Evidence Hub

Pretreatment Factors Associated With Pain Improvement After Cernitin Pollen Extract Therapy in Men With Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Post Hoc Analysis

Matsukawa Y, Naito Y, Inoue S, Kimura T, Gotoh M, Akamatsu S

Lower urinary tract symptoms, 2026

42 participants

Abstract

Objectives: Cernitin pollen extract is used for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS), but pretreatment factors associated with pain improvement remain unclear. This study explored baseline factors associated with clinically meaningful pain relief after cernitin therapy in men with CP/CPPS.

Methods: This exploratory post hoc analysis was based on a single-center, open-label, randomized prospective trial conducted between July 2017 and December 2018. Men with persistent CP/CPPS despite at least 12 weeks of α1-blocker therapy were randomized to receive add-on cernitin pollen extract or tadalafil for 12 weeks. The present analysis included 42 men assigned to cernitin. Good responders were defined as patients with a ≥ 50% improvement in the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) pain subscore. Baseline variables were compared, and exploratory logistic regression analysis with a limited number of covariates was performed.

Results: Among 42 patients, 21 were good responders and 21 were poor responders. The NIH-CPSI pain subscore improved by 67.0% in good responders and by 28.9% in poor responders (p < 0.001). Baseline serum total testosterone was significantly lower in good responders than in poor responders (4.5 ± 2.9 vs. 6.3 ± 2.4 ng/mL; p = 0.006). In exploratory multivariable analysis, lower serum total testosterone remained the only factor associated with clinically meaningful pain improvement (odds ratio 0.53, 95%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 42 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free