-
Rheumatology (Oxford, England) Oct 2021The objective of this study was to identify and summarize the efficacy and safety of systemic glucocorticoids (GCs) and local injections of GC in SpA.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to identify and summarize the efficacy and safety of systemic glucocorticoids (GCs) and local injections of GC in SpA.
METHODS
PubMed (Medline) and EMBASE were searched with pre-defined keywords for relevant articles in English reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized interventional studies and non-randomized observational studies of the efficacy of GC in SpA, with five or more patients, for inclusion in a systematic literature review. Local injections of GC included IA and entheseal injections, but excluded SI joint injections.
RESULTS
Out of 9657 records identified, there were 14 studies on the use of systemic GCs in SpA (364 patients), including two RCTs of oral prednisolone. On pooling data from two placebo-controlled RCTs (≤24 weeks), BASDAI 50 was 4.2 times more likely (95% CI: 1.5, 11.5) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Assessment Group (ASAS) 20 was twice more likely (95% CI: 1.1, 3.64) to occur in patients on high-dose oral prednisolone (± taper). Pulsed GCs led to dramatic improvements that lasted a few weeks to a few months. There were no deaths or major adverse events. There were 10 studies (560 patients) on local GCs in SpA. IA injection was effective in achieving a sustained response in 51.5-90% of joints at 6 months. Entheseal injections led to reduced pain and improved US parameters.
CONCLUSION
There were limited studies on either systemic or local injections of GCs in SpA. However, there was good evidence of efficacy with the use of high-dose systemic GCs in the short term (≤6 months) in SpA. Both IA and entheseal injections seemed safe and effective.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Clinical Trials as Topic; Female; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Prednisolone; Spondylarthritis; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 33748829
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keab275 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2023The preferred agent of glucocorticoids in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The preferred agent of glucocorticoids in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.
METHODS
By searching the electronic literature database including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science, the clinical studies comparing methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in the treatment of severe COVID-19 were selected according to the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted and literature quality was assessed. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. The secondary outcomes were the rates of ICU admission and mechanical ventilation, PaO/FiO ratio, plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, hospital stay, and the incidence of severe adverse events. Statistical pooling applied the fixed or random effects model and reported as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.1.0.
RESULTS
Twelve clinical studies were eligible, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nine non-RCTs. A total of 2506 patients with COVID-19 were analyzed, of which 1242 (49.6%) received methylprednisolone and 1264 (50.4%) received dexamethasone treatment. In general, the heterogeneity across studies was significant, and the equivalent doses of methylprednisolone were higher than that of dexamethasone. Our meta-analysis showed that methylprednisolone treatment in severe COVID-19 patients was related to significantly reduced plasma ferritin and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio compared with dexamethasone, and that no significant difference in other clinical outcomes between the two groups was found. However, subgroup analyses of RCTs demonstrated that methylprednisolone treatment was associated with reduced short-term mortality, and decreased CRP level compared with dexamethasone. Moreover, subgroup analyses observed that severe COVID-19 patients treated with a moderate dose (2 mg/kg/day) of methylprednisolone were related to a better prognosis than those treated with dexamethasone.
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed that compared with dexamethasone, methylprednisolone could reduce the systemic inflammatory response in severe COVID-19, and its effect was equivalent to that of dexamethasone on other clinical outcomes. It should be noted that the equivalent dose of methylprednisolone used was higher. Based on the evidence of subgroup analyses of RCTs, methylprednisolone, preferably at a moderate dose, has an advantage over dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; Glucocorticoids; Methylprednisolone; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 37147596
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08280-2 -
Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology Sep 2023Glucocorticoids (GCs) remain a cornerstone of the initial management of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV), but have several... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efficacy and safety of low- versus high-dose glucocorticoid regimens for induction of remission of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
Glucocorticoids (GCs) remain a cornerstone of the initial management of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV), but have several dose-dependent side effects, in particular infections. The optimal dosing and tapering of oral GCs for remission induction are unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to determine the efficacy and safety of low- versus high-dose GC regimens.
METHOD
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed databases was conducted. Clinical studies using a GC-based induction protocol were selected. A daily dose of 0.5 mg/kg or < 30 mg/day oral prednisolone equivalent by the start of week 4 of the induction tapering schedule marked the threshold between high- and low-dose GCs. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated by the random effects model for outcomes of remission and infection. Relapse events were summarized using risk differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
In total, 1145 participants were included in three randomized controlled trials and two observational studies, of whom 543 were assigned to the low-dose GC group and 602 to the high-dose GC group. A low-dose GC regimen was non-inferior to high-dose GCs with respect to outcomes of remission (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.95-1.02, p = 0.37; I = 0%) and relapse (risk difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.06, p = 0.15; I = 12%), while significantly reducing the incidence of infection (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39-0.91, p = 0.02; I = 65%).
CONCLUSION
Studies with low-dose GC regimens in AAV are associated with fewer infections while obtaining equivalent efficacy.
Topics: Humans; Glucocorticoids; Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis; Remission Induction; Recurrence; Cytoplasm; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37339385
DOI: 10.1080/03009742.2023.2211387 -
Clinical and Investigative Medicine.... Dec 2023Glucocorticoids are often used to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Glucocorticoids are often used to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoids in the treatment of ARDS caused by COVID-19 are still controversial; therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis of the literature on this topic.
METHODS
Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched from the establishment of the databases to August 16, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared glucocorticoid versus standard treatment for ARDS caused by COVID-19 were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) checklist and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were used to evaluate the risk of bias. Review Manager 5.4 software and STATA 17.0 were used for meta-analy-sis, and the relative risk (RR), mean difference, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were then determined. Results: A total of 17 studies involving 8592 patients were evaluated, including 14 retrospective studies and 3 RCTs. Sixteen studies reported data on all-cause mortality. The results of the meta-analysis showed that glucocorticoids did not reduce all-cause (RR, 0.96; 95% CI 0.82-1.13, P = .62) or 28-day (RR, 1.01; 95% CI 0.78-1.32, P = .93) mortality. Subgroup analysis showed that only methylprednisolone reduced all-cause mortality. No matter whether glucocorticoid use was early or delayed, high-dose or low-dose, long-term or short-term, no regimen reduced all-cause mortality. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, length of hospital stay, hyperglycemia, and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP); how-ever, glucocorticoids increased the number of ventilator-free days.
CONCLUSIONS
Although methylprednisolone may reduce all-cause mortality from ARDS caused by COVID-19, this effect was not found with other types of glucocorticoids. At the same time, glucocorticoid use was associ-ated with more ventilator-free days, without increasing the incidence of hyperglycemic events or VAP. Con-sidering that almost all of the included studies were retrospective cohort studies, more RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Glucocorticoids; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Methylprednisolone
PubMed: 38330183
DOI: 10.3138/cim.v46i4e03 -
BMJ Open Nov 2019Topical steroids are the cornerstone in controlling the inflammation after cataract surgery. Prednisolone acetate and difluprednate are the two main products for this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Topical steroids are the cornerstone in controlling the inflammation after cataract surgery. Prednisolone acetate and difluprednate are the two main products for this purpose. However, it is unclear which one should be used in terms of effectiveness and safety.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline via PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science and clinicaltrials.gov were searched through 10 January 2018, and updated on 20 July 2019, in addition to researching the references' lists of the relevant articles.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing difluprednate and prednisolone acetate regardless of the dosing regimen used.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent authors assessed the included RCTs regarding the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. Relevant data were extracted, and meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to appraise the evidence quality.
RESULTS
We included six RCTs with 883 patients: 441 received difluprednate and 442 received prednisolone acetate. The evidence quality was graded as moderate for corneal oedema and intraocular pressure and low for anterior chamber (AC) clearance. After small incision cataract surgery, difluprednate was superior in clearing AC cells at 1 week (OR=2.5, p>0.00001) and at 2 weeks (OR=2.5, p=0.04), as well as clearing the AC flare at 2 weeks (OR=6.7, p=0.04). After phacoemulsification, difluprednate was superior in terms of corneal clarity at 1 day (OR=2.6, p=0.02) and 1 week after surgery (OR=1.96, p=0.0007). No statistically significant difference was detected between both agents at 1 month in effectiveness. Also, both agents were safe, evaluated by the ocular hypertension (OR=1.23, p=0.8).
CONCLUSION
With low-to-moderate certainty, difluprednate and prednisolone acetate are safe agents for controlling the inflammation after cataract surgery. Difluprednate showed significant superiority in terms of AC cells and AC flare at 2 weeks postoperatively.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Cataract Extraction; Fluprednisolone; Humans; Postoperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Prednisolone
PubMed: 31678934
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026752 -
EClinicalMedicine Feb 2023Immune thrombocytopenia is an autoimmune disease characterised by decreased platelet count. In recent years, novel therapeutic regimens have been investigated in...
BACKGROUND
Immune thrombocytopenia is an autoimmune disease characterised by decreased platelet count. In recent years, novel therapeutic regimens have been investigated in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different treatments in newly diagnosed adult primary immune thrombocytopenia.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs involving treatments for newly diagnosed primary immune thrombocytopenia. PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched up to April 31, 2022. The primary outcomes were 6-month sustained response and early response. Secondary outcome was grade 3 or higher adverse events. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022296179).
FINDINGS
Eighteen RCTs (n = 1944) were included in this study. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that the percentage of patients achieving early response was higher in the dexamethasone-containing doublet group than in the dexamethasone group (79.7% 68.7%, odds ratio [OR] 1.82, 95% CI 1.10-3.02). The difference was more profound for sustained response (60.5% 37.4%, OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.95-3.40). Network meta-analysis showed that dexamethasone plus recombinant human thrombopoietin ranked first for early response, followed by dexamethasone plus oseltamivir or tacrolimus. Rituximab plus prednisolone achieved highest sustained response, followed by dexamethasone plus all-trans retinoic acid or rituximab. Rituximab plus dexamethasone showed 15.3% of grade 3 or higher adverse events, followed by prednis(ol)one (4.8%) and all-trans retinoic acid plus dexamethasone (4.7%).
INTERPRETATION
Our findings suggested that compared with monotherapy dexamethasone or prednis(ol)one, the combined regimens had better early and sustained responses. rhTPO plus dexamethasone ranked top in early response, while rituximab plus corticosteroids obtained the best sustained response, but with more adverse events. Adding oseltamivir, all-trans retinoic acid or tacrolimus to dexamethasone reached equally encouraging sustained response, without compromising safety profile. Although this network meta-analysis compared all the therapeutic regimens up to date, more head-to-head RCTs with larger sample size are warranted to make direct comparison among these strategies.
FUNDING
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Major Research Plan of National Natural Science Foundation of China, Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation and Young Taishan Scholar Foundation of Shandong Province.
PubMed: 36578882
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101777 -
Brain and Behavior Jun 2023Sydenham's chorea (SC), prevalent in developing countries and occasionally affecting developed ones, poses a clinical challenge due to the lack of systematic guidelines... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Sydenham's chorea (SC), prevalent in developing countries and occasionally affecting developed ones, poses a clinical challenge due to the lack of systematic guidelines for diagnosis and treatment. Resulting from Group A Beta-Hemolytic Streptococcus infection, SC presents various symptoms. This review aims to collect and evaluate available data on SC management to propose a cohesive treatment plan.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov for literature on SC management from inception until 24th July 2022. Studies were screened by titles and abstracts. Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool (RoB-1) assessed Randomized Controlled Trials, while the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool evaluated nonrandomized studies.
RESULTS
The review includes 11 articles assessing 579 patients. Excluding one study with 229 patients, of the remaining 550 patients, 338 (61.5%) were females. Treatments used were dopamine antagonists in 118 patients, antiepileptics in 198, corticosteroids in 134, IVIG in 7, and PE in 8 patients. Dopamine antagonists, particularly haloperidol, were the primary treatment choice, while valproic acid (VPA) was favored among antiepileptics. Prednisolone, a corticosteroid, showed promising results with weight gain as the only side-effect. Our review emphasizes the importance of immunomodulators in SC, contrasting previous literature.
CONCLUSION
Despite limitations, dopamine antagonists can serve as first-line agents in SC management, followed by antiepileptics. The role of immunomodulators warrants further investigation for conclusive recommendations.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Chorea; Anticonvulsants; Valproic Acid; Haloperidol; Dopamine Antagonists
PubMed: 37150977
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.3035 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022Chronic histiocytic intervillositis (CHI) is a rare placental lesion with a high recurrence rate and poor perinatal outcomes. There are currently limited guidelines... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic histiocytic intervillositis (CHI) is a rare placental lesion with a high recurrence rate and poor perinatal outcomes. There are currently limited guidelines regarding the diagnosis of this condition in the index pregnancy and treatment where recurrence is suspected.
OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the perinatal outcomes of pregnancies affected by chronic histiocytic intervillositis and to what extent they can be improved with treatment. The secondary objective was to assess the relationship between CHI lesion severity and pregnancy loss.
METHODS
A systematic search of Ovid Embase, Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed, Ovid Medline, Google Scholar and CINAHL was carried out. Case reports, cohort, case-control and randomised controlled trials (RCT) detailing the perinatal outcomes of CHI pregnancies, both treated and untreated, were included.
RESULTS
No RCTs were identified. However, in a review population of 659 pregnancies, with additional 7 in case reports, CHI treatments included aspirin, prednisone, prednisolone, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), hydroxychloroquine and adalimumab. A descriptive synthesis of data found mixed results for treatments in relation to live birth, miscarriage and fetal growth restriction outcomes. Furthermore, quantitative synthesis of 38 pregnancies revealed a non-significant improvement in live birth rate with CHI targeted treatment (OR 1.79 [95% CI 0.33-9.61] (p=0.50), while meta-analysis of CHI severity in line with pregnancy loss, in a sample of 231 pregnancies, revealed lower odds of pregnancy loss with less severe lesions (OR: 0.17 [0.03-0.80], p=0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis reinforce notions surrounding the insufficient evidence for CHI treatment. It also strengthens previous hypotheses detailing the positive association between CHI lesion severity and odds of pregnancy loss. Aspirin, LMWH, prednisolone, hydroxychloroquine and adalimumab are candidates with varying levels of weak to moderate evidence supporting their use. Further prospective research is required to obtain robust evidence pertaining to treatment safety and efficacy and optimal drug regimes.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
[website], identifier CRD42021237604.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Adalimumab; Aspirin; Female; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Prednisolone; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35937841
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.945543 -
Pain Practice : the Official Journal of... Mar 2022Many patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) experience refractory pain with severe restrictions in the activities of daily living. Oral prednisolone is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) experience refractory pain with severe restrictions in the activities of daily living. Oral prednisolone is commonly used to treat these patients.
PURPOSE
To review previous studies assessing the effects of prednisolone in CRPS patients.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Articles published from January 1, 1980 to July 23, 2021 in the PubMed database were searched using the following key phrases: (prednisolone OR corticosteroid OR steroid) AND (complex regional pain syndrome OR reflex sympathetic dystrophy OR shoulder-hand syndrome OR causalgia). Specifically, we included those articles in which oral prednisolone or corticosteroids were used to control the CRPS symptoms.
RESULTS
In total, 11 articles were included, comprising 3 randomized trials, 5 single-arm prospective observational studies, and 3 retrospective studies. Nearly all previous studies reported that oral prednisolone can effectively control the CRPS symptoms. Moreover, though 30-100 mg/day of oral prednisolone was initially administered in these studies, 30 mg/day was also found to be effective in controlling the symptoms. Although prednisolone was usually administered for 1-3 months, short-term treatment for 1-2 weeks was also reportedly effective. Furthermore, only 0%-30% of the patients in these studies had minor side effects after prednisolone treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review showed that prednisolone may be effective in alleviating the CRPS symptoms. To determine higher levels of evidence, a full systematic review with more highly qualified studies, such as randomized controlled trials, should be conducted in the future.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Complex Regional Pain Syndromes; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Prednisolone; Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34779145
DOI: 10.1111/papr.13090 -
Ophthalmic Epidemiology Jun 2024Herpes stromal keratitis (HSK) is an immune-mediated corneal inflammation that occurs after a herpes simplex virus infection. This paper aims to systematically identify... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Herpes stromal keratitis (HSK) is an immune-mediated corneal inflammation that occurs after a herpes simplex virus infection. This paper aims to systematically identify and compare interventions for treating HSK and their patient outcomes.
METHODS
This systematic review followed the PRISMA methodology. Online databases were searched to obtain all relevant papers. Two independent reviewers screened through 168 records. Seven papers were included and used for data extraction. A qualitative analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
HSK patients receiving prednisolone phosphate and acyclovir showed a higher treatment success rate and significantly longer time to failure compared to patients receiving only acyclovir ( < .001). No difference in resolution time was found between oral and topical acyclovir. Between groups receiving dexamethasone and flurbiprofen, resolution occurred in 93% and 67% of patients, and BCVA (LogMAR) improved from 1.0 to 0.30 and 0.48, respectively. BCVA improved in both cyclosporine-A ( < .001) and its control (prednisolone) groups ( = .002). A tacrolimus treatment group showed greater improvement in BCVA compared to its control (prednisolone) group ( < .001).
CONCLUSION
Corticosteroids and antivirals managed HSK most effectively only when used concurrently. Oral acyclovir showed similar effectiveness to its ointment counterpart, a preferable alternative for easier administration. Corticosteroid use could induce greater therapeutic benefits when tapered in concentration and frequency and administrated for at least 10 weeks. Anti-inflammatory drugs including flurbiprofen, cyclosporine-A, and tacrolimus could be safe and effective for treating HSK. Future long-term follow-up and RCTs could provide insights on the therapeutic benefits of these potential alternatives.
Topics: Humans; Keratitis, Herpetic; Antiviral Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Glucocorticoids; Acyclovir; Corneal Stroma
PubMed: 37184084
DOI: 10.1080/09286586.2023.2213324