ReviewJournal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996)2026
Efficacy and safety of amantadine in the treatment of fatigue in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory condition that leads to the gradual loss of myelin in the central nervous system. Approximately half of MS patients experience fatigue that hinders daily activities and impairs quality of life. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of amantadine in the treatment of fatigue in MS. In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search across four electronic databases. We retrieved the relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of amantadine versus placebo for the treatment of fatigue in MS. Ten RCTS were included with a total of 1210 patients. Patients treated with amantadine had a significant improvement in fatigue compared to the placebo, according to the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) and self-reported treatment response (MD = - 0.53, p < 0.001), (RR = 1.73, p < 0.001), respectively. While there is no significant difference in the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) (P = 0.40) between the two groups. Amantadine also improved walking speed as measured by Timed 25-foot Walk (MD = 0.18, p = 0.03). Regarding safety, there were no significant differences between groups in the overall risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (p = 0.07). However, amantadine was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation related to TEAE (p < 0.001), constipation (p = 0.04), hallucinations (p = 0.05), and mouth dryness (p < 0.001). Amantadine was associated with modest improvements in fatigue and mobility outcomes; however, the overall clinical benefit is offset by an increased risk of adverse events, notably any TEAE leading to study drug discontinuation, any drug-related TEAE, constipation, hallucinations, and mouth dryness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42439933What 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.