Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 163

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lamotrigine for treatment of pain associated with diabetic neuropathy: Results of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

Vinik, Aaron I., Tuchman, Michael, Safirstein, Beth, Corder, Clinton, Kirby, Louis, Wilks, Kerri, Quessy, Steve, Blum, David, Grainger, Joanne, White, Jonathan, Silver, Marianne·2007·Pain

Abstract

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of lamotrigine in pain associated with diabetic neuropathy, two replicate randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were conducted. Patients (n=360 per study) with painful diabetic neuropathy were randomized to receive lamotrigine 200, 300, or 400 mg daily or placebo during the 19-week treatment phase, including a 7-week dose-escalation phase and a 12-week, fixed-dose maintenance phase. The mean reduction in pain-intensity score from baseline to week 19 (primary endpoint) was greater (p < or = 0.05) in patients receiving lamotrigine 400 mg than placebo in Study 2 (observed scores, -2.7 versus -1.6 on a 0- to 10-point scale). This finding was not replicated in Study 1. Lamotrigine 200 and 300 mg did not significantly differ from placebo at week 19 in either study. Lamotrigine 300 and 400 mg were only occasionally more effective than placebo for secondary efficacy endpoints. The 200-mg dose did not separate from placebo. In a post hoc analysis of pooled data including only patients who reached their target dose, lamotrigine 400 mg conferred greater (p0.05) mean reduction in pain-intensity score from baseline to week 19 than placebo (-2.5 for 300 mg and -2.7 for 400mg versus -2.0 for placebo). Adverse events were reported in 71-82% of lamotrigine-treated patients compared with 63-70% of placebo-treated patients. The most common adverse events with lamotrigine were headache and rash. Compared with placebo, lamotrigine (300 and 400 mg daily) was inconsistently effective for pain associated with diabetic neuropathy but was generally safe and well tolerated.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.040

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 163

Metadata

Authors
Vinik, A. I., Tuchman, M., Safirstein, B., Corder, C., Kirby, L., Wilks, K., Quessy, S., Blum, D., Grainger, J., White, J., & Silver, M.
Venue
Pain
Published
2007-03
Volume
128
Issue
1
Pages
169-179
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2034884858
Cited by
163
References
3
FWCI
11.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Lamotrigine for treatment of pain associated with diabetic neuropathy: Results of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.040
The paper
Vinik, A. I., Tuchman, M., Safirstein, B., Corder, C., Kirby, L., Wilks, K., Quessy, S., Blum, D., Grainger, J., White, J., & Silver, M. (2007). Lamotrigine for treatment of pain associated with diabetic neuropathy: Results of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.040

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.