Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,117

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of Desipramine, Amitriptyline, and Fluoxetine on Pain in Diabetic Neuropathy

Open access
Max, Mitchell B., Lynch, Sue A., Muir, Joanne, Shoaf, Susan E., Smoller, Bruce, Dubner, Ronald·1992·New England Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1056/nejm199205073261904
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Amitriptyline reduces the pain caused by peripheral-nerve disease, but treatment is often limited by side effects related to the drug's many pharmacologic actions. Selective agents might be safer and more effective. METHODS: We carried out two randomized, double-blind, crossover studies in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy, comparing amitriptyline with the relatively selective blocker of norepinephrine reuptake desipramine in 38 patients, and comparing the selective blocker of serotonin reuptake fluoxetine with placebo in 46 patients. Fifty-seven patients were randomly assigned to a study as well as to the order of treatment, permitting comparison among all three drugs and placebo as the first treatment. The patients rated the degree of pain present each day using verbal descriptors, and they also assessed the extent of pain relief globally at the end of each treatment period. RESULTS: After individual dose titration, the mean daily doses of the drugs were as follows: amitriptyline, 105 mg; desipramine, 111 mg; and fluoxetine, 40 mg. There was moderate or greater relief of pain in 28 of the 38 patients (74 percent) who received amitriptyline, 23 of the 38 patients (61 percent) who received desipramine, 22 of the 46 patients (48 percent) who received fluoxetine, and 19 of the 46 patients (41 percent) who received placebo. The differences in responses between amitriptyline and desipramine and between fluoxetine and placebo were not statistically significant, but both amitriptyline and desipramine were superior to placebo. Amitriptyline and desipramine were as effective in patients who were not depressed as in depressed patients, but fluoxetine was effective only in depressed patients. CONCLUSIONS: Desipramine relieves pain caused by diabetic neuropathy with efficacy similar to that of amitriptyline, offering an alternative for patients unable to tolerate the latter. Blockade of norepinephrine reuptake is likely to mediate the analgesic effect of these antidepressant drugs in diabetic neuropathy. Fluoxetine, which blocks serotonin uptake, is no more effective than placebo for the relief of pain.

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 · 10.1056/nejm199205073261904

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Max, M. B., Lynch, S. A., Muir, J., Shoaf, S. E., Smoller, B., & Dubner, R.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Massachusetts Medical Society
Published
1992-05-07
Volume
326
Issue
19
Pages
1250-1256
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
DOI
10.1056/nejm199205073261904
OpenAlex
W2328445755
Cited by
1,117
References
1
FWCI
12.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

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.