scholarly journals Effect of janus kinase inhibitors and methotrexate combination on malignancy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinod Solipuram ◽  
Akhila Mohan ◽  
Roshniben Patel ◽  
Ruoning Ni
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Risk Of Malignancy

Abstract Background Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease. The combination therapy of methotrexate (MTX) and Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) is commonly used. Patients with RA are at increased risk of malignancy, however, it remains unclear whether the combination therapy is associated with a higher risk. Objective To assess the malignancy risk among patients with RA receiving combination therapy of JAKi and MTX compared to MTX alone. Methods PubMed, Cochrane and Embase were thoroughly searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with RA receiving JAKi and MTX, from inception to July 2020. Primary endpoints were malignancy events, Non melanomatous skin cancer (NMSC) and malignancy excluding NMSC and secondary endpoints were serious adverse events (SAE), deaths. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI were calculated using the Mantel–Haenszel random-effect method. Results 659 publications were screened and 13 RCTs with a total of 6911 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in malignancy [RR = 1.42; 95% CI (0.59, 3.41)], neither NMSC [RR = 1.44 (0.36, 5.76)] nor malignancies excluding NMSC [RR = 1.12 (0.40, 3.13)]. No statistically significant difference between the two groups for SAE [RR = 1.15 (0.90, 1.47)] and deaths [RR = 1.99 (0.75, 5.27)] was found. Conclusion The adjunction of JAKi to MTX is not associated with an increased risk of malignancy when compared to MTX alone. There is no increased risk of SAE and deaths when compared to MTX alone in patients with RA.

scholarly journals Intravenous Colistin Monotherapy versus Combination Therapy against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria Infections: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. 208 ◽  
Author(s):  
I-Ling Cheng ◽  
Yu-Hung Chen ◽  
Chih-Cheng Lai ◽  
Hung-Jen Tang
Keyword(s):  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Gram Negative Bacteria ◽  
Gram Negative ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Carbapenem Resistant ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

This meta-analysis aims to compare intravenous colistin monotherapy and colistin-based combination therapy against carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria (GNB) infections. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up to July 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating colistin alone and colistin-based combination therapy in the treatment of carbapenem-resistant GNB infections were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Five RCTs including 791 patients were included. Overall, colistin monotherapy was associated with a risk ratio (RR) of 1.03 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89–1.20, I2 = 0%) for all-cause mortality compared with colistin-based combination therapy. The non-significant difference was also detected in infection-related mortality (RR, 1.23, 95% CI, 0.91–1.67, I2 = 0%) and microbiologic response (RR, 0.86, 95% CI, 0.72–1.04, I2 = 62%). In addition, no significant difference was observed in the subgroup analysis—high or low dose, with or without a loading dose, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections, and in combination with rifampicin. Finally, colistin monotherapy was not associated with lower nephrotoxicity than colistin combination therapy (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.84–1.21, I2 = 0%). Based on the analysis of the five RCTs, no differences were found between colistin monotherapy and colistin-based combination therapy against carbapenem-resistant GNB infections, especially for A. baumannii infections.

scholarly journals Effect of Combination Therapy on Joint Destruction in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PLoS ONE ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e106408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels Graudal ◽  
Thorbjørn Hubeck-Graudal ◽  
Simon Tarp ◽  
Robin Christensen ◽  
Gesche Jürgens
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Destruction ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Leflunomide Use and Risk of Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Literature Review and Metaanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 855-860 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Conway ◽  
Candice Low ◽  
Robert J. Coughlan ◽  
Martin J. O’Donnell ◽  
John J. Carey
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Increased Risk

Objective.To evaluate the relative risk (RR) of pulmonary disease among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with leflunomide (LEF).Methods.We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to April 15, 2014. We included double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCT) of LEF versus placebo or active comparator agents in adults with RA. Studies with fewer than 50 subjects or shorter than 12 weeks were excluded. Two investigators independently searched both databases. All authors reviewed selected studies. We compared RR differences using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects method to assess total respiratory adverse events, infectious respiratory adverse events, noninfectious respiratory adverse events, interstitial lung disease, and death.Results.Our literature search returned 5673 results. A total of 8 studies, 4 with placebo comparators, met our inclusion criteria. There were 708 respiratory adverse events documented in 4579 participants. Six cases of pneumonitis occurred, all in the comparator group. Four pulmonary deaths were reported, none in the LEF group. LEF was not associated with an increased risk of total adverse respiratory events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.56–1.78) or infectious respiratory adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.58–1.82). LEF was associated with a decreased risk of noninfectious respiratory adverse events (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41–0.97).Conclusion.Our study found no evidence of increased respiratory adverse events in RCT of LEF treatment.

scholarly journals Drug-induced gynecomastia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-496
Author(s):  
Alberto Trinchieri ◽  
Gianpaolo Perletti ◽  
Vittorio Magri ◽  
Konstantinos Stamatiou ◽  
Margherita Trinchieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Drug Induced ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Reductase Inhibitors ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
5 Alpha Reductase Inhibitors

Objective: To review the evidence concerning treatment-related gynecomastia in patients taking spironolactone, antiandrogens, 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors, lipid-lowering and psychotropic drugs. Material and methods: A search of Medline and EMBASE was performed up to 30 June 2021. We included randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of a drug belonging to these classes versus placebo or versus a drug of the same class. Results: A total of 32 randomized controlled trials were included in the final review. There was an increased odds of gynecomastia in men receiving antiandrogens (OR = 17.38, 95% CI: 11.26 to 26.82; 6 trials, 9599 participants) and 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors compared to controls (OR = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.53 to 2.06; 7 series out of 6 trials, 34860 participants). The use of spironolactone in mixed gender populations was characterized by significantly higher odds of having gynecomastia compared to controls (OR = 8.39, 95% CI: 5.03 to 13.99; 14 trials, 3745 participants). No placebo-controlled trials focusing on the risk of gynecomastia in patients taking antipsychotic drugs was available, although there was a significant difference in the odds of having gynecomastia in a comparison between risperidone and quetiapine (OR = 4.32, 95% CI: 1.31 to 14.27; 3 trials, 343 participants). Limited evidence about the effects of statins on mammary glands was found. Conclusions: Antiandrogens and to a lesser extent 5 alphareductase inhibitors and spironolactone are associated with an increased risk of developing gynecomastia. Such effect can be explained by a modification of the testosterone to estradiol ratio. Gynecomastia (and galactorrhea) associated to the use of conventional and certain atypical antipsychotics can be related to high prolactin levels.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Steroidal Anti-Androgens in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammed Rashid ◽  
Madhan Ramesh ◽  
K. Shamshavali ◽  
Amit Dang ◽  
Himanshu Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the sixth primary cause of cancer death. However, conflicts are present about the efficacy and safety of Non-steroidal anti-androgens (NSAA) for its treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of NSAAs versus any comparator for the treatment of advanced or metastatic PCa (mPCa). Methodology: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched. References of included studies and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for relevant studies. Only English language studies after 1990 were considered for review. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of NSAAs as compared with any other comparator including surgery or chemotherapy in mPCa patients were included. The outcomes include efficacy, safety and the tolerability of the treatment. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for quality assessment. Two authors were independently involved in the selection, extraction and quality assessment of included studies and disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third reviewer. Results: Fifty-eight out of 1307 non-duplicate RCTs with 29154 patients were considered for the review. NSAA showed significantly better progression-free survival [PFS] (Hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.78; P=0.0001), time to distant metastasis or death [TTD] (HR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.73-0.91; p<0.0001), objective response (Odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI 1.06-2.54; P=0.03) and clinical benefits (OR, 1.33; 95% CI 1.08-1.63; P=0.006) as compared to the control group. There was no significant difference observed between the groups in terms of overall survival (HR, 0.95; 95%CI, 0.87-1.03; P=0.18) and time to progression (HR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.77-1.11; P=0.43). Treatment-related adverse events were more with the NSAA group, but the discontinuation due to lack of efficacy reason was 43% significantly lesser than the control group in patients with mPCa. Rest of the outcomes were appeared to be non-significant. Conclusion: Treatment with NSAA was appeared to be better efficacious with respect to PFS, TTD, and response rate with considerable adverse events when compared to the control group in patients with metastatic PCa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document