-
European Review For Medical and... Aug 2017Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Over 80% of all lung cancer cases are non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and approximately 5% of NSCLC... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Over 80% of all lung cancer cases are non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and approximately 5% of NSCLC patients are positive for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangement or fusion with echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4). NSCLC patients with positive ALK-EML4 gene fusion are highly sensitive to ALK-inhibitors. While the efficacy of the ALK-inhibitors in the treatment of NSCLC has been consistently reported, a limited number of randomized, large-scale clinical trials have been reported. The current study was, therefore, designed to systematically review and appraise current knowledge and conduct a meta-analysis on phase I, II, and III clinical trials in which ALK-inhibitors were used to treat NSCLC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The PubMed online database was thoroughly searched. A total of 26 articles were included in a qualitative systematic review, and four of them were used to conduct the quantitative meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We found that ALK inhibitors significantly improved the overall survival (OS) and progress free survival (PFS) of NSCLC patients, especially of ALK or ROS1 gene fusion-positive cases. ALK inhibitors contributed to better therapeutic outcomes regarding increased one-year and two-year OS, PFS, and ORR (Odds ratio: 4.393, 95% CI: 3.302-5.845, p < 0.001). Visual disturbance was the most common side effect observed in the patients treated with crizotinib, whereas mild gastrointestinal reactions, such as diarrhea and nausea, were most frequent in the patients treated with the 2nd generation of ALK inhibitors.
CONCLUSIONS
ALK inhibitors are safe and effective in the treatment of NSCLC patients, especially those with positive ALK-EML4 gene fusion or rearrangement.
Topics: Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Crizotinib; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptor Protein-Tyrosine Kinases
PubMed: 28829490
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) show a significant overall survival advantage over standard advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) therapies, tumor response... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) show a significant overall survival advantage over standard advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) therapies, tumor response to these agents remains poor. Some studies have shown that combination therapy including an ICI appears to be the best treatment; however, the overall benefit in terms of efficacy and toxicity still needs to be assessed. Thus, we performed a network meta-analysis to evaluate the differences in the efficacy of several combinations that include an ICI to provide a basis for clinical treatment selection.
METHODS
We conducted a thorough search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for articles from January 2010 to June 2023. R 4.4.2 and STATA 16.0 were used to analyze data; hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the results.
RESULTS
An indirect comparison showed that nivolumab plus cabozantinib and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib were the most effective treatments for progression-free survival (PFS), with no significant differences between the two interventions (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.96-1.78; P=0.08); rank probability showed that pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib had a 57.1% chance of being the preferred treatment. In the absence of indirect comparisons between pembrolizumab plus axitinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, avelumab plus axitinib, nivolumab plus cabozantinib, and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, pembrolizumab plus axitinib (40.2%) was the best treatment option for overall survival (OS). Compared to pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.65; P=0.02) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.00-0.78; P<0.001) had a lower incidence of overall adverse events (AEs).
CONCLUSION
Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib and pembrolizumab plus axitinib resulted in the highest PFS and OS rates, respectively. Pembrolizumab plus axitinib may be the best option when AEs are a concern.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://inplasy.com/, identifier INPLASY202410078.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Axitinib; Nivolumab; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Ipilimumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Kidney Neoplasms; Anilides; Phenylurea Compounds; Pyridines; Quinolines
PubMed: 38390328
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1255577 -
Renal Failure Dec 2024This review aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of apixaban vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients on dialysis. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of apixaban vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients on dialysis.
METHODS
All types of studies published on PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science up to 10 September 2023 and comparing outcomes of apixaban vs. VKA in dialysis patients were eligible.
RESULTS
Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six retrospective studies were included. Apixaban treatment was associated with significantly lower risk of major bleeding (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.77; = 50%) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.98, = 9%) compared to VKA. Meta-analysis also showed that the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.85, = 16%) and intracranial bleeding (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.84, = 0%) was significantly reduced with apixaban. Meta-analysis showed no difference in the risk of ischemic stroke (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.06, 2.69, = 0%), mortality (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.74, 2.16, = 94%) and recurrent venous thromboembolism (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.21, = 0%) between the two groups. Subgroup analysis of RCTs showed no difference in bleeding outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Low-quality evidence from a mix of RCTs and retrospective studies shows that apixaban may have better safety and equivalent efficacy as compared to VKA in dialysis patients. Apixaban treatment correlated with significantly reduced risk of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in observational studies but not in RCTs. The predominance of retrospective data warrants caution in the interpretation of results.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Hemorrhage; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Vitamin K
PubMed: 38770962
DOI: 10.1080/0886022X.2024.2349114 -
Blood Cancer Journal Jul 2021Myelofibrosis is a myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with constitutional symptoms, increasing splenomegaly, and worsening cytopenias. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Myelofibrosis is a myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with constitutional symptoms, increasing splenomegaly, and worsening cytopenias. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been used for the treatment of myelofibrosis for several years, but there is a lack of comparative information between those treatments. A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed on randomized controlled trials in patients with myelofibrosis receiving JAK inhibitor or placebo or control. Primary outcomes were efficacy on spleen volume reduction and total symptom score reduction. Additional analyses were conducted on anemia and thrombopenia events. Seven studies were included in the network meta-analysis including 1953 patients randomly assigned to four JAK inhibitors-ruxolitinib, fedratinib, pacritinib, momelotinib-or control. In first-line therapy, momelotinib and fedratinib were associated with comparable efficacy to ruxolitinib, and with less toxicity on erythrocytes and platelets, respectively. Pacritinib was less effective on splenomegaly than ruxolitinib as a first-line treatment but seemed effective in second line, after ruxolitinib exposure. Fedratinib and ruxolitinib that are FDA approved in myelofibrosis have both confirmed being valuable option to treat splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms, and their slightly different tolerance-profiles can guide therapeutic choice for first-line treatment, according to patient profile. Momelotinib could be another option especially due to its positive effect on anemia.
Topics: Bridged-Ring Compounds; Humans; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Nitriles; Primary Myelofibrosis; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Pyrrolidines; Splenomegaly; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34315858
DOI: 10.1038/s41408-021-00526-z -
Psychopharmacology Jul 2024Zuranolone, a newly FDA-approved synthetic neurosteroid, shows promise in treating depression. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
RATIONALE
Zuranolone, a newly FDA-approved synthetic neurosteroid, shows promise in treating depression.
OBJECTIVES
Our aim is to evaluate Zuranolone's efficacy and safety in treating depression.
METHODS
Five databases were searched until September 2023 for relevant randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of zuranolone. The potential risk of bias in the included trials was evaluated by the Cochrane Risk of Bias II guideline Data were extracted and pooled using Review Manager Software (RevMan 5.3).
RESULTS
An analysis of eight studies highlights Zuranolone's efficacy in treating depression compared to placebo across most of the outcomes. Notably, the 30mg and 50mg doses demonstrated significant improvements in reducing HAM-D scores by over 50% within a 15-day follow-up (RR) of 1.46 (95% CI [1.27, 1.68], p < 0.0001) and 1.14 (95% CI [1.01, 1.3], p = 0.04). Additionally, the HAM-D ≤ 7% score analysis revealed significant enhancements with the 30mg dose over both 15-day (RR = 1.82, 95% CI [1.44, 2.31], p < 0.0001) and 45-day (RR = 1.43, 95% CI [1.16, 1.77], p = 0.0008) durations. Adverse Events Drug Discontinuation demonstrated no overall significant difference (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: [0.79, 2.23], p = 0.282). Further, specific adverse events, such as headache, showed no significant overall difference between Zuranolone and placebo (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: [0.84, 1.47], p = 0.47), with dose-dependent analysis revealing less headache in the 30 mg group.
CONCLUSION
Zuranolone demonstrates favorable tolerability and safety, particularly at 30mg and 50mg doses after 15 days, suggesting its potential and effective treatment for depression.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Treatment Outcome; Pregnanolone; Pyrazoles
PubMed: 38802705
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-024-06611-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Brain radionecrosis (tissue death caused by radiation) can occur following high-dose radiotherapy to brain tissue and can have a significant impact on a person's quality... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Brain radionecrosis (tissue death caused by radiation) can occur following high-dose radiotherapy to brain tissue and can have a significant impact on a person's quality of life (QoL) and function. The underlying pathophysiological mechanism remains unclear for this condition, which makes establishing effective treatments challenging.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of interventions used for the treatment of brain radionecrosis in adults over 18 years old.
SEARCH METHODS
In October 2017, we searched the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for eligible studies. We also searched unpublished data through Physicians Data Query, www.controlled-trials.com/rct, www.clinicaltrials.gov, and www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials for ongoing trials and handsearched relevant conference material.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any intervention directed to treat brain radionecrosis in adults over 18 years old previously treated with radiation therapy to the brain. We anticipated a limited number of RCTs, so we also planned to include all comparative prospective intervention trials and quasi-randomised trials of interventions for brain radionecrosis in adults as long as these studies had a comparison group that reflects the standard of care (i.e. placebo or corticosteroids). Selection bias was likely to be an issue in all the included non-randomised studies therefore results are interpreted with caution.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (CC, PB) independently extracted data from selected studies and completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment. For dichotomous outcomes, the odds ratio (OR) for the outcome of interest was reported. For continuous outcomes, treatment effect was reported as mean difference (MD) between treatment arms with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS
Two RCTs and one prospective non-randomised study evaluating pharmacological interventions met the inclusion criteria for this review. As each study evaluated a different drug or intervention using different endpoints, a meta-analysis was not possible. There were no trials of non-pharmacological interventions that met the inclusion criteria.A very small randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of bevacizumab versus placebo reported that 100% (7/7) of participants on bevacizumab had reduction in brain oedema by at least 25% and reduction in post-gadolinium enhancement, whereas all those receiving placebo had clinical or radiological worsening or both. This was an encouraging finding but due to the small sample size we did not report a relative effect. The authors also failed to provide adequate details regarding the randomisation and blinding procedures Therefore, the certainty of this evidence is low and a larger RCT adhering to reporting standards is needed.An open-label RCT demonstrated a greater reduction in brain oedema (T2 hyperintensity) in the edaravone plus corticosteroid group than in the corticosteroid alone group (MD was 3.03 (95% CI 0.14 to 5.92; low-certainty evidence due to high risk of bias and imprecision); although the result approached borderline significance, there was no evidence of any important difference in the reduction in post-gadolinium enhancement between arms (MD = 0.47, 95% CI - 0.80 to 1.74; low-certainty evidence due to high risk of bias and imprecision).In the RCT of bevacizumab versus placebo, all seven participants receiving bevacizumab were reported to have neurological improvement, whereas five of seven participants on placebo had neurological worsening (very low-certainty evidence due to small sample size and concerns over validity of analyses). While no adverse events were noted with placebo, three severe adverse events were noted with bevacizumab, which included aspiration pneumonia, pulmonary embolus and superior sagittal sinus thrombosis. In the RCT of corticosteroids with or without edaravone, the participants who received the combination treatment were noted to have significantly greater clinical improvement than corticosteroids alone based on LENT/SOMA scale (OR = 2.51, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.01; low-certainty evidence due to open-label design). No differences in treatment toxicities were observed between arms.One included prospective non-randomised study of alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) versus no active treatment was found but it did not include any radiological assessment. As only one included study was a double-blinded randomised controlled trial, the other studies were prone to selection and detection biases.None of the included studies reported quality of life outcomes or adequately reported details about corticosteroid requirements.A limited number of prospective studies were identified but subsequently excluded as these studies had a limited number of participants evaluating different pharmacological interventions using variable endpoints.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is a lack of good certainty evidence to help quantify the risks and benefits of interventions for the treatment of brain radionecrosis after radiotherapy or radiosurgery. In an RCT of 14 patients, bevacizumab showed radiological response which was associated with minimal improvement in cognition or symptom severity. Although it was a randomised trial by design, the small sample size limits the quality of data. A trial of edaravone plus corticosteroids versus corticosteroids alone reported greater reduction in the surrounding oedema with combination treatment but no effect on the enhancing radionecrosis lesion. Due to the open-label design and wide confidence intervals in the results, the quality of this data was also low. There was no evidence to support any non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of radionecrosis. Further prospective randomised studies of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions are needed to generate stronger evidence. Two ongoing RCTs, one evaluating bevacizumab and one evaluating hyperbaric oxygen therapy were identified.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Antipyrine; Bevacizumab; Brain; Brain Edema; Drug Therapy, Combination; Edaravone; Gadolinium; Humans; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Radiation Injuries; Radiosurgery; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29987845
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011492.pub2 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Mar 2024Due to the large cost of joint replacement for surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis, there are many complications in elderly patients, and there are many... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Due to the large cost of joint replacement for surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis, there are many complications in elderly patients, and there are many contraindications to surgery, and conservative treatment is still based on drugs. To further evaluate the efficacy and safety of sodium hyaluronate combined with celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. In total, 202 studies were screened, with a final selection of 9 RCTs involving 2339 participants; of these, 9 RCTs were included in the final meta-analysis. Treatment group reduces VAS (SMD = -1.61; 95 % CI [-2.25, -0.98]; I = 95 %; P < 0.00001) and adverse reactions (OR = 0.45; 95 % CI [0.22,0.94]; I = 0 %; P < 0.33); Meanwhile, improving Lysholm knee scores (SMD = 0.19; 95 % CI [-0.06, -0.44]; I = 76 %; P = 0.0004) and Clinical efficiency (OR = 0.31; 95 % CI [0.19,0.50]; I = 0 %; P < 0.00001). All indicators were superior to the control group. Our primary findings suggest that KOA treatment with celecoxib combined with sodium hyaluronate reduces VAS, while improving Lysholm scores and Clinical efficiency. In addition, we found that celecoxib combined with sodium hyaluronate treatment had fewer adverse effects than the control group, indicating that the combination is safe and effective in the treatment of KOA.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Celecoxib; Hyaluronic Acid; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Knee Joint; Pain Management; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38008631
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.11.077 -
Blood Jul 2016
Meta-Analysis Review
Topics: Adenine; Agammaglobulinaemia Tyrosine Kinase; Animals; Atrial Fibrillation; Humans; Incidence; Leukemia; Lymphoma; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Protein-Tyrosine Kinases; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines
PubMed: 27247135
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2016-05-712828 -
Medicine Oct 2018Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been investigated the benefits of soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulators in the treatment of heart failure, but a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been investigated the benefits of soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulators in the treatment of heart failure, but a comprehensive evaluation is lacking. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral sGC stimulators (vericiguat and riociguat) in patients with heart failure.
METHODS
Studies were searched and screened in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Eligible RCTs were included that reported mortality, the change of EuroQol Group 5-Dmensional Self-report Questionnaire (EQ-5D) US index, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), or serious adverse events (SAEs). Relative risk or weight mean difference (WMD) was estimated using fixed effect model or random effect model. Analysis of sensitivity and publication bias was conducted.
RESULTS
Five trials with a total of 1200 patients were included. sGC stimulators had no impact on the mortality (1.25; 95% confidence interval 0.50-3.11) and significantly improved EQ-5D US index (0.04; 95% confidence interval 0.020-0.05). Furthermore, in comparison with control group, NT-proBNP was statistically decreased in riociguat group (-0.78; 95% confidence interval -1.01 to -0.47), but not in vericiguat group (0.04, 95% confidence interval -0.18 to 0.25). There were not obverse differences in SAEs between sGC stimulators and control groups (0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.12).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis suggests that sGC stimulators could improve the quality of life in patients with heart failure with good tolerance and safety, but their long-term benefits need to be observed in the future. sGC stimulators are likely to be promising add-on strategies for the treatment of heart failure.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Enzyme Activators; Female; Heart Failure; Heterocyclic Compounds, 2-Ring; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Natriuretic Peptide, Brain; Peptide Fragments; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Quality of Life; Soluble Guanylyl Cyclase
PubMed: 30313068
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012709 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Ear wax (cerumen) is a normal bodily secretion that can become a problem when it obstructs the ear canal. Symptoms attributed to wax (such as deafness and pain) are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ear wax (cerumen) is a normal bodily secretion that can become a problem when it obstructs the ear canal. Symptoms attributed to wax (such as deafness and pain) are among the commonest reasons for patients to present to primary care with ear trouble.Wax is part of the ear's self-cleaning mechanism and is usually naturally expelled from the ear canal without causing problems. When this mechanism fails, wax is retained in the canal and may become impacted; interventions to encourage its removal may then be needed. Application of ear drops is one of these methods. Liquids used to remove and soften wax are of several kinds: oil-based compounds (e.g. olive or almond oil); water-based compounds (e.g. sodium bicarbonate or water itself); a combination of the above or non-water, non-oil-based solutions, such as carbamide peroxide (a hydrogen peroxide-urea compound) and glycerol.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of ear drops (or sprays) to remove or aid the removal of ear wax in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; Cochrane Register of Studies; PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 23 March 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which a 'cerumenolytic' was compared with no treatment, water or saline, an alternative liquid treatment (oil or almond oil) or another 'cerumenolytic' in adults or children with obstructing or impacted ear wax.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear wax and 2) adverse effects (discomfort, irritation or pain). Secondary outcomes were: extent of wax clearance; proportion of people (or ears) with relief of symptoms due to wax; proportion of people (or ears) requiring further intervention to remove wax; success of mechanical removal of residual wax following treatment; any other adverse effects recorded and cost. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies, with 623 participants (900 ears). Interventions included: oil-based treatments (triethanolamine polypeptide, almond oil, benzocaine, chlorobutanol), water-based treatments (docusate sodium, carbamide peroxide, phenazone, choline salicylate, urea peroxide, potassium carbonate), other active comparators (e.g. saline or water alone) and no treatment. Nine of the studies were more than 15 years old.The overall risk of bias across the 10 included studies was low or unclear.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear waxSix studies (360 participants; 491 ears) contributed quantitative data and were included in our meta-analyses.Active treatment versus no treatmentOnly one study addressed this comparison. The proportion of ears with complete clearance of ear wax was higher in the active treatment group (22%) compared with the no treatment group (5%) after five days of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 4.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 16.80); one study; 117 ears; NNTB = 8) (low-quality evidence).Active treatment versus water or salineWe found no evidence of a difference in the proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear wax when the active treatment group was compared to the water or saline group (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.75; three studies; 213 participants; 257 ears) (low-quality evidence). Two studies applied drops for five days, but one study only applied the drops for 15 minutes. When we excluded this study in a sensitivity analysis it did not change the result.Water or saline versus no treatmentThis comparison was only addressed in the single study cited above (active versus no treatment) and there was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of ears with complete wax clearance when comparing water or saline with no treatment after five days of treatment (RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 17.62; one study; 76 ears) (low-quality evidence).Active treatment A versus active treatment BSeveral single studies evaluated 'head-to-head' comparisons between two active treatments. We found no evidence to show that one was superior to any other.Subgroup analysis of oil-based active treatments versus non-oil based active treatmentsWe found no evidence of a difference in this outcome when oil-based treatments were compared with non-oil-based active treatments.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
adverse effects: discomfort, irritation or painOnly seven studies planned to measure and did report this outcome. Only two (141 participants;176 ears) provided useable data. There was no evidence of a significant difference in the number of adverse effects between the types of ear drops in these two studies. We summarised the remaining five studies narratively. All events were mild and reported in fewer than 30 participants across the seven studies (low-quality evidence).Secondary outcomesThree studies reported 'other' adverse effects (how many studies planned to report these is unclear). The available information was limited and included occasional reports of dizziness, unpleasant smell, tinnitus and hearing loss. No significant differences between groups were reported. There were no emergencies or serious adverse effects reported in any of the 10 studies.There was very limited or no information available on our remaining secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although a number of studies aimed to evaluate whether or not one type of cerumenolytic is more effective than another, there is no high-quality evidence to allow a firm conclusion to be drawn and the answer remains uncertain.A single study suggests that applying ear drops for five days may result in a greater likelihood of complete wax clearance than no treatment at all. However, we cannot conclude whether one type of active treatment is more effective than another and there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between oil-based and water-based active treatments.There is no evidence to show that using saline or water alone is better or worse than commercially produced cerumenolytics. Equally, there is also no evidence to show that using saline or water alone is better than no treatment.
Topics: Adult; Antipyrine; Benzocaine; Carbamide Peroxide; Carbonates; Cerumen; Child; Chlorobutanol; Choline; Dioctyl Sulfosuccinic Acid; Drug Combinations; Ear Canal; Ethanolamines; Humans; Hygiene; Peroxides; Pharmaceutical Solutions; Plant Oils; Potassium; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salicylates; Sodium Chloride; Surface-Active Agents; Urea; Water
PubMed: 30043448
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012171.pub2