Skip to content

Silodosin

  • Prescription medicine
  • Prescription only
  • 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 Silodosin does in the body

Silodosin blocks the specific receptor variant those signals use — the one the prostate is richest in — so the muscle relaxes and the channel opens.

The prostate and the neck of the bladder are wrapped in muscle held tense by nerve signals, and that tension squeezes the tube urine passes through. The gland does not shrink. The problem is that the tubes carrying semen use the same receptor variant to push their contents forward at orgasm, so blocking it well enough to help the urine stream also stops seminal emission in about one man in four. The two effects are not separable, because they are the same molecular event in two different organs.

Why people take it. A weak, slow or hesitant stream and getting up at night, caused by an enlarged prostate

What happened in people

International Prostate Symptom Score fell 6.5 and 6.3 points against 3.6 and 3.4 on placebo in the two registration trials

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.

The limit that matters most

Its adverse-event rate is the clearest illustration in this file that an on-target effect in the wrong organ is not a safety margin problem but a design consequence

Where it acts
Smooth muscle of the prostatic stroma, prostatic urethra and bladder neck — and of the seminal vesicles and vas deferens, which use the same receptor subtype
Kind of result
Symptoms and quality of life
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 · CUZ39LUY82 · read 2026-08-29

  • Its recorded molecular formula is C25H32F3N3O4, weighing 495.53.

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

Where each sentence above came from

A person wrote this explanation into the record, with the studies named in the path below.

The recorded use, written for a reader without medical training. Not signed off.

A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.

The four opening statements run to 152 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.

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.

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.

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.

Change from baseline in International Prostate Symptom Score total at 12 weeks

The study showed what it set out to show

Who was studied
US phase 3 registration trial (NCT00224120)
How many people
462
Study design
Phase 3 randomised double-blind placebo-controlled, 12 weeks
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Pooled across the two registration studies, IPSS fell 6.5 and 6.3 points against 3.6 and 3.4 on placebo, with peak flow rising 2.2 to 2.9 mL/sec against 1.2 to 1.9
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. Retrograde or absent ejaculation occurred in 28.1% of 466 silodosin patients against 0.9% of 457 on placebo across the pooled programme. A later analysis found 82% of those events were absence of seminal emission rather than retrograde flow.

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

Form and route. Oral capsule, once daily with a meal

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

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

Spontaneous passage of a unilateral ureteral calculus of 4 to 10 mm within four weeks

The study did not show it

Who was studied
Silodosin for ureteral stone passage (Sur 2015)
How many people
232
Study design
Phase 2 randomised double-blind placebo-controlled multi-institutional, 4 weeks
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Passage of all stones 52% on silodosin against 44% on placebo, p=0.2. Distal ureteric stones passed significantly more often on silodosin, p=0.01, in an analysis for which no sample size was calculated.
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. The intent-to-treat population was below the calculated sample size, 232 against 240. No significant differences were seen in emergency-room visits, hospital admission or analgesic use.

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

Form and route. Oral capsule, once daily with a meal

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

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

Adverse events

The study showed what it set out to show

Who was studied
Long-term safety study (NCT00224133)
How many people
661
Study design
Phase 3 open-label extension, adverse events as primary endpoint
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
A safety endpoint with no efficacy hypothesis test and no placebo arm; the study describes tolerability over extended exposure rather than effect size
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated

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. An open-label extension cannot separate drug effect from expectation, and no placebo arm exists to subtract. It is a legitimate safety dataset and not an efficacy one.

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

Form and route. Oral capsule, once daily with a meal

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

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

Change in baseline total score on the International Prostate Symptom Score

The study did not show it

Who was studied
European symptom-score trial (NCT00359905)
How many people
1228
Study design
Phase 3 randomised, 12 weeks
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
No results are posted on the registry record for this study. `endpoint met: false` records the absence of a public result, not a missed endpoint.
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. The largest registered randomised symptom-score trial of this drug, with 1,228 participants, carries no results section on the public registry record.

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

Form and route. Oral capsule, once daily with a meal

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

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

What we know
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 it changes in the bodyRead 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.

  1. Start

    Silodosin

    What a person takes: Oral capsule, once daily with a meal.

    The measurement behind this step

    A conventional capsule taken with food, because absorption depends on it. There is no modified-release engineering here: silodosin solves the cardiovascular problem through receptor subtype preference rather than through a release profile, which is the opposite of alfuzosin's approach to the same problem. Dose is reduced in moderate renal impairment and the drug is contraindicated below a creatinine clearance of 30 mL/min.

  2. Getting in

    A once-daily capsule with a single clearance route

    One capsule daily with a meal. The body clears it mainly through one liver enzyme and then through the kidneys, which is why severe impairment of either rules the drug out entirely.

    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

    Oral capsule, once daily with food. Metabolised principally by CYP3A4 with UGT2B7 conjugation, and metabolites eliminated renally. Contraindicated with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, in creatinine clearance below 30 mL/min and at Child-Pugh 10 or above. A dedicated QT study at 8 mg and 24 mg for five days found no QTcI increase.

  3. Reaching the cell

    It reaches the receptor from outside the muscle cell

    The target sits on the outer surface of the smooth muscle cell, facing the bloodstream. The drug arrives and occupies it; nothing is transported inside.

    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

    Alpha-1 adrenoceptors are plasma-membrane G-protein-coupled receptors with an outward-facing orthosteric pocket, so no transporter step and no intracellular accumulation is required. The same access applies wherever the receptor is expressed, including the seminal vesicles and vas deferens.

  4. What it acts on

    It picks out one receptor variant more sharply than any rival

    There are three versions of this receptor in the body. The prostate is rich in one of them, and silodosin prefers that one more strongly than any other drug in its class. That preference is the entire design.

    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 states silodosin binds with high affinity to the alpha-1A subtype. The functional consequence is visible in two places at once: orthostatic hypotension at 2.6% against 1.5% on placebo, because the alpha-1B subtype governing vascular tone is largely spared, and retrograde or absent ejaculation at 28.1% against 0.9%, because the seminal tract runs on alpha-1A.

  5. The change it makes

    The calcium signal holding the muscle tense collapses

    Smooth muscle tension needs a continuous internal calcium signal. With the receptor blocked, that signal falls and the muscle releases — in the prostate, and in the tubes that carry semen.

    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

    Loss of alpha-1A-Gq/11 coupling ends phospholipase C activation, so inositol trisphosphate falls, sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium release drops and myosin light-chain kinase activity declines. Prostatic and bladder-neck smooth muscle relaxes; seminal vesicle and vas deferens smooth muscle fails to generate the coordinated emission contraction. Prostate volume is unchanged.

  6. What that does for a person

    Nearly three points of symptom score, and no semen in one man in four

    The symptom score improves by about three points more than placebo and the flow rate by about one millilitre a second. Roughly 28% of men stop producing semen at orgasm. Those who do are more likely to be the ones whose symptoms improved.

    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

    IPSS fell 6.5 and 6.3 against 3.6 and 3.4 on placebo; peak flow rose 2.2 to 2.9 against 1.2 to 1.9 mL/sec. Retrograde or absent ejaculation 28.1% against 0.9%, of which 82% were absence of seminal emission rather than retrograde flow. Men with the effect had 1.75 times the odds of a combined 3-point symptom and 3 mL/sec flow response, P=0.0127.

No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.

What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.

What 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.

  • Men with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia, particularly where blood pressure or postural symptoms are the limiting factor and where ejaculatory function is not a priority.

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 · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

  • On older people, the label states: “In double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week clinical studies of silodosin capsules, 259 (55.6%) were under 65 years of age, 207 (44.4%) patients were 65 years of age and over, while 60 (12.9%) patients were 75 years of age and over.”

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

  • On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Silodosin capsule is not indicated for use in women.”

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

  • On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “In a study comparing nine male patients with moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh scores 7 to 9), to nine healthy male subjects, the single dose pharmacokinetics of silodosin were not significantly altered in patients with hepatic impairment.”

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

  • On people with reduced kidney function, the label states: “The effect of renal impairment on silodosin pharmacokinetics was evaluated in a single dose study of six male patients with moderate renal impairment and seven male subjects with normal renal function.”

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

Where the result stopped carrying

  • The primary endpoint of the ureteric-stone trial, at 52% against 44%, p=0.2, in a population slightly below the calculated sample size
  • The public reporting of NCT00359905, a 1,228-participant randomised symptom-score trial with no results posted
  • Ejaculatory function in 28.1% of men treated, which is not a failure of the drug but a failure of the premise that selectivity means safety
  • 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

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 capsule, once daily with a meal

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

A conventional capsule taken with food, because absorption depends on it.

Source-linked record

Where this came from

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

Recorded notes on how this is sold. The rest of the recorded wording: There is no modified-release engineering here: silodosin solves the cardiovascular problem through receptor subtype preference rather than through a release profile, which is the opposite of alfuzosin's approach to the same problem. Dose is reduced in moderate renal impairment and the drug is contraindicated below a creatinine clearance of 30 mL/min.

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 takeRead 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

Retrograde or absent ejaculation dominates at 28.1% against 0.9% on placebo, and is the reason most discontinuations occur. Dizziness, orthostatic hypotension and diarrhoea each occur in under 4% and separate only modestly from placebo. Contraindicated in severe renal impairment, severe hepatic impairment, with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, and in hypersensitivity. Warnings cover orthostatic hypotension, intraoperative floppy iris syndrome in cataract and glaucoma surgery, and priapism. A dedicated QT study at three times the therapeutic dose found no increase.

Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.

Where this came from

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

Oral capsule, once daily with a meal

Source-linked record

Where this came from

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

The form used in the studies cited on this page.

No source is stored against this line.

What is sold

A recorded note compares this form with the others that are sold. It is kept below, word for word.

A fixed RNAWiki sentence

Where this came from

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

The recorded note, unchanged: There is no modified-release engineering here: silodosin solves the cardiovascular problem through receptor subtype preference rather than through a release profile, which is the opposite of alfuzosin's approach to the same problem. Dose is reduced in moderate renal impairment and the drug is contraindicated below a creatinine clearance of 30 mL/min.

No source is stored against this line.

What is recorded as being sold

  • 39 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 39 of them contain it and nothing else.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 72789-351 · read 2026-08-29

  • They are sold as capsule and powder, taken oral.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 72789-351 · read 2026-08-29

  • The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is adrenergic alpha-antagonists [moa] and alpha-adrenergic blocker [epc].

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 72789-351 · read 2026-08-29

  • 17 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 17 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-29

  • Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-29

  • Silodosin is oral at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS The 4 mg capsules are white opaque/white opaque, hard gelatin capsules of size “3” imprinted with “A238” on cap in gold ink, filled with white to off-white powder., recorded as fda label in effect 2023-01-30 in the United States.

    US prescribing information · 322ce16e-485f-4fd2-bb30-6b4776bc9e85 · read 2026-08-30

  • Recorded price in US: 0.2703–0.31375 USD per one unit as the pricing file counts it — a tablet, capsule, patch or single item, across 21 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 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 Silodosin 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

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 silodosin works as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones — the whole-ureter primary endpoint was not met and the positive finding is an unpowered subgroup

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 ejaculatory effect is retrograde flow — 82% of the coded events were absence of seminal emission, a different physiological event

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 absent emission should be sought as a marker of adequate dosing — the association is a target-engagement observation from a post hoc responder analysis, not a dosing strategy

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 greater subtype selectivity means fewer side effects — here it means a different and far more frequent one

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 unclearRead 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 Silodosin 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.

Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.

Ejaculation stops in 28.1% against 0.9% on placebo — thirty times the rate
In plain words
More than one man in four on silodosin stops producing semen at orgasm. On placebo it is fewer than one in a hundred. This is the drug working, in the wrong organ.
What was measured
Incidence of retrograde or absent ejaculation, dizziness, orthostatic hypotension and diarrhoea against placebo
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Pooled 12-week placebo-controlled data on the US label, from 466 patients on silodosin and 457 on placebo, report retrograde ejaculation in 28.1% against 0.9%. Dizziness was 3.2% against 1.1%, orthostatic hypotension 2.6% against 1.5% and diarrhoea 2.6% against 1.3% — every other effect an order of magnitude smaller than the ejaculatory one. The mechanism is not incidental: seminal vesicle and vas deferens smooth muscle expresses the alpha-1A subtype that silodosin was designed to prefer, so the same receptor occupancy that relaxes the prostatic urethra abolishes seminal emission. The rate is dose-ordered across the class as well: tamsulosin reports 8.4% at 0.4 mg and 18.1% at 0.8 mg, and silodosin, the most alpha-1A-preferring agent, reports 28.1%.
Source
US prescribing information for silodosin capsules, Adverse Reactions section, pooled 12-week placebo-controlled studies (openFDA drug label endpoint)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Most of the "retrograde ejaculation" was not retrograde
In plain words
The label calls the effect retrograde ejaculation, which means semen going backwards into the bladder. When the trial data were examined, 82% of the events were something different: orgasm with no seminal emission at all.
What was measured
Proportion of coded retrograde-ejaculation events that were reported as orgasm with absence of seminal emission
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Roehrborn and colleagues analysed the two phase 3 registration studies (NCT00224107 and NCT00224120). Of 466 patients receiving silodosin, 131 (28%) reported retrograde ejaculation and 335 (72%) did not; 4 of 457 placebo patients (0.9%) reported it. Of 134 such events in silodosin-treated patients, 110 — 82% — were reported as "orgasm with absence of seminal emission." Retrograde flow and absent emission are different physiological events with different implications: one deposits semen in the bladder, the other means the seminal tract never contracts. The label term survives because it is the coded adverse-event category, and the distinction only appeared when someone went back to the case reports. It matters to a patient being counselled, and it matters to anyone reasoning about the mechanism.
Source
Roehrborn CG, Kaplan SA, Lepor H, Volinn W, Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2011;14:143-148 (PMID 21135869)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The men who lost emission had 1.75 times the odds of a symptomatic response
In plain words
The side effect turns out to track the benefit. Men who stopped producing semen were significantly more likely to reach a meaningful improvement in both their symptom score and their flow rate.
What was measured
Odds ratio for achieving a 3-point symptom-score and 3 mL/sec peak-flow improvement, with versus without absent seminal emission
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
In the same analysis of the two phase 3 trials, silodosin-treated patients with and without the ejaculatory effect both improved significantly against placebo on symptom score, peak flow and quality of life (P<0.02). The men who lost emission improved numerically more, though not significantly on the continuous measures (P>0.05). The responder analysis was significant: for patients with absent emission, the odds of achieving both a 3-point improvement in symptom score and a 3 mL/sec improvement in peak flow by study end were 1.75 times those of patients without it, P=0.0127. The authors concluded that absence of seminal emission may predict superior efficacy in individual patients. Read carefully, this is target-engagement evidence: the adverse effect is a biomarker for how thoroughly the alpha-1A receptor is blocked, and blockade produces both outcomes. It does not license a claim that the side effect should be sought.
Source
Roehrborn CG, Kaplan SA, Lepor H, Volinn W, Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2011;14:143-148 (PMID 21135869)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The stone trial missed its primary endpoint and reported a subgroup instead
In plain words
A randomised trial tested silodosin against placebo for passing kidney stones. Overall, 52% passed on the drug and 44% on placebo, p=0.2 — no difference. The result that got reported was a subgroup the trial was not sized to test.
What was measured
Spontaneous stone passage rate for all stones, silodosin versus placebo, with the distal subgroup reported separately
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
Sur and colleagues ran a multi-institutional, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in adults with a unilateral ureteral calculus of 4 to 10 mm, randomised 1:1 to silodosin 8 mg or placebo for up to four weeks, with spontaneous stone passage as the primary outcome. The passage rate for all stones was 52% against 44%, p=0.2 — not significant. No significant differences were found for emergency-room visits, hospital admission or analgesic use either. Distal ureteric stones passed significantly more often on silodosin, p=0.01, and that is the finding the paper is usually cited for. The abstract itself states two limitations plainly: the intent-to-treat population was slightly below the calculated sample size, 232 against 240, and "sample sizes were not calculated for subgroup analyses." A subgroup result from a trial that missed its primary endpoint and was slightly underpowered for the endpoint it did specify is a hypothesis, and the authors say as much when they call for additional future studies.
Source
Sur RL et al., Eur Urol 2015;67:959-964 (PMID 25465978)
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
About 2.9 points of symptom score and 1.0 to 1.4 mL/sec of flow over placebo
In plain words
Both registration trials found a real effect. The symptom score fell about three points more than placebo, and the flow rate improved by about one millilitre a second more.
What was measured
Change in International Prostate Symptom Score total and peak urine flow rate at 12 weeks against placebo, in two registration trials
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The label reports two 12-week placebo-controlled studies. International Prostate Symptom Score total fell 6.5 and 6.3 points against 3.6 and 3.4 on placebo, treatment effects of 2.9 points in both. Peak urine flow rose 2.2 to 2.9 mL/sec against 1.2 to 1.9 on placebo. The symptom-score margin is at the upper end of the alpha-blocker class — alfuzosin's three trials delivered about 2.0 points and tamsulosin's two delivered 2.8 and 1.5 — and it sits near the commonly cited minimally important difference of around three points for this instrument. That is worth stating precisely because it is unusual: most drugs in this file deliver margins that fall below their instrument's own threshold for a noticeable change, and this one lands close to it.
Source
US prescribing information for silodosin capsules, Clinical Studies section (openFDA drug label endpoint)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A dedicated QT study in 189 men found no increase at all
In plain words
At three times the usual dose for five days, silodosin did not lengthen the heart's electrical interval at any measured time point. The antibiotic used as a positive control in the same study did.
What was measured
Individual corrected QT interval change at 8 mg and 24 mg for five days, against a moxifloxacin positive control
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
A cardiac safety trial in 189 healthy males aged 18 to 45 tested silodosin at 8 mg and 24 mg daily for five days. The label states silodosin "was not associated with an increase in individual corrected (QTcI) QT interval at any time during steady state measurement," while moxifloxacin as active control produced a maximum increase of 9.59 msec. That is a genuine negative with a demonstrably sensitive assay — the positive control worked. It is recorded here rather than omitted because a clean negative reported with its positive control is a different object from silence, and because tolterodine's label in this same file reports 11.84 msec at twice its therapeutic dose with confidence intervals overlapping the same comparator.
Source
US prescribing information for silodosin capsules, Clinical Pharmacology section (openFDA drug label endpoint)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Four absolute contraindications, two of them about how the drug leaves the body
In plain words
Silodosin must not be taken by anyone with severe kidney impairment, severe liver impairment, or on a strong inhibitor of the enzyme that clears it. These are contraindications, not cautions.
What was measured
Contraindicated conditions and interactions listed on the US label, with the clearance basis for each
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The US label lists four contraindications: severe renal impairment with creatinine clearance below 30 mL/min, severe hepatic impairment at Child-Pugh 10 or above, concomitant use of strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, and hypersensitivity. Two of those are clearance statements: the drug depends on CYP3A4 for metabolism and on the kidney for elimination of its metabolites, and removing either route raises exposure of a compound whose whole design point is high receptor occupancy. Alfuzosin's label carries a comparable CYP3A4 contraindication for the same structural reason. Tamsulosin, cleared by two enzymes rather than one, handles the same interaction with a warning.
Source
US prescribing information for silodosin capsules, Contraindications section (openFDA drug label endpoint)
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

How many documents were read

  • 17 documents were read for this substance.

    RNAWiki source record

  • 17 of them state the same halfLife, and they agree.

    RNAWiki source record

  • 17 of them state the same bioavailability, and they agree.

    RNAWiki source record

  • 17 of them state the same volumeOfDistribution, and they agree.

    RNAWiki source record

Where else this substance is registered

FDA substance identifier (UNII)
CUZ39LUY82
RxNorm concept
809477

Checks this page had to pass

  • Passed

    Identity resolved

    no open identity hold

  • Passed

    No unresolved merge across substance families

    no quarantine open

  • Passed

    Every public sentence names a source

    The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.

  • Not passed

    Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence

    No registered study is classified as testing this substance.

  • Passed

    No internal keys in reader text

    enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page

  • Not passed

    Safety mode resolved

    No register row and no identity class settled the question.

  • Passed

    Canonical metadata present

    slug and display name present

What is missing or 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

  • 14 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA022206, approved 20081008 to ABBVIE.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA022206 · read 2026-08-29

  • Marketing status on the register: discontinued and prescription.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA022206 · read 2026-08-29

  • The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20060123.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 72789-351 · 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

7 questions this page could not answer

These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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 alpha-1A-selective alpha-blocker licensed, which lowered the International Prostate Symptom Score by 6.5 and 6.3 points against 3.6 and 3.4 on placebo in its two registration trials while producing absent or retrograde ejaculation in 28.1% of patients against 0.9% on placebo — the same receptor preference generating both results, and the trial that examined it finding that the men who lost seminal emission had 1.75 times the odds of a symptomatic response.

Recorded evidence blocks (10)

On the Silodosin label: indicated for what?


"1 INDICATIONS & USAGE Silodosin, a selective alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist, is indicated for the treatment of the signs and symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) [ see CLINICAL STUDIES ( 14 )]. Silodosin is not indicated for the treatment of hypertension.": indications and usage on Silodosin's label. DailyMed label · afbf4823-8663-4152-9346-ca42c7b7d722 · 2026-07-07

40 registered trials of Silodosin — at which phases?


Registered studies posting no result
33 of 40

40 registered studies of Silodosin: 16 phase4, 10 phase3, 8 phase2, 3 na, 2 phase1, 1 early phase1, 1 na or unstated. CLINICALTRIALS_SNAPSHOT · 2026-09-01

86 with a PubMed record

Show the evidence
  • phase4
    16
  • phase3
    10
  • phase2
    8
  • na
    3
  • phase1
    2
  • early phase1
    1
7 more recorded rows
  • na or unstated
    1
  • completed
    28
  • unknown
    4
  • not yet recruiting
    3
  • recruiting
    2
  • terminated
    2
  • withdrawn
    1

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

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


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

"accrual of subjects did not occur as anticipated"; 3 of 40 registered studies

Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT01560091
    withdrawn; "accrual of subjects did not occur as anticipated"
  • NCT02090439
    terminated; "Following difficulties in patient recruitment, we were forced to stop the study prematurely."
  • NCT02369744
    terminated; "due to lack of suitable patient population"

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

Human studies of Silodosin used Silodosin 8 mg — over how long?


Human studies of Silodosin used "Silodosin 8 mg". ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

4 recorded entries; human; capsule; also "Silodosin 4 mg", "silodosin 8 mg capsule and the pyridostigmine bromide 60 mg tablet", "silodosin 8 mg capsule"

Show the evidence

human

  • NCT00740779
    Silodosin 8 mg
  • NCT00740779
    Silodosin 4 mg
  • NCT06319469
    capsule; silodosin 8 mg capsule and the pyridostigmine bromide 60 mg tablet
  • NCT06319469
    capsule; silodosin 8 mg capsule

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

Silodosin's half-life is 24 hours — which schedules were studied?


24 hours, the half-life Silodosin's label states: "KMD-3213G, which has been shown in vitro to be active, has an extended half-life (approximately 24 hours) and reaches plasma exposure (AUC) approximately four times greater than that of silodosin." DailyMed label · afbf4823-8663-4152-9346-ca42c7b7d722 · 2026-07-07

bioavailability 32 %.

Show the evidence
  • half life pharmacokinetics
    24 hours; KMD-3213G, which has been shown in vitro to be active, has an extended half-life (approximately 24 hours) and reaches plasma exposure (AUC) approximately four times greater than that of silodosin.
  • bioavailability pharmacokinetics
    32 %; Table 3 Mean (±SD) Steady State Pharmacokinetic Parameters in Healthy Males Following Silodosin 8 mg Once Daily with Food Cmax (ng/mL) t max (hours) t 1/2 (hours) AUC ss (ng•hr/mL) 61.6 ± 27.54 2.6 ± 0.90 13.3 ± 8.07 373.4 ± 164.94 C max = maximum concentration, t max = time to reach C max , t 1/2 = elimination half-life, AUCss = steady state area under the concentration-time curve Figure 1 Mean…
  • metabolism pharmacokinetics
    Elimination Metabolism Silodosin undergoes extensive metabolism through glucuronidation, alcohol and aldehyde dehydrogenase, and cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) pathways.

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

Which 18 trials of Silodosin posted no result?


Posted no result
18 of 18 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00359905, NCT01259531, NCT01260129, NCT01228370, NCT01533389 and NCT01757769, and 12 more
Completion dates
oldest 2008-01; newest 2024-08-15
Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT00359905
    2008-01
  • NCT01259531
    2011-09
  • NCT01260129
    2011-10
  • NCT01228370
    2012-01
  • NCT01533389
    2012-08
  • NCT01757769
    2013-08
12 further recorded trials
  • NCT02106182
    2016-08-01
  • NCT06282731
    2017-04-27
  • NCT04107896
    2018-08-31
  • NCT05789732
    2022-08-30
  • NCT05790902
    2023-02-28
  • NCT05823662
    2023-03-02
  • NCT02220829
    2023-08
  • NCT05921370
    2023-09-01
  • NCT06381206
    2023-10-25
  • NCT06319469
    2024-01-30
  • NCT07134907
    2024-07-09
  • NCT06999135
    2024-08-15

At the median, Silodosin's trials enrolled 140 people — anything larger?


Median enrolment
140
Largest enrolment
1228
Registered trials counted
40

What do 227 spontaneous reports say about Silodosin — 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.

Silodosin appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 227 reaction mentions were counted: acute kidney injury 35; fall 32; loss of consciousness 30; confusional state 26. FAERS via Open Targets · CHEMBL24778 · 2026-06-24

Show the evidence
  • acute kidney injury
    35
  • fall
    32
  • loss of consciousness
    30
  • confusional state
    26
  • orthostatic hypotension
    26
  • hyponatraemia
    21
4 more recorded rows
  • syncope
    20
  • urinary retention
    13
  • atrioventricular block complete
    12
  • granulomatous rosacea
    12

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

Which 10 reactions does Silodosin's label not list?


acute kidney injury, atrioventricular block complete and confusional state and 7 more reported for Silodosin, absent from its label. FAERS via Open Targets · CHEMBL24778 · 2026-06-24

2 label terms; 10 reported and unlisted; afbf4823-8663-4152-9346-ca42c7b7d722

Show the evidence
  • acute kidney injury
    count not stated
  • atrioventricular block complete
    count not stated
  • confusional state
    count not stated
  • fall
    count not stated
  • granulomatous rosacea
    count not stated
  • hyponatraemia
    count not stated
4 more recorded rows
  • loss of consciousness
    count not stated
  • orthostatic hypotension
    count not stated
  • syncope
    count not stated
  • urinary retention
    count not stated

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

Silodosin and CYP3A4, P-GLYCOPROTEIN and P-GP: shared by which compounds?


CYP3A4, P-GLYCOPROTEIN and P-GP appear in Silodosin's recorded interaction sentences, 8 in all. DailyMed label · afbf4823-8663-4152-9346-ca42c7b7d722 · 2026-07-07

CYP3A4, P-gp; 2 shared nodes; drug_interactions

Show the evidence

Interaction statement

  • drug_interactions
    • Strong P-glycoprotein inhibitors (e.g., cyclosporine): Co-administration may increase plasma silodosin concentration.
  • drug_interactions
    ( 5.5 , 7.5 ) 7.1 Moderate and Strong CYP3A4 Inhibitors In a clinical metabolic inhibition study, a 3.8-fold increase in silodosin maximum plasma concentrations and 3.2-fold increase in silodosin exposure were observed with concurrent administration of a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, 400 mg ketoconazole.
  • drug_interactions
    Use of strong CYP3A4 inhibitors such as itraconazole or ritonavir may cause plasma concentrations of silodosin to increase.
  • drug_interactions
    Concomitant administration of strong CYP3A4 inhibitors and silodosin is contraindicated [ see CONTRAINDICATIONS ( 4 ), WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS ( 5.4 ) and CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY ( 12.3 ) ].
  • drug_interactions
    The effect of moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors on the pharmacokinetics of silodosin has not been evaluated.
  • drug_interactions
    Concomitant administration with moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors (e.g., diltiazem, erythromycin, verapamil) may increase concentration of silodosin.
2 more recorded rows
  • Interaction statement drug_interactions
    Exercise caution and monitor patients for adverse events when co-administering silodosin with moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors.
  • Interaction statement drug_interactions
    7.2 Strong P-glycoprotein (P-gp) Inhibitors In vitro studies indicated that silodosin is a P-gp substrate.
  • CYP3A4
    FINGOLIMOD LAURYL SULFATE, ERYTHROMYCIN LACTOBIONATE, FOSAPREPITANT DIMEGLUMINE, TAFAMIDIS MEGLUMINE, Arimoclomol, Beclometasone, Rasagiline, Sofpironium
  • P-gp
    FINGOLIMOD LAURYL SULFATE, ERYTHROMYCIN LACTOBIONATE, Darunavir Propylene Glycolate, FOSAPREPITANT DIMEGLUMINE, TAFAMIDIS MEGLUMINE, Arimoclomol, Ceftobiprole Medocaril, Vincristine

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

Where it is registered
Identifiers, relations and other names

The exact record

ChEMBL id
CHEMBL24778
PubChem CID
5312125
CAS number
160970-54-7
RxCUI
720825
InChIKey
PNCPYILNMDWPEY-QGZVFWFLSA-N
Development code
KAD-3213, KMD-3213
Also called
Kso-0400, Rapilif, Silodal, Silodosina, Silodosine, Silodyx, Urief, Urorec, sildosin, SILODOSIN [EMA EPAR], SILODOSIN [JAN], SILODOSIN [MART.]
Trade name
Rapaflo, Silodosin recordati
Sources (6)

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: 6 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.