MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890671849 · doi:10.2147/dddt.s168878

Alpha lipoic acid combined with epalrestat: a therapeutic option for patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy

2018· review· en· W2890671849 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaotong Wang, Haixiong Lin, Shuai Xu, Jin Yuanlin, Ren Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Design Development and Therapy · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiochemical Acid Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGuangzhou UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPeripheral neuropathyMedicinePeripheralDiabetic neuropathyLipoic acidAlpha-Lipoic AcidDiabetes mellitusPharmacologySurgeryInternal medicineEndocrinologyChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Alpha lipoic acid (ALA), a type of antioxidant, is used in combination with epalrestat in the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). However, whether combined treatment is superior to epalrestat monotherapy is controversial. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library and Chinese databases to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to October 31, 2017. Data were extracted to evaluate methodological quality and analyzed using Review Manager 5.3.0 software. Results: Twelve studies were included. Compared to epalrestat monotherapy, ALA 600 mg/d once a day (qd) combined with epalrestat 50 mg three times a day (tid) augmented the total effectiveness rate (14 days – risk ratio [RR]: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.16–1.69, P =0.0005; 28 days – RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.27–1.72, P <0.00001); at the same, it could improve the median motor nerve conduction velocity (MNCV) and sensory nerve conduction velocity (SNCV), peroneal MNCV, and SNCV after 14, 21, and 28 days of treatment and could reduce the Toronto Clinical Scoring System (TCSS) (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -1.60, 95% CI: (-2.91, -0.29), P =0.02) and Total Symptom Score (TSS) (WMD: -0.93, 95% CI: -1.27, -0.60, P <0.00001) after 21 days of treatment. The treatment strategy of ALA 300 mg/d qd combined with epalrestat 50 mg tid had the same effects in regard to the total effectiveness rate (RR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.18–1.59, P <0.0001), median MNCV (WMD: 6.12, 95% CI: 5.04, 7.20, P =0.00001), median SNCV (WMD: 6.70, 95% CI: 5.75, 7.65, P =0.00001), peroneal MNCV (WMD: 6.68, 95% CI: 5.82, 7.55, P =0.00001), and peroneal SNCV (WMD: 4.27, 95% CI: 3.34, 5.20, P =0.00001) after 28 days of treatment. Conclusion: ALA combined with epalrestat is an effective option for DPN patients. Future large-sample RCTs should be conducted to further confirm this finding. Keywords: alpha lipoic acid, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, epalrestat, meta-analysis

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Design Development and TherapySame topicBiochemical Acid Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207