-
Journal of Applied Physiology... Dec 2023Hormonal changes around ovulation divide the menstrual cycle (MC) into the follicular and luteal phases. In addition, oral contraceptives (OCs) have active (higher... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Hormonal changes around ovulation divide the menstrual cycle (MC) into the follicular and luteal phases. In addition, oral contraceptives (OCs) have active (higher hormone) and placebo phases. Although there are some MC-based effects on various physiological outcomes, we found these differences relatively subtle and difficult to attribute to specific hormones, as estrogen and progesterone fluctuate rather than operating in a complete on/off pattern as observed in cellular or preclinical models often used to substantiate human data. A broad review reveals that the differences between the follicular and luteal phases and between OC active and placebo phases are not associated with marked differences in exercise performance and appear unlikely to influence muscular hypertrophy in response to resistance exercise training. A systematic review and meta-analysis of substrate oxidation between MC phases revealed no difference between phases in the relative carbohydrate and fat oxidation at rest and during acute aerobic exercise. Vascular differences between MC phases are also relatively small or nonexistent. Although OCs can vary in composition and androgenicity, we acknowledge that much more work remains to be done in this area; however, based on what little evidence is currently available, we do not find compelling support for the notion that OC use significantly influences exercise performance, substrate oxidation, or hypertrophy. It is important to note that the study of females requires better methodological control in many areas. Previous studies lacking such rigor have contributed to premature or incorrect conclusions regarding the effects of the MC and systemic hormones on outcomes. While we acknowledge that the evidence in certain research areas is limited, the consensus view is that the impact of the MC and OC use on various aspects of physiology is small or nonexistent.
Topics: Female; Humans; Contraceptives, Oral; Menstrual Cycle; Hormones; Progesterone; Hypertrophy
PubMed: 37823207
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00346.2023 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Dec 2023To evaluate the efficacy of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to January 31, 2023), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials that compared vaginal progesterone to placebo or no treatment in asymptomatic women with a twin gestation.
METHODS
The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The primary outcome was preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We assessed the risk of bias in each included study, heterogeneity, publication bias, and quality of evidence, and performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (3401 women and 6802 fetuses/infants) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among all twin gestations, there were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and placebo or no treatment groups in the risk of preterm birth <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.17; high-quality evidence), <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.06; high-quality evidence), and <28 weeks (relative risk, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.55; moderate-quality evidence), and spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.18; high-quality evidence). Vaginal progesterone had no significant effect on any of the perinatal outcomes evaluated. Subgroup analyses showed that there was no evidence of a different effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation related to chorionicity, type of conception, history of spontaneous preterm birth, daily dose of vaginal progesterone, and gestational age at initiation of treatment. The frequencies of preterm birth <37, <34, <32, <30, and <28 weeks of gestation and adverse perinatal outcomes did not significantly differ between the vaginal progesterone and placebo or no treatment groups in unselected twin gestations (8 studies; 3274 women and 6548 fetuses/infants). Among twin gestations with a transvaginal sonographic cervical length <30 mm (6 studies; 306 women and 612 fetuses/infants), vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of preterm birth occurring at <28 to <32 gestational weeks (relative risks, 0.48-0.65; moderate- to high-quality evidence), neonatal death (relative risk, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.92; moderate-quality evidence), and birthweight <1500 g (relative risk, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.88; high-quality evidence). Vaginal progesterone significantly reduced the risk of preterm birth occurring at <28 to <34 gestational weeks (relative risks, 0.41-0.68), composite neonatal morbidity and mortality (relative risk, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.98), and birthweight <1500 g (relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.94) in twin gestations with a transvaginal sonographic cervical length ≤25 mm (6 studies; 95 women and 190 fetuses/infants). The quality of evidence was moderate for all these outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Vaginal progesterone does not prevent preterm birth, nor does it improve perinatal outcomes in unselected twin gestations, but it appears to reduce the risk of preterm birth occurring at early gestational ages and of neonatal morbidity and mortality in twin gestations with a sonographic short cervix. However, more evidence is needed before recommending this intervention to this subset of patients.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Progesterone; Premature Birth; Birth Weight; Administration, Intravaginal; Cervix Uteri; Infant, Very Low Birth Weight
PubMed: 37196896
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.05.010 -
European Journal of Endocrinology Oct 2023To assess (1) comorbidities associated with and (2) treatment strategies for patients with adrenal incidentalomas and mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS; >... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess (1) comorbidities associated with and (2) treatment strategies for patients with adrenal incidentalomas and mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS; > 1.8 µg/dL (>50 nmol/L) cortisol level cut-off following the 1 mg dexamethasone suppression test).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Seven databases were searched up to July 14, 2022. Eligible studies were (randomized) trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies assessing comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol excess or mortality in patients with adrenal incidentaloma with or without MACS or the effects of conservative or surgical management of MACS. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled proportions (with 95% CIs).
RESULTS
In 30 cross-sectional and 16 cohort studies (n = 17 156 patients in total), patients with MACS had a higher prevalence of diabetes (relative risk [RR] 1.44 [1.23-1.69]), hypertension (RR = 1.24 [1.16-1.32]), and dyslipidemia (RR = 1.23 [1.13-1.34]). All-cause mortality (adjusted for confounders) in patients with MACS, assessed in 4 studies (n = 5921), was increased (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.54 [1.27-1.81]). Nine observational studies (n = 856) and 2 randomized trials (n = 107) suggest an improvement in glucometabolic control (RR = 7.99 [2.95-21.90]), hypertension (RR = 8.75 [3.99-19.18]), and dyslipidemia (RR = 3.24 [1.19-8.82]) following adrenalectomy.
CONCLUSIONS
The present systematic review and meta-analysis highlight the relevance of MACS, since both cardiometabolic morbidities and mortality appeared to have increased in patients with MACS compared to patients with non-functioning incidentalomas. However, due to heterogeneous definitions, various outcomes, selective reporting, and missing data, the reported pooled estimates need to be interpreted with caution. The small number of patients in randomized trials prevents any strong conclusion on the causality between MACS and these comorbidities.
Topics: Humans; Adrenal Gland Neoplasms; Hydrocortisone; Cross-Sectional Studies; Hypertension; Dyslipidemias
PubMed: 37801655
DOI: 10.1093/ejendo/lvad134 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Aug 2023Vaginal progesterone and cervical cerclage are both effective interventions for reducing preterm birth. It is currently unclear whether combined therapy offers superior... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Vaginal progesterone and cervical cerclage are both effective interventions for reducing preterm birth. It is currently unclear whether combined therapy offers superior effectiveness than single therapy. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of combining cervical cerclage and vaginal progesterone in the prevention of preterm birth.
DATA SOURCES
We searched Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library (Wiley), and Scopus (from their inception to 2020).
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
The review accepted randomized and pseudorandomized control trials, nonrandomized experimental control trials, and cohort studies. High risk patients (shortened cervical length <25mm or previous preterm birth) who were assigned cervical cerclage, vaginal progesterone, or both for the prevention of preterm birth were included. Only singleton pregnancies were assessed.
METHODS
The primary outcome was birth <37 weeks. Secondary outcomes included birth <28 weeks, <32 weeks and <34 weeks, gestational age at delivery, days between intervention and delivery, preterm premature rupture of membranes, cesarean delivery, neonatal mortality, neonatal intensive care unit admission, intubation, and birthweight. Following title and full-text screening, 11 studies were included in the final analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias (ROBINS-I and RoB-2). Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) tool.
RESULTS
Combined therapy was associated with lower risk of preterm birth at <37 weeks than cerclage alone (risk ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.79) or progesterone alone (risk ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.96). Compared with cerclage only, combined therapy was associated with preterm birth at <34 weeks, <32 weeks, or <28 weeks, decreased neonatal mortality, increased birthweight, increased gestational age, and a longer interval between intervention and delivery. Compared with progesterone alone, combined therapy was associated with preterm birth at <32 weeks, <28 weeks, decreased neonatal mortality, increased birthweight, and increased gestational age. There were no differences in any other secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Combined treatment of cervical cerclage and vaginal progesterone could potentially result in a greater reduction in preterm birth than in single therapy. Further, well-conducted and adequately powered randomized controlled trials are needed to assess these promising findings.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Progesterone; Premature Birth; Cerclage, Cervical; Birth Weight; Administration, Intravaginal
PubMed: 37211087
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101024 -
Journal of Critical Care Apr 2024The role of corticosteroids in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains uncertain. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to investigate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The role of corticosteroids in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains uncertain. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and potential effect modifiers of adjunctive corticosteroids in patients with CAP.
METHODS
The protocol of this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022354920). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and trial registers from inception till March 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating corticosteroids in adult patients with CAP. Our primary outcome was the risk of all-cause mortality within 30 days after randomization (if not reported at day 30, we extracted the outcome closest to 30 days). Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MDs) were pooled under a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Fifteen RCTs (n = 3252 patients) were included in this review. Corticosteroids reduced the risk of all-cause mortality in CAP patients (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.53-0.89; high certainty). This significant result was restricted to hydrocortisone therapy and patients with severe CAP. Additionally, younger patients demonstrated a greater reduction in mortality. Corticosteroids reduced the incidence of shock and the need for mechanical ventilation (MV), and decreased the length of hospital and ICU stay (moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS
Corticosteroids reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, especially in younger patients receiving hydrocortisone, and probably decrease the need for MV, the incidence of shock, and the length of hospital and ICU stay in patients with CAP. Our findings indicate that patients with CAP, especially severe CAP, will benefit from adjunctive corticosteroid therapy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Community-Acquired Infections; Hydrocortisone; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38128217
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2023.154507 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Dec 2023Protein supplements are important to maintain optimum health and physical performance, particularly in athletes and active individuals to repair and rebuild their...
Effect of Soy Protein Supplementation on Muscle Adaptations, Metabolic and Antioxidant Status, Hormonal Response, and Exercise Performance of Active Individuals and Athletes: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials.
BACKGROUND
Protein supplements are important to maintain optimum health and physical performance, particularly in athletes and active individuals to repair and rebuild their skeletal muscles and connective tissues. Soy protein (SP) has gained popularity in recent years as an alternative to animal proteins.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review evaluates the evidence from randomised controlled clinical trials of the effects of SP supplementation in active individuals and athletes in terms of muscle adaptations, metabolic and antioxidant status, hormonal response and exercise performance. It also explores the differences in SP supplementation effects in comparison to whey protein.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science, as well as a manual search in Google Scholar and EBSCO, on 27 June 2023. Randomised controlled trials that evaluated the applications of SPs supplementation on sports and athletic-related outcomes that are linked with exercise performance, adaptations and biomarkers in athletes and physically active adolescents and young adults (14 to 39 years old) were included, otherwise, studies were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane's revised risk of bias tool.
RESULTS
A total of 19 eligible original research articles were included that investigated the effect of SP supplementation on muscle adaptations (n = 9), metabolic and antioxidant status (n = 6), hormonal response (n = 6) and exercise performance (n = 6). Some studies investigated more than one effect. SP was found to provide identical increases in lean mass compared to whey in some studies. SP consumption promoted the reduction of exercise-induced metabolic/blood circulating biomarkers such as triglycerides, uric acid and lactate. Better antioxidant capacity against oxidative stress has been seen with respect to whey protein in long-term studies. Some studies reported testosterone and cortisol fluctuations related to SP; however, more research is required. All studies on SP and endurance performance suggested the potential beneficial effects of SP supplementation (10-53.3 g) on exercise performance by improving high-intensity and high-speed running performance, enhancing maximal cardiac output, delaying fatigue and improving isometric muscle strength, improving endurance in recreational cyclists, increasing running velocity and decreasing accumulated lactate levels; however, studies determining the efficacy of soy protein on VOmax provided conflicted results.
CONCLUSION
It is possible to recommend SP to athletes and active individuals in place of conventional protein supplements by assessing their dosage and effectiveness in relation to different types of training. SP may enhance lean mass compared with other protein sources, enhance the antioxidant status, and reduce oxidative stress. SP supplementation had an inconsistent effect on testosterone and cortisol levels. SP supplementation may be beneficial, especially after muscle damage, high-intensity/high-speed or repeated bouts of strenuous exercise.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Humans; Young Adult; Antioxidants; Athletes; Biomarkers; Dietary Supplements; Hydrocortisone; Lactates; Muscle, Skeletal; Soybean Proteins; Testosterone; Whey Proteins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37603200
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-023-01899-w -
American Journal of Respiratory and... May 2024The use of hydrocortisone in adult patients with septic shock is controversial, and the effectiveness of adding fludrocortisone to hydrocortisone remains uncertain. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Effectiveness of Fludrocortisone Plus Hydrocortisone versus Hydrocortisone Alone in Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
The use of hydrocortisone in adult patients with septic shock is controversial, and the effectiveness of adding fludrocortisone to hydrocortisone remains uncertain. To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone, hydrocortisone alone, and placebo or usual care in adults with septic shock. A systematic review and a Bayesian network meta-analysis of peer-reviewed randomized trials were conducted. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at last follow-up. Treatment effects are presented as relative risks (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Placebo or usual care was the reference treatment. Among 7,553 references, we included 17 trials (7,688 patients). All-cause mortality at last follow-up was lowest with fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone (RR, 0.85; 95% CrI, 0.72-0.99; 98.3% probability of superiority, moderate-certainty evidence), followed by hydrocortisone alone (RR, 0.97; 95% CrI, 0.87-1.07; 73.1% probability of superiority, low-certainty evidence). The comparison of fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone was based primarily on indirect evidence (only two trials with direct evidence). Fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone was associated with a 12% lower risk of all-cause mortality compared with hydrocortisone alone (RR, 0.88; 95% CrI, 0.74-1.03; 94.2% probability of superiority, moderate-certainty evidence). In adult patients with septic shock, fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality at last follow-up than placebo and hydrocortisone alone. The scarcity of head-to-head trials comparing fludrocortisone plus hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone alone led our network meta-analysis to rely primarily on indirect evidence for this comparison. Although we undertook several sensitivity analyses and assessments, these findings should be considered while also acknowledging the heterogeneity of included trials.
Topics: Humans; Fludrocortisone; Hydrocortisone; Shock, Septic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Drug Therapy, Combination; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Male; Bayes Theorem; Female; Adult; Middle Aged
PubMed: 38271488
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202310-1785OC -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2023Alopecia areata is an autoimmune disease leading to nonscarring hair loss on the scalp or body. There are different treatments including immunosuppressants, hair growth... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Alopecia areata is an autoimmune disease leading to nonscarring hair loss on the scalp or body. There are different treatments including immunosuppressants, hair growth stimulants, and contact immunotherapy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of the treatments for alopecia areata (AA), alopecia totalis (AT), and alopecia universalis (AU) in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were searched up to July 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated classical immunosuppressants, biologics, small molecule inhibitors, contact immunotherapy, hair growth stimulants, and other therapies in paediatric and adult populations with AA.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard procedures expected by Cochrane including assessment of risks of bias using RoB2 and the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The primary outcomes were short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (between 12 and 26 weeks of follow-up), and incidence of serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (greater than 26 weeks of follow-up) and health-related quality of life. We could not perform a network meta-analysis as very few trials compared the same treatments. We presented direct comparisons and made a narrative description of the findings.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 63 studies that tested 47 different treatments in 4817 randomised participants. All trials used a parallel-group design except one that used a cross-over design. The mean sample size was 78 participants. All trials recruited outpatients from dermatology clinics. Participants were between 2 and 74 years old. The trials included patients with AA (n = 25), AT (n = 1), AU (n = 1), mixed cases (n = 31), and unclear types of alopecia (n = 4). Thirty-three out of 63 studies (52.3%) reported the proportion of participants achieving short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (between 12 and 26 weeks). Forty-seven studies (74.6%) reported serious adverse events and only one study (1.5%) reported health-related quality of life. Five studies (7.9%) reported the proportion of participants with long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (greater than 26 weeks). Amongst the variety of interventions found, we prioritised some groups of interventions for their relevance to clinical practice: systemic therapies (classical immunosuppressants, biologics, and small molecule inhibitors), and local therapies (intralesional corticosteroids, topical small molecule inhibitors, contact immunotherapy, hair growth stimulants and cryotherapy). Considering only the prioritised interventions, 14 studies from 12 comparisons reported short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% and 22 studies from 10 comparisons reported serious adverse events (18 reported zero events and 4 reported at least one). One study (1 comparison) reported quality of life, and two studies (1 comparison) reported long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75%. For the main outcome of short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75%, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral prednisolone or cyclosporine versus placebo (RR 4.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 38.27; 79 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence), intralesional betamethasone or triamcinolone versus placebo (RR 13.84, 95% CI 0.87 to 219.76; 231 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), oral ruxolitinib versus oral tofacitinib (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.52; 80 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), diphencyprone or squaric acid dibutil ester versus placebo (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71; 99 participants; 1 study; very-low-certainty evidence), diphencyprone or squaric acid dibutyl ester versus topical minoxidil (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71; 99 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), diphencyprone plus topical minoxidil versus diphencyprone (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.44; 30 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), topical minoxidil 1% and 2% versus placebo (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.96; 202 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and cryotherapy versus fractional CO2 laser (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.86; 80 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests oral betamethasone may increase short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% compared to prednisolone or azathioprine (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.88; 80 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between subcutaneous dupilumab and placebo in short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (RR 3.59, 95% CI 0.19 to 66.22; 60 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) as well as between topical ruxolitinib and placebo (RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 100.89; 78 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). However, baricitinib results in an increase in short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% when compared to placebo (RR 7.54, 95% CI 3.90 to 14.58; 1200 participants; 2 studies; high-certainty evidence). For the incidence of serious adverse events, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of topical ruxolitinib versus placebo (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.94; 78 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Baricitinib and apremilast may result in little to no difference in the incidence of serious adverse events versus placebo (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.60; 1224 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). The same result is observed for subcutaneous dupilumab compared to placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.07 to 36.11; 60 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). For health-related quality of life, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral cyclosporine compared to placebo (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.07; very low-certainty evidence). Baricitinib results in an increase in long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% compared to placebo (RR 8.49, 95% CI 4.70 to 15.34; 1200 participants; 2 studies; high-certainty evidence). Regarding the risk of bias, the most relevant issues were the lack of details about randomisation and allocation concealment, the limited efforts to keep patients and assessors unaware of the assigned intervention, and losses to follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found that treatment with baricitinib results in an increase in short- and long-term hair regrowth compared to placebo. Although we found inconclusive results for the risk of serious adverse effects with baricitinib, the reported small incidence of serious adverse events in the baricitinib arm should be balanced with the expected benefits. We also found that the impact of other treatments on hair regrowth is very uncertain. Evidence for health-related quality of life is still scant.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Child, Preschool; Adolescent; Young Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Alopecia Areata; Minoxidil; Network Meta-Analysis; Immunosuppressive Agents; Prednisolone; Betamethasone; Cyclosporins; Biological Products
PubMed: 37870096
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013719.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease. Oral steroids are the standard treatment. We have updated this review, which was first... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease. Oral steroids are the standard treatment. We have updated this review, which was first published in 2002, because several new treatments have since been tried.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of treatments for bullous pemphigoid.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated searches of the following databases to November 2021: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched five trial databases to January 2022, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs of treatments for immunofluorescence-confirmed bullous pemphigoid.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors, working independently, evaluated the studies against the review's inclusion criteria and extracted data from included studies. Using GRADE methodology, we assessed the certainty of the evidence for each outcome in each comparison. Our primary outcomes were healing of skin lesions and mortality.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 14 RCTs (1442 participants). The main treatment modalities assessed were oral steroids, topical steroids, and the oral anti-inflammatory antibiotic doxycycline. Most studies reported mortality but adverse events and quality of life were not well reported. We decided to look at the primary outcomes 'disease control' and 'mortality'. Almost all studies investigated different comparisons; two studies were placebo-controlled. The results are therefore based on a single study for each comparison except azathioprine. Most studies involved only small numbers of participants. We assessed the risk of bias for all key outcomes as having 'some concerns' or high risk, due to missing data, inappropriate analysis, or insufficient information. Clobetasol propionate cream versus oral prednisone Compared to oral prednisone, clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body probably increases skin healing at day 21 (risk ratio (RR 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.13; 1 study, 341 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Skin healing at 21 days was seen in 99.8% of participants assigned to clobetasol and 92.4% of participants assigned to prednisone. Clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body compared to oral prednisone may reduce mortality at one year (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.01; 1 study, 341 participants; low-certainty evidence). Death occurred in 26.5% (45/170) of participants assigned to clobetasol and 36.3% (62/171) of participants assigned to oral prednisone. This study did not measure quality of life. Clobetasol propionate cream may reduce risk of severe complications by day 21 compared with oral prednisone (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.86; 1 study, 341 participants; low-certainty evidence). Mild clobetasol propionate cream regimen (10 to 30 g/day) versus standard clobetasol propionate cream regimen (40 g/day) A mild regimen of topical clobetasol propionate applied over the whole body compared to the standard regimen probably does not change skin healing at day 21 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.03; 1 study, 312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Both groups showed complete healing of lesions at day 21 in 98% participants. A mild regimen of topical clobetasol propionate applied over the whole body compared to the standard regimen may not change mortality at one year (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.32; 1 study, 312 participants; low-certainty evidence), which occurred in 118/312 (37.9%) participants. This study did not measure quality of life. A mild regimen of topical clobetasol propionate applied over the whole body compared to the standard regimen may not change adverse events at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.14; 1 study, 309 participants; low-certainty evidence). Doxycycline versus prednisolone Compared to prednisolone (0.5 mg/kg/day), doxycycline (200 mg/day) induces less skin healing at six weeks (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.92; 1 study, 213 participants; high-certainty evidence). Complete skin healing was reported in 73.8% of participants assigned to doxycycline and 91.1% assigned to prednisolone. Doxycycline compared to prednisolone probably decreases mortality at one year (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.89; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 14; 1 study, 234 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mortality occurred in 2.4% (3/132) of participants with doxycycline and 9.7% (11/121) with prednisolone. Compared to prednisolone, doxycycline improved quality of life at one year (mean difference 1.8 points lower, which is more favourable on the Dermatology Life Quality Index, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.58 lower; 1 study, 234 participants; high-certainty evidence). Doxycycline compared to prednisolone probably reduces severe or life-threatening treatment-related adverse events at one year (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.99; 1 study, 234 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Prednisone plus azathioprine versus prednisone It is unclear whether azathioprine plus prednisone compared to prednisone alone affects skin healing or mortality because there was only very low-certainty evidence from two trials (98 participants). These studies did not measure quality of life. Adverse events were reported in a total of 20/48 (42%) participants assigned to azathioprine plus prednisone and 15/44 (34%) participants assigned to prednisone. Nicotinamide plus tetracycline versus prednisone It is unclear whether nicotinamide plus tetracycline compared to prednisone affects skin healing or mortality because there was only very low-certainty evidence from one trial (18 participants). This study did not measure quality of life. Fewer adverse events were reported in the nicotinamide group. Methylprednisolone plus azathioprine versus methylprednisolone plus dapsone It is unclear whether azathioprine plus methylprednisolone compared to dapsone plus methylprednisolone affects skin healing or mortality because there was only very low-certainty evidence from one trial (54 participants). This study did not measure quality of life. A total of 18 adverse events were reported in the azathioprine group and 13 in the dapsone group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body is probably similarly effective as, and may cause less mortality than, oral prednisone for treating bullous pemphigoid. Lower-dose clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body is probably similarly effective as standard-dose clobetasol propionate cream and has similar mortality. Doxycycline is less effective but causes less mortality than prednisolone for treating bullous pemphigoid. Other treatments need further investigation.
Topics: Humans; Azathioprine; Prednisone; Clobetasol; Pemphigoid, Bullous; Doxycycline; Methylprednisolone; Dapsone; Niacinamide
PubMed: 37572360
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002292.pub4 -
European Journal of Endocrinology Sep 2023Anorexia nervosa is a primary psychiatric disorder characterized by self-induced negative energy balance. A number of hormonal responses and adaptations occur in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Anorexia nervosa is a primary psychiatric disorder characterized by self-induced negative energy balance. A number of hormonal responses and adaptations occur in response to starvation and low body weight including changes in adrenocortical hormones. Our objective was to systematically review adrenocortical hormone levels in anorexia nervosa.
DESIGN/METHODS
We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies that reported at least one adrenocortical hormone, including dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), DHEA-sulphate (DHEA-S), progesterone, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, pregnenolone, cortisol (serum, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, and hair sample), aldosterone, androstenedione, and testosterone in patients with anorexia nervosa and normal-weight healthy controls from inception until October 2021. Means and standard deviations for each hormone were extracted from the studies to calculate a mean difference (MD). A pooled MD was then calculated by combining MDs of each study using the random-effects model.
RESULTS
We included a total of 101 studies with over 2500 females with anorexia nervosa. Mean cortisol levels were significantly higher in anorexia nervosa as compared to normal-weight controls for multiple forms of measurement, including morning cortisol, 12-hour and 24-hour pooled serum cortisol, 24-hour urine cortisol, and after an overnight dexamethasone suppression test. In contrast, mean serum total testosterone and DHEA-S levels were significantly lower among patients with anorexia nervosa.
CONCLUSIONS
Women with anorexia nervosa have higher cortisol levels and lower DHEA-S and testosterone levels compared to women without anorexia nervosa. This finding is important to consider when evaluating low-weight women for disorders involving the adrenal axis, especially Cushing's syndrome.
Topics: Humans; Female; Anorexia Nervosa; Hydrocortisone; Aldosterone; Progesterone; Dehydroepiandrosterone Sulfate
PubMed: 37669399
DOI: 10.1093/ejendo/lvad123