Trial reportCurrent neuropharmacology2025
Vortioxetine
Trial report in Current neuropharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06025474 (Comparative Evaluation of Vortioxetine Versus Other Antidepressants With Pregabalin Augmentation in Treatment-resistant Burning Mouth Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Comparative Evaluation of Vortioxetine Versus Other Antidepressants With Pregabalin Augmentation in Treatment-resistant Burning Mouth Syndrome: a Prospective Longitudinal Clinical Trial With Treatment Response Prediction
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Topical Pregabalin in Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Real-World Study of Peripheral Neuromodulation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Retrospective Evaluation of the Topical Use of 1% Amitriptyline in Patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Management strategies for burning mouth syndrome: a comprehensive review.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2026Review
- Comprehensive analysis of adverse events associated with vortioxetine using the FDA adverse event reporting system.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe treatment of Burning Mouth Syndrome (BMS) represents a challenge in tailoring appropriate medication for individual patients. The augmentation of pregabalin to conventional treatment has shown promising outcomes in relieving pain and improving the quality of life in chronic pain conditions. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of vortioxetine with other antidepressants (SSRIs/SNRIs) in combination with pregabalin in a cohort of unresponsive BMS patients and to predict treatment response by using clinical data.
methodsA 52-week randomized, open-label, comparative clinical study was conducted, enrolling 203 BMS patients previously treated with one antidepressant for 12 weeks and non-responders to the treatment (clinical trial registration: NCT06025474). The study sample included two groups: Group A (136) received vortioxetine, while Group B (67) received SSRIs/SNRIs. Pregabalin (75 mg/day) was added to both groups, with a potential dosage increase to 150 mg/day for inadequate responders after 12 weeks. Treatment response was assessed with VAS and SF-MPQ, HAM-A, and HAM-D scores at 12, 24, 36, and 52 weeks. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to predict treatment response.
resultsA total of 84 (61.8%) BMS patients in Group A and 39 (58.2%) in Group B showed treatment response. Group A reported a faster onset of action compared to Group B (44.8% versus 22.4% at time 1; p:0.002**) and lower adverse event rates (8.8% versus 20.8%; p:0.001).
conclusionThe addition of pregabalin to vortioxetine may be considered a potential treatment option for BMS. Further research is required to corroborate these findings and optimize personalized treatment approaches for BMS patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06025474).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.