scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of interleukin-17A inhibitors in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Wang ◽  
Shuo Zhang ◽  
Binwu Hu ◽  
Weijian Liu ◽  
Xiao Lv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Interleukin 17A ◽  
Mean Differences

AbstractTo assess the efficacy and safety of interleukin (IL)-17A inhibitors in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched up to 5 February 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the efficacy and safety of IL-17A inhibitors in patients with AS. We used a meta-analytic approach to perform a random effects analysis or fixed effects analysis according to heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses between studies included medication, time to primary endpoint, and data source. Odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) were used to assess the efficacy and safety of IL-17A inhibitors in AS. A total of ten RCTs with 2613 patients were eligible for inclusion in the analysis (six for secukinumab, two for ixekizumab, one for netakimab, and one for bimekizumab). Compared to placebo, IL-17A inhibitors improved ASAS20 response rate (OR = 2.58; p < 0.01) and ASAS40 response rate (OR = 2.80; p < 0.01), and significantly increased the risk of AEs (OR = 1.23; p = 0.03) and nasopharyngitis (OR = 1.72; p < 0.01), but not SAEs (OR = 0.87; p = 0.60). IL-17A inhibitors demonstrated better efficacy in patients with AS in several evaluation indicators. However, the safety of IL-17A inhibitors remains to be further studied in studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up times.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Sinomenine Preparation for Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Shan-Shan Lin ◽  
Chun-Xiang Liu ◽  
Jun-Hua Zhang ◽  
Hui Wang ◽  
Jing-Bo Zhai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Morning Stiffness ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Objectives. To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of sinomenine preparation (SP) for treating ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Methods. Clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SP for treating AS were systematically identified in six electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), and Wanfang Databases from the inception up to 31 October 2019. Cochrane’s risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality and Review Manager 5.3 software was used to analyze data. Results. A total of 12 RCTs involving 835 patients were finally included. According to interventions, RCTs were divided into two types. The intervention in 10 RCTs was SP combined with conventional pharmacotherapy (CPT) versus CPT and that in 2 RCTs was SP alone versus CPT. The results of the meta-analysis showed that, compared with CPT alone, SP combined with oral CPT has better improvement in BASDAI (WMD = −1.84, 95% CI [−3.31, −0.37], P=0.01), morning stiffness time (WMD = −13.46, 95% CI [−16.12, −10.79], P<0.00001), the Schober test (WMD = 1.26, 95% CI [0.72, 1.80], P<0.00001), the occipital wall test (WMD = −0.55, 95% CI [−0.96, −0.14], P=0.009), the finger-to-ground distance (WMD = −3.28, 95% CI [−5.64, −0.93], P=0.006), 15 m walking time (WMD = −8.81, 95% CI [−13.42, −4.20], P=0.0002), the C-reactive protein (CRP) (WMD = −1.84, 95% CI [−3.24, −0.45], P=0.01), and the total effective rate (RR = 1.10, 95% CI [1.01, 1.20], P=0.03). Besides, it also showed that oral SP alone may be more effective in improving morning stiffness time (WMD = −31.89, 95% CI [−34.91, −28.87], P<0.00001) compared with CPT alone. However, this study cannot provide evidence that loading the injectable SP based on CPT can significantly increase the efficacy due to the insufficient number of studies included. In terms of adverse events, there was no statistically significant difference between the experimental group and the control group. Conclusions. This study shows that oral SP may be effective and safe in the treatment of AS. Due to the low methodological quality of the included RCTs and the limitations of the meta-analysis, it is still necessary to carry out more multicenter, large-sample, and high-quality RCTs to further verify the conclusions. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018099170), and the review was constructed following the PRISMA guidelines (Annex 1).

Efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid in patients with hypercholesterolemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
pp. 204748732093058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Dai ◽  
Yuyue Zuo ◽  
Qiqi You ◽  
Hesong Zeng ◽  
Shiyi Cao
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Oral Drug ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Aim Bempedoic acid is a novel oral drug, which has been increasingly researched to play an important role in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia recently. However, results from original studies were inconsistent and inconclusive. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to quantitatively appraise the efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid. Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus were searched from inception to 30 January 2020. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid with placebo in patients with hypercholesterolemia. Results from trials were presented as mean differences or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were pooled by random or fixed effects model. The risk of bias and heterogeneity among trials were also assessed and analyzed. Results Pooled analysis of 10 eligible trials showed that bempedoic acid treatment resulted in greater lowering of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level than the placebo group (mean difference –23.16%, 95% CI –26.92% to –19.04%). We also found that improvements in lipid parameters and biomarkers were still maintained at weeks 24 and 52 from the long-term trials. As for safety, bempedoic acid did not increase the risk of overall adverse events (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18). However, the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation was higher in the bempedoic acid group (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.82). Conclusions Available evidence from randomized controlled trials suggests that bempedoic acid provides a well-tolerated and effective therapeutic option for lipid lowering in patients with hyperlipidemia

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of the Combination Treatment of Rituximab and Dexamethasone for Adults with Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP): A Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia Wang ◽  
Ya Li ◽  
Chong Wang ◽  
Yayue Zhang ◽  
Chong Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Combination Treatment ◽  
Immune Thrombocytopenia ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia

Objective.To conduct a meta-analysis, assessing the efficacy and safety of the combination treatment of dexamethasone and rituximab for adults with ITP (primary immune thrombocytopenia).Methods.Randomized controlled trials that compared rituximab and dexamethasone combination treatment to dexamethasone monotherapy in the treatment of adults with ITP were collected by searching Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, China National Knowledge (CNKI), Wanfang database, and Sino Med. We conducted pooled analyses on OR (overall response) rate, CR (complete response) rate, PR (partial response) rate, SR (sustained response) rate, R (relapse) rate, change in Treg cell count (mean [SD]), and AE (adverse event). GRADE pro scale was used to assess the quality of the evidence. Publication bias was assessed with Egger’s test method.Results.A total of 11 randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. The overall efficacy estimates favored combination arm in terms of OR rate at month 3, CR rate at week 4 and month 3, SR rate, and Treg cell count at week 2. Subgroup analysis showed that females obtained a higher OR rate than males did at week 4. No significant difference was found in pooled analysis of relapse rate between combination arm and monotherapy arm. The comparison of serious AE and other AEs showed no significant difference either. A total of 19 outcomes were assessed by GRADE pro software, of which 79% (15/19) was scaled as moderate-to-high level. Publication bias existed in studies on OR at week 4 (P=0.025), CR at week 4 (P=0.017), infection (P=0.006), and rash (P=0.028) of the AEs.Conclusion.Dexamethasone combined with rituximab can provide a better long-term response in the treatment of adults with ITP and will not increase the risk of adverse effects.

scholarly journals The Efficacy and Safety of Simple-Needling Therapy for Treating Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yichen Xuan ◽  
Hui Huang ◽  
Yiyong Huang ◽  
Duanyong Liu ◽  
Xiuwu Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Chinese Literature ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background. Clinical investigators have found that the use of needling in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has a good clinical application prospect in recent years. However, these studies were insufficient to provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of simple-needling for AS. So, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of simple-needling for treating AS. Methods. We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Wangfang database (Wanfang), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), and any other gray literature sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used simple-needling to treat AS before June 2019 with the language restriction of Chinese and English. Researchers evaluated the retrieved literature studies and extracted valid data according to relevant requirements and used RevMan5.3 software for meta-analysis. Results. A total of 10 studies were included, all of which were Chinese literature studies, involving 729 patients. Compared with the control groups, simple-needling groups had a better effect on the clinical effective rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CI (1.11, 1.29), P<0.00001), TCM syndrome score (MD = −5.26, 95% CI (−5.99, −4.53), P<0.00001), symptom score (MD = −8.08, 95% CI (−10.18, −5.97), P<0.00001), and Schober test outcome (MD = 0.39, 95% CI (0.15, 0.64), P=0.002). Sensibility analysis was based on the leave-one-out cross-validation procedure, and the results showed no significant changes. Most studies did not describe adverse reactions. The funnel plot suggested publication bias on clinical effectiveness. Conclusions. This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that simple-needling was effective as an intervention for AS. However, due to the low quality of the methodology of included studies, the designs of clinical trials were not rigorously standardized. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out multiquality RCTs for verification.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Oncolytic Viruses in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zengbin Li ◽  
Zeju Jiang ◽  
Yingxuan Zhang ◽  
Xiaotian Huang ◽  
Qiong Liu
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Oncolytic Viruses ◽  
Oncolytic Virotherapy ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Oncolytic virotherapy is a promising antitumor therapeutic strategy. It is based on the ability of viruses to selectively kill cancer cells and induce host antitumor immune responses. However, the clinical outcomes of oncolytic viruses (OVs) vary widely. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to illustrate the efficacy and safety of oncolytic viruses. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to 31 January 2020. The data for objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) were independently extracted by two investigators from 11 studies that met the inclusion criteria. In subgroup analyses, the objective response rate benefit was observed in patients treated with oncolytic DNA viruses (odds ratio (OR) = 4.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.96–8.33; p = 0.0002), but not in those treated with oncolytic RNA viruses (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.66–1.52, p = 0.99). Moreover, the intratumoral injection arm yielded a statistically significant improvement (OR = 4.05, 95% CI: 1.96–8.33, p = 0.0002), but no such improvement was observed for the intravenous injection arm (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.66–1.52, p = 0.99). Among the five OVs investigated in RCTs, only talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) effectively prolonged the OS of patients (hazard ratio (HR), 0.79; 95% CI: 0.63–0.99; p = 0.04). None of the oncolytic virotherapies improved the PFS (HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.85–1.19, p = 0.96). Notably, the pooled rate of severe AEs (grade ≥3) was higher for the oncolytic virotherapy group (39%) compared with the control group (27%) (risk difference (RD), 12%; risk ratio (RR), 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17–1.78; p = 0.0006). This review offers a reference for fundamental research and clinical treatment of oncolytic viruses. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to verify these results.

scholarly journals Is Fluoxetine Good for Subacute Stroke? A Meta-Analysis Evidenced From Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guangjie Liu ◽  
Xingyu Yang ◽  
Tao Xue ◽  
Shujun Chen ◽  
Xin Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Subacute Stroke

Background and Purpose: Fluoxetine is a drug commonly used to treat mental disorders, such as depression and obsessive–compulsive disorder, and some studies have shown that fluoxetine can improve motor and function recovery after stroke. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine in the treatment of post-stroke neurological recovery.Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were performed to assess the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine for functional and motor recovery in subacute stroke patients up to October 2020. Review Manager 5.3 software was used to assess the data. The risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were analyzed and calculated with a fixed effects model.Results: We pooled 6,788 patients from nine RCTs. The primary endpoint was modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Fluoxetine did not change the proportion of mRS ≤ 2 (P = 0.47). The secondary endpoints were Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale (FMMS), Barthel Index (BI), and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Fluoxetine improved the FMMS (P &lt; 0.00001) and BI(P &lt; 0.0001) and showed a tendency of improving NIHSS (P = 0.08). In addition, we found that fluoxetine reduced the rate of new-onset depression (P &lt; 0.0001) and new antidepressants (P &lt; 0.0001).Conclusion: In post-stroke treatment, fluoxetine did not improve participants' mRS and NIHSS but improved FMMS and BI. This difference could result from heterogeneities between the trials: different treatment duration, clinical scales sensitivity, patient age, delay of inclusion, and severity of the deficit.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Cerebrolysin for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danfeng Zhang ◽  
Yan Dong ◽  
Ya Li ◽  
Jigang Chen ◽  
Junyu Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Safety Outcomes

Cerebrolysin was reported to be effective in the neurological improvement of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in experimental models, while data from clinical trials were inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of cerebrolysin for AIS. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials, which intervened within 72 hours after the stroke onset. We investigated the efficacy and safety outcomes, respectively. Risk ratios and mean differences were pooled with fixed-effects model or random-effects model. Seven studies were identified, involving 1779 patients with AIS. The summary results failed to demonstrate significant superiority of cerebrolysin in the assessment of efficacy outcomes of mRS and BI. Similarly, administration of cerebrolysin had neutral effects on safety outcomes compared with placebo, including mortality and SAE. However, the number of included studies was small, especially in the analysis of efficacy outcomes, which might cause publication bias and inaccurate between-studies variance in the meta-analysis. Conclusively, although it seemed to be safe, routine use of cerebrolysin to improve the long-term rehabilitation after stroke could not be supported by available evidence.

Efficacy and safety of IL-17 inhibitors for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yufeng Yin ◽  
Mingjun Wang ◽  
Mengru Liu ◽  
Erye Zhou ◽  
Tian Ren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
End Point ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Objectives: To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of IL-17 inhibitors in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis.Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning IL-17 inhibitors in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. The efficacy and safety of the IL-17 inhibitors in the treatment of these patients were compared to those of a placebo. The primary end point was predefined as the proportion of patients with at least 20% improvement in the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS20) response criteria at week 16, and the secondary end point was defined as ASAS40 at week 16.Results: Six phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials including 1733 patients (1153 patients received IL-17 inhibitors, including secukinumab or ixekizumab, whereas 580 patients received a placebo as comparators) were included. At week 16, the IL-17 inhibitor regimen produced a significant increase in the ASAS20 response rate (RR=1.63, 95% CI 1.45 to 1.84, p=0.00) and the secondary endpoint ASAS40 response rate (RR=2.12, 95% CI 1.75 to 2.56, p=0.00) versus those for the placebo. With respect to the safety profile, more infectious diseases were described after treatment with IL-17 inhibitors than after treatment with placebo (RR=1.82, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.37, p<0.001), while no increased risk of other adverse events was indicated after IL-17 inhibitor therapy, including treatment-emergent adverse events, death, discontinuation due to adverse event, serious adverse events, or total adverse events.Conclusions: IL-17 inhibitors produced favourable response rates but an increased risk of infectious diseases in the treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document