Intramuscular neridronate for the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome type 1: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Complex regional pain syndrome type-1 (CRPS-1) is a severely disabling painful disease challenging to treat. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial examined the efficacy of intramuscular (i.m.) neridronate in CRPS-1 patients. Methods: A total of 78 patients diagnosed with CRPS-1 (aged 59.5 ± 10.3, 66.7% female) were randomly assigned to 25 mg (i.m.) neridronate ( N = 41) given once daily for 16 consecutive days or placebo control ( N = 37). Efficacy was assessed after 30 days using a visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and the number of patients achieving ⩾50% reduction in VAS score. Change in clinical signs and symptoms, quality of life (QoL) using Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire were also assessed. Results: After 30 days, VAS score decreased significantly to a greater extent in neridronate-treated patients versus placebo (31.9 ± 23.3 mm versus 52.3 ± 27.8 mm, p = 0.0003). Furthermore, the proportion of patients achieving a VAS reduction of ⩾50% was greater in the neridronate group (65.9% versus 29.7%, p = 0.0017). Clinical signs and symptoms were improved significantly in the neridronate group versus placebo for edema (72.5% versus 79.9%, p = 0.03), pain during motion (70% versus 83.3%, p = 0.0009), allodynia (20% versus 63.3%, p = 0.0004), and hyperalgesia (20% versus 56.7%, p = 0.0023). Whereas no difference was observed for QoL measures using the SF-36 questionnaire, three of the four pain variables using the McGill Pain Questionnaire improved significantly in the neridronate group. No serious drug-related adverse events were reported during the study. Conclusion: In patients with acute CRPS-1, i.m. injections of 25 mg neridronate were associated with clinically relevant benefit compared with placebo controls. Trial registration: EU Clinical Trials Register: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2014-001156-28
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".