Comparison of biologic porcine secretin, synthetic porcine secretin, and synthetic human secretin in pancreatic function testing

What Was Tested

This randomized controlled trial paper looks at Secretin.

Due to the unavailability of biologic porcine secretin (BPS), 2 synthetic forms of secretin were developed.

Their aim is to determine the bioequivalency of the 3 forms of secretin in pancreatic function testing.

Who Took Part

The abstract describes 12 subjects taking part.

The age groups tagged for this paper are adults, middle-aged adults and older adults, both men and women.

In a randomized, crossover design, synthetic porcine (SPS) and synthetic human secretin (SHS) were compared in a group of 12 subjects with chronic pancreatitis undergoing secretin stimulation test (SST).

The 2 synthetic forms of secretin were then compared with BPS in 12 subjects utilizing a similar design.

How the Study Was Run

The researchers set it up as a randomized and crossover study.

Random assignment meant chance, not the researchers, decided who got Secretin and who got the comparison, which limits bias.

In the crossover set-up each of the subjects took both Secretin and the comparison in turn, acting as their own control.

Finally, 18 healthy subjects underwent secretin stimulation testing with SHS.

What Was Measured

Topics PubMed links to this paper include Chronic Disease, Pancreas, Pancreatic Function Tests, Pancreatitis, Secretin and Swine.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized and crossover study of Secretin in 12 subjects.

With fewer than 40 people, it is a small study, so it is better read as an early signal for further research than as a settled answer.

The abstract goes on to report its results in about 4 sentences; this page does not restate them, so read the paper for the findings and their limits.

The publication is from 2003 (Pancreas), a journal based in United States.

More context: the Secretin compound page, all human trials.