Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28596150›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2017

Pain Improvement With Novel Combination Analgesic Regimens (PAIN-CARE): Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.

Ian Gilron, Dongsheng Tu, Ronald Holden, Alan C Jackson, Nader Ghasemlou, Scott Duggan, Elizabeth Vandenkerkhof, Roumen Milev

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ian GilronQueen's University, Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5293-8792
Dongsheng TuQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4842-2184
Ronald HoldenQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9070-2510
Alan C JacksonUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0413-4236
Nader GhasemlouQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1696-7342
Scott DugganQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0161-2706
Elizabeth VandenkerkhofQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4287-346X
Roumen MilevQueen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6884-171X
Queen's University · CAUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeuropathic pain (NP) (including painful diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, etc) affects approximately 7% to 8% of the population and is associated with a devastating symptom burden as well as a profound economic impact for patients, their families, and the health care system. Current therapies have limited efficacy and dose-limiting adverse effects (AEs). Rational combination therapy with carefully selected NP drugs has shown potential for measurable improvements in pain relief, quality of life, and health care use. Today, over half of NP patients concurrently receive 2 or more analgesics but combination use is based on little evidence. Research is urgently needed to identify safer, more effective combinations.

objectiveWe hypothesize that analgesic combinations containing at least 1 nonsedating agent would be as safe but more effective than either monotherapy without increasing overall AEs because of additive pain relief. Pregabalin (PGB), a sedating anticonvulsant, is proven effective for NP; the antioxidant alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) is one of the only nonsedating systemic agents proven effective for NP. Thus, we will conduct a clinical trial to compare a PGB+ALA combination to each monotherapy for NP.

methodsUsing a double-blind, double-dummy, crossover design, 54 adults with NP will be randomly allocated to 1 of 6 sequences of treatment with PGB, ALA and PGB+ALA combination. During each of 3 different treatment periods, participants will take 2 sets of capsules containing (1) ALA or placebo and (2) PGB or placebo for 31 days, followed by an 11-day taper/washout period. The primary outcome will be mean daily pain intensity (0-10) at maximally tolerated dose (MTD) during each period. Secondary outcomes, assessed at MTD, will include global improvement, adverse events, mood, and quality of life.

resultsParticipant recruitment is expected to begin September 1, 2017. The proposed trial was awarded external peer-reviewed funding by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Canada) on July 15, 2016.

conclusionsThis trial will provide rigorous evidence comparing the efficacy of a PGB+ALA combination to PGB alone and ALA alone in the treatment of NP.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN14577546; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14577546?q=&filters=conditionCategory:Signs%20and%20Symptoms,trialStatus: Ongoing,recruitmentCountry:Canada&sort=&offset=1&totalResults=2&page=1&pageSize=10&searchType=basic-search (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6qvHFDc6m).

Indexed as

alpha-lipoic acidanticonvulsantantioxidantneuropathic painpregabalin

Identifiers

PMID28596150
PMCPMC5481665
OpenAlexW2622034410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.