Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26541878›Full record

Trial reportDrugs in R&D2015

Comparison of Two Forms of Loperamide-Simeticone and a Probiotic Yeast (Saccharomyces boulardii) in the Treatment of Acute Diarrhoea in Adults: A Randomised Non-Inferiority Clinical Trial.

Jeremy Cottrell, Kerstin Koenig, Roland Perfekt, Robert Hofmann, Loperamide–Simethicone Acute Diarrhoea Study Team

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drugs in R&D, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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.

NCT00807326 phase4completednot on this map

A Randomized, Parallel Group Comparison of Loperamide/Simeticone Caplet, Loperamide/Simeticone Chewable Tablet (IMODIUM® PLUS) and a Probiotic (Saccharomyces Boulardii) in the Treatment of Acute Diarrhea in Adults

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcNeil ABRan2008 to 2009Enrolled415ConditionsDiarrheaArmsLoperamide/simeticone 2 mg/125 mg caplets, Loperamide/simeticone 2 mg/125 mg chewable tablets, Probiotic Saccharomyces boulardii 250 mg capsules
NCT04186936 phase1completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

An Open-label, Randomized, Fasting, Two-period, Single-dose, Crossover Study to Assess Bioequivalence Between a Combination Caplet With Loperamide Hydrochloride and Simethicone (Janssen-Cilag, France), and Imodium® Express Tablets-lyophilizate (Janssen-Cilag, France) Coadministered With Espumisan® Capsule (Berlin-Chemie AG, Germany), in Healthy Volunteers

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcNeil ABRan2019 to 2019Enrolled48ConditionsHealthyArmsCombination Caplet with Loperamide HCl and Simethicone, Loperamide HCl, Simethicone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jeremy CottrellMedical Affairs, Johnson & Johnson Ltd, Foundation Park, Roxborough Way, Maidenhead, SL6 3UG, UK. jcottre1@its.jnj.com.
Kerstin KoenigMedical Affairs, Johnson & Johnson Ltd, Foundation Park, Roxborough Way, Maidenhead, SL6 3UG, UK.
Roland PerfektMcNeil AB, PO Box 941, 251 09, Helsingborg, Sweden.
Robert HofmannJohnson & Johnson GmbH, Johnson & Johnson Platz 2 (Raiffeisenstraße 9), 41470, Neuss, Germany.
Loperamide–Simethicone Acute Diarrhoea Study Team
Johnson & Johnson (Germany) · DEJohnson & Johnson (United Kingdom) · GBHelsingborgs lasarett · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute diarrhoea is a frequent health problem in both travellers and residents that has a social and economic impact. This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of two loperamide-simeticone formulations and a Saccharomyces boulardii capsule as symptomatic treatment.

methodsThis was a prospective, randomised, single (investigator)-blind, three-arm, parallel group, non-inferiority clinical trial in adult subjects with acute diarrhoea at clinics in Mexico and India, with allocation to a loperamide-simeticone 2/125 mg caplet or chewable tablet (maximum eight in 48 h) or S. boulardii (250 mg twice daily for 5 days). OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the number of unformed stools between 0 and 24 h following the initial dose of study medication (NUS 0-24). The secondary outcome measures were time to last unformed stool (TLUS), time to complete relief of diarrhoea (TCRD), time to complete relief of abdominal discomfort (TCRAD) and the subject's evaluation of treatment effectiveness. Follow-up endpoints at 7 days were feeling of complete wellness; stool passed since final study visit; and continued or recurrent diarrhoea. SUBJECTS: In this study, 415 subjects were randomised to either a loperamide-simeticone caplet (n = 139), loperamide-simeticone chewable tablet (n = 139) or S. boulardii capsule (n = 137) and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis.

resultsWith regards to mean NUS 0-24, the loperamide-simeticone caplet was non-inferior to loperamide-simeticone tablets (3.4 vs. 3.3; one-sided 97.5 % confidence interval ≤0.5), with both significantly lower than S. boulardii (4.3; p < 0.001). The loperamide-simeticone groups had a shorter median TLUS [14.9 and 14.0 vs. 28.5 h (loperamide-simeticone caplet and chewable tablet groups, respectively, vs. S. boulardii); p < 0.001], TCRD (26.0 and 26.0 vs. 45.8 h; p < 0.001) and TCRAD (12.2 and 12.0 vs. 23.9 h; p < 0.005) than S. boulardii. Treatment effectiveness for overall illness, diarrhoea and abdominal discomfort relief was greater (p < 0.001) in the loperamide-simeticone groups than with S. boulardii. At 7-day follow-up most subjects reported passing stool at least once since the final study visit (loperamide-simeticone caplet 94.1 %, loperamide-simeticone chewable tablet 94.8 %, S. boulardii 97.0 %), did not experience continued or recurrent diarrhoea [loperamide-simeticone caplet 3.7 % (p < 0.03 vs. S. boulardii), loperamide-simeticone chewable tablet 3.7 %, S. boulardii 5.7 %] and felt completely well [loperamide-simeticone caplet 96.3 % (p < 0.02 vs. S. boulardii), loperamide-simeticone chewable tablet 96.3 % (p < 0.02 vs. S. boulardii), S. boulardii 88.6 %]. All treatments were well-tolerated with few adverse events.

conclusionsThe loperamide-simeticone caplet was non-inferior to the original loperamide-simeticone chewable tablet formulation; both formulations can be expected to demonstrate similar clinical efficacy in the relief of symptoms of acute diarrhoea. Both loperamide-simeticone formulations were superior to the S. boulardii capsule in the primary and secondary endpoints. CLINICAL

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00807326.

Indexed as

Drug CombinationsSaccharomycesAcute DiseaseAdultAgedDiarrheaFemaleHumansLoperamideMaleMiddle AgedProbioticsResearch DesignSimethiconeSingle-Blind MethodTime FactorsDrug CombinationsLoperamideSimethicone

Identifiers

PMID26541878
PMCPMC4662947
OpenAlexW2284639617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.