Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35548913›Full record

Trial reportRevista de neurologia2022

[Comparison of tiapride and topiramate in the prophylactic treatment of chronic migraine: a randomised, double-blind, pilot study].

S Juica-Avello, C Riquelme-Vergara, F Condeza-Riquelme, A González-Burboa, M Fuentealba-Sandoval, G Klaassen-Pinto, C Pérez-Villalobos, A Vera-Calzaretta, L Contreras-Espinoza, E Werlinger-Estay and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Revista de neurologia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 53% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

S Juica-AvelloUniversidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
C Riquelme-VergaraHospital Clínico Regional de Concepción Dr. Guillermo Grant Benavente, Concepción, Chile.
F Condeza-RiquelmeHospital Clínico Regional de Concepción Dr. Guillermo Grant Benavente, Concepción, Chile.
A González-BurboaUniversidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
M Fuentealba-SandovalUniversidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
G Klaassen-PintoUniversidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
C Pérez-VillalobosUniversidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
A Vera-CalzarettaUniversidad de Atacama, Copiapó, Chile.
L Contreras-EspinozaHospital Clínico Regional de Concepción Dr. Guillermo Grant Benavente, Concepción, Chile.
E Werlinger-EstayHospital Clínico Regional de Concepción Dr. Guillermo Grant Benavente, Concepción, Chile.
C Herrera-HormazábalUniversidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
University of Concepción · CLHospital Regional de Concepción · CLUniversity of Atacama · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tiapride compared to topiramate as a prophylactic in chronic migraine. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe study was conducted under randomised and double blind conditions. A total of 56 patients aged 18-65 years with chronic migraine were assigned to two treatment arms: tiapride, 100 mg twice daily, or topiramate, 25 mg twice daily, for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the monthly average number of migraine days. In addition, measurements were performed to determine the change in the monthly number of headache days, the percentage of subjects with >50% and >75% decrease in their monthly migraine days, and the change in headache impact as measured by the Headache Impact Test-6.

resultsThe intention-to-treat population included 39 subjects (tiapride = 21; topiramate = 18), 35 of whom (tiapride = 18; topiramate = 16) completed the trial. The tiapride group had a mean reduction of 7.2 ± 7.5 migraine days per month compared to 7.6 ± 5.8 for the topiramate group (p = 0.86). As with the other efficacy variables measured, no differences were found between the two groups. Adverse side effects were mild in both groups.

conclusionIn patients with chronic migraine, tiapride was found to be an effective, safe and well-tolerated prophylactic treatment when compared to topiramate.

Indexed as

Migraine DisordersTiapride HydrochlorideDouble-Blind MethodFructoseHeadacheHumansPilot ProjectsTopiramateTreatment OutcomeFructoseTiapride HydrochlorideTopiramate

Identifiers

PMID35548913
PMCPMC11502187
OpenAlexW4280578571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.