ArticleCureus2026
The Clinico-Epidemiological Profile and Effectiveness of Codeine and Triprolidine in Dry Cough Patients Not Responding to Non-Opioid-Based Antitussives: Results From a Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm, Open-Label Postmarketing Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDry cough is highly prevalent in clinical practice, and antitussives remain the cornerstone of treatment. Among these, the combination of codeine phosphate and first-generation antihistamine triprolidine hydrochloride (triprolidine HCl) is often preferred in a dry cough unresponsive to non-opioid antitussives. However, there is limited real-world evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of the fixed-dose combination (FDC) of codeine phosphate and triprolidine HCl in the Indian population.
methodsThis prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, post-marketing observational study evaluated the clinico-epidemiological profile of Indian patients with dry cough unresponsive to non-opioid antitussives, prescribed FDC codeine phosphate 10 mg + triprolidine HCl 1.25 mg per 5 mL oral syrup, 10 mL thrice daily for seven days. The study also assessed effectiveness, quality of life (QoL), safety, and tolerability of the FDC.
resultsA total of 250 patients (male:female, 129:121; mean±SD age, 40.8 ± 14.0 years) were observed. Most were graduates (107 (42.8%)), with homemakers comprising the largest occupational group (98 (39.2%)). Acute cough was observed in 137 (54.8%) of patients, with upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) as the leading etiology in 188 (75.2%) of patients. From baseline to end of study, mean±SD cough severity decreased by 3.8±1.8, frequency by 2.4±1.2, and nighttime awakening by 3.5±1.8 points (p<0.001), while QoL scores improved by 33.5±19.9 points (p<0.001). Additionally, subgroup analyses also showed significant improvements across etiologies. Treatment was well tolerated, with 15 patients reporting 17 adverse drug reactions (ADRs; mostly constipation and sedation). All ADRs were mild and non-serious in nature and did not lead to treatment discontinuation.
conclusionIn this observational study of 250 adults with dry cough, balanced by gender and predominantly middle-aged with a mean age 40.8 years, the FDC of codeine phosphate 10 mg and triprolidine HCl 1.25 mg per 5 mL oral syrup, prescribed as 10 mL thrice daily for seven days, significantly reduced cough severity, frequency, and nighttime awakenings, improving the QoL. Importantly, these results support the role of this FDC in the management of dry cough, especially when non-opioid antitussives are ineffective, a key differentiator of this study. Benefits were consistent across different etiologies of dry cough, with only mild, non-serious adverse events.
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.