Trial reportBMC medicine2026
The efficacy and safety of duloxetine in treating refractory chronic cough: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEnhanced cough sensitivity is proposed as a potential cause for refractory chronic cough (RCC), and modulation of sensory nerve hyperresponsiveness is suggested as an effective treatment. However, the treatment of RCC has considerable potential for enhancement, particularly in terms of the targets and side effects. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine, a selective 5-HT and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, in patients with RCC.
methodsThis is a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. RCC patients without mood disorders in the Tongji Hospital of Tongji University outpatient clinic were invited to participate in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to the duloxetine group or placebo group, with both patients and investigators being masked. The co-primary endpoint was the change in Leicester cough questionnaire (LCQ) score and cough frequency.
resultsBetween Oct 2020 and May 2024, 98 patients were randomly assigned to duloxetine (n = 49) and placebo (n = 49) groups. After an 8-week treatment phase and a 3-week follow-up period, the mean number of coughs per hour in the duloxetine group was reduced from 83.96 ± 28.95 to 33.12 ± 22.99, showing a significant decrease than that of the placebo group (87.67 ± 31.75 to 80.36 ± 31.75) (p < 0.001). In addition, duloxetine significantly improved scores on the LCQ (12.75 ± 2.44 to 14.88 ± 2.45), whereas no significant reduction was observed in the placebo group (12.17 ± 2.64 to 12.81 ± 2.32) (P < 0.001 between groups). However, adverse events such as nausea 5 (11.36%), dizziness 7 (15.91%), and somnolence 4 (9.09%) occurred more frequently in the duloxetine group (all P < 0.05).
conclusionsDuloxetine reduced cough frequency and sensitivity, which appears to be a novel therapeutic approach for RCC.
trial registrationThe study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Tongji Hospital (2020-KYSB-160, 2021-086) and registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000037429).
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.