scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Wenxin Granules and Propafenone in Treatment of Atrial Premature Beats: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Yi Yuan ◽  
Xing-jiang Xiong ◽  
Duo-duo Li ◽  
Hai-xia Li ◽  
Jian-ping Fu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Sinus Bradycardia ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Gastrointestinal Symptoms ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Premature Beats

Objective. A meta-analysis was conducted on the clinical efficacy and safety of Wenxin granules and propafenone for the therapy of atrial premature beats (APBs). Methods. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Wenxin granules and propafenone in the therapy of APB was systematically searched until June 1, 2019. Meta-analysis was conducted with review manager (RevMan) 5.3. For the evaluation of methodological quality for randomized controlled trials, the Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias. For the evaluation of the evidence quality, the online GRADEpro GDT was used. Results. Eleven RCTs with 1149 participants were included in this study. It has been identified that Wenxin granules combined with propafenone have better clinical efficacy than the use of propafenone alone in the treatment of APB (OR = 3.89, 95% CI (2.03, 7.44), P<0.0001, low-dose propafenone; OR = 4.24, 95% CI (1.32, 13.60), P=0.02, high-dose propafenone). There is no difference in clinical efficacy between the Wenxin granules alone and high-dose propafenone in the treatment of APB (OR = 1.17, 95% CI (0.65, 2.11), P=0.60), and Wenxin granules alone are superior to the low-dose propafenone in the treatment of APB (OR = 2.56, 95% CI (1.34, 4.89), P=0.004). Wenxin granules combined with propafenone can reduce the incidence of sinus bradycardia caused by propafenone (OR = 0.15, 95% CI (0.03, 0.70), P=0.02). There was no significant difference between Wenxin granules combined with propafenone and propafenone alone in causing the atrioventricular block, dizziness, xerostomia, gastrointestinal symptoms, and tongue paresthesia. There was no significant difference between Wenxin granules alone and propafenone alone in causing dizziness, xerostomia, gastrointestinal symptoms, tongue paresthesia, frequent premature ventricular contractions, and prolongation of R-R interval. Conclusion. Very low-quality evidence showed that Wenxin granules may be superior to low-dose propafenone in the treatment of APB. Wenxin granules may reduce the incidence of sinus bradycardia caused by propafenone. Limited by the quality of included RCTs, the conclusions of this study still need further verification.

scholarly journals Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety between Indacaterol and Tiotropium in COPD: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e0119948 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung Soo Kim ◽  
Jinkyeong Park ◽  
Seong Yong Lim ◽  
Yeon-Mok Oh ◽  
Kwang Ha Yoo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Valganciclovir 900mg Versus 450mg for Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis in Renal Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wang Xin ◽  
Yang Hui ◽  
Zhang Xiaodong ◽  
Cui Xiangli ◽  
Wang Shihui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Transplantation ◽  
Acute Rejection ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Opportunistic Infections ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Renal Transplant Recipients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Allograft Loss ◽  
Cmv Disease

Objectives: Valganciclovir 900 mg/day is approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis, but 450 mg/day is seems also effective. We systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of low-dose versus high-dose valganciclovir prophylaxis in renal transplantation recipients. Methods: An electronic search was conducted up to November 29, 2016. The primary outcomes were incidences of CMV, CMV disease, mortality and opportunistic infection. The second outcomes were acute rejection, allograft loss, adverse drug reaction (ADR). Results: 7 cohort studies, all with high quality involving (1431 patients) were included. There was no significant difference of the incidence of following CMV disease (1271 patients, odds ratio [OR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-1.43, p=0.36), acute rejection (1343 patients, OR 0.77, 95%CI 0.53-1.14, p=0.19), allograft loss (1271 patients, OR 0.64, 95%CI 0.31-1.35, p=0.24), mortality (1271 patients, OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.20-1.47, p=0.23) and opportunistic infections (OI) (985 patients, OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.52-1.10, p=0.14) between the low-dose and the high-dose valganciclovir  prophylaxis. And no significant difference was observed for premature valganciclovir discontinuation (1010 patients, OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.52-1.25, p=0.33) and the incidence of leukopenia (1082 patients, OR 0.65, 95%CI 0.34-1.22, p=0.18) between the two regimens. Conclusion: 450 mg and 900 mg doses of valganciclovir are equipotent for CMV universal prophylaxis. CMV 450 mg prophylaxis should be used for renal transplant recipients. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see “For Readers”) may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue’s contents page.

The Efficacy and Safety of Coenzyme Q10 in Preventing the Progression of Early Parkinson’s Disease: A Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ranhel C. De Roxas ◽  
Roland Dominic G. Jamora
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Coenzyme Q10 ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
P Value ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Early Parkinson’S Disease

Introduction. Coenzyme Q10, also known as Ubiquinone, is a substance now being used as a dietary supplement in many countries including the Philippines. It has also been the focus of several researches as treatment for several diseases including Parkinson’s Disease. Several studies have shown that Coenzyme Q10 inhibits mitochondrial dysfunction in Parkinson’s Disease, hence delaying its progression. Objectives. The objective of this study is to assess and summarize the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of Coenzyme Q10 administration in the prevention of the progression of early Parkinson’s Disease. Methods. This is meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the use of Coenzyme Q10 in Parkinson’s Disease. A literature search in several databases was conducted for relevant studies. Three randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. The efficacy of Coenzyme Q10 were measured using the total and the component scores of the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale on follow-up. On the other hand, safety were measured using the withdrawal rate and the associated adverse reactions during the therapy of CoQ10. The Review Manager Software was utilized for the meta-analysis. Results. Compared to Placebo, treatment of CoQ10 did not show any significant difference in the mean scores of the UPDRS mental and ADL scores. Interestingly, the UPDRS motor score showed a significant difference between Coenzyme Q10 and placebo, but no significant difference when a subgroup analysis between high-dose (-4.03 [-15.07-7.01], p-value 0.47, I2 67%, P for heterogeneity 0.08) and low-dose Coenzyme Q10 (0.53 [-0.891.94], p-value 0.47, I2 34%, P for heterogeneity 0.22) was done. Overall, there was no significant difference in the total UPDRS score (0.68 [-0.61-1.97], p-value 0.30, I2 0%, P for heterogeneity 0.70). The most common side effects of the use of Coenzyme Q10 are anxiety, back pain, headache, sore throat, nausea, dizziness and constipation. Conclusion. Contrary to some animal and human studies, this meta-analysis showed that the use of CoQ10 results to nonsignificant improvement in all components of the UPDRS scores as opposed to placebo. However, the use of CoQ10 is tolerated and seems to be safe but further studies are needed to validate this finding.

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).

scholarly journals Efficacy of low or high-dose rituximab treatment in membranous nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naresh Kharbuja ◽  
Min Wu ◽  
Yu-Chen Han ◽  
Dan Liu ◽  
Bin Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Membranous Nephropathy ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biological Indicators ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Protein Levels ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: Rituximab (RTX) has emerged as a promising therapeutic option in patients with primary membranous nephropathy (MN). But the optimal dosing of RTX protocol has not been established. Recently, favorable outcomes even with low-dose of RTX has been described in MN patients. Thus, the aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety between high-dose and low-dose RTX in patients with MN.Methods: After literature search, eligible studies were further classified into high-dose and low-dose groups according to the dosage of one cycle RTX therapy. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate remission rates and changes in biological indicators in two groups. Results: Eight studies involving 588 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In comparison to the control groups (including cyclosporin, cyclophosphamide, chlorambucil, prednisone, non-immunosuppressive anti-proteinuria treatment), RTX significantly improved the complete remission (CR) rate. Furthermore, there is no significant difference between high-dose and low-dose RTX in inducing total remission (TR) and CR. Also, high-dose RTX did not significantly improve serum albumin, creatine and urinary protein levels when compared with the low-dose RTX group. However, high-dose RTX did reduce the serum PLA2R antibody titers in patients. Even the difference was not significant, there was a tendency for low-dose RTX to have less serious adverse events (SAEs) than high-dose RTX groups. Conclusion: RTX administration indicated a better efficacy than the control strategies for the treatment of primary MN. And a low-dose regimen of RTX was non-inferior to high-dose usage in inducing long-term TR up to 24 months and holds the superior tendency in preventing SAEs in MN patients.

scholarly journals Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Human Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy for Degenerative Disc Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Baocheng Xie ◽  
Shichun Chen ◽  
Yongxiang Xu ◽  
Weichao Han ◽  
Runkai Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Disc Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vas Scores

Degenerative disc disease (DDD) can cause severe low back pain, which will have a serious negative impact on the ability to perform daily tasks or activities. For the past few years, mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) transplantation has emerged as a promising strategy for the treatment of DDD. However, the clinical efficacy of MSC in the treatment of DDD still lacks clinical evidence and is controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of MSC transplantation in patients with DDD. We searched major databases using terms from the database’s inception through March 2021. The Cochrane bias risk assessment tool was used to assess quality. The analysis showed that MSC therapy could decrease visual analog scale (VAS) scores ( SMD = − 0.50 , 95 % CI = − 0.68 ~ − 0.33 , P < 0.00001 ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores ( SMD = − 0.27 , 95 % CI = − 0.44 ~ − 0.09 , P = 0.003 ). The outcomes with subgroup analysis showed that MSC therapy could decrease VAS scores in 3 months ( P = 0.001 ), 6 months ( P = 0.01 ), 12 months ( P = 0.02 ), and ≥24 months ( P = 0.002 ) and ODI scores in ≥24 months ( P = 0.006 ). Pooled analysis showed that MSC therapy has a higher ratio of patients at most thresholds but particularly at the MIC (minimally important change) ( P = 0.0002 ) and CSC (clinically significant change) ( P = 0.0002 ) in VAS and MIC ( P = 0.0005 ) and CSC ( P = 0.001 ) pain responders in ODI. Adverse events (AE) of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), back pain, arthralgia, and muscle spasms were not statistically significant between the two groups. However, our further statistical analysis showed that MSC therapy may induce AE of TEAE related to study treatment ( OR = 3.05 , 95 % CI = 1.11 ~ 8.40 , P = 0.03 ). In conclusion, this study pooled the main outcomes and showed that MSC therapy could significantly decrease VAS and ODI scores in patients with DDD. Distinctly, the findings of this meta-analysis suggest a novel therapeutic strategy for patients with chronic low back pain (LBP) and lumbar dysfunction by DDD.

scholarly journals Activity and Safety of Tegafur, Gimeracil, and Oteracil Potassium for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Ximing Zhang ◽  
Xiumei Tian ◽  
Yuezi Wei ◽  
Hao Deng ◽  
Lichun Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

In clinical practice, tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil potassium (S-1) therapy is commonly administered to treat nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, its efficacy and safety remain controversial in both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of S-1 treatment for NPC. We searched PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, and VIP databases for RCTs of chemotherapy with or without S-1 for NPC, from 2001 to 2020. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.3 and Stata15. Randomized controlled trials published in journals were included irrespective of blinding and language used. Patients were diagnosed with NPC through a clinicopathological examination; patients of all cancer stages and ages were included. Overall, 25 trials and 1858 patients were included. There were significant differences in the complete remission (OR = 2.42, 95% CI (1.88–3.10), P < 0.05 ) and overall response rate (OR = 2.68, 95% CI (2.08–3.45), P < 0.05 ) between the S-1 and non-S-1 groups. However, there was no significant difference in partial remission (OR = 1.10, 95% CI (0.87–1.39), P = 0.42 ) and seven adverse reactions (leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, dermatitis, oral mucositis, and anemia) between the S-1 and non-S-1 groups. Additionally, statistical analyses with six subgroups were performed. S-1 was found to be a satisfactory chemotherapeutic agent combined with radiotherapy, intravenous chemotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy for NPC. As an oral medicine, the adverse reactions of S-1, especially gastrointestinal reactions, can be tolerated by patients, thereby optimizing their quality of life. S-1 may be a better choice for the treatment of NPC. This trial is registered with CRD42019122041.

Efficacy and safety of pharmacological cachexia interventions: systematic review and network meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2020-002601
Author(s):  
Manit Saeteaw ◽  
Phitjira Sanguanboonyaphong ◽  
Jukapun Yoodee ◽  
Kaitlyn Craft ◽  
Ratree Sawangjit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Total Body Weight ◽  
Megestrol Acetate ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Pharmacological Interventions ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Significant Difference

AimsRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated benefits of pharmacological interventions for cachexia in improving weight and appetite. However, comparative efficacy and safety are not available. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for cachexia.MethodsPubMed, EmBase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for RCTs until October 2019. Key outcomes were total body weight (TBW) improvement, appetite (APP) score and serious adverse events. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. NMA was performed to estimate weight gain and APP score increase at 8 weeks, presented as mean difference (MD) or standardised MD with 95% CI.Results80 RCTs (10 579 patients) with 12 treatments were included. Majority is patients with cancer (7220). Compared with placebo, corticosteroids, high-dose megestrol acetate combination (Megace_H_Com) (≥400 mg/day), medroxyprogesterone, high-dose megestrol acetate (Megace_H) (≥400 mg/day), ghrelin mimetic and androgen analogues (Androgen) were significantly associated with MD of TBW of 6.45 (95% CI 2.45 to 10.45), 4.29 (95% CI 2.23 to 6.35), 3.18 (95% CI 0.94 to 5.41), 2.66 (95% CI 1.47 to 3.85), 1.73 (95% CI 0.27 to 3.20) and 1.50 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.44) kg. For appetite improvement, Megace_H_Com, Megace_H and Androgen significantly improved standardised APP score, compared with placebo. There is no significant difference in serious adverse events from all interventions compared with placebo.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that several pharmacological interventions have potential to offer benefits in treatment of cachexia especially Megace_H and short-term use corticosteroids. Nonetheless, high-quality comparative studies to compare safety and efficacy are warranted for better management of cachexia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document