PhenotropilФенотропил
What the studies found
Randomized study in people · 2014
Seizure responses reported, with 32 adverse-event withdrawals
- At least 50% seizure-frequency reduction
- 83% at 200 mg/day; 61% at 100 mg/dayPublished results narrative; placebo responder percentage is not supplied in the checked passageEnd of treatment
- Adverse-event discontinuations
- 12/30 at 200 mg/day; 12/30 at 100 mg/day; 8/30 with placeboCounts as reported in methods; 32/90 total withdrawalsDuring three-month treatment
- Cognitive and mood outcomes
- Improvements reported; exact scale differences are in image tablesMMSE, depression, asthenia and P300 assessments; no reconstructed numbers
The paper reports at least 50% seizure reduction in 83% and 61% of the two active groups, alongside 32 discontinuations due to adverse events.
More reported outcomes
- Withdrawal-associated EEG finding
- 62.5% of withdrawals versus 18.8% of continuers had hypersynchronous EEG patternsAssociation across treatment groupsCorrelation r=0.43; p<0.05
Study notes · methods, sources and limitations
Participants or model 90 adults with resistant focal epilepsy; three groups of 30, adjunctive to unchanged antiepileptic therapy
Design 90 adults with resistant focal epilepsy; 30 each assigned to adjunctive 200 mg/day, 100 mg/day or placebo for three months; background antiepileptic therapy unchanged.
Important limitations
- The text separately describes 48 active-group completers, which does not reconcile with 60 active allocations minus 24 withdrawals. Preserve reported response percentages without reconstructing their denominators or claiming a clear intention-to-treat effect. Table images and missing-data analysis remain review priorities. Adjunctive epilepsy findings do not establish effectiveness or safety in healthy users.
- The text separately describes 48 active-group completers, which does not reconcile with 60 active allocations minus 24 withdrawals. Preserve reported response percentages without reconstructing their denominators or claiming a clear intention-to-treat effect. Table images and missing-data analysis remain review priorities.
Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova. 114(11 Pt 2):27–31 · Publication record
Comparison in people · 2006
Phenotropil and piracetam in a Russian chronic fatigue comparison
Study of multiple preparations
- Complete or partial symptom response in the CFS subgroup
- 28/32 (87.5%) with Phenotropil and 11/20 (55%) with piracetam. The authors reported p<0.05 for the drug comparison.
- Placebo
- The authors report no complete response. The narrative gives no matching count for partial response.
28/32 (87.5%) with Phenotropil and 11/20 (55%) with piracetam. The authors reported p<0.05 for the drug comparison.
Study notes · methods, sources and limitations
Participants or model 180 participants across asthenic syndrome and CFS groups. The CFS subgroup totaled 70 (32 Phenotropil, 20 piracetam, 18 placebo).
Design Four-week oral comparison. Phenotropil started at 50 mg twice daily and was titrated to 200–250 mg/day. Piracetam was 400 mg three times daily. Placebo mimicked the Phenotropil regimen.
Important limitations
- The dossier does not establish random allocation, assessor masking or a modern case definition requiring PEM. The authors’ criteria describe symptom relief over four weeks.
MEDI.RU author report, March 2006 · Publication record
Observational study · 2014
Fatigue scores declined in an uncontrolled observational program
- General-fatigue reduction at three months
- 59.1%, 55.9%, 60.5% and 55.7%Four age-by-duration subgroups; within-person reductions, not a placebo-adjusted effectThree months after treatment started
- Post-treatment MFI-20 score
- 33.3 points in younger patients; 37.0 in older patientsAges 45–54 and 55–65; reported overall baseline score 77Final follow-up
- Baseline severity versus subsequent reduction
- r=0.789Correlational associationp=0.001
Fatigue scores declined in an observational program, with large exclusions from analysis and no untreated group.
Study notes · methods, sources and limitations
Participants or model 2,029 participants; 1,170 analyzed; 859 excluded for protocol completion/documentation problems
Design 2,029 enrolled; 1,170 analyzed; 859 excluded for protocol/documentation problems. Physicians chose two or three months of 100 mg/day treatment.
- Analysis population
- 1,170 of 2,029 participants859 records excluded; not all enrollment contributed to results
Important limitations
- Large exclusion from analysis creates potential selection bias. No untreated control; within-person improvement cannot establish causation. This program is not a randomized trial and cannot establish long-term safety.
- Treatment duration was not randomized and there was no placebo or untreated comparator. The table preserves each subgroup rather than assigning the largest percentage to the whole cohort.
Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova. 114(12):104–111 · Publication record
About Phenotropil
Names in this research collection
Phenylpiracetam · 4-phenylpiracetam · Fonturacetam · Carphedon · Фонтурацетам · Карфедон · Fenotropil
Phenotropil is a name used for phenylpiracetam (fonturacetam), historically called Carphedon. It is a synthetic phenyl-substituted analogue of piracetam in the racetam family, not a peptide.
Identity / background source ↗
Research background
A phenyl-substituted piracetam analogue connecting early Soviet experimental pharmacology, IMBP development and later clinical studies. Temperature-dependent animal findings, patient trials and healthy-volunteer PK studies address different questions.
Russian ME/CFS and fatigue research ↗
More study findings
Animal research · 2011
Investigation into Stereoselective Pharmacological Activity of Phenotropil
The study compares the pharmacological activity of different stereochemical forms, emphasizing why results for an isolated enantiomer should not automatically be assigned to the racemate.
Study notes · methods, sources and limitations
Participants or model Preclinical comparison of racemate and R/S enantiomers
Important limitations
- Animal findings are not a human efficacy comparison. Do not equate all phenylpiracetam derivatives or enantiomer products.
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 109:407–412 · Indexed abstract
- Compound class
- Racetam-derived nootropic
- Research collection
- Related nootropics & combinations · editorial grouping
- Research institutions
- No institutional affiliation recorded
- Source review
- Review dates and the material assessed are listed with each publication below.
Understanding the evidence
Human research
Adjunctive epilepsy RCT; observational patient reports
Study methods
Study-specific review scopes; many original methods pending
Independent replication
Independent confirmation not established in this collection
Source access
Publisher texts, indexed records and explicit document/review scopes below
Safety evidence
Mixed temperature findings; occupational and long-term safety not established
Open a topic for the evidence assessment.
Patents and claimed inventions
These 2 grouped records distinguish claimed molecules, uses, formulations and related chemistry. Patent disclosure does not establish clinical benefit or approval.
Status is an indexed snapshot, not an official legal assessment. Search the patent collection and read the method →
Linked sources
Explore the research map and unresolved leads ↗
Related compound research
Follow shared publications or research classes. These links do not establish equivalent effects between compounds.
Research collection curated by @PepMariner · editorial standards. Send a source correction ↗
Browse bibliography & PDFs ↗