MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

High Dose Intravenous Immunoglobulin is Effective in Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy Resistant to Conventional Treatments. Results of a Double Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Trial. (P2.268)

2016· article· en· W2752398826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Jann, Raffaella Fazio, Dario Cocito, Giovanni Antonini, Angelo Schenone, Antonio Toscano, Gerolama Alessandra Marfia, Luisa De Toni Franceschini, Anna Teresa Mazzeo, Elio Clemente Agostoni

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboPolyneuropathyDouble blindMulticenter studyRandomized controlled trialMulticenter trialInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of high dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) as pain therapy in treatment resistant diabetic painful polyneuropathy. Background: Overexpression of proinflammatory cytokines is involved in the pathogenesis of neuropathic pain. Design/Methods: Randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, involving diabetic patients with a painful polyneuropathy resistant to antidepressants and atiepileptics alone or in combination and who reported baseline severity of pain more than 60 units (mm) on a VAS scale at enrollment. Results: 26 diabetic patients with a painful polyneuropathy according to the Toronto Diabetic Neuropathy Expert Group and resistant to conventional therapies were enrolled and followed up for 12 weeks. Eleven patients in the IVIg arm and 12 patients in the placebo arm completed the study. There were no significant differences concerning age, sex and pain severity. The mean value of pain intensity in the IVIg group dropped from 87.3mm at baseline to 48.4 at the end of the first week and to 47.5 after 4 weeks, while in the placebo group changed from 92.9 to 75.8 after one week and to 85.8 after 4 weeks (p=0.0001). At the end of the study pain severity in patients in the IVIg arm was 54.1 while in the placebo arm was 86.7 (p=0.001). The mean Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) total score in the IVIg group dropped from 86 at baseline to 50 after one week and to 40 after 4 weeks while in the placebo group changed from 89 to 80 and then to 86 (p=0.000001 comparing baseline and the fourth week in the 2 groups). The therapy was well tolerated without significant side effects along the follow up. Conclusions: The present study confirms previous data concerning a significant pain relief with IVIg in diabetic patients with a painful neuropathy resistant to conventional treatments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology→Same topicPain Mechanisms and Treatments→French-language works237,207→