pioglitazone has been researched along with Recrudescence in 18 studies
Pioglitazone: A thiazolidinedione and PPAR GAMMA agonist that is used in the treatment of TYPE 2 DIABETES MELLITUS.
pioglitazone : A member of the class of thiazolidenediones that is 1,3-thiazolidine-2,4-dione substituted by a benzyl group at position 5 which in turn is substituted by a 2-(5-ethylpyridin-2-yl)ethoxy group at position 4 of the phenyl ring. It exhibits hypoglycemic activity.
| Excerpt | Relevance | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| "To analyze the effects of pioglitazone in patients with good adherence as well as intention-to-treat effects of pioglitazone in patients with prediabetes in the IRIS trial." | 9.30 | Pioglitazone Therapy in Patients With Stroke and Prediabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IRIS Randomized Clinical Trial. ( Dearborn-Tomazos, J; Ford, GA; Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Inzucchi, SE; Kernan, WN; Lovejoy, AM; Spence, JD; Viscoli, CM; Young, LH, 2019) |
| "The IRIS trial (Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke) demonstrated that pioglitazone reduced the risk for a composite outcome of stroke or myocardial infarction among nondiabetic patients with insulin resistance and a recent stroke or transient ischemic attack." | 9.27 | Pioglitazone Prevents Stroke in Patients With a Recent Transient Ischemic Attack or Ischemic Stroke: A Planned Secondary Analysis of the IRIS Trial (Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke). ( Conwit, R; Dearborn, J; Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Inzucchi, SE; Kamel, H; Kasner, SE; Kernan, WN; Lovejoy, AM; Viscoli, CM; Yaghi, S; Young, LH, 2018) |
| "To determine whether, among patients with an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack and insulin resistance, those at higher risk for future stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) derive more benefit from the insulin-sensitizing drug pioglitazone hydrochloride compared with patients at lower risk." | 9.24 | Targeting Pioglitazone Hydrochloride Therapy After Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack According to Pretreatment Risk for Stroke or Myocardial Infarction. ( Conwit, R; Dearborn, JL; Fayad, P; Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Guarino, PD; Inzucchi, SE; Kent, DM; Kernan, WN; Stuart, A; Viscoli, CM; Young, LH, 2017) |
| "While this study was too underpowered to determine the effect of pioglitazone, the result failed to show beneficial effects in patients of ischemic stroke or TIA with impaired glucose tolerance and newly diagnosed diabetes." | 9.20 | Effects of Pioglitazone for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Newly Diagnosed Diabetes: The J-SPIRIT Study. ( Furukawa, Y; Hattori, N; Kawamori, R; Miyamoto, N; Nakahara, T; Nakamura, S; Okuma, Y; Shimura, H; Tanaka, R; Tanaka, Y; Tomizawa, Y; Ueno, Y; Urabe, T; Watada, H; Yamashiro, K, 2015) |
| "In this nested case-control study using real-world data, treatment with pioglitazone exhibited significant cardiovascular preventive effect in diabetic patients with acute ischemic stroke." | 7.91 | Effect of pioglitazone in acute ischemic stroke patients with diabetes mellitus: a nested case-control study. ( Kim, J; Lee, HS; Woo, MH, 2019) |
| "All patients had a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and were divided based on whether they received pioglitazone before ablation or not." | 6.76 | Beneficial effect of pioglitazone on the outcome of catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus. ( Gu, J; Jiang, W; Liu, X; Shi, H; Tan, H; Wang, X; Wang, Y; Zhou, L, 2011) |
| "Pioglitazone was also associated with reduced recurrent IS in patients who also used telmisartan (p for interaction = 0." | 5.56 | Pioglitazone and PPAR-γ modulating treatment in hypertensive and type 2 diabetic patients after ischemic stroke: a national cohort study. ( Lee, TH; Li, YR; Lin, YS; Liu, CH; Sung, PS; Wei, YC, 2020) |
| " IRIS was a randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind trial testing pioglitazone to prevent stroke or myocardial infarction in patients with a recent ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack." | 5.34 | Adherence to study drug in a stroke prevention trial"?>. ( Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Kernan, WN; Kiran, A; Viscoli, CM, 2020) |
| "To analyze the effects of pioglitazone in patients with good adherence as well as intention-to-treat effects of pioglitazone in patients with prediabetes in the IRIS trial." | 5.30 | Pioglitazone Therapy in Patients With Stroke and Prediabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IRIS Randomized Clinical Trial. ( Dearborn-Tomazos, J; Ford, GA; Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Inzucchi, SE; Kernan, WN; Lovejoy, AM; Spence, JD; Viscoli, CM; Young, LH, 2019) |
| "The IRIS trial (Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke) demonstrated that pioglitazone reduced the risk for a composite outcome of stroke or myocardial infarction among nondiabetic patients with insulin resistance and a recent stroke or transient ischemic attack." | 5.27 | Pioglitazone Prevents Stroke in Patients With a Recent Transient Ischemic Attack or Ischemic Stroke: A Planned Secondary Analysis of the IRIS Trial (Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke). ( Conwit, R; Dearborn, J; Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Inzucchi, SE; Kamel, H; Kasner, SE; Kernan, WN; Lovejoy, AM; Viscoli, CM; Yaghi, S; Young, LH, 2018) |
| "To determine whether, among patients with an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack and insulin resistance, those at higher risk for future stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) derive more benefit from the insulin-sensitizing drug pioglitazone hydrochloride compared with patients at lower risk." | 5.24 | Targeting Pioglitazone Hydrochloride Therapy After Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack According to Pretreatment Risk for Stroke or Myocardial Infarction. ( Conwit, R; Dearborn, JL; Fayad, P; Furie, KL; Gorman, M; Guarino, PD; Inzucchi, SE; Kent, DM; Kernan, WN; Stuart, A; Viscoli, CM; Young, LH, 2017) |
| "Participants were enrolled in the Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke trial, which examined the insulin sensitiser, pioglitazone versus placebo for prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction after ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack." | 5.22 | Taking care of volunteers in a stroke trial: a new assisted-management strategy. ( Cote, R; Ford, GA; Furie, KL; Inzucchi, SE; Kernan, WN; Sico, JJ; Spence, JD; Stuart, AC; Tanne, D; Tayal, AH; Viscoli, CM, 2016) |
| "While this study was too underpowered to determine the effect of pioglitazone, the result failed to show beneficial effects in patients of ischemic stroke or TIA with impaired glucose tolerance and newly diagnosed diabetes." | 5.20 | Effects of Pioglitazone for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Newly Diagnosed Diabetes: The J-SPIRIT Study. ( Furukawa, Y; Hattori, N; Kawamori, R; Miyamoto, N; Nakahara, T; Nakamura, S; Okuma, Y; Shimura, H; Tanaka, R; Tanaka, Y; Tomizawa, Y; Ueno, Y; Urabe, T; Watada, H; Yamashiro, K, 2015) |
| " These include new evidence about nutrition, antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation, lipid-lowering therapy, hypertension control, pioglitazone, and carotid endarterectomy and stenting." | 5.05 | Recent advances in preventing recurrent stroke. ( Spence, JD, 2020) |
| "To compare the effects of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone on inflammatory mediators associated with atherosclerosis and CVD, surrogate cardiovascular endpoints, and hard cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes." | 4.85 | Improving cardiovascular risk--applying evidence-based medicine to glucose-lowering therapy with thiazolidinediones in patients with type 2 diabetes. ( Fisher, M, 2009) |
| "In this nested case-control study using real-world data, treatment with pioglitazone exhibited significant cardiovascular preventive effect in diabetic patients with acute ischemic stroke." | 3.91 | Effect of pioglitazone in acute ischemic stroke patients with diabetes mellitus: a nested case-control study. ( Kim, J; Lee, HS; Woo, MH, 2019) |
| "All patients had a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and were divided based on whether they received pioglitazone before ablation or not." | 2.76 | Beneficial effect of pioglitazone on the outcome of catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus. ( Gu, J; Jiang, W; Liu, X; Shi, H; Tan, H; Wang, X; Wang, Y; Zhou, L, 2011) |
| "Pioglitazone was also associated with reduced recurrent IS in patients who also used telmisartan (p for interaction = 0." | 1.56 | Pioglitazone and PPAR-γ modulating treatment in hypertensive and type 2 diabetic patients after ischemic stroke: a national cohort study. ( Lee, TH; Li, YR; Lin, YS; Liu, CH; Sung, PS; Wei, YC, 2020) |
| Timeframe | Studies, this research(%) | All Research% |
|---|---|---|
| pre-1990 | 0 (0.00) | 18.7374 |
| 1990's | 0 (0.00) | 18.2507 |
| 2000's | 2 (11.11) | 29.6817 |
| 2010's | 12 (66.67) | 24.3611 |
| 2020's | 4 (22.22) | 2.80 |
| Authors | Studies |
|---|---|
| Liu, CH | 1 |
| Lee, TH | 1 |
| Lin, YS | 1 |
| Sung, PS | 1 |
| Wei, YC | 1 |
| Li, YR | 1 |
| Schwandt, ML | 1 |
| Diazgranados, N | 1 |
| Umhau, JC | 1 |
| Kwako, LE | 1 |
| George, DT | 1 |
| Heilig, M | 1 |
| Spence, JD | 3 |
| Kiran, A | 1 |
| Viscoli, CM | 5 |
| Furie, KL | 5 |
| Gorman, M | 4 |
| Kernan, WN | 5 |
| Adachi, M | 1 |
| Mitsuhashi, K | 1 |
| Matsuda, H | 1 |
| Watanabe, J | 1 |
| Nakanishi, K | 1 |
| Stuart, AC | 1 |
| Sico, JJ | 1 |
| Tayal, AH | 1 |
| Inzucchi, SE | 4 |
| Ford, GA | 2 |
| Cote, R | 1 |
| Tanne, D | 1 |
| Dearborn, JL | 1 |
| Kent, DM | 1 |
| Conwit, R | 2 |
| Fayad, P | 1 |
| Guarino, PD | 1 |
| Stuart, A | 1 |
| Young, LH | 3 |
| Yaghi, S | 1 |
| Kamel, H | 1 |
| Dearborn, J | 1 |
| Lovejoy, AM | 2 |
| Kasner, SE | 1 |
| Liu, J | 1 |
| Wang, LN | 1 |
| Dearborn-Tomazos, J | 1 |
| Woo, MH | 1 |
| Lee, HS | 1 |
| Kim, J | 1 |
| Tanaka, R | 1 |
| Yamashiro, K | 1 |
| Okuma, Y | 1 |
| Shimura, H | 1 |
| Nakamura, S | 1 |
| Ueno, Y | 1 |
| Tanaka, Y | 1 |
| Miyamoto, N | 1 |
| Tomizawa, Y | 1 |
| Nakahara, T | 1 |
| Furukawa, Y | 1 |
| Watada, H | 1 |
| Kawamori, R | 1 |
| Hattori, N | 1 |
| Urabe, T | 1 |
| Yasui, T | 1 |
| Okada, A | 1 |
| Hamamoto, S | 1 |
| Ando, R | 1 |
| Taguchi, K | 1 |
| Tozawa, K | 1 |
| Kohri, K | 1 |
| de Guglielmo, G | 1 |
| Kallupi, M | 1 |
| Scuppa, G | 1 |
| Demopulos, G | 1 |
| Gaitanaris, G | 1 |
| Ciccocioppo, R | 1 |
| Miller, WR | 1 |
| Fox, RG | 1 |
| Stutz, SJ | 1 |
| Lane, SD | 1 |
| Denner, L | 1 |
| Cunningham, KA | 1 |
| Dineley, KT | 1 |
| Fisher, M | 1 |
| Gu, J | 2 |
| Liu, X | 1 |
| Wang, X | 1 |
| Shi, H | 1 |
| Tan, H | 1 |
| Zhou, L | 1 |
| Jiang, W | 1 |
| Wang, Y | 1 |
| Plikat, K | 1 |
| Reichle, A | 1 |
| Elmlinger, MW | 1 |
| Schölmerich, J | 1 |
| Trial | Phase | Enrollment | Study Type | Start Date | Status | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Role of Proinflammatory Signaling in Alcohol Craving[NCT01631630] | Phase 2 | 16 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2012-05-31 | Terminated (stopped due to The study was closed to recruitment due to feasibility problems.) | ||
| Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke (IRIS) Trial[NCT00091949] | Phase 3 | 3,876 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2005-02-28 | Completed | ||
| [information is prepared from clinicaltrials.gov, extracted Sep-2024] | |||||||
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 15 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 17.4172 |
| Placebo | 9.8121 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 15 minutes prior to the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 13.7505 |
| Placebo | 8.1871 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 30 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 19.0838 |
| Placebo | 10.5621 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 45 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 18.0838 |
| Placebo | 8.4371 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 5 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 20.5838 |
| Placebo | 9.6871 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 60 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 16.4172 |
| Placebo | 8.9371 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 75 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 15.2505 |
| Placebo | 9.6871 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 90 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 19.2505 |
| Placebo | 8.9371 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 1 hour after the subject received an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 9.5285 |
| Placebo | 9.1697 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 15 minutes prior to the subject receiving an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 11.1285 |
| Placebo | 10.7947 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 2 hours after the subject received an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 11.9285 |
| Placebo | 9.0447 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 3 hours after the subject received an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 9.5285 |
| Placebo | 10.5447 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 4 hours after the subject received an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 12.1285 |
| Placebo | 10.5447 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 5 hours after the subject received an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 12.1285 |
| Placebo | 10.9197 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 6 hours after the subject received an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide, which occurred on Day 25 or Day 32 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 9.9285 |
| Placebo | 9.6697 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 15 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10 |
| Placebo | 12.125 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 15 minutes prior to the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10 |
| Placebo | 11.25 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 30 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10 |
| Placebo | 11.375 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 45 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10.1667 |
| Placebo | 9.125 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 5 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10.3333 |
| Placebo | 11.875 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 60 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10.1667 |
| Placebo | 9.25 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 75 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10.1667 |
| Placebo | 9.5 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Alcohol Urges Questionnaire (AUQ). The AUQ is an 8-item self-administered instrument that assesses craving for alcohol among alcohol users in the current context (i.e., right now). The score ranges from 8 (lowest craving value) to 56 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: 90 minutes after the beginning of script presentation, which occurred on Day 21, 22, or 23 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 10.6667 |
| Placebo | 9.625 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 1 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 2.8502 |
| Placebo | 4.5791 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 10 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 3.3403 |
| Placebo | 1.1956 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 14 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.2173 |
| Placebo | 1.2136 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 17 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 5.0507 |
| Placebo | 1.0706 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 21 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 5.0507 |
| Placebo | 1.6956 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 24 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 3.884 |
| Placebo | 0.6956 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 28 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.884 |
| Placebo | 1.1125 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 3 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 5.884 |
| Placebo | 0.5706 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 31 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 7.2173 |
| Placebo | 1.8206 |
Anxiety symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 7 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 3.2897 |
| Placebo | 2.0706 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 1 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 6.3661 |
| Placebo | 3.2956 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 10 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.7167 |
| Placebo | 0.8687 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 14 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.6366 |
| Placebo | 0.5912 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 17 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 6.3032 |
| Placebo | 0.8687 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 21 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 5.1366 |
| Placebo | 1.4937 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 24 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 7.1366 |
| Placebo | 1.1187 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 28 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 6.4699 |
| Placebo | 1.1228 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 3 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 5.6366 |
| Placebo | 0.9937 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 31 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 8.6366 |
| Placebo | 0.8687 |
Depression symptoms were measured using the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS). The CPRS is an 18-item interview-based instrument for assessing depression and anxiety. There are two 10-item subscales, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Scale for Anxiety (BSA). Each subscale ranges from 0 (lowest symptom severity) to 60 (highest symptom severity). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 7 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.9065 |
| Placebo | 0.9937 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 1 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 7.7503 |
| Placebo | 7.8122 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 10 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 6.0837 |
| Placebo | 3.9372 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 14 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.7503 |
| Placebo | 4.1872 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 17 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.7503 |
| Placebo | 4.0622 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 21 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.417 |
| Placebo | 3.8122 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 24 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 5.917 |
| Placebo | 2.3122 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 28 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 6.417 |
| Placebo | 2.6872 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 3 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 8.417 |
| Placebo | 5.9372 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 31 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 4.5837 |
| Placebo | 2.8122 |
Alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS). The PACS is a five-item self-administered instrument for assessing alcohol craving over the course of the past week. The score ranges from 0 (lowest craving value) to 30 (highest craving value). (NCT01631630)
Timeframe: Day 7 of the treatment period
| Intervention | Units on a scale (Least Squares Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 7.0837 |
| Placebo | 4.1872 |
Fatal or non-fatal acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina (NCT00091949)
Timeframe: 5 years
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 206 |
| Placebo | 249 |
(NCT00091949)
Timeframe: 5 years
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 136 |
| Placebo | 146 |
(NCT00091949)
Timeframe: 5 years
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 206 |
| Placebo | 249 |
Change in modified mental status examination (3MS) score from baseline to exit. Theoretical range of 3MS scores is 0-100. Baseline scores ranged from 22-100. (NCT00091949)
Timeframe: Annual measures from baseline to exit (up to 5 years)
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 0.27 |
| Placebo | 0.29 |
(NCT00091949)
Timeframe: 5 years
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 73 |
| Placebo | 149 |
(NCT00091949)
Timeframe: 5 years
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 127 |
| Placebo | 154 |
(NCT00091949)
Timeframe: Up to 5 years
| Intervention | participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| Pioglitazone | 175 |
| Placebo | 228 |
4 reviews available for pioglitazone and Recrudescence
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Recent advances in preventing recurrent stroke.
Topics: Aged; Blood Pressure; Diet; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Hypertension; Pioglitazone; Recurrence; | 2020 |
Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Carotid Artery Diseases; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Resistance; I | 2017 |
Pathophysiology-based treatment of urolithiasis.
Topics: Animals; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, Dietary; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Disease Models, A | 2017 |
Improving cardiovascular risk--applying evidence-based medicine to glucose-lowering therapy with thiazolidinediones in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Topics: Atherosclerosis; Biomarkers; Blood Glucose; Carotid Artery Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diab | 2009 |
8 trials available for pioglitazone and Recrudescence
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
PPARγ activation by pioglitazone does not suppress cravings for alcohol, and is associated with a risk of myopathy in treatment seeking alcohol dependent patients: a randomized controlled proof of principle study.
Topics: Adult; Alcoholism; Animals; Craving; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Imagi | 2020 |
Adherence to study drug in a stroke prevention trial"?>.
Topics: Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Resi | 2020 |
Taking care of volunteers in a stroke trial: a new assisted-management strategy.
Topics: Aged; Anticholesteremic Agents; Antihypertensive Agents; Biomarkers; Blood Coagulation; Blood Pressu | 2016 |
Targeting Pioglitazone Hydrochloride Therapy After Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack According to Pretreatment Risk for Stroke or Myocardial Infarction.
Topics: Aged; Double-Blind Method; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Resistanc | 2017 |
Pioglitazone Prevents Stroke in Patients With a Recent Transient Ischemic Attack or Ischemic Stroke: A Planned Secondary Analysis of the IRIS Trial (Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke).
Topics: Aged; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin Resistance; Ischemic Attack, | 2018 |
Pioglitazone Therapy in Patients With Stroke and Prediabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis of the IRIS Randomized Clinical Trial.
Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Aged; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Disease Progression; Female; Glycated Hemo | 2019 |
Effects of Pioglitazone for Secondary Stroke Prevention in Patients with Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Newly Diagnosed Diabetes: The J-SPIRIT Study.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Brain Ischemia; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Glucose Intoleran | 2015 |
Beneficial effect of pioglitazone on the outcome of catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Topics: Aged; Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Cardiomyopathies; | 2011 |
6 other studies available for pioglitazone and Recrudescence
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Pioglitazone and PPAR-γ modulating treatment in hypertensive and type 2 diabetic patients after ischemic stroke: a national cohort study.
Topics: Aged; Antihypertensive Agents; Brain Ischemia; Databases, Factual; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female | 2020 |
Myelodysplastic syndrome diagnosed on the occasion of Fournier's gangrene.
Topics: Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Fournier Gangrene; Humans; Male; Myelodysplastic Syndromes; Pioglitazon | 2017 |
Effect of pioglitazone in acute ischemic stroke patients with diabetes mellitus: a nested case-control study.
Topics: Aged; Brain Ischemia; Databases, Factual; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Ag | 2019 |
Pioglitazone attenuates the opioid withdrawal and vulnerability to relapse to heroin seeking in rodents.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Animals; Behavior, Addictive; Conditioning, Operant; Heroin; Male; Mice; Morphin | 2017 |
PPARγ agonism attenuates cocaine cue reactivity.
Topics: Anilides; Animals; Behavior, Animal; Cocaine; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Craving; Cues; Dopamine Upt | 2018 |
[Hypoglycemia associated with the production of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-II by a hemangiopericytoma].
Topics: Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antineoplastic Agents, Alky | 2003 |