↓ Skip to main content

Capsaicin 8% patch repeat treatment plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a randomised, 52-week, open-label, safety study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
138 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Capsaicin 8% patch repeat treatment plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a randomised, 52-week, open-label, safety study
Published in
BMC Neurology, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0752-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron I. Vinik, Serge Perrot, Etta J. Vinik, Ladislav Pazdera, Hélène Jacobs, Malcolm Stoker, Stephen K. Long, Robert J. Snijder, Marjolijne van der Stoep, Enrique Ortega, Nathaniel Katz

Abstract

This 52-week study evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability of capsaicin 8% w/w (179 mg) patch repeat treatment plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN). Phase 3, multinational, open-label, randomised, controlled, 52-week safety study, conducted in Europe. Patients were randomised to capsaicin 8% patch repeat treatment (30 or 60 min; 1-7 treatments with ≥ 8-week intervals) to painful areas of the feet plus SOC, or SOC alone. The primary objective was the safety of capsaicin 8% patch repeat treatment (30 min and 60 min applications) plus SOC versus SOC alone over 52 weeks, assessed by changes in Norfolk Quality of Life-Diabetic Neuropathy (QOL-DN) total score from baseline to end of study (EOS). Secondary safety endpoints included Utah Early Neuropathy Scale (UENS) assessments and standardised testing of sensory perception and reflex function. Overall, 468 patients were randomised (30 min plus SOC, n = 156; 60 min plus SOC, n = 157; SOC alone, n = 155). By EoS, mean changes in Norfolk QOL-DN total score from baseline [estimated mean difference versus SOC alone; 90% CI for difference] were: 30 min plus SOC, -27.6% [-20.9; -31.7, -10.1]; 60 min plus SOC, -32.8% [-26.1; -36.8, -15.4]; SOC alone, -6.7%. Mean changes [difference versus SOC alone] in UENS total score by EoS versus baseline were: 30 min plus SOC, -2.1 [-0.9; -1.8, 0.1]; 60 min plus SOC, -3.0 [-1.7; -2.7, -0.8]; SOC alone, -1.2. No detrimental deterioration was observed in any of the Norfolk or UENS subscales by EoS with capsaicin. Also, no worsening in sensory perception testing of sharp, warm, cold and vibration stimuli was found with capsaicin by EoS. Capsaicin treatment was well tolerated and the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events were application site pain (30 min, 28.2%; 60 min, 29.3%), burning sensation (30 min, 9.0%; 60 min, 9.6%) and application site erythema (30 min, 7.7%; 60 min, 8.9%). In patients with PDPN, capsaicin 8% patch repeat treatment plus SOC over 52 weeks was well tolerated with no negative functional or neurological effects compared with SOC alone. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01478607 . Date of registration November 21, 2011; retrospectively registered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 138 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 12%
Other 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Researcher 8 6%
Other 25 18%
Unknown 53 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 7%
Neuroscience 6 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 54 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,452,602
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#104
of 2,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,745
of 424,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#2
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,532 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,516 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.