153P Ramucirumab safety in East Asian (EA) compared to non-EA patients: A meta-analysis of adverse events (AEs) in 6 global, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (suppl_9) ◽  
Author(s):  
H.C. Chung ◽  
Y. Chao ◽  
K-W. Lee ◽  
M. Kudo ◽  
C-J. Yen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Double Blind

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of guselkumab for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A metaanalysis of randomized clinical trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 433-440
Author(s):  
Xing-Bao Tao ◽  
Yin-Qiu Huang ◽  
Yi-Hong Zhou ◽  
Lv-Lang Zhang ◽  
Yao-Kai Chen
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Severe Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Central Registry

Purpose: To conduct a systematic analysis on data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different doses of guselkumab, and provide high-quality evidence for its use in the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (PsO). Methods: Related studies were searched using online search engines including MEDLINE, PubMed, and central registry of Cochrane controlled trials from January 2001 to October 2017. Only randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials involving guselkumab- and placebo-treated PsO subjects were included. Results: Five eligible double-blind, randomized, and placebo-controlled trials involving patients with moderate-to-severe PsO subjects treated with guselkumab were included. Compared with the placebo groups, the proportion of patients with improvements in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 (RR= 12.14; 95% CI= 9.11-16.16; p < 0.001); PASI 90 (RR= 23.26; 95% CI =14.57-37.13; p < 0.001), and PASI 100 (RR = 37.66; 95% CI = 15.81-89.69; p < 0.001) were significantly higher than those in guselkumab-treated groups. Furthermore, the guselkumab-treated groups showed significant decreases in Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score (RR = 10.46; 95% CI = 7.96-13.83; p < 0.001) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score (SMD = -1.3; 95% CL = -1.4 to -1.19; p < 0.001), when compared with the placebo groups. However, there were no significant differences in adverse events (AEs) (RR = 1.01; 95% CL = 0.93-1.11; p > 0.05); severe adverse events (SAEs) (RR = 1.32; 95% CI =0.69-2.54; p > 0.05) and study discontinuations (RR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.42-1.48; p > 0.05) between the two groups. Conclusion: This meta-analysis summarizes available evidence for the use of guselkumab in psoriasis. The results suggest that guselkumab is superior to placebo in moderate-to-severe psoriasis, and is welltolerated, effective, and safe in improving the severity of disease and quality of life. Keywords: Guselkumab, Effectiveness, Safety, Plaque psoriasis, Meta-analysis, Quality of life

scholarly journals Identifying Anticipated Events of Future Clinical Trials by Leveraging Data from the Placebo Arms of Completed Trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiang-Lin Tan ◽  
David M. Kern ◽  
M. Soledad Cepeda
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Road Traffic ◽  
Bipolar Depression ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Summary Estimate ◽  
Safety Surveillance

Abstract Background An important component of a systematic strategy for safety surveillance is prospective identification of anticipated serious adverse events (SAEs). Developing a structured approach to identify anticipated events and estimating their incidence can help align the safety strategy and the safety surveillance efforts. Methods We developed a novel approach to identify anticipated events for a hypothetical randomized, double-blind, controlled trial in subjects with bipolar disorder using the adverse events reported in the placebo arm of trials from the ClinicalTrials.gov database. We searched the ClinicalTrials.gov database for all trials on bipolar depression with similar inclusion/exclusion criteria and study duration as our hypothetical study. The frequencies of anticipated events in placebo arms were abstracted from each trial and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Clopper–Pearson method. Meta-analysis with a random effects model was performed to obtain a summary estimate and 95% CI for the events identified in more than one trial. Results A total of 129 clinical trials were initially identified, and 18 were ultimately selected as they met all the selection criteria. There were 69 unique anticipated SAEs identified, and 13 out of 69 were reported in at least 2 clinical trials. The top 5 anticipated SAEs for our study were: (1) hospitalization, psychiatric symptom (3.57%); (2) suicidal behavior, overdose (3.57%), (3) cholecystitis (2.86%); (4) fall (2.86%); (5) road traffic accident, injury (2.86%). Conclusion We successfully identified the anticipated events from registered trials that included a population similar to our trial. This method for identifying anticipated events could be applied to other disease areas.

Pharmacological Treatment of Osteoporosis in Elderly People: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Gerontology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Qin-Yi Wang ◽  
Na Ding ◽  
Yi-He Dong ◽  
Zhang-Xin Wen ◽  
Rong Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Anabolic Agents ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Antiresorptive Agents ◽  
Statistical Heterogeneity ◽  
Post Hoc

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The evidence supporting the use of antiresorptive and anabolic agents for fracture prevention in elderly patients is still inconclusive. Whether it is too late to alter the course of the disease in this age-group has remained uncertain. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of antiresorptive and anabolic agents in elderly patients. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and post hoc analyses of RCTs reporting efficacy outcomes or adverse events of antiresorptive and anabolic agents in elderly patients. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochran <i>Q</i> χ<sup>2</sup> test and <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic. All results were expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). <b><i>Results:</i></b> The meta-analysis included 1 RCT and 11 post hoc analyses of data from 10 double-blind placebo-controlled RCTs. Antiresorptive therapy significantly reduced the pooled incidence of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.35–0.53; and <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001). It was also associated with lower risk of nonvertebral and hip fractures (RR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.74–0.96; and <i>p</i> = 0.009 and RR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.58–0.97; and <i>p</i> = 0.028, respectively). For any adverse events, no difference was observed between antiresorptive agents and placebo groups (RR = 1.01; 95% CI = 1.00–1.02; and <i>p</i> = 0.23). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Both antiresorptive and anabolic agents represented potentially important osteoporosis treatments, showing significant effects on reducing vertebral, nonvertebral, or hip fracture risk, and were well-tolerated by elderly patients. Even in the elderly, maybe it is not too late to alter the course of the disease.

675 FUNDOPLICATION VERSUS ORAL PROTON PUMP INHIBITORS FOR GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Schiliró Tristão ◽  
Francisco Tustumi ◽  
Guilherme Tavares ◽  
Letícia Nogueira Datrino ◽  
Maria Carolina Andrade Serafim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Intake

Abstract   Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a widely studied and highly prevalent condition. However, few is reported about the exact efficacy and safety of fundoplication (FPT) compared to oral intake proton-pump inhibitors (PPI). This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) aims to compare PPI and FPT in relation to the efficacy, as well as the adverse events associated with these therapies. Methods This systematic review was guided by PRISMA statement. Search carried out in June 2020 was conducted on Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE and LILACS. The inclusion criteria were (I) patients with GERD; (II) Randomized clinical trials, comparing oral intake PPI with FPT; (III) relevant outcomes for this review. The exclusion criteria were (I) reviews, case reports, editorials and letters (II) transoral or endoscopic FPT (III) studies with no full text. No restrictions were set for language or period. Certainty of evidence and risk of bias were assessed with GRADE Pro and with Review Manager Version 5.4 bias assessment tool. Results Ten RCT were included. Meta-analysis showed that heartburn (RD = −0.19; 95% CI = −0.29, −0.09) was less frequently reported by patients that underwent FPT. Furthermore, patients undergoing surgery had greater pressure on the lower esophageal sphincter than those who used PPI (MD = 7.81; 95% CI 4.79, 10.83). There was no significant difference between groups in the percentage of time with pH less than 4 in 24 hours, sustained remission and Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. Finally, FPT did not increase significantly the risk for adverse events such as postoperative dysphagia and impaired belching. Conclusion FPT is a more effective therapy than PPI treatment for GERD, without significantly increasing the risk for adverse events. However, before indicating a possible surgical approach, it is extremely important to correctly assess and select the patients who would benefit from FPT, such as those with severe erosive esophagitis, severe respiratory symptoms, low adherence to continuous drug treatment and patients with non-acid reflux, to ensure better results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document