-
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Jan 2023Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and microbes. The role of environmental allergens (aeroallergens) in triggering AD remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
We systematically synthesized evidence regarding the benefits and harms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for AD.
METHODS
As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD Guideline update, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Resource for Eczema Trials, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized controlled trials comparing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and/or no AIT (placebo or standard care) for guideline panel-defined patient-important outcomes: AD severity, itch, AD-related quality of life (QoL), flares, and adverse events. Raters independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We synthesized intervention effects using frequentist and Bayesian random-effects models. The GRADE approach determined the quality of evidence.
RESULTS
Twenty-three randomized controlled trials including 1957 adult and pediatric patients sensitized primarily to house dust mite showed that add-on SCIT and SLIT have similar relative and absolute effects and likely result in important improvements in AD severity, defined as a 50% reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.53 [1.31-1.78]; 26% vs 40%, absolute difference 14%) and QoL, defined as an improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index by 4 points or more (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.44 [1.03-2.01]; 39% vs 56%, absolute difference 17%; both outcomes moderate certainty). Both routes of AIT increased adverse events (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.44-1.79]; 66% with SCIT vs 41% with placebo; 13% with SLIT vs 8% with placebo; high certainty). AIT's effect on sleep disturbance and eczema flares was very uncertain. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings.
CONCLUSIONS
SCIT and SLIT to aeroallergens, particularly house dust mite, can similarly and importantly improve AD severity and QoL. SCIT increases adverse effects more than SLIT. These findings support a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to optimally managing AD.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Humans; Child; Dermatitis, Atopic; Quality of Life; Bayes Theorem; Desensitization, Immunologic; Pyroglyphidae; Hypersensitivity; Asthma; Allergens; Sublingual Immunotherapy; Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus; Eczema
PubMed: 36191689
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.09.020 -
Journal of Microbiology, Immunology,... Dec 2020Dengue is an arboviral disease caused by dengue virus. Symptomatic dengue infection causes a wide range of clinical manifestations, from mild dengue fever (DF) to...
BACKGROUND
Dengue is an arboviral disease caused by dengue virus. Symptomatic dengue infection causes a wide range of clinical manifestations, from mild dengue fever (DF) to potentially fatal disease, such as dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) or dengue shock syndrome (DSS). We conducted a literature review to analyze the risks of DHF and current perspectives for DHF prevention and control.
METHODS
According to the PRISMA guidelines, the references were selected from PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar database using search strings containing a combination of terms that included dengue hemorrhagic fever, pathogenesis, prevention and control. Quality of references were evaluated by independent reviewers.
RESULTS
DHF was first reported in the Philippines in 1953 and further transmitted to the countries in the region of South-East Asia and Western Pacific. Plasma leakages is the main pathophysiological hallmark that distinguishes DHF from DF. Severe plasma leakage can result in hypovolemic shock. Various factors are thought to impact disease presentation and severity. Virus virulence, preexisting dengue antibodies, immune dysregulation, lipid change and host genetic susceptibility are factors reported to be correlated with the development of DHF. However, the exact reasons and mechanisms that triggers DHF remains controversial. Currently, no specific drugs and licensed vaccines are available to treat dengue disease in any of its clinical presentations.
CONCLUSION
This study concludes that antibody-dependent enhancement, cytokine dysregulation and variation of lipid profiles are correlated with DHF occurrence. Prompt diagnosis, appropriate treatment, active and continuous surveillance of cases and vectors are the essential determinants for dengue prevention and control.
Topics: Animals; Antibodies, Viral; Culicidae; Dengue Virus; Female; Humans; Male; Mosquito Vectors; Severe Dengue; Virulence
PubMed: 32265181
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2020.03.007 -
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection... 2017Dengue is an arthropod-borne infectious disease caused by dengue virus (DENV) infection and transmitted by mosquitoes. Approximately 50-100 million people are infected... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Dengue is an arthropod-borne infectious disease caused by dengue virus (DENV) infection and transmitted by mosquitoes. Approximately 50-100 million people are infected with DENV each year, resulting in a high economic burden on both governments and individuals. Here, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize information regarding the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and serotype distribution and risk factors for global dengue outbreaks occurring from 1990 to 2015. We searched the PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases through December 2016 using the term "dengue outbreak." In total, 3,853 studies were identified, of which 243 studies describing 262 dengue outbreaks met our inclusion criteria. The majority of outbreak-associated dengue cases were reported in the Western Pacific Region, particularly after the year 2010; these cases were primarily identified in China, Singapore and Malaysia. The pooled mean age of dengue-infected individuals was 30.1 years; of the included patients, 54.5% were male, 23.2% had DHF, 62.0% had secondary infections, and 1.3% died. The mean age of dengue patients reported after 2010 was older than that of patients reported before 2010 (34.0 vs. 27.2 years); however, the proportions of patients who had DHF, had secondary infections and died significantly decreased after 2010. Fever, malaise, headache, and asthenia were the most frequently reported clinical symptoms and signs among dengue patients. In addition, among the identified clinical symptoms and signs, positive tourniquet test ( = 4.86), ascites ( = 13.91) and shock ( = 308.09) were identified as the best predictors of dengue infection, DHF and mortality, respectively (both < 0.05). The main risk factors for dengue infection, DHF and mortality were living with uncovered water container ( = 1.65), suffering from hypotension ( = 6.18) and suffering from diabetes mellitus ( = 2.53), respectively (all < 0.05). The serotype distribution varied with time and across WHO regions. Overall, co-infections were reported in 47.7% of the evaluated outbreaks, and the highest pooled mortality rate (2.0%) was identified in DENV-2 dominated outbreaks. Our study emphasizes the necessity of implementing programs focused on targeted prevention, early identification, and effective treatment.
Topics: Aedes; Animals; Dengue; Dengue Virus; Disease Outbreaks; Humans
PubMed: 28748176
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00317 -
The Ocular Surface Oct 2019We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count, improvement of symptoms and mites' eradication, stratified on type of treatments and mode of delivery of treatments (local or systemic).
METHOD
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google scholar and Science Direct databases were searched for studies reporting an efficacy of treatments for Demodex blepharitis.
RESULTS
We included 19 studies (14 observational and 5 randomized clinical trials), for a total of 934 patients, 1741 eyes, and 13 different treatments. For mites count, eradication rate, and symptoms improvement, meta-analysis included fifteen, fourteen and thirteen studies, respectively. The overall effect sizes for efficiency of all treatments, globally, were 1.68 (95CI 1.25 to 2.12), 0.45 (0.26-0.64), and 0.76 (0.59-0.90), respectively. Except usual lid hygiene for mites count, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario ointment (CHEO) for both eradication rate and symptoms, and CHEO, 2% metronidazole ointment, and systemic metronidazole for eradication rate, all treatments were efficient. Stratified meta-analysis did not show significant differences between local and systemic treatments (1.22, 0.83 to 1.60 vs 2.24, 1.30 to 3.18 for mites count; 0.37, 0.21 to 0.54 vs 0.56, 0.06 to 0.99 for eradication rate; and 0.77, 0.58 to 0.92 vs 0.67, 0.25 to 0.98 for symptoms improvement).
CONCLUSION
We reported the efficiency of the different treatments of Demodex blepharitis. Because of less systemic side effects, local treatments seem promising molecules in the treatment of Demodex blepharitis.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Antiparasitic Agents; Blepharitis; Eye Infections, Parasitic; Humans; Ivermectin; Metronidazole; Miotics; Mite Infestations; Mites; Pilocarpine; Tea Tree Oil
PubMed: 31229586
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2019.06.004 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2015Head louse infection is diagnosed by finding live lice, as eggs take 7 days to hatch (but a few may take longer, up to 13 days) and may appear viable for weeks after... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Head louse infection is diagnosed by finding live lice, as eggs take 7 days to hatch (but a few may take longer, up to 13 days) and may appear viable for weeks after death of the egg. Infestation may be more likely in school children, with risks increased in children with more siblings or of lower socioeconomic group. Factors such as longer hair make diagnosis and treatment more difficult.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of physically acting treatments for head lice? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to March 2014 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found six studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: 1,2-octanediol, dimeticone, herbal and essential oils, and isopropyl myristate.
Topics: Animals; Antiparasitic Agents; Dimethylpolysiloxanes; Humans; Lice Infestations; Myristates; Octanols; Oils, Volatile; Pediculus; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25587918
DOI: No ID Found -
Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) 2023Demodex mites are related to some inflammatory diseases such as rosacea and blepharitis and could be harmful in patients with immunodeficiency or immunosuppression,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Demodex mites are related to some inflammatory diseases such as rosacea and blepharitis and could be harmful in patients with immunodeficiency or immunosuppression, especially notable in patients using biologic like dupilumab. In order to have an objective observation of different anti-Demodex strategies, we conducted this study, based on interventional clinical evidence with quantified Demodex mite data.
METHODS
We used the PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Medline, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) as databases. To assess the risk of bias, the RoB2 and ROBINS-I tools were used. The certainty of evidence was assessed following the GRADE guideline. Furthermore, the effect sizes (ESs) of different strategies were compared in different time periods (0-1, 1-2, 2-3, >3 months), as well as Demodex decrease rates.
RESULTS
1,618 studies were identified in the databases, with 21 of which included in the final quantitative synthesis. Interventions in these studies included ivermectin, tea tree oil (TTO), permethrin, crotamiton, metronidazole, light therapies, combined therapies, and other therapies. During 0-1 month, the ES varied from 0.07 (cleanser) to 1.95 (systemic ivermectin-metronidazole). During 1-2 months, the ES varied from 0.88 (topical permethrin) to 4.40 (topical ivermectin). During 2-3 months, the ES varied from 0.79 (topical permethrin) to 8.37 (topical ivermectin). During the time of 3 months, the ES varied from 0.59 (topical permethrin) to 2.25 (intense pulsed light [IPL]). In terms of Demodex decrease rates, topical ivermectin, TTO, permethrin, IPL, and baby shampoo had achieved a nearly 100% decrease. The reported adverse events were mostly mild, without severe adverse events reported in any of the studies.
CONCLUSIONS
We found ivermectin (topical and systemic), ivermectin-metronidazole (topical), and TTO (topical) are promising anti-Demodex interventions. In addition to traditional pharmacotherapy, light therapies, especially IPL and skin cleansing, could also be considered as effective methods to control Demodex mite infestation.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Ivermectin; Mite Infestations; Metronidazole; Permethrin; Skin; Mites
PubMed: 36310014
DOI: 10.1159/000526296 -
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology Nov 2023Entomopathogenic ascomycetes (EA) are an important part of the microbiota in most terrestrial ecosystems, where they can be found regulating natural populations of... (Review)
Review
Entomopathogenic ascomycetes (EA) are an important part of the microbiota in most terrestrial ecosystems, where they can be found regulating natural populations of arthropod pests in both epigeous and hypogeous habitats while also establishing unique relationships with plants. These fungi offer direct benefits to agriculture and human welfare. In the present work, we conducted a systematic review to comprehensively assess the range of ecosystem services provided by EA, including direct and indirect pest biocontrol, plant growth promotion, plant defense against other biotic and abiotic stresses, nutrient cycling, and the production of new bioactive compounds with agricultural, pharmaceutical and medical importance. Moreover, EA are compatible with the ecosystem services provided by other microbial and macrobial biocontrol agents. This systematic review identified the need for future research to focus on evaluating the economic value of the ecological services provided by EA with a special emphasis on hypocrealean fungi. This evaluation is essential not only for the conservation but also for better regulation and exploitation of the benefits of EA in promoting agricultural sustainability, reducing the use of chemicals that enter the environment, and minimizing the negative impacts of crop protection on the carbon footprint and human health.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Ecosystem; Pest Control, Biological; Arthropods; Ascomycota; Agriculture
PubMed: 37924859
DOI: 10.1016/j.jip.2023.108015 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases May 2018Mosquitoes are incriminated as vectors for many crippling diseases, including malaria, West Nile fever, Dengue fever, and other neglected tropical diseases (NTDs).... (Review)
Review
Mosquitoes are incriminated as vectors for many crippling diseases, including malaria, West Nile fever, Dengue fever, and other neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). microRNAs (miRNAs) can interact with multiple target genes to elicit biological functions in the mosquitoes. However, characterization and function of individual miRNAs and their potential targets have not been fully determined to date. We conducted a systematic review of published literature following PRISMA guidelines. We summarize the information about miRNAs in mosquitoes to better understand their metabolism, development, and responses to microorganisms. Depending on the study, we found that miRNAs were dysregulated in a species-, sex-, stage-, and tissue/organ-specific manner. Aberrant miRNA expressions were observed in development, metabolism, host-pathogen interactions, and insecticide resistance. Of note, many miRNAs were down-regulated upon pathogen infection. The experimental studies have expanded the identification of miRNA target from the 3' untranslated regions (UTRs) of mRNAs of mosquitoes to the 5' UTRs of mRNAs of the virus. In addition, we discuss current trends in mosquito miRNA research and offer suggestions for future studies.
Topics: Animals; Culicidae; Insect Vectors; MicroRNAs
PubMed: 29718912
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006463 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2022Malaria remains an important public health problem. Research in 1900 suggested house modifications may reduce malaria transmission. A previous version of this review... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Malaria remains an important public health problem. Research in 1900 suggested house modifications may reduce malaria transmission. A previous version of this review concluded that house screening may be effective in reducing malaria. This update includes data from five new studies.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of house modifications that aim to reduce exposure to mosquitoes on malaria disease and transmission.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (PubMed); Embase (OVID); Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International (CAB) Abstracts (Web of Science); and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (LILACS) up to 25 May 2022. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry to identify ongoing trials up to 25 May 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials, including cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs), cross-over studies, and stepped-wedge designs were eligible, as were quasi-experimental trials, including controlled before-and-after studies, controlled interrupted time series, and non-randomized cross-over studies. We sought studies investigating primary construction and house modifications to existing homes reporting epidemiological outcomes (malaria case incidence, malaria infection incidence or parasite prevalence). We extracted any entomological outcomes that were also reported in these studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used risk ratios (RR) to compare the effect of the intervention with the control for dichotomous data. For continuous data, we presented the mean difference; and for count and rate data, we used rate ratios. We presented all results with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
One RCT and six cRCTs met our inclusion criteria, with an additional six ongoing RCTs. We did not identify any eligible non-randomized studies. All included trials were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa since 2009; two randomized by household and four at the block or village level. All trials assessed screening of windows, doors, eaves, ceilings, or any combination of these; this was either alone, or in combination with roof modification or eave tube installation (an insecticidal "lure and kill" device that reduces mosquito entry whilst maintaining some airflow). In one trial, the screening material was treated with 2% permethrin insecticide. In five trials, the researchers implemented the interventions. A community-based approach was adopted in the other trial. Overall, the implementation of house modifications probably reduced malaria parasite prevalence (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.82; 5 trials, 5183 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), although an inconsistent effect was observed in a subpopulation of children in one study. House modifications reduced moderate to severe anaemia prevalence (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89; 3 trials, 3643 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was no consistent effect on clinical malaria incidence, with rate ratios ranging from 0.38 to 1.62 (3 trials, 3365 participants, 4126.6 person-years). House modifications may reduce indoor mosquito density (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.30; 4 trials, 9894 household-nights; low-certainty evidence), although two studies showed little effect on this parameter.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
House modifications - largely screening, sometimes combined with insecticide and lure and kill devices - were associated with a reduction in malaria parasite prevalence and a reduction in people with anaemia. Findings on malaria incidence were mixed. Modifications were also associated with lower indoor adult mosquito density, but this effect was not present in some studies.
Topics: Adult; Anemia; Animals; Child; Culicidae; Humans; Insecticides; Malaria; Permethrin
PubMed: 36200610
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013398.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Insecticide-based interventions, such as long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), remain the backbone of malaria vector control.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Insecticide-based interventions, such as long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), remain the backbone of malaria vector control. These interventions target mosquitoes that prefer to feed and rest indoors, but have limited capacity to prevent transmission that occurs outdoors or outside regular sleeping hours. In low-endemicity areas, malaria elimination will require that these control gaps are addressed, and complementary tools are found. The use of topical repellents may be particularly useful for populations who may not benefit from programmatic malaria control measures, such as refugees, the military, or forest goers. This Cochrane Review aims to measure the effectiveness of topical repellents to prevent malaria infection among high- and non-high-risk populations living in malaria-endemic regions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of topical repellents alone or in combination with other background interventions (long-lasting insecticide-treated nets, or indoor residual spraying, or both) for reducing the incidence of malaria in high- and non-high-risk populations living in endemic areas.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 11 January 2023: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialised Register; CENTRAL (in the Cochrane Library); MEDLINE; Embase; CAB Abstracts; and LILACS. We also searched trial registration platforms and conference proceedings; and contacted organizations and companies for ongoing and unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) of topical repellents proven to repel mosquitoes. We also included non-randomized studies that complied with pre-specified inclusion criteria: controlled before-after studies (CBA), controlled interrupted time series (ITS), and controlled cross-over trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Four review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, and extracted the data. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias (RoB) using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. A fifth review author resolved any disagreements. We analysed data by conducting a meta-analysis, stratified by whether studies included populations considered to be at high-risk of developing malaria infection (for example, refugees, forest goers, or deployed military troops). We combined results from cRCTs with RCTs by adjusting for clustering and presented results using forest plots. We used the GRADE framework to assess the certainty of the evidence. We only included data on Plasmodium falciparum infections in the meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirteen articles relating to eight trials met the inclusion criteria and were qualitatively described. We included six trials in the meta-analysis (five cRCTs and one RCT). Effect on malaria incidence Topical repellents may slightly reduce P falciparum infection and clinical incidence when both outcomes are considered together (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.98; 3 cRCTs and 1 RCT, 61,651 participants; low-certainty evidence); but not when these two outcomes were considered independently. Two cRCTs and one RCT (12,813 participants) evaluated the effect of topical repellents on infection incidence (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.02; low-certainty evidence). One cRCT (48,838 participants) evaluated their effect on clinical case incidence (IRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.36; low-certainty evidence). Three studies (2 cRCTs and 1 RCT) included participants belonging to groups considered at high-risk of being infected, while only one cRCT did not include participants at high risk. Adverse events Topical repellents are considered safe. The prevalence of adverse events among participants who used topical repellents was very low (0.6%, 283/47,515) and limited to mild skin reactions. Effect on malaria prevalence Topical repellents may slightly reduce P falciparum prevalence (odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.97; 3 cRCTs and 1 RCT; 55,366 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two of these studies (1 cRCT and 1 RCT) were carried out in refugee camps, and included exclusively high-risk populations that were not receiving any other background vector control intervention.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to conclude that topical repellents can prevent malaria in settings where other vector control interventions are in place. We found the certainty of evidence for all outcomes to be low, primarily due to the risk of bias. A protective effect was suggested among high-risk populations, specially refugees, who might not have access to other standard vector control measures. More adequately powered clinical trials carried out in refugee camps could provide further information on the potential benefit of topical repellents in this setting. Individually randomized studies are also likely necessary to understand whether topical repellents have an effect on personal protection, and the degree to which diversion to non-protected participants affects overall transmission dynamics. Despite this, the potential additional benefits of topical repellents are most likely limited in contexts where other interventions are available.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Insecticides; Mosquito Vectors; Malaria, Falciparum; Controlled Before-After Studies; Culicidae
PubMed: 37602418
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015422.pub2