-
Scientific Reports Dec 2023Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common type of headache worldwide. It is defined and classified according to the International Classification of Headache... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common type of headache worldwide. It is defined and classified according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders. TTH is treated with over-the-counter medications, mostly paracetamol or ibuprofen. The purpose was to assess the effectiveness of paracetamol versus ibuprofen in treating episodic tension-type headache (ETTH) through direct and indirect comparisons of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We included RCTs comparing paracetamol with a placebo, ibuprofen with a placebo, or paracetamol with ibuprofen for acute ETTH treatment that were published between 1988 and 2022. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Web of Science. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. We identified 14 studies including 6521 people with ETTH. None of the studies had a low risk of bias for all domains; this was most likely due to inadequate reporting and a small sample size. Ibuprofen (odds ratio (OR): 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-2.56) showed better efficacy than paracetamol (OR: 1.62, 95% CI 1.24-2.13) for pain-free status at 2 h, while paracetamol (OR: 1.42, 95% CI 0.87-2.30) showed better efficacy than ibuprofen (OR: 1.20, 95% CI 0.58-2.48) for pain-free status at 1 h. Paracetamol was associated with the lowest likelihood of rescue medication use (OR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.37-0.65). Ibuprofen was associated with a lower likelihood of the occurrence of any events and gastrointestinal adverse events compared with placebo and paracetamol (OR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.64-1.41 and OR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.44-1.50, respectively). Paracetamol and ibuprofen showed better efficacy than placebo in treating ETTH; there was no statistically significant difference in efficacy between the two drugs. For individuals at a higher risk (like renal insufficiency or risk of GI bleeding), paracetamol may be considered as a preferred option instead of Ibuprofen. Further meta-analyses of head-to-head trials are needed for direct comparisons in the future.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022340936.
Topics: Humans; Acetaminophen; Ibuprofen; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Tension-Type Headache; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 38057585
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-48910-y -
Cancer Medicine Mar 2024Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including "aspirin," "NSAID," "statin" (including specific statin drug names), "metformin," "ACE inhibitors," and "ARBs" (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with "cancer." Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival.
RESULTS
We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Lung Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Aspirin; Antihypertensive Agents; Metformin
PubMed: 38491813
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7049 -
United European Gastroenterology Journal Nov 2023Several studies have suggested that the mucosal protective effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) do not extend beyond the duodenum; however, PPIs may cause lower... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several studies have suggested that the mucosal protective effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) do not extend beyond the duodenum; however, PPIs may cause lower gastrointestinal (LGI) injury, although these relationships have not yet been fully elucidated.
METHODS
We searched all the relevant studies published until September 2022 that examined the risk of PPIs for LGI bleeding. We performed a meta-analysis of the risk of LGI bleeding (small bowel (SB) or colorectal bleeding) between PPI users and non-users. A subgroup analysis of patients consuming aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) was also performed.
RESULTS
Twelve studies with 341,063 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The use of PPIs was associated with the risk of LGI bleeding (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval [CI]] = 1.42 [1.16-1.73]; hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI] = 3.23 [1.56-6.71]). An association between PPI use and the risk of LGI bleeding was also identified in the subgroup of aspirin or NSAID users (OR [95% CI] = 1.64 [1.49-1.80]; HR [95% CI] = 6.55 [2.01-21.33]). In the bleeding site-specific analyses, the risk of SB bleeding was associated with PPI use (OR [95% CI] = 1.54 [1.30-1.84]).
CONCLUSIONS
PPI use was associated with an increased risk of LGI bleeding, particularly SB bleeding. This association was particularly pronounced among aspirin and NSAID users. Inappropriate PPI prescriptions should be avoided in patients with LGI bleeding and a low risk of upper gastrointestinal disease.
Topics: Humans; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Aspirin; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Colorectal Neoplasms
PubMed: 37553807
DOI: 10.1002/ueg2.12448 -
Indian Pediatrics Aug 2023Serotonin receptors 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D in the cerebral arteries are activated by the 5-hydroxytryptophan agonists (triptans) to relieve the discomfort associated with...
BACKGROUND
Serotonin receptors 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D in the cerebral arteries are activated by the 5-hydroxytryptophan agonists (triptans) to relieve the discomfort associated with migraines. Even though triptans are often used to treat acute migraines, there is some debate over their effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE
Our systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of triptans for acute treatment of migraine in young individuals.
METHODS
Utilizing the databases of Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and PubMed, a literature search was conducted, and all papers published till July 2022 were included. This systematic review was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards. In addition to the Boolean operators AND, OR, and NOT, the following descriptive terms were also used: "Triptans," "Pediatric Migraine," "Migraine disorders," "Headache," "Children," and "Adolescent."
RESULTS
A total of 1047 studies were identified, and 25 articles were finally included in the study. 17 of them were RCTs while the remaining were non-randomized trials. Most studies recruited participants aged between 12-17 years. Among 25 studies, 7 reported sumatriptan use, 3 assessed a combination of sumatriptan and naproxen, 4 were on almotriptan, 1 on eletriptan, 6 on rizatriptan, and 4 on zolmitriptan use.
CONCLUSION
We found that rizatriptan (good tolerability profile with a dose of 5 mg) and sumatriptan (nasal spray, 10 mg and 20 mg) had higher efficiency as compared to other triptans. Regardless of type or dose, all triptans are generally well tolerated by patients, but a few adverse effects such as light-headedness (sumatriptan), nasopharyngitis, and, muscular spasms (sumatriptan/ naproxen), somnolence, and dry mouth (rizatriptan), and dizziness (zolmitriptan group) were reported with the triptans.
Topics: Adolescent; Humans; Child; Sumatriptan; Naproxen; Tryptamines; Migraine Disorders; Headache
PubMed: 37209053
DOI: No ID Found -
Skin Research and Technology : Official... Mar 2024The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine,... (Review)
Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, tofacitinib, baricitinib, corticosteroids, statins, zinc, apremilast, etc., for treating vitiligo lesions.
METHOD
Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were meticulously searched for studies spanning from 2010 to August 2023, focusing on systemic oral and injectable therapies for vitiligo, using comprehensive keywords and search syntaxes tailored to each database. Key data extracted included study design, treatment efficacy, patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, and safety profiles.
RESULTS
In a total of 42 included studies, oral mini-pulse corticosteroid therapy (OMP) was the subject of six studies (14.2%). Minocycline was the focus of five studies (11.9%), while methotrexate, apremilast, and tofacitinib each were examined in four studies (9.5%). Antioxidants and Afamelanotide were the subjects of three studies each (7.1%). Cyclosporine, simvastatin, oral zinc, oral corticosteroids (excluding OMP) and injections, and baricitinib were each explored in two studies (4.8%). Azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and Alefacept were the subjects of one study each (2.4%).
CONCLUSION
Systemic treatments for vitiligo have been successful in controlling lesions without notable side effects. OMP, Methotrexate, Azathioprine, Cyclosporine, Mycophenolate mofetil, Simvastatin, Apremilast, Minocycline, Afamelanotide, Tofacitinib, Baricitinib, Antioxidants, and oral/injectable corticosteroids are effective treatment methods. However, oral zinc and alefacept did not show effectiveness.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Azathioprine; Vitiligo; Mycophenolic Acid; Minocycline; Alefacept; Cyclosporine; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Hypopigmentation; Simvastatin; Zinc; Purines; Pyrazoles; Sulfonamides; Azetidines; Thalidomide
PubMed: 38454597
DOI: 10.1111/srt.13642 -
Nutrition and Health Mar 2024Curcumin is a polyphenol derived from the L (turmeric) plant and has gained attention through its perceived anti-inflammatory characteristics. The potential... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Curcumin is a polyphenol derived from the L (turmeric) plant and has gained attention through its perceived anti-inflammatory characteristics. The potential interaction with exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) and delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) has led to investigation of curcumin as a post-exercise strategy that may have the potential to lessen acute reductions in functional strength (FS) following physical activity. The purpose of this review is to assess the evidence examining curcumin in relation to four outcome measures: FS, EIMD, DOMS and inflammation. A Medline, SPORTDiscus and CINAHL database search was undertaken with no publication date limit. Sixteen papers met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Three meta-analyses were completed for EIMD, DOMS and inflammation, respectively, with FS being excluded due to limited research. Effect sizes were as follows: EIMD (0.15, -0.12, -0.04, -0.2 and -0.61 corresponding to 0, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h post-exercise, respectively), DOMS (-0.64, -0.33, 0.06, -0.53 and -1.16 corresponding to 0, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h post-exercise, respectively) and inflammation (-0.10, 0.26, 0.15 and 0.26 corresponding to 0, 24, 48 and 72 h post-exercise, respectively). A 96 h post-exercise inflammation meta-analysis was not conducted due to limited data. No effect sizes were statistically significant for EIMD ( = 0.644, 0.739, 0.893, 0.601 and 0.134), DOMS ( = 0.054, 0.092, 0.908, 0.119 and 0.074) and inflammation ( = 0.729, 0.603, 0.611 and 0.396). Further research is needed to thoroughly examine whether an effect exists.
Topics: Humans; Curcumin; Dietary Supplements; Myalgia; Inflammation; Muscles; Muscle, Skeletal
PubMed: 37408367
DOI: 10.1177/02601060231186439 -
RMD Open Jan 2024An important consideration in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is whether the addition of methotrexate (MTX) to biologics has greater efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
An important consideration in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is whether the addition of methotrexate (MTX) to biologics has greater efficacy than biologic monotherapy with respect to efficacy outcomes in these patients.
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing biologics by treatment class with and without MTX for treatment of adults with active PsA.
METHODS
A systematic literature review (SLR) identified randomised, double-blinded, controlled trials, and a Bayesian NMA compared biologics with and without MTX by treatment class (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-23 inhibitors (IL-23i) and IL-17i). Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50% and 70% (ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70) improvement response.
RESULTS
The SLR initially identified 31 studies, of which 17 met feasibility criteria for the NMA by containing the 'without MTX' subgroup. For ACR20 efficacy (the most robust assessment examined), all active treatments were significantly better than placebo. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between biologic monotherapy (for all classes examined) and biologics in combination with MTX for ACR20/50. IL-17i were comparable to IL-23i, and IL-17i were significantly better than TNFi for ACR20. Although limited by fewer trials, TNFi, IL-23i and IL-17i were not statistically different for ACR50/70.
CONCLUSIONS
Concomitant use of MTX and biologics did not improve ACR efficacy outcomes versus biologic monotherapy. MTX does not appear to be necessary as a background therapy when biologics are used for the achievement of ACR20/50 responses in patients with PsA.
Topics: Adult; Humans; United States; Methotrexate; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Biological Products
PubMed: 38296801
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2023-003423 -
Medicine May 2024The goal of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
The goal of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, and rilonacept) compared with placebo for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients, through a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to July 2023 for randomized controlled trials comparing different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, and rilonacept) or placebo directly or indirectly in JIA. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted. Data was extracted and analyzed by R with gemtc package. The treatment options were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value.
RESULTS
We identified 10 randomized controlled trials and analyzed 898 participants. Canakinumab (odds ratio 55.0, 95% credible intervals 2.4-67.0) was more effective than the placebo, and the difference was statistically significant. However, there was no statistical significance between other drugs versus placebo in terms of the modified ACRpedi30 (P > .05). The SUCRA shows that canakinumab ranked first (SUCRA, 86.9%), anakinra ranked second (SUCRA, 77.7%), adalimumab ranked third (SUCRA, 61.9%), and placebo ranked the last (SUCRA, 6.3%). Nevertheless, there were no notable discrepancies in the occurrence of adverse events, hepatic-related adverse events, infectious adverse event, serious adverse events, and serious infection following treatment with canakinumab, anakinra, tocilizumab, rilonacept, or the placebo. Based on the clustergram of modified ACRpedi30 and adverse events, canakinumab is suggested for JIA according to the surface under SUCRAs considering the symptom and adverse events simultaneously.
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with JIA, canakinumab exhibited the highest likelihood of being the optimal treatment for achieving the modified ACRpedi30 response rate, and neither of the tested biological agents carried a significant risk of serious adverse events.
Topics: Arthritis, Juvenile; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Antirheumatic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Adalimumab; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Bayes Theorem
PubMed: 38701278
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038002 -
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology Dec 2023Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not been elucidated. In this network meta-analysis and systematic review, we compared the influence of control and individual NSAIDs on the indices of analgesia, side effects, and quality of recovery.
METHODS
CDSR, CINAHL, CRCT, Embase, LILACS, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing a specific NSAID to either control or another NSAID in elective or emergency cesarean section under general or neuraxial anesthesia. Network plots and league tables were constructed, and the quality of evidence was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis.
RESULTS
We included 47 trials. Cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h, the primary outcome, was examined in 1,228 patients and 18 trials, and control was found to be inferior to diclofenac, indomethacin, ketorolac, and tenoxicam (very low quality evidence owing to serious limitations, imprecision, and publication bias). Indomethacin was superior to celecoxib for pain score at rest at 8-12 h and celecoxib + parecoxib, diclofenac, and ketorolac for pain score on movement at 48 h. In regard to the need for and time to rescue analgesia COX-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib were inferior to other NSAIDs.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review suggests the presence of minimal differences among the NSAIDs studied. Nonselective NSAIDs may be more effective than selective NSAIDs, and some NSAIDs such as indomethacin might be preferable to other NSAIDs.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Diclofenac; Ketorolac; Celecoxib; Cesarean Section; Network Meta-Analysis; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Indomethacin; Pain
PubMed: 37066603
DOI: 10.4097/kja.23014 -
PloS One 2023There are currently no studies comparing histologic remission of FDA-approved biologics for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC), except for one head-to-head... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS
There are currently no studies comparing histologic remission of FDA-approved biologics for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC), except for one head-to-head VARSITY trial. The current study employs a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy, including histologic remission and safety of biologic agents for UC.
METHODS
Using four electronic databases, including Pubmed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, a search was conducted of all literature published until September 2022. Included were studies of randomized controlled trials with adult patients with moderate to severe UC using biologics approved by the FDA. An odd ratio with a 95 percent credible interval and ranking information was calculated for each endpoint.
RESULTS
The results of the network meta-analysis did not reveal statistically significant differences among biological agents. However, the ranking information for each biological agent exhibited the following patterns. Vedolizumab was ranked first for overall efficacy endpoints in the maintenance phase, including histologic remission. Except for histologic remission, Ustekinumab was identified as the top-ranked drug for induction phase efficacy endpoints other than histologic remission. Adalimumab was identified as the top-ranked drug for maintenance phase corticosteroid-free remission. Vedolizumab was identified as the top-ranked drug in the induction phase for Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE). Adalimumab was identified as the top-ranked drug in the induction phase for infection. For TEAE and infection in the maintenance phase and Treatment Emergent Severe Adverse Events (TESAE) in both the induction and maintenance phases, Ustekinumab was determined to be the top-ranked medication.
CONCLUSIONS
Including histologic remission, for the overall efficacy endpoints in the maintenance phase, VDZ was identified as the first rank drug, but there was no statistically significant difference between biologics. Therefore, the generalization of the results of this study is bounded due to the intrinsic limitations of the study provided.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Colitis, Ulcerative; Adalimumab; Ustekinumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Biological Factors; Biological Products; Biological Therapy
PubMed: 37917756
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293655