-
Drug Metabolism and Disposition: the... Feb 2022Duloxetine (DLX) is a dual serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, widely used for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Although DLX has shown good...
Duloxetine (DLX) is a dual serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, widely used for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Although DLX has shown good efficacy and safety, serious adverse effects (e.g., liver injury) have been reported. The mechanisms associated with DLX-induced toxicity remain elusive. Drug metabolism plays critical roles in drug safety and efficacy. However, the metabolic profile of DLX in mice is not available, although mice serve as commonly used animal models for mechanistic studies of drug-induced adverse effects. Our study revealed 39 DLX metabolites in human/mouse liver microsomes and mice. Of note, 13 metabolites are novel, including five -acetyl cysteine adducts and one reduced glutathione (GSH) adduct associated with DLX. Additionally, the species differences of certain metabolites were observed between human and mouse liver microsomes. CYP1A2 and CYP2D6 are primary enzymes responsible for the formation of DLX metabolites in liver microsomes, including DLX-GSH adducts. In summary, a total of 39 DLX metabolites were identified, and species differences were noticed in vitro. The roles of CYP450s in DLX metabolite formation were also verified using human recombinant cytochrome P450 (P450) enzymes and corresponding chemical inhibitors. Further studies are warranted to address the exact role of DLX metabolism in its adverse effects in vitro (e.g., human primary hepatocytes) and in vivo (e.g., Cyp1a2-null mice). SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This current study systematically investigated Duloxetine (DLX) metabolism and bioactivation in liver microsomes and mice. This study provided a global view of DLX metabolism and bioactivation in liver microsomes and mice, which are very valuable to further elucidate the mechanistic study of DLX-related adverse effects and drug-drug interaction from metabolic aspects.
Topics: Animals; Depressive Disorder, Major; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Mice; Microsomes, Liver; Serotonin; Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 34785568
DOI: 10.1124/dmd.121.000633 -
Journal of Affective Disorders May 2023Desvenlafaxine and duloxetine are selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Their efficacy has not been directly compared using statistical hypotheses.... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, duloxetine-controlled, non-inferiority trial of desvenlafaxine succinate extended-release in patients with major depressive disorder.
BACKGROUND
Desvenlafaxine and duloxetine are selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Their efficacy has not been directly compared using statistical hypotheses. This study evaluated the non-inferiority of desvenlafaxine extended-release (XL) to duloxetine in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).
METHODS
In this study, 420 adult patients with moderate-to-severe MDD were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 50 mg (once daily [QD]) of desvenlafaxine XL (n = 212) or 60 mg QD of duloxetine (n = 208). The primary endpoint was evaluated using a non-inferiority comparison based on the change from baseline to 8 weeks in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) total score. Secondary endpoints and safety were evaluated.
RESULTS
Least-squares mean change in HAM-D total score from baseline to 8 weeks was -15.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -17.73, -12.89) in the desvenlafaxine XL group and - 15.9 (95% CI, -18.44, -13.39) in the duloxetine group. The least-squares mean difference was 0.6 (95% CI: -0.48, 1.69), and the upper boundary of 95% CI was less than the non-inferiority margin (2.2). No significant between-treatment differences were found in most secondary efficacy endpoints. The incidence of the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was lower for desvenlafaxine XL than for duloxetine for nausea (27.2% versus 48.8%) and dizziness (18.0% versus 28.8%).
LIMITATIONS
A short-term non-inferiority study without a placebo arm.
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrated that desvenlafaxine XL 50 mg QD was non-inferior to duloxetine 60 mg QD in efficacy in patients with MDD. Desvenlafaxine had a lower incidence of TEAEs than duloxetine did.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Depressive Disorder, Major; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Antidepressive Agents; Double-Blind Method; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36813043
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.02.067 -
Current Urology Reports Jul 2024Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a commonly observed condition in females, as well as in males who have undergone prostatectomy. Despite the significant progress... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a commonly observed condition in females, as well as in males who have undergone prostatectomy. Despite the significant progress made in surgical techniques, pharmacotherapy has not yielded substantial outcomes within the clinical domain. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of the existing pharmacotherapy options for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and the emerging therapeutic targets in this field.
RECENT FINDINGS
One meta-analysis demonstrated that α-adrenergic medications are more efficacious in improving rather than curing SUI symptoms. One trial showed reduced pad weight gain with PSD-503, a locally administered α-adrenergic receptor agonist. New data show that duloxetine's risk outweighs its benefits. One small-scale trial was found to support the use of locally administered estriol in improving subjective outcomes. Emerging targets include serotonin 5HT agonists, selective inhibitors of norepinephrine uptake, and myostatin inhibitors. Only one of the evaluated drugs, duloxetine, has been approved by some countries. Currently, trials are evaluating novel targets. Systemic adverse effects such as gastrointestinal upset with duloxetine and orthostatic hypotension with α-adrenoceptor agonists have hampered the efficacy of drugs used to treat SUI in women and men.
Topics: Humans; Urinary Incontinence, Stress; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Female; Male
PubMed: 38727982
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-024-01205-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2018Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. People with fibromyalgia often report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy, for example, with serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life. This review updates and extends the 2013 version of this systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the US National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles, to 8 August 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently extracted data, examined study quality, and assessed risk of bias. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 50% or greater and of 30% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for fatigue, sleep problems, health-related quality of life, mean pain intensity, depression, anxiety, disability, sexual function, cognitive disturbances and tenderness. For tolerability we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawals due to adverse events and for nausea, insomnia and somnolence as specific adverse events. For safety we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We added eight new studies with 1979 participants for a total of 18 included studies with 7903 participants. Seven studies investigated duloxetine and nine studies investigated milnacipran against placebo. One study compared desvenlafaxine with placebo and pregabalin. One study compared duloxetine with L-carnitine. The majority of studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in three to five domains.The quality of evidence of all comparisons of desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran versus placebo in studies with a parallel design was low due to concerns about publication bias and indirectness, and very low for serious adverse events due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness. The quality of evidence of all comparisons of duloxetine and desvenlafaxine with other active drugs was very low due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness.Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater: 1274 of 4104 (31%) on duloxetine and milnacipran reported pain relief of 50% or greater compared to 591 of 2814 (21%) participants on placebo (risk difference (RD) 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.11; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 14). Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit over placebo in patient's global impression to be much or very much improved: 888 of 1710 (52%) on duloxetine and milnacipran (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26; NNTB 5, 95% CI 4 to 8) reported to be much or very much improved compared to 354 of 1208 (29%) of participants on placebo. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo for pain relief of 30% or greater. RD was 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.12; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 12. Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit for fatigue (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; NNTB 18, 95% CI 12 to 29), compared to placebo. There were no differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.01). Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo in improving health-related quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.15; NNTB 11, 95% CI 8 to 14).There were 794 of 4166 (19%) participants on SNRIs who dropped out due to adverse events compared to 292 of 2863 (10%) of participants on placebo (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; NNTH 14, 95% CI 10 to 25). There was no difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine, milnacipran or desvenlafaxine and placebo (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00).There was no difference between desvenlafaxine and placebo in efficacy, tolerability and safety in one small trial.There was no difference between duloxetine and desvenlafaxine in efficacy, tolerability and safety in two trials with active comparators (L-carnitine, pregabalin).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The update did not change the major findings of the previous review. Based on low- to very low-quality evidence, the SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in the frequency of pain relief of 50% or greater, but for patient's global impression to be much or very much improved and in the frequency of pain relief of 30% or greater there was a clinically relevant benefit. The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in improving health-related quality of life and in reducing fatigue. Duloxetine and milnacipran did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. On average, the potential benefits of duloxetine and milnacipran in fibromyalgia were outweighed by their potential harms. However, a minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically relevant adverse events with duloxetine or milnacipran.We did not find placebo-controlled studies with other SNRIs than desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran.
Topics: Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; Adult; Carnitine; Cyclopropanes; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Milnacipran; Norepinephrine; Pregabalin; Quality of Life; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Syndrome
PubMed: 29489029
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010292.pub2 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Feb 2022Some osteoarthritis (OA) patients experience inadequate pain relief from analgesics like acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This could be the result... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Some osteoarthritis (OA) patients experience inadequate pain relief from analgesics like acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This could be the result of experienced non-nociceptive centralized pain. Placebo-controlled randomized trials (RCT) have proven the effectiveness of duloxetine for OA and several chronic pain conditions where central sensitization (CS) is one of the key underlying pain mechanisms.
OBJECTIVES
Assess the efficacy of an 8-week duloxetine treatment compared to usual care in end-stage knee and hip OA patients with a level of centralized pain.
DESIGN
Pragmatic, enriched, open-label RCT.
METHODS
Patients were randomized to duloxetine or to care-as-usual. Primary outcome was pain in the index joint, measured with the pain domain of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) or the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). The intention-to-treat principle was used, with mixed-model repeated measures to analyze the effect.
RESULTS
One hundred eleven patients were randomized. Nearly 44% felt much to very much better after duloxetine usage compared to 0% in the care-as-usual group (p < 0.001). The duloxetine group scored 11.3 points (95%CI: 5.8, 16.8) better on the pain domain of the KOOS/HOOS (p < 0.001). Knee patients improved significantly more than hip patients (18.7 [95%CI: 11.3, 26.1] versus 6.0 [95%CI: - 2.6, 14.5] points better).
CONCLUSIONS
Adding duloxetine treatment seems to be beneficial for end-stage knee OA patients with neuropathic-like symptoms (at risk of CS). End stage Hip OA patients seem to be nonresponsive to duloxetine.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Dutch Trial Registry with number NTR 4744 (15/08/2014) and in the EudraCT database with number 2013-004313-41 .
Topics: Chronic Pain; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Humans; Osteoarthritis, Hip; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35123461
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05034-0 -
IBRO Reports Dec 2020In attempt to conquer the major concerns of oral duloxetine hydrochloride (like low bioavailability, intolerable side-effects and no regeneration of demyelinated nerve...
OBJECTIVE
In attempt to conquer the major concerns of oral duloxetine hydrochloride (like low bioavailability, intolerable side-effects and no regeneration of demyelinated nerve fibres) for the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), an alternative delivery of duloxetine hydrochloride was aimed for optimization.
METHODS
A film forming dermal gel consisting of duloxetine hydrochloride was formulated and enriched with methylcobalamin and geranium oil. The formulated gel successfully qualified the various pharmaceutical characteristics of gel. Administration of paclitaxel (8 mg/kg/ in four divided doses) for 4 alternate days induced the symptoms of peripheral neuropathy in rats. On 14th day, the responses to noxious stimulus (mechanical hyperalgesia, cold allodynia, and heat hyperalgesia) were increased and reached to its maximum. Thereafter, drug treatment with formulated dermal gel and oral duloxetine hydrochloride (30 mg/kg, once daily) was initiated for 2 weeks in different group of animals. On the 28th day animals were sacrificed to isolate sciatic nerve, to assess biochemical changes (TBARS, reduced GSH, total protein, TNF-α, IL-6) and for histopathological examinations of nerve sections using Hematoxylin-Eosin and Toludine blue staining methods.
RESULTS
Application of formulated dermal gel to paclitaxel-treated rats significantly improved paw-withdrawal latency responses during noxious stimulus testing, reduced the levels of TBARS, TNF-α, IL-6 and elevated the levels of reduced GSH as compared to paclitaxel treated rats. Histographs also indicated marked regeneration of the damaged nerve fibers. Topical delivery of duloxetine hydrochloride produced similar results in disparity to oral route. However, no significant disparity in responses was obtained with twice application of formulated dermal gel when compared to once daily application.
CONCLUSION
Tremendous recovery from nociception, oxidation and inflammation in addition to nerve degeneration was achieved through dermal application of duloxetine hydrochloride in peripheral neuropathy.
PubMed: 32760845
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibror.2020.07.006 -
BMC Pulmonary Medicine Aug 2023Refractory cough, a chronic cough with an unclear diagnosis or poor treatment response. The symptoms are often stubborn and persistent, causing serious complications and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
INTRODUCTION
Refractory cough, a chronic cough with an unclear diagnosis or poor treatment response. The symptoms are often stubborn and persistent, causing serious complications and lowering the patient's quality of life. Cough hypersensitivity syndrome (CHS) is proposed as a potential cause, and reducing sensory nerve hyperresponsiveness is suggested as an effective treatment. However, current drugs have low efficacy and benefit rates and numerous side effects. This trail proposes using duloxetine, a selective 5-HT and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, as a potential treatment for refractory cough, which has shown promise in treating pain and depression. Duloxetine may inhibit pain conduction and oxidative stress in peripheral nerves by inhibiting the activity of TRPV1 channels, which play an important role in the peripheral afferent pathway of refractory cough. Meanwhile, the antidepressant effects of duloxetine may also play a role in the treatment of refractory cough.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
This is a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, and controlled trial. A total of 98 individuals will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to duloxetine group and placebo control group (starting with 20 mg QD, increasing 20 mg daily until 20 mg TID). After a screening period, the second stage runs from baseline to the 42nd (last) day of treatment, with follow-up visits on the 3rd, 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th, 35th, 42nd and 49th days. The main end-stage observation indicators include objective cough frequency, cough visual analog scale (VAS), cough symptom score, Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ), and cough evaluation test (CET); the secondary end-stage observation indicators include capsaicin cough sensitivity, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Major Depression Inventory (MDI), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale (GAD-7), Life Events Scale (LES-32), induced sputum supernatant. The safety measures will be AEs/SAEs, vital signs, liver and kidney function, fecal occult blood test.
DISCUSSION
This study is the first randomized, double-blind, and controlled clinical trial investigating the use of duloxetine in the treatment of refractory coughs. The study aims to provide a high-quality basis for evaluating the efficacy and safety of duloxetine for this condition.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Our study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trials Register ( www.chictr.org.cn/ ) (ChiCTR2000037429) in 28/08/2020.
Topics: Humans; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Cough; Tablets, Enteric-Coated; Quality of Life; Prospective Studies; Pain; Double-Blind Method; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37533019
DOI: 10.1186/s12890-023-02575-5 -
Anais Da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias 2022This study aimed to evaluate the effect of duloxetine hydrochloride (DH) on Cryptococcus neoformans. DH minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum fungicidal...
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of duloxetine hydrochloride (DH) on Cryptococcus neoformans. DH minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum fungicidal concentration (MFC) were 18.5 µg/mL, and the combination with fluconazole (FLZ) reduced the MIC value by 16-and 4-fold for DH and FLZ, respectively. The capsule size decreased by 67% and 16% when treated with DH and DH with FLZ, respectively. Therefore, this study showed that DH is active against C. neoformans alone and in combination with FLZ, leading to the reduction of the capsule size of this yeast.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Cryptococcus neoformans; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Fluconazole; Microbial Sensitivity Tests
PubMed: 35544847
DOI: 10.1590/0001-3765202220211021 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Mar 2024There is no consensus in the current literature on the analgesic role of duloxetine after total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Thus, we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
There is no consensus in the current literature on the analgesic role of duloxetine after total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Thus, we designed this meta-analysis to reveal the analgesic effectiveness and safety of duloxetine in TKA or THA.
METHODS
As of October 2022, two authors (L.C. and W.Q.J.) independently searched five main databases (EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) to find relevant studies. Duloxetine vs. placebo in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for THA or TKA were included. We set perioperative total opioid consumption as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included resting or dynamic pain scores over time, gastrointestinal adverse events, neurological adverse events, and other adverse reactions.
RESULTS
Eight RCTs with 695 patients were incorporated in our study. This meta-analysis showed high evidence that duloxetine was effective in reducing perioperative opioid consumption (Standard mean difference [SMD] = - 0.50, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: -0.70 to - 0.31, P < 0.00001) and low to moderate evidence that duloxetine could reduce pain within three weeks after surgery. Low to high evidence showed no differences between the two groups for most adverse events. Substantial evidence suggests that duloxetine can reduce nausea and vomiting after surgery (Risk ratio [RR] = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.95, P = 0.02, I = 4%). However, moderate evidence suggested that duloxetine might be associated with increased postoperative drowsiness (RR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.08 to 3.09, P = 0.02, I = 0%).
CONCLUSION
Duloxetine reduced overall opioid consumption in the perioperative period and relieved pain within three weeks after surgery without increasing the risk of adverse drug events. Duloxetine can be part of a multimodal management regimen in patients with THA and TKA.
Topics: Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Analgesics
PubMed: 38481321
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04648-5 -
Systematic Reviews Apr 2022Duloxetine is an antidepressant that benefits from a wide range of approval in the elderly population, while its safety for use compared to non-elderly is not clearly...
Tolerability of duloxetine in elderly and in non-elderly adults: a protocol of a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Duloxetine is an antidepressant that benefits from a wide range of approval in the elderly population, while its safety for use compared to non-elderly is not clearly assessed. This protocol outlines a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis comparing the tolerability of duloxetine between elderly and non-elderly.
METHODS
Searches will be conducted in PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov , Clinicaltrialsregister.eu, data sharing platforms, FDA drug approval packages, European public assessment reports and withdrawn applications from the EMA website. The review will be performed on studies available in electronic databases from their date of inception to the 31 March 2022. Only randomized controlled clinical trials, comparing duloxetine to placebo, will be included in this meta-analysis. The studies will be selected if they comprise both elderly and non-elderly adults, in conditions of use of duloxetine approved by the European Medical Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The primary outcome will be the rate ratio of serious adverse events under duloxetine compared to placebo, between participants at least 65 years old and non-elderly. Second, the number of any adverse events, clinical efficacy and quality of life will be compared between elderly and non-elderly under both interventions. The quality of evidence in the tolerability of duloxetine will be assessed using the GRADE system. A one or two-stage individual participant data random effect meta-analysis will be conducted depending on the availability of the data.
DISCUSSION
This meta-analysis will investigate the tolerability safety of duloxetine in the elderly population across all conditions approved by European and American regulatory authorities. The results from this meta-analysis are intended to help prescribers to provide better care for the elderly population.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number: CRD42019130488 ).
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antidepressive Agents; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35428340
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-01945-0