-
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 -
Clinical Cardiology Aug 2023This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive drugs in patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. Through Searching Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science collected only randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs in people with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The search period is from the establishment of the database to July 2022. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software. This review ultimately included 32 references involving 16 273 patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that a total of 11 single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs were included, namely: Amlodipine/valsartan, Telmisartan/amlodipine, Losartan/HCTZ, Candesartan/HCTZ, Amlodipine/benazepril, Telmisartan/HCTZ, Valsartan/HCTZ, Irbesartan/amlodipine, Amlodipine/losartan, Irbesartan/HCTZ, and Perindopril/amlodipine. According to SUCRA, Irbesartan/amlodipine may rank first in reducing systolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 92.2%); Amlodipine/losartan may rank first in reducing diastolic blood pressure (SUCRA: 95.1%); Telmisartan/amlodipine may rank first in blood pressure control rates (SUCRA: 83.5%); Amlodipine/losartan probably ranks first in diastolic response rate (SUCRA: 84.5%). Based on Ranking Plot of the Network, we can conclude that single-pill combination antihypertensive drugs are superior to monotherapy, and ARB/CCB combination has better advantages than other SPC in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control rate, and diastolic response rate. However, due to the small number of some drug studies, the lack of relevant studies has led to not being included in this study, which may impact the results, and readers should interpret the results with caution.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Losartan; Hypertension; Telmisartan; Irbesartan; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Hydrochlorothiazide; Valine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Amlodipine; Valsartan; Tetrazoles; Blood Pressure; Essential Hypertension
PubMed: 37432701
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24082 -
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... Jan 2024Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects more than 1 in 10 women. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects more than 1 in 10 women.
OBJECTIVE
As part of the 2023 International PCOS Guidelines update, comparisons between combined oral contraceptive pills (COCP), metformin, and combination treatment were evaluated.
DATA SOURCES
Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, All EBM, and CINAHL were searched.
STUDY SELECTION
Women with PCOS included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
DATA EXTRACTION
We calculated mean differences and 95% CIs regarding anthropometrics, metabolic, and hyperandrogenic outcomes. Meta-analyses and quality assessment using GRADE were performed.
DATA SYNTHESIS
The search identified 1660 publications; 36 RCTs were included. For hirsutism, no differences were seen when comparing metformin vs COCP, nor when comparing COCP vs combination treatment with metformin and COCP. Metformin was inferior on free androgen index (FAI) (7.08; 95% CI 4.81, 9.36), sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) (-118.61 nmol/L; 95% CI -174.46, -62.75) and testosterone (0.48 nmol/L; 95% CI 0.32, 0.64) compared with COCP. COCP was inferior for FAI (0.58; 95% CI 0.36, 0.80) and SHBG (-16.61 nmol/L; 95% CI -28.51, -4.71) compared with combination treatment, whereas testosterone did not differ. Metformin lowered insulin (-27.12 pmol/L; 95% CI -40.65, -13.59) and triglycerides (-0.15 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.29, -0.01) compared with COCP. COCP was inferior for insulin (17.03 pmol/L; 95% CI 7.79, 26.26) and insulin resistance (0.44; 95% CI 0.17, 0.70) compared with combination treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
The choice of metformin or COCP treatment should be based on symptoms, noting some biochemical benefits from combination treatment targeting both major endocrine disturbances seen in PCOS (hyperinsulinemia and hyperandrogenism).
Topics: Female; Humans; Metformin; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Hypoglycemic Agents; Testosterone; Insulins
PubMed: 37554096
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgad465 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Jan 2024Resistance exercise training is widely used by general and athletic populations to increase skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength. Endogenous sex hormones... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The Effect of Hormonal Contraceptive Use on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy, Power and Strength Adaptations to Resistance Exercise Training: A Systematic Review and Multilevel Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Resistance exercise training is widely used by general and athletic populations to increase skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength. Endogenous sex hormones influence various bodily functions, including possibly exercise performance, and may influence adaptive changes in response to exercise training. Hormonal contraceptive (HC) use modulates the profile of endogenous sex hormones, and therefore, there is increasing interest in the impact, if any, of HC use on adaptive responses to resistance exercise training.
OBJECTIVE
Our aim is to provide a quantitative synthesis of the effect of HC use on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength adaptations in response to resistance exercise training.
METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted on experimental studies which directly compared skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength adaptations following resistance exercise training in hormonal contraceptive users and non-users conducted before July 2023. The search using the online databases PUBMED, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Embase and other supplementary search strategies yielded 4669 articles, with 8 articles (54 effects and 325 participants) meeting the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the "Tool for the assessment of study quality and reporting in exercise".
RESULTS
All included studies investigated the influence of oral contraceptive pills (OCP), with no study including participants using other forms of HC. The articles were analysed using a meta-analytic multilevel maximum likelihood estimator model. The results indicate that OCP use does not have a significant effect on hypertrophy [0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) [- 0.11, 0.13], t = 0.14, p = 0.90), power (- 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.93, 0.84], t = - 0.29, p = 0.80) or strength (0.10, 95% CI [- 0.08, 0.28], t = 1.48, p = 0.20).
DISCUSSION
Based on the present analysis, there is no evidence-based rationale to advocate for or against the use of OCPs in females partaking in resistance exercise training to increase hypertrophy, power and/or strength. Rather, an individualised approach considering an individual's response to OCPs, their reasons for use and menstrual cycle history may be more appropriate.
REGISTRATION
The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID number and hyperlink: CRD42022365677).
Topics: Female; Humans; Contraceptives, Oral; Gonadal Steroid Hormones; Hypertrophy; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 37755666
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-023-01911-3 -
Cureus Nov 2023Mifepristone and misoprostol are globally used medications that have become disparaged through the stigmatization of reproductive healthcare. Patients are hindered from... (Review)
Review
Mifepristone and misoprostol are globally used medications that have become disparaged through the stigmatization of reproductive healthcare. Patients are hindered from receiving prompt treatment in clinical scenarios where misoprostol and mifepristone are the drugs of choice. It is no exaggeration to emphasize that in cases where reproductive healthcare is concerned. The aim of this paper is to discuss the different indications of mifepristone and to delineate where the discrepancy in accessibility arises. For this systematic review, we included publications citing clinical trials involving the use and efficacy of mifepristone published in English within the date range of 2000 to 2023. Five databases were searched to identify relevant sources. These databases are Google Scholar, MEDLINE with full text through EBSCO, and three National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) databases (NCBI Bookshelf, PubMed, and PubMed Central). Twenty-three records were ultimately included in this review. Mifepristone has been shown to have therapeutic effects in the treatment of psychiatric disorders, such as major depressive disorder and psychotic depression. There was a significant decrease in depression and psychiatric rating symptoms for patients taking mifepristone versus placebo with no adverse events. Mifepristone has also been shown to improve treatment course in patients with Cushing's disease (CD) who failed or are unable to undergo surgical treatment. In addition, mifepristone has been shown to be a successful treatment option for adenomyosis and leiomyomas. Patients had a statistically significant decrease in uterine volumes following mifepristone treatment, which aided in the alleviation of other symptoms, such as blood loss and pelvic discomfort. Mifepristone is a synthetic steroid that has immense potential to provide symptomatic relief in patients suffering from a wide array of complicated diseases. Historically, mifepristone has been proven to have an incredible safety profile. While further research is certainly needed, the politicization of its medical use for only one of its many indications has unfortunately led to the willful ignorance of its potential despite its evidence-based safety profile and efficacy.
PubMed: 38060710
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48372 -
Irish Journal of Medical Science Aug 2023Molnupiravir is an oral antiviral drug that received Emergency Use Authorization in three countries for the treatment of mild COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Molnupiravir is an oral antiviral drug that received Emergency Use Authorization in three countries for the treatment of mild COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review was to find out the safety and efficacy of Molnupiravir in SARS-COV-2 infections.
METHODS
The electronic databases such as PubMed, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, FDA, ClinicalTrials.Gov, ctri.nic.in and Google Scholar were searched for articles from January 2021 to March 2022 using the keywords such as "Molnupiravir", "COVID-19", "Oral antiviral pill", "MK-4482", "EIDD-280", "Efficacy" and "Safety". Details of published, unpublished with interim reports and ongoing studies of Molnupiravir in COVID-19 were retrieved, and a systematic review was performed.
RESULTS
A total of 6 articles and 18 ongoing trials data were collected. Out of these, data from 4 published and 2 unpublished with interim reports were extracted. After review of these studies, it was observed that the daily dose of 1600 mg Molnupiravir for 5 days was safe and tolerable with nausea, diarrhea and headache as the common adverse effects. The results also showed significant decrease in time to viral clearance with 800 mg twice daily in mild patients and reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death by 50% in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
CONCLUSION
Evidence from clinical studies showed that Molnupiravir caused significant reduction in the risk of hospitalization or death in high-risk mild COVID-19 patients. Molnupiravir was also found to be well tolerated and safe without any major adverse events on short-term use. For confirmative use of this drug in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 disease, further studies are required in vaccinated COVID-19 patients and against emerging variants.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Databases, Factual; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 36087236
DOI: 10.1007/s11845-022-03139-y -
Gynecological Endocrinology : the... Dec 2023In recent years, new combined oral contraceptives (COCs) have become available, representing an advance in terms of individualization and compliance by users. To... (Review)
Review
In recent years, new combined oral contraceptives (COCs) have become available, representing an advance in terms of individualization and compliance by users. To provide recommendations regarding COCs: formulations, use, efficacy, benefits and safety. For these recommendations, we have used the modified Delphi methodology and carried out a systematic review of studies found in the literature and reviews performed in humans, published in English and Spanish in Pubmed, Medline and advanced medicine and computer networks until the year 2021, using the combination of terms: 'oral contraceptives', 'estroprogestins' and 'combined oral contraceptives'. Regarding the estrogen component, initially switching from mestranol (the pro-drug of ethinylestradiol) to ethinylestradiol (EE) and then reducing the EE dose helped reduce side effects and associated adverse events. Natural estradiol and estradiol valerate are already available and represent a valid alternative to EE. The use of more potent 19-nortestosterone-derived progestins, in order to lower the dose and then the appearance of non-androgenic progestins with different endocrine and metabolic characteristics, has made it possible to individualize the prescription of COC according to the profile of each woman. Advances in the provision of new COCs have improved the risk/benefit ratio by increasing benefits and reducing risks. Currently, the challenge is to tailor contraceptives to individual needs in terms of safety, efficacy, and protection of female reproductive health.
Topics: Female; Humans; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Progestins; Latin America; Ethinyl Estradiol; Estrogens; Women's Health
PubMed: 37857350
DOI: 10.1080/09513590.2023.2271072 -
Journal of Healthcare Informatics... Jun 2024As medication adherence represents a critical challenge in healthcare, pill and medication dispensers have gained increasing attention as potential solutions to promote...
As medication adherence represents a critical challenge in healthcare, pill and medication dispensers have gained increasing attention as potential solutions to promote adherence and improve patient outcomes. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, we carried out a systematic literature review on papers indexed in Scopus and PubMed, which present solutions for pill or medication dispensers. Given the importance of user acceptance for these solutions, the research questions of the survey are driven by a human-centered perspective. We first provide an overview of the different solutions, classifying them according to their stage of development. We then analyze each solution considering its hardware/software architecture. Finally, we review the characteristics of user interfaces designed for interacting with pill and medication dispensers and analyze the involvement of different types of users in dispenser management. On the basis of this analysis, we draw findings and indications for future research that are aimed to provide insights to healthcare professionals, researchers, and designers who are interested in developing and using pill and medication dispensers.
PubMed: 38681758
DOI: 10.1007/s41666-024-00161-w -
EClinicalMedicine Sep 2023Anti-androgens and combined oral contraceptive pills (COCPs) may mitigate hyperandrogenism-related symptoms of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, their efficacy...
BACKGROUND
Anti-androgens and combined oral contraceptive pills (COCPs) may mitigate hyperandrogenism-related symptoms of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, their efficacy and safety in PCOS remain unclear as previous reviews have focused on non-PCOS populations. To inform the 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline in PCOS, we conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the efficacy and safety of anti-androgens in the management of hormonal and clinical features of PCOS.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, All EBM reviews, and CINAHL up to 28th June 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining oral anti-androgen use, alone or in combination with metformin, COCPs, lifestyle, or other interventions, in women of any age, with PCOS diagnosed by Rotterdam, National Institutes of Health or Androgen Excess & PCOS Society criteria, and using a form of contraception. Non-English studies and studies of less than 6 months duration or which used the same anti-androgen regimen in both/all groups were excluded in order to establish efficacy for the clinical outcomes of interest. Three authors screened articles against selection criteria and assessed risk of bias and quality using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. Critical outcomes (prioritised during guideline development for GRADE purposes) included weight, body mass index (BMI), irregular cycles, hirsutism, liver function, and quality of life. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted where appropriate. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022345640.
FINDINGS
From 1660 studies identified in the search, 27 articles comprising 20 unique studies were included. Of these, 13 studies (n = 961) were pooled in meta-analysis. Seven studies had a high risk of bias, nine moderate and four low. Anti-androgens included finasteride, flutamide, spironolactone, or bicalutamide. In meta-analysis, anti-androgens + lifestyle were superior to metformin + lifestyle for hirsutism (weighted mean difference [WMD] [95% CI]: -1.59 [-3.06, -0.12], p = 0.03; = 74%), SHBG (7.70 nmol/l [0.75, 14.66], p = 0.03; = 0%), fasting insulin and fasting insulin: glucose ratio (-2.11 μU/ml [-3.97, -0.26], p = 0.03; = 0% and -1.12 [-1.44, -0.79], p < 0.0001, = 0%, respectively), but were not superior to placebo + lifestyle for hirsutism (-0.93, [-3.37, 1.51], p = 0.45; = 76%) or SHBG (9.72 nmol/l [-0.71, 20.14], p = 0.07; = 31%). Daily use was more effective for hirsutism than use every three days (-3.48 [-4.58, -2.39], p < 0.0001, = 1%), and resulted in lower androstenedione levels (-0.30 ng/ml [-0.50, -0.10], p = 0.004; = 0%). Combination treatment with anti-androgens + metformin + lifestyle resulted in lower testosterone compared with metformin + lifestyle (-0.29 nmol/l [-0.52, -0.06], p = 0.01; = 61%), but there were no differences in hirsutism when anti-androgens + metformin + lifestyle were compared with either anti-androgens + lifestyle or metformin + lifestyle. In limited meta-analyses (n = 2 trials), combining anti-androgens with COCP resulted in poorer lipid profiles compared with COCP ± placebo, with no differences in other outcomes.
INTERPRETATION
Current evidence does not support the use of anti-androgens preferentially to COCPs to treat hyperandrogenism in PCOS. Anti-androgens could be considered to treat hirsutism in PCOS, where COCPs are contraindicated, poorly tolerated, or present a sub-optimal response after a minimum 6-month period, with consideration of clinical context and individual risk factors and characteristics.
FUNDING
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia Monash University.
PubMed: 37583655
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102162 -
Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine... Oct 2023To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Weichang'an pill (, WCA) combined with Western Medicine (WM) for the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Weichang'an pill (, WCA) combined with Western Medicine (WM) for the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases.
METHODS
Eight databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wanfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal Database, SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase, were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of WCA from inception to 30 September 2021. We independently screened the literature, extracted data, and then evaluated the bias risk, effectiveness, safety, and other indicators of the included articles.
RESULTS
A total of 33 RCTs were included in this study with 3368 patients. After analysis, it was found that WCA combined with WM could effectively prevent and treat antibiotic-associated gastrointestinal reaction, functional dyspepsia (FD), irritable bowel syndrome, rotavirus diarrhea (RVD), and ulcerative colitis (UC); no serious adverse reactions occurred. Moreover, compared with the control group, the experimental group showed significantly improved symptoms and some biochemical parameters.
CONCLUSIONS
WCA combined with WM for the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases had better clinical efficacy than the control group, without serious adverse reactions. Notably, in the treatment of FD, RVD, and UC, WCA improved clinical symptoms and biochemical indicator expression. Nevertheless, owing to the restricted quality and quantity of the literature, the results need to be further studied using high-quality RCTs.
Topics: Humans; Phytotherapy; Dyspepsia; Colitis, Ulcerative; Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Treatment Outcome; Diarrhea
PubMed: 37946467
DOI: 10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20230814.003