Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37794502›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2023

A blinded, randomized and controlled multicenter clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of Leisguard

Marta Baxarias, Giulia Donato, Cristina Mateu, Marta Salichs, Josep Homedes, Guadalupe Miró, Maria Grazia Pennisi, Laia Solano-Gallego

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial, VeterinaryMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Commentary on the Issue ofVeterinary sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. EXCLI journal · 2024
    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.

Marta BaxariasDepartament de Medicina i Cirurgia Animals, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
Giulia DonatoDipartimento di Scienze Veterinarie, Università di Messina - Polo Universitario Annunziata, Messina, Italy.
Cristina MateuEcuphar Veterinaria SLU, Barcelona, Spain.
Marta SalichsEcuphar Veterinaria SLU, Barcelona, Spain.
Josep HomedesEcuphar Veterinaria SLU, Barcelona, Spain.
Guadalupe MiróDepartamento de Sanidad Animal, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Maria Grazia PennisiDipartimento di Scienze Veterinarie, Università di Messina - Polo Universitario Annunziata, Messina, Italy.
Laia Solano-GallegoDepartament de Medicina i Cirurgia Animals, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain. laia.solano@uab.cat.
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDomperidone (Leisguard

methodsSixty-seven dogs were treated with domperidone at 0.5 mg/kg and 44 dogs received placebo, once daily for 4 consecutive weeks. Monthly treatments were repeated every 4 months until the end of the 1-year follow-up period. Veterinary examinations were performed on days 0, 30, 120, 150, 240, 270 and 360. Samples of blood and urine were collected on days 0, 120, 240 and 360 for routine laboratory tests and quantitative in-house ELISA for the detection of L. infantum-specific antibodies. Furthermore, Leishmania real-time PCR and IFN-γ ELISA were performed at day 0 and the end of the study. Dogs that developed disease were withdrawn from the study and classified as sick dogs. Adverse drug reactions were reported.

resultsThirty dogs developed disease during the follow-up period: 13/67 (19.4%) in the group treated with domperidone and 17/44 (38.6%) in the placebo-treated group (P = 0.03). Low-seropositive dogs treated with domperidone (4/40, 9.1%) were significantly less likely to develop disease compared to low-seropositive dogs treated with placebo (7/24, 29.2%; P = 0.04), while no differences were found between domperidone (9/23, 39.1%) and placebo (10/20, 50%) in medium- to high-seropositive dogs. At the end of the study, a higher proportion of Leishmania PCR-positive dogs was observed in the placebo-treated group (16/33, 48.5%) compared to the domperidone group (13/51, 25.5%; P = 0.04). Furthermore, low-seropositive dogs treated with domperidone with an increase of IFN-γ concentration presented a higher increase than those treated with placebo at the end of the study. Four dogs treated with domperidone presented self-limiting diarrhea.

conclusionsHealthy dogs with low L. infantum antibody levels treated with domperidone were less likely to develop disease compared to placebo-treated dogs. Furthermore, domperidone presented a good safety profile.

Indexed as

Dog DiseasesLeishmania infantumLeishmaniasis, VisceralAnimalsAntibodies, ProtozoanDogsDomperidoneImmunotherapyReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionAntibodies, ProtozoanDomperidoneAntibodyCanineDomperidoneInterferon gammaLeishmaniosisPCRPlacebo

Identifiers

PMID37794502
PMCPMC10552330
OpenAlexW4387343582

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.