0-b0dc-11e2-9e96-0800200c9a66

Show the evidence
  • blister
    count not stated
  • cardiac arrest
    count not stated
  • deep vein thrombosis
    count not stated
  • erythema
    count not stated
  • injection site pain
    count not stated
  • injection site urticaria
    count not stated
4 more recorded rows
  • pain
    count not stated
  • pulmonary embolism
    count not stated
  • skin discolouration
    count not stated
  • swelling
    count not stated

recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04

Where it is registered
Identifiers, relations and other names

The exact record

ChEMBL id
CHEMBL6067961
CAS number
9002-92-0
RxCUI
968170
Also called
POLIDOCANOL, Laureth 9, Polyoxyl 9 lauryl ether, pem, polidocanol endovenous microfoam, polidocanol injectable foam, varisolve, 10XB-101, 10XBIO, AETHOXY-SKLEROL, LAURETH 9 [USAN], LAUROMACROGOL 400 [EP MONOGRAPH]
Trade name
Aethoxysklerol, Asclera, Marlipal 24/90, Nikkol bl-9ex, Varithena, Asclera / Varithena
Japanese name
Lauromacrogol
Sources (5)

Sources

ChEMBL 37 — CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported · ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work

How these records are assembled · Which registers were checked

Index-quality checks
  • identity passed: no open identity hold
  • required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
  • public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
  • source coverage passed: 5 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.