-
Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic... 2021Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a widely recognized autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD) linked with a high incidence of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was... (Review)
Review
Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a widely recognized autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD) linked with a high incidence of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the available findings of randomized clinical trial studies to update interventions for Bullous pemphigoid. This article provides an updated overview of interventions for BP. A literature search was performed using Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science from August 2010 to December 2020. All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were done on adults and investigated the effectiveness of administered topical or systemic medications versus placebos or controls included in the current systematic review. Three RCTs comprising 363 patients were included in the systematic review. One of the eligible studies was placebo-controlled. All of the included studies used various interventions including, methylprednisolone plus azathioprine versus methylprednisolone plus dapsone, doxycycline versus prednisolone, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). Following their potentials in disease control, no difference was observed between dapsone and azathioprine; although, dapsone had a higher corticosteroid-sparing potential. The evaluation of the effect of doxycycline in short-term blister control in comparison to corticosteroids showed that the medication was not inferior to prednisolone, although it had a higher long-term safety. Therapeutic outcome of IVIG for steroid-resistant patients was satisfactory. Moreover, the effectiveness and reliability of various immunosuppressive drugs and tetracyclines are investigated by blinded RCTs for the treatment of BP.
PubMed: 34956957
DOI: 10.47176/mjiri.35.111 -
Epilepsia Feb 2021To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and oral steroids as first-line treatment for infantile spasm resolution, we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and oral steroids as first-line treatment for infantile spasm resolution, we performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness study.
METHODS
A decision analysis model was populated with effectiveness data from a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature and cost data from publicly available prices. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of clinical spasm resolution 14 days after treatment initiation.
RESULTS
We included 21 studies with a total of 968 patients. The effectiveness of ACTH was not statistically significantly different from that of oral steroids (.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .60-.79 vs. .63, 95% CI = .56-.70; p = .28). Considering only the three available randomized trials with a total of 185 patients, the odds ratio of spasm resolution at 14 days with ACTH compared to high-dose prednisolone (4-8 mg/kg/day) was .92 (95% CI = .34-2.52, p = .87). Adjusting for potential publication bias, estimates became even more favorable to high-dose prednisolone. Using US prices, the more cost-effective treatment was high-dose prednisolone, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $333 per case of spasms resolved, followed by ACTH, with an ICER of $1 432 200 per case of spasms resolved. These results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses and different assumptions. Prednisolone at 4-8 mg/kg/day was more cost-effective than ACTH under a wide range of assumptions.
SIGNIFICANCE
For infantile spasm resolution 2 weeks after treatment initiation, current evidence does not support the preeminence of ACTH in terms of effectiveness and, especially, cost-effectiveness.
Topics: Adrenocorticotropic Hormone; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Decision Support Techniques; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Glucocorticoids; Hormones; Humans; Infant; Prednisolone; Spasms, Infantile; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33417252
DOI: 10.1111/epi.16799 -
The Journal of Maternal-fetal &... Dec 2023There is ongoing interest in glucocorticoid treatment during oocyte stimulation to treat infertility in women who have undergone Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is ongoing interest in glucocorticoid treatment during oocyte stimulation to treat infertility in women who have undergone Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART).
OBJECTIVE
This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of adjuvant glucocorticoid therapy on pregnancy outcomes in infertile women undergoing ART cycles.
STUDY DESIGN
A literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2022. To assess the efficacy and safety of additional glucocorticoid treatment during ovulation induction in women who underwent IVF or ICSI treatment, only randomized controlled trials were included.
RESULTS
Overall, glucocorticoid therapy during ovulation showed a nonsignificant effect of prednisolone improving the live birth rate (OR = 1.03, 95% CI [.75, 1.43], I = .0%, = .84), abortion rate (OR = 1.14, 95% CI [.62, 2.08], I = 31%, = .68), and implantation rate (OR = 1.1, 95% CI [.82, 1.5], I = 8%, = .52) of infertile women compared to the control group. The present meta-analysis revealed that the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle tended to increase after glucocorticoid treatment (OR = 1.29, 95% CI [1.02, 1.63], I = 8%, = .52).
CONCLUSIONS
The present meta-analysis suggested that ovarian stimulation prednisolone therapy does not significantly improve clinical outcomes in women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Although the results indicated that adjuvant glucocorticoid therapy during ovarian stimulation may increase the clinical pregnancy rate, subgroup analysis showed that it was affected by infertility factors, dose schedules, and length of treatment. Therefore, these results should be interpreted with caution.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Glucocorticoids; Infertility, Female; Ovulation Induction; Prednisolone; Adjuvants, Pharmaceutic; Dietary Supplements
PubMed: 37385781
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2023.2227310 -
Journal of Osteopathic Medicine Apr 2023Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease that commonly affects joints. Although many treatment options exist, the most common, disease-modifying... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease that commonly affects joints. Although many treatment options exist, the most common, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), have been associated with pulmonary infections. These types of infections (specifically pneumonia) can be detrimental to RA patients. This leads providers to utilize other treatment modalities such as glucocorticoids (GCs). GCs are commonly utilized to treat RA; however, the role of GCs in the onset of pneumonia in RA patients is not fully understood.
OBJECTIVES
The goal of this study was to systematically review and statistically analyze pooled data documenting pneumonia as an adverse event in RA patients on DMARDs as a monotherapy vs RA patients on DMARDs and GCs as combination therapy utilizing the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) framework.
METHODS
On August 1, 2021, a search was conducted and completed on six databases: Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 12 researchers were involved with the search and screening of articles (K.E., P.R.; V.A., D.P.C.; C.B., D.C.; T.A., E.S.; S.H., L.B.; K.S., C.S.). Search terms were identified utilizing Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree and included "glucocorticoids," "rheumatoid arthritis," "pneumonia," and "respiratory tract infections," Inclusion criteria included human subjects over the age of 18 with seropositive RA, on a combination of GC (prednisone, methylprednisolone, or prednisolone) with DMARD (methotrexate [MTX], hydroxychloroquine [HCQ], or sulfasalazine [SSZ]) and developed pneumonia of bacterial, viral, or fungal origin. The control groups were on a DMARD monotherapy regimen. Articles were excluded if they were not in English, had less than 20 participants, were case reports or literature reviews, included animal subjects, and did not adhere to the established PICO framework. Five teams of two researchers individually sorted through abstracts of articles based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The same teams individually sorted through full-text articles of selected abstracts based on the same criteria. Conflicts between each team were resolved by a separate researcher. Odds ratios were utilized to quantify the effect sizes of combined studies from a random effects model. Chi-square tests and I2 statistics were utilized to analyze heterogeneity.
RESULTS
A total of 3360 articles were identified from all databases, and 416 duplicate articles were removed. Thus, a total of 2944 articles abstracts were screened, of which 2819 articles either did not meet the inclusion criteria or did meet the exclusion criteria. A total of 125 articles were retrieved and assessed for full-text eligibility, of which only three observational articles were included for meta-analysis. Statistical results revealed that patients treated with DMARDs monotherapy are 95% (95% CI: 0.65-0.99) less likely to develop pneumonia compared to patients treated with a DMARD and GCs (p=0.002).
CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest that RA patients have a higher probability of developing pneumonia on combination therapy with GCs, compared to monotherapy with DMARDs. To our knowledge, our findings are the first to systematically review and statistically evaluate the relationship between the use of GCs and show an increased chance of developing pneumonia.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Middle Aged; Glucocorticoids; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Antirheumatic Agents; Methotrexate; Pneumonia
PubMed: 36691851
DOI: 10.1515/jom-2022-0177 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Apr 2024Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated...
BACKGROUND
Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated angioedema), but their benefits and harms are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treating acute urticaria or chronic urticaria flares with versus without systemic corticosteroids.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and CBM databases from inception to July 8, 2023, for randomized controlled trials of treating urticaria with versus without systemic corticosteroids. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane 2.0 tool. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of urticaria activity, itch severity, and adverse events. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
We identified 12 randomized trials enrolling 944 patients. For patients with low or moderate probability (17.5%-64%) to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improve urticaria activity by a 14% to 15% absolute difference (odds ratio [OR], 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-3.31; number needed to treat [NNT], 7; moderate certainty). Among patients with a high chance (95.8%) for urticaria to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improved urticaria activity by a 2.2% absolute difference (NNT, 45; moderate certainty). Corticosteroids may improve itch severity (OR, 2.44; 95% CI: 0.87-6.83; risk difference, 9%; NNT, 11; low certainty). Systemic corticosteroids also likely increase adverse events (OR, 2.76; 95% CI: 1.00-7.62; risk difference, 15%; number needed to harm, 9; moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS
Systemic corticosteroids for acute urticaria or chronic urticaria exacerbations likely improve urticaria, depending on antihistamine responsiveness, but also likely increase adverse effects in approximately 15% more.
PubMed: 38642709
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2024.04.016 -
PloS One 2021Evidence on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and corticoids for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is inconclusive and is not up to date. This systematic...
Evidence on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and corticoids for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is inconclusive and is not up to date. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of these anti-inflammatories (AI) in the treatment of RA. COCHRANE (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) with adults which used AI (dose represented in mg/day) compared with placebo or active controls and was carried out up to December of 2019. Reviewers, in pairs and independently, selected studies, performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was assessed by GRADE. Network meta-analyses were performed using the Stata v.14.2. Twenty-six articles were selected (NSAIDs = 21 and corticoids = 5). Naproxen 1,000 improved physical function, reduced pain and the number of painful joints compared to placebo. Etoricoxib 90 reduced the number of painful joints compared to placebo. Naproxen 750 reduced the number of swollen joints, except for etoricoxib 90. Naproxen 1,000, etoricoxib 90 and diclofenac 150 were better than placebo regarding patient assessment. Assessment physician showed that NSAIDs were better than placebo. Meta-analyses were not performed for prednisolone and prednisone. Naproxen 1,000 was the most effective drug and celecoxib 200 showed fewer adverse events. However, the low quality of the evidence observed for the outcomes with NSAIDs, the absence of meta-analyses to assess the outcomes with corticoids, as well as the risk of bias observed, indicate that future RCT can confirm such findings.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 33826610
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248866 -
The Clinical Journal of Pain Mar 2023The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of conservative interventions compared with other interventions, placebo/sham...
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of conservative interventions compared with other interventions, placebo/sham interventions, or no intervention on disability, pain, function, quality of life, and psychological impact in adults with cervical radiculopathy (CR).
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO from inception to June 15, 2022 to identify studies that were randomized controlled trials, had at least one conservative treatment arm, and diagnosed participants with CR through confirmatory clinical examination and/or diagnostic tests. Studies were appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the quality of the evidence was rated using the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS
Of the 2561 records identified, 59 trials met our inclusion criteria (n = 4108 participants). Due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity, the findings were synthesized narratively. There is very-low certainty evidence supporting the use of acupuncture, prednisolone, cervical manipulation, and low-level laser therapy for pain and disability in the immediate to short-term, and thoracic manipulation and low-level laser therapy for improvements in cervical range of motion in the immediate term. There is low to very-low certainty evidence for multimodal interventions, providing inconclusive evidence for pain, disability, and range of motion. There is inconclusive evidence for pain reduction after conservative management compared with surgery, rated as very-low certainty.
DISCUSSION
There is a lack of high-quality evidence, limiting our ability to make any meaningful conclusions. As the number of people with CR is expected to increase, there is an urgent need for future research to help address these gaps.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Conservative Treatment; Radiculopathy; Quality of Life; Acupuncture Therapy; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36599029
DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000001092 -
Journal of Nephrology Jul 2023Acute pyelonephritis is a common infection in children that may cause renal scarring. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse the use of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute pyelonephritis is a common infection in children that may cause renal scarring. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse the use of corticosteroid treatment to prevent renal scarring.
METHODS
We searched the PubMED, SCOPUS, Cochrane CENTRAL and Web of Science databases in June 2022 for (corticosteroid* or dexamethasone or prednisolone* or prednisone* or hydrocortisone*) AND pyelonephritis. Randomised controlled trials focusing on children were included. The intervention was corticosteroid treatment with antibiotics compared to antibiotics with or without a placebo. The main outcome was the presence of renal scars on dimercaptosuccinic acid scanning at follow-up. The evidence quality was assessed using the GRADE methodology and risk of bias 2.0 tool. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), absolute risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat (NNT). We applied a fixed effects model due to low heterogeneity.
RESULTS
We screened 872 abstracts and included five full texts. Renal scarring at follow-up was found in 31/220 (14.1%) patients in the corticosteroid groups and 76/278 (27.3%) in the control groups (RR 0.65, CI 0.44-0.96, RD - 13.2%, NNT 8). The evidence quality was moderate. Two studies reported adverse events with no differences between the groups. The risk of bias analysis showed some concerns in four studies.
CONCLUSION
We found moderate quality evidence that adjuvant corticosteroid treatment could prevent renal scarring. Adverse events were insufficiently reported, and more research on their effectiveness and harm is therefore needed before using corticosteroids in clinical settings.
Topics: Child; Humans; Cicatrix; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Prednisolone; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Pyelonephritis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36692666
DOI: 10.1007/s40620-022-01552-1 -
Ecancermedicalscience 2020Cancer and transplant patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of developing severe and even fatal respiratory diseases, especially as they may be treated with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cancer and transplant patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of developing severe and even fatal respiratory diseases, especially as they may be treated with immune-suppressive or immune-stimulating drugs. This review focuses on the effects of these drugs on host immunity against COVID-19.
METHODS
Using Ovid MEDLINE, we reviewed current evidence for immune-suppressing or -stimulating drugs: cytotoxic chemotherapy, low-dose steroids, tumour necrosis factorα (TNFα) blockers, interlukin-6 (IL-6) blockade, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, IL-1 blockade, mycophenolate, tacrolimus, anti-CD20 and CTLA4-Ig.
RESULTS
89 studies were included. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has been shown to be a specific inhibitor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in in vitro studies, but no specific studies exist as of yet for COVID-19. No conclusive evidence for or against the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of COVID-19 patients is available, nor is there evidence indicating that TNFα blockade is harmful to patients in the context of COVID-19. COVID-19 has been observed to induce a pro-inflammatory cytokine generation and secretion of cytokines, such as IL-6, but there is no evidence of the beneficial impact of IL-6 inhibitors on the modulation of COVID-19. Although there are potential targets in the JAK-STAT pathway that can be manipulated in treatment for coronaviruses and it is evident that IL-1 is elevated in patients with a coronavirus, there is currently no evidence for a role of these drugs in treatment of COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to challenging decision-making about treatment of critically unwell patients. Low-dose prednisolone and tacrolimus may have beneficial impacts on COVID-19. The mycophenolate mofetil picture is less clear, with conflicting data from pre-clinical studies. There is no definitive evidence that specific cytotoxic drugs, low-dose methotrexate for auto-immune disease, NSAIDs, JAK kinase inhibitors or anti-TNFα agents are contraindicated. There is clear evidence that IL-6 peak levels are associated with severity of pulmonary complications.
PubMed: 32256705
DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2020.1022 -
Surgery Today Dec 2021Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is an inflammatory disease of the breasts with an unknown etiology. Corticosteroids are one the primary options for treating this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is an inflammatory disease of the breasts with an unknown etiology. Corticosteroids are one the primary options for treating this disease, but the results of previous studies concerning their efficacy have been controversial. We, therefore, decided to assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids on IGM using a systematic review and meta-analysis. We conducted a systematic search using MeSH terms and all relevant keywords in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science until May 21, 2019. Data were analyzed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) V.2 software program and presented as the event rate, risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD). Twelve studies including 559 IGM patients were entered into the meta-analysis. Our analysis showed that the RR and RD of recurrence in the steroid-only group compared with the surgery-only group were 2.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-31.33) and 0.14 (95% CI - 0.01-0.30), respectively, showing no statistical significance. The meta-analysis of the steroid-only group and steroid + surgery group showed that the RR of recurrence was 6.13 (95% CI 0.41-81.62) with no significance. However, the meta-analysis of the RD showed that the risk of recurrence in the steroid group was significantly higher than that in the steroids + surgery group (RD: 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.44). This meta-analysis showed that managing IGM with only steroids may be less effective than the combination of steroids and surgery. This combination approach may result in a lower rate of recurrence and side effects in these patients.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Child; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Glucocorticoids; Granulomatous Mastitis; Humans; Mastectomy; Methylprednisolone; Middle Aged; Prednisolone; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 33590327
DOI: 10.1007/s00595-021-02234-4