Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34692320›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

Efficacy and Safety of Acotiamide Versus Mosapride in Patients With Functional Dyspepsia Associated With Meal-Induced Postprandial Distress Syndrome: A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial.

Shubhadeep Sinha, Sreenivasa Chary, Pankaj Thakur, Leela Talluri, Mohan Reddy, Gautam S K, Jagan M Mohan, Pankaj Jain, Sunil Naik, Srinivas V C Reddy

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shubhadeep SinhaClinical Development and Medical Affairs, Hetero Labs Limited, Hyderabad, IND.
Sreenivasa CharyClinical Development and Medical Affairs, Hetero Labs Limited, Hyderabad, IND.
Pankaj ThakurClinical Development and Medical Affairs, Hetero Labs Limited, Hyderabad, IND.
Leela TalluriClinical Development and Medical Affairs, Hetero Labs Limited, Hyderabad, IND.
Mohan ReddyClinical Development and Medical Affairs, Hetero Labs Limited, Hyderabad, IND.
Gautam S KInternal Medicine, Shri Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi Memorial Medical College, Kanpur, IND.
Jagan M MohanGastroenterology, New Government General Hospital, Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, IND.
Pankaj JainInternal Medicine, Sterling Hospital, Vadodara, IND.
Sunil NaikGeneral Medicine, Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Srikakulam, IND.
Srinivas V C ReddyDepartment of Medicine, King George Hospital, Andhra Medical College, Vishakhapatnam, IND.
Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences · INHetero Drugs (India) · INSiddhartha Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcotiamide is a novel prokinetic drug that acts by enhancing the release of acetylcholine and is used in the treatment of functional dyspepsia-postprandial distress syndrome (FD-PDS). Mosapride is indicated to FD-PDS as per the Rome III treatment guidelines. Mosapride 5 mg three times daily (TID) is approved by the Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI) for the treatment of FD-PDS. The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of Acotiamide in comparison with Mosapride on FD-PDS.

methodsThe 220 patients of either gender (aged 18-64 years) with active PDS included in the study were centrally randomized 1:1 to receive either 100 mg Acotiamide (test product) or 5 mg Mosapride (reference product) TID for four weeks. Responder rates for the overall treatment effect (OTE) at the end of four weeks were the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the elimination rate of postprandial fullness, upper abdominal bloating, and early satiation. The study also evaluated the OTE at each week, individual symptom scores, and quality of life (QoL) assessed by the Short Form-Nepean Dyspepsia Index questionnaire (SF-NDI). The safety endpoints included assessments of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

resultsAt the end of four weeks, the responders in the Acotiamide versus Mosapride group for OTE was 98% versus 93.27% in the per-protocol (PP) population. Among the intent to treat (ITT) population, the comparison of Acotiamide versus Mosapride stood at 95.15% versus 89.81%. Secondary efficacy endpoints were significantly improved with 100 mg TID Acotiamide, which was evident from the improvement in postprandial fullness (14.56%), upper abdominal bloating (15.53%), early satiation (10.68%), and QoL (13.7 ± 4.67).

conclusionsOur study results demonstrated that Acotiamide is effective, safe, and well-tolerated and had significantly improved the QoL over a four-week treatment period in FD-PDS patients. The efficacy and safety profiles of Acotiamide were similar to Mosapride.

Indexed as

acotiamideclinical trialepigastric pain syndromefunctional dyspepsiapostprandial distress syndromerome iv criteria

Identifiers

PMID34692320
PMCPMC8526522
OpenAlexW3200548660

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.