Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17627707›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of clinical practice2007

Efficacy of dosing and re-dosing of two oral fixed combinations of indomethacin, prochlorperazine and caffeine compared with oral sumatriptan in the acute treatment of multiple migraine attacks: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, parallel group, multicentre study.

G Sandrini, R Cerbo, E Del Bene, A Ferrari, S Genco, I Grazioli, P Martelletti, G Nappi, L Pinessi, P Sarchielli and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of clinical practice, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. New drugs for migraine.The journal of headache and pain · 2009
    Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

G SandriniUniversity Centre for Adaptive Disorders and Headache (UCADH), IRCCS C. Mondino Institute of Neurology Foundation, Pavia, Italy.
R Cerbo
E Del Bene
A Ferrari
S Genco
I Grazioli
P Martelletti
G Nappi
L Pinessi
P Sarchielli
P Tamburro
C Uslenghi
G Zanchin
Sapienza University of Rome · ITSolvay (Italy) · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · ITUniversity of Chieti-Pescara · ITUniversity of Florence · ITUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia · ITUniversity of Padua · ITUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

methodsIn this double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, parallel group, multicentre study, the efficacy of dosing and re-dosing of a fixed combination of indomethacin, prochlorperazine and caffeine (Indoprocaf) was compared with encapsulated sumatriptan in the acute treatment of two migraine attacks. Additionally, in the group taking Indoprocaf, two different oral formulations were tested: effervescent tablets and encapsulated coated tablets.

resultsOf 297 patients randomised (150 assigned to Indoprocaf and 147 to sumatriptan), 281 were included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. The initial dosing of Indoprocaf and sumatriptan was similarly effective with pain-free rates higher than 30% (95% CI of odds-ratio: 0.57-1.28) and headache relief rates of about 60% (95% CI of odds-ratio: 0.82-1.84) with both the drugs. The efficacy of re-dosing of Indoprocaf as rescue medication was more effective than that of sumatriptan with pain-free values of 47% vs. 27% in the total attacks with a statistically significant difference in the first migraine attack in favour of Indoprocaf. The efficacy of re-dosing to treat a recurrence/relapse was very high without differences between the drugs (pain-free: 60% with Indoprocaf and 50% with sumatriptan in the total attacks). Indoprocaf and sumatriptan were well-tolerated.

conclusionThe study demonstrated that the efficacy of the initial dosing of Indoprocaf was not higher than that of sumatriptan, but that the strategy to use the lowest effective dose as soon as the headache occurred, followed by a second dose if the headache has not relieved or to treat a relapse, was very effective, especially with Indoprocaf.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdolescentAdultAnalgesicsCaffeineDouble-Blind MethodDrug CombinationsFemaleHumansIndomethacinMaleMiddle AgedMigraine DisordersProchlorperazineRecurrenceSumatriptanAnalgesicsCaffeineDrug CombinationsIndomethacinIndoprocafProchlorperazineSumatriptan

Identifiers

PMID17627707
PMCPMC1974802
OpenAlexW1676522621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.