scholarly journals Short-term efficacy and safety of lasmiditan, a novel 5-HT1F receptor agonist, for the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Hou ◽  
Haiyan Xing ◽  
Chen Li ◽  
Xianfeng Wang ◽  
Dongmei Deng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Treatment ◽  
Receptor Agonist ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Efficacy

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of a Combination of Shenmai Injection plus Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Guo-wei Qin ◽  
Tong-tong Xu ◽  
Xiang-wei Lv ◽  
Shi-min Jiang ◽  
Ke-jia Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Shenmai Injection ◽  
Term Efficacy

Objective. To perform a systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of combined treatment of Shenmai injection and chemotherapy for lung cancer. Methods. A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) describing the treatment of lung cancer by Shenmai injection and chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone was performed using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Value In Paper (VIP), China BioMed, and Wanfang databases. The databases were searched for entries published before September 1, 2019. Results. Thirty-seven RCTs, comprising a total of 2808 cases, were included in the present meta-analysis. Of these, 1428 cases were treated by Shenmai injection plus chemotherapy, and 1380 cases were treated only by chemotherapy. The results of meta-analysis showed that the combined treatment (Shenmai injection plus chemotherapy) increased the short-term efficacy of treatment (relative risk [RR] = 1.183, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.043–1.343, P < 0.01 ) and improved patients’ quality of life (RR = 1.514, 95%CI = 1.211–1.891, P < 0.01 ) compared with chemotherapy alone. With regard to the adverse effects, the combined treatment markedly reduced the incidence of white blood cell (WBC) reduction (RR = 0.846, 95%CI = 0.760–0.941, P < 0.01 ), platelet reduction (RR = 0.462, 95% CI = 0.330–0.649, P < 0.01 ), and hemoglobin reduction (RR = 0.462, 95% CI = 0.330–0.649, P < 0.01 ) and alleviated drug-induced liver injury (RR = 0.677, 95%CI = 0.463–0.990, P < 0.05 ). However, it did not offer a significant protective effect (RR = 0.725, 95%CI = 0.358–1.468, P < 0.05 ). The effect of the combined treatment on the occurrence of vomiting was considerable (RR = 0.889, 95%CI = 0.794–0.996, P < 0.05 ), and the combined treatment markedly increased the immunity of patients with lung cancer. Conclusion. The combined treatment of Shenmai injection plus chemotherapy enhanced the short-term efficacy of chemotherapy, improved the patient quality of life, alleviated the adverse effects of chemotherapeutics, and increased the patient immunity. These results should be confirmed by large-scale, high-quality RCTs.

scholarly journals Endostar continuous versus intermittent intravenous infusion combined with chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis including non-randomized studies

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Wang ◽  
Lu Xu ◽  
Qihuan Li ◽  
Sailimai Man ◽  
Cheng Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Cardiovascular Toxicity ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Quality Of Evidence ◽  
Term Efficacy ◽  
Safety Outcomes

Abstract Background Both intermittent intravenous (IIV) infusion and continuous intravenous (CIV) infusion of Endostar are widely used for NSCLC in China. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CIV of Endostar versus IIV in combination with first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC. Methods RCTs, NRCTs and cohort studies which compared CIV of Endostar with IIV in advanced NSCLC patients and reported efficacy or safety outcomes were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis for short-term efficacy and safety outcomes, and hazard ratios (HRs) for survival outcomes. Results Finally nine studies involving 597 patients were included, containing two RCTs, three NRCTs and four cohort studies. For short-term efficacy, moderate quality of evidence showed that there were no significant differences between CIV of Endostar and IIV in objective response rate (ORR; RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.91–1.98, P = 0.14) and disease control rate (DCR; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.94–1.30, P = 0.21). Very low quality of evidence indicated that CIV of Endostar significantly improved both overall survival (OS; HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48–0.99, P = 0.046) and progression-free survival (PFS; HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55–0.93, P = 0.01) compared with IIV. As for safety outcomes, moderate quality of evidence found that CIV of Endostar significantly reduced the risk of myelosuppression (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32–0.96, P = 0.03) and cardiovascular toxicity (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06–0.78, P = 0.02) compared with IIV. Conclusions In advanced NSCLC, compared with IIV, CIV of Endostar had similar short-term efficacy, and substantially lower risk of myelosuppression and cardiovascular toxicity. Although very low quality of evidence supported the survival benefit of CIV compared with IIV, large RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to demonstrate survival benefits. Caution should be given for off-label use of CIV of Endostar.

Efficacy and Safety of Adjunctive Trimetazidine Therapy for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cardiology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 135 (3) ◽  
pp. 188-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongyong Li ◽  
Dewei Wang ◽  
Chunxiao Hu ◽  
Peng Zhang ◽  
Dongying Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Acute Mi

Background: Several lines of evidence support the clinical use of trimetazidine as an adjunctive therapy in cardioischemic patients. Therefore, we assessed here the efficacy and safety of adjunctive trimetazidine therapy in acute myocardial infarction (MI) patients by a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for clinical studies comparing adjunctive trimetazidine therapy against placebo in adult acute MI patients. Several clinical outcomes [early/short-term all-cause mortality, long-term all-cause mortality, total major adverse cardiac events (MACE), recurrent nonfatal MI, in-hospital adverse events, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)] were analyzed by the intention-to-treat principle. Odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were derived from the number of outcome events in each study arm to estimate the association between adjuvant trimetazidine administration and the various clinical outcomes. A random-effects model was applied for all meta-analyses. Results: We found that adjunctive trimetazidine therapy showed a significant effect upon total MACE (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.15-0.74; p = 0.007) but showed no significant effect upon early/short-term all-cause mortality, long-term all-cause mortality, recurrent nonfatal MI, in-hospital adverse events, TVR, or CABG (p > 0.05). Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis to report that adjunctive trimetazidine therapy has a beneficial effect upon total MACE in acute MI patients. Clinical investigators should consider further trials on adjunctive trimetazidine therapy in order to better define its risks and benefits in acute MI patients.

scholarly journals Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l2222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shang-He-Lin Yin ◽  
Peng Xu ◽  
Bian Wang ◽  
Yao Lu ◽  
Qiao-Yu Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Drug Eluting Stent ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Standard Term

Abstract Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of standard term (12 months) or long term (>12 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) versus short term (<6 months) DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES). Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources Relevant studies published between June 1983 and April 2018 from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library for clinical trials, PubMed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Clinicaltrialsregister.eu. Review methods Randomised controlled trials comparing two of the three durations of DAPT (short term, standard term, and long term) after PCI with DES were included. The primary study outcomes were cardiac or non-cardiac death, all cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and all bleeding events. Results 17 studies (n=46 864) were included. Compared with short term DAPT, network meta-analysis showed that long term DAPT resulted in higher rates of major bleeding (odds ratio 1.78, 95% confidence interval 1.27 to 2.49) and non-cardiac death (1.63, 1.03 to 2.59); standard term DAPT was associated with higher rates of any bleeding (1.39, 1.01 to 1.92). No noticeable difference was observed in other primary endpoints. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the risks of non-cardiac death and bleeding were further increased for ≥18 months of DAPT compared with short term or standard term DAPT. In the subgroup analysis, long term DAPT led to higher all cause mortality than short term DAPT in patients implanted with newer-generation DES (1.99, 1.04 to 3.81); short term DAPT presented similar efficacy and safety to standard term DAPT with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presentation and newer-generation DES placement. The heterogeneity of pooled trials was low, providing more confidence in the interpretation of results. Conclusions In patients with all clinical presentations, compared with short term DAPT (clopidogrel), long term DAPT led to higher rates of major bleeding and non-cardiac death, and standard term DAPT was associated with an increased risk of any bleeding. For patients with ACS, short term DAPT presented similar efficacy and safety with standard term DAPT. For patients implanted with newer-generation DES, long term DAPT resulted in more all cause mortality than short term DAPT. Although the optimal duration of DAPT should take personal ischaemic and bleeding risks into account, this study suggested short term DAPT could be considered for most patients after PCI with DES, combining evidence from both direct and indirect comparisons. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018099519.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document