Clinical safety and efficacy of NG440: a novel combination of rho iso-alpha acids from hops, rosemary, and oleanolic acid for inflammatory conditionsThis article is one of a selection of papers published in this special issue (part 1 of 2) on the Safety and Efficacy of Natural Health Products.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this report, we examine the clinical safety and efficacy of NG440, a phytochemical-based antiinflammatory formula consisting of a combination of rho iso-alpha acids from hops, rosemary, and oleanolic acid. In a previous study, we demonstrated that NG440 significantly decreased pain by 50% in patients with osteoarthritis. Consistent with these data, results from a multicentre trial indicate that NG440 reduced pain scores in patients with joint discomfort, as measured by VAS (visual analog scale) methodology. As demonstrated in an ex vivo clinical study, these effects on pain relief may be due to reduced inflammatory cytokine production including lower prostaglandin E2 formation. Finally, strong data exist to suggest that NG440 is a safe formula for human consumption. Animal toxicity data revealed no adverse effects of NG440 at dosages < or =250 mg.kg-1.day-1 for 21 days. Furthermore, human trial data suggest that NG440 does not negatively impact cardiovascular and gastrointestinal markers normally affected by selective COX-2 enzyme inhibitors, including platelet function, blood pressure, blood cell count, or fecal calprotectin, a measure of gastrointestinal injury. In conclusion, NG440 may serve as a safe and efficacious alternative in some areas where specific COX-2 inhibitors have been traditionally used.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".