-
Indian Journal of Pharmacology 2020Multiple options are being tried for the management of 2019-nCoV infection since its pandemic started. Favipiravir (FPV) is one of drugs, which is also being tried for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Multiple options are being tried for the management of 2019-nCoV infection since its pandemic started. Favipiravir (FPV) is one of drugs, which is also being tried for the management of 2019-nCoV infection. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FPV in published literature. Comparative randomized or nonrandomized controlled clinical trials comparing FPV to the standard of care (SOC)/control or other antiviral agent/combinations were included. A total of 12 databases were searched and identify four studies which were further used for final analysis. The data analysis was done as pooled prevalence using a random effect model by "RevMan manager version 5.4.1 and "R" software. The point estimate, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for dichotomous data. In the present study, the marginal beneficial effect was seen in the FPV group in overall clinical improvement comparison to SOC/control, i.e., (4 studies, log OR [95% CI] (-0.19 [-0.51, 0.13]). However, in all other outcomes, it was found to be comparable to the SOC/control arm namely "clinical improvement on day 7-10" (3 studies, OR [95% CI] 1.63 [1.07, 2.48]) while "clinical improvement on day 10-14" (3 studies, OR [95% CI] 1.37 [0.24, 7.82]) and viral negativity was seen (4 studies, OR [95% CI] 1.91 [0.91, 4.01]). No difference in efficacy was found between FPV versus lopinavir/ritonavir or arbidol groups. Regarding adverse effects, except for the occurrence of rash (higher in the FPV group), safety was comparable to SOC. In our study, there was a marginal difference between the FPV and the SOC arm in terms of "clinical improvement" on day 7-10 or 10-14, and "virological negativity" on day 10-14." However, some benefit was observed in a few studies, but it was also comparable to the control drugs or SOC.
Topics: Amides; Antiviral Agents; Humans; Pyrazines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 33283773
DOI: 10.4103/ijp.ijp_998_20 -
Advances in Therapy Aug 2022The combination of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd) has become standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The combination of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd) has become standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). This study aimed to determine the efficacy of RVd as induction therapy in terms of response rates and survival outcomes of transplant-eligible patients with NDMM.
METHODS
The databases of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched until February 1, 2021. Both randomized controlled trials (RCT) and non-RCTs from the available literature were extracted as one-arm data to assess the efficacy of each triplet regimen for the target patients in terms of response rates and survival rates for transplant-eligible patients with NDMM. Data was summarized as estimated pooled value regarding each evaluated index. Risk of bias of studies was assessed with standard methods.
RESULTS
The findings of 71 studies published from 2008 to 2020 were analyzed. For RVd induction, the overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, and complete response or better (≥ CR) rate after induction were 0.91 (95% CI 0.86-0.95), 0.23 (95% CI 0.17-0.29), and 0.56 (95% CI 0.51-0.61), respectively. Indirect comparisons in efficacy were made between RVd and other traditional triplet regimens. RVd induction led to a better ≥ CR rate than bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCd) regimen in both postinduction and post-ASCT phase, ≥ CR rate 0.11 (95% CI 0.08-0.15) and 0.21 (95% CI 0.12-0.32), respectively. The 1-year overall survival (OS) rate and 3-year OS rate of RVd regimen were longer than that of bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd), 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-0.98) vs 0.71 (95% CI 0.61-0.80), and 0.90 (95% CI 0.79-0.98) vs 0.70 (95% CI 0.64-0.75), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The RVd induction demonstrated confident response rates and survival benefits for transplant-eligible patients with NDMM.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bortezomib; Dexamethasone; Humans; Lenalidomide; Multiple Myeloma
PubMed: 35771352
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-022-02195-1 -
Microbial Drug Resistance (Larchmont,... Jan 2022Pyrazinamide (PZA) susceptibility testing plays a critical role in determining the appropriate treatment regimens for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. We conducted a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Pyrazinamide (PZA) susceptibility testing plays a critical role in determining the appropriate treatment regimens for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of sequencing PZA susceptibility tests against culture-based susceptibility testing methods as the reference standard. We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for the relevant records. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. Diagnostic accuracy measures (, sensitivity and specificity) were pooled with a random-effects model. All statistical analyses were performed with Meta-DiSc (version 1.4, Cochrane Colloquium, Barcelona, Spain), STATA (version 14, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX), and RevMan (version 5.3, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, the Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) software. A total of 72 articles, published between 2000 and 2019, comprising data for 8,701 isolates of were included in the final analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the PZA sequencing test against all reference tests (the combination of BACTEC mycobacteria growth indicator tube 960 (MGIT 960), BACTEC 460, and proportion method) were 87% (95% CI: 85-88) and 94.7% (95% CI: 94-95). The positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and the area under the curve estimates were found to be 12.0 (95% CI: 9.0-16.0), 0.17 (95% CI: 0.13-0.21), 106 (95% CI: 71-158), and 96%, respectively. Deek's test result indicated a low likelihood for publication bias ( = 0.01). Our analysis indicated that PZA sequencing may be used in combination with conventional tests due to the advantage of the time to result and in scenarios where culture tests are not feasible. Further work to improve molecular tests would benefit from the availability of standardized reference standards and improvements to the methodology.
Topics: Antitubercular Agents; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Pyrazinamide; Sensitivity and Specificity; Sequence Analysis
PubMed: 34582723
DOI: 10.1089/mdr.2021.0048 -
Journal of Microbiology, Immunology,... Oct 2021Despite aggressive efforts on containment measures for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic around the world, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2... (Review)
Review
Despite aggressive efforts on containment measures for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic around the world, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is continuously spreading. Therefore, there is an urgent need for an effective antiviral agent. To date, considerable research has been conducted to develop different approaches to COVID-19 therapy. In addition to early observational studies, which could be limited by study design, small sample size, non-randomized design, or different timings of treatment, an increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the clinical efficacy and safety of antiviral agents are being carried out. This study reviews the updated findings of RCTs regarding the clinical efficacy of eight antiviral agents against COVID-19, including remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir, sofosbuvir/daclatasvir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, baloxavir, umifenovir, darunavir/cobicistat, and their combinations. Treatment with remdesivir could accelerate clinical improvement; however, it lacked additional survival benefits. Moreover, 5-day regimen of remdesivir might show adequate effectiveness in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Favipiravir was only marginally effective regarding clinical improvement and virological assessment based on the results of small RCTs. The present evidence suggests that sofosbuvir/daclatasvir may improve survival and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, the sample sizes for analysis were relatively small, and all studies were exclusively conducted in Iran. Further larger RCTs in other countries are warranted to support these findings. In contrast, the present findings of limited RCTs did not indicate the use of lopinavir/ritonavir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, baloxavir, umifenovir, and darunavir/cobicistat in the treatment of patients hospitalized for COVID-19.
Topics: Adenosine Monophosphate; Alanine; Amides; Antiviral Agents; Carbamates; Cobicistat; Darunavir; Dibenzothiepins; Drug Combinations; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Imidazoles; Indoles; Iran; Lopinavir; Morpholines; Pyrazines; Pyridones; Pyrrolidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ritonavir; SARS-CoV-2; Sofosbuvir; Treatment Outcome; Triazines; Valine; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 34253490
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2021.05.011 -
Drug Research Nov 2021Sitagliptin is known as an antidiabetic agent inhibiting the dipeptidyl peptidase-4. Although sitagliptin may influence weight, controversial results have been reported,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effects of Sitagliptin as Monotherapy and Add-On to Metformin on Weight Loss among Overweight and Obese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Sitagliptin is known as an antidiabetic agent inhibiting the dipeptidyl peptidase-4. Although sitagliptin may influence weight, controversial results have been reported, and there is no general agreement on this issue. Therefore, this study assessed the effect of sitagliptin as monotherapy and add-on therapy to metformin on weight reduction in overweight or obese cases with type 2 diabetes.
METHODS
We reviewed the following databases to identify all relevant papers published until 1st April 2021: Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The research included all clinical trials investigating the effect of sitagliptin in obese or overweight adult patients with type 2 diabetes without any language restriction.
RESULTS
In total, eighteen randomized controlled trials with 2009 participants were included in our meta-analysis. Results showed supplementation of sitagliptin has led to weight loss for sitagliptin treated (MD -0.99; 95% CI; (-1.87, -0.12); p=0.026)) and sitagliptin+metformin treated groups (MD -1.09; 95% CI; (-1.69, -0.49); p<0.001)). Also, the intervention has influenced body mass index in sitagliptin treated (MD -0.23; 95% CI; (-0.45, 0.02); p=0.033)) and sitagliptin+metformin treated groups (MD -0.52; 95% CI; (-0.96, 0.08); p=0.020)) comparing to placebo.
CONCLUSION
Our results demonstrated that sitagliptin administration with or without metformin might reduce the body weight and body mass index if these drugs are taken for more than 6 months.
Topics: Adult; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Drug Therapy, Combination; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Metformin; Obesity; Overweight; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sitagliptin Phosphate; Weight Loss
PubMed: 34388848
DOI: 10.1055/a-1555-2797 -
European Journal of Internal Medicine Nov 2019The role of bortezomib in the treatment of immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis is not well defined. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The role of bortezomib in the treatment of immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis is not well defined. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based regimens in patients with AL amyloidosis who are not eligible for or refuse autologous stem cell transplantation.
METHODS
A systematic search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify related studies.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies with 1238 patients were included. The pooled overall response rate (ORR) and complete hematological response rate (CHR) were 0.72 (95% CI, 0.67-0.77) and 0.35 (95% CI, 0.30-0.40), respectively. Bortezomib significantly improved the outcome of ORR compared to other regimens (RR 1.28, 95% CI, 1.04-1.57, P = .02). Similar results were observed in CHR (RR 1.90, 95% CI, 1.45-2.50, P < .001) and cardiac response (RR 2.03, 95% CI, 1.31-3.13, P = .002), but not in overall survival (HR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.62-1.09, P = .17). In addition, once-weekly bortezomib was associated with improved overall survival compared with twice-weekly bortezomib (HR 0.52, 95% CI, 0.27-0.99, P = .05). Peripheral neuropathy was the most widely reported adverse event. Incorporation of bortezomib into the standard melphalan + dexamethasone setting showed a trend of increased serious adverse events, though this was not statistically significant (RR 1.29, 95% CI, 0.95-1.75, P = .10).
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence indicates that bortezomib-based regimens might be effective and safe therapies for patients with AL amyloidosis. There is a great need to conduct more well-designed randomized controlled trials to provide high-quality evidence.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Bortezomib; Humans; Immunoglobulin Light-chain Amyloidosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31447275
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2019.08.011 -
Journal of Neuroimmunology Jul 2021N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis is a potentially treatable condition, although a small proportion of patients remains refractory to immunotherapy....
N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis is a potentially treatable condition, although a small proportion of patients remains refractory to immunotherapy. Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor that has a promising role in autoimmune conditions. We performed an independent PubMed search employing "Anti-N-Methyl‑D-Aspartate encephalitis AND bortezomib", including papers published between January 1st, 2007 to April 15th, 2021. Fourteen articles were included, with 29 patients. 16 patients (55,2%) had a favorable outcome after bortezomib and 11 (37,9%) patients developed side effects. Quality of studies was overall poor and future trials should aim to include more homogeneous and larger cohorts.
Topics: Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis; Bortezomib; Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunotherapy
PubMed: 33975246
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2021.577586 -
Hormone and Metabolic Research =... Jul 2020Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is currently the most common cause of chronic liver disease. However, the treatment is limited. The aim of this meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is currently the most common cause of chronic liver disease. However, the treatment is limited. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects and safety of sitagliptin, a selective inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4I), in treating NAFLD. Studies were sourced from electronic databases including PubMed, CENTRAL (Cochrane Controlled Trials Register), Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and CNKI to identify all randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs in adult patients with NAFLD. Key outcomes were changes in serum levels of liver enzymes and improvement in hepatic histology and fat content measured by imaging or liver biopsy. Stata14.0 and RevMan5.3 were used for the meta-analysis. Seven studies with 269 NAFLD patients were included. Compared to the control group, sitagliptin treatment improved serum gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) levels in the RCT subgroup (SMD = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.01-1.58). However, there was no significant improvement in serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels following sitagliptin treatment. Four of the included studies performed liver imaging, but sitagliptin treatment did not result in a significant reduction in liver fat content. Only five participants developed sitagliptin-related gastrointestinal discomfort. Our study suggests that sitagliptin effects individuals with NAFLD by improving serum GGT. Although sitagliptin is safe and well tolerated in NAFLD patients, it exerts no beneficial effects on liver transaminase and liver fat content in these patients.
Topics: Aged; Clinical Trials as Topic; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Liver; Liver Function Tests; Male; Middle Aged; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Sitagliptin Phosphate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32559768
DOI: 10.1055/a-1186-0841 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological malignancy that is characterised by proliferation of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. For adults ineligible to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological malignancy that is characterised by proliferation of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. For adults ineligible to receive high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant, the recommended treatment combinations in first-line therapy generally consist of combinations of alkylating agents, immunomodulatory drugs, and proteasome inhibitors. Daratumumab is a CD38-targeting, human IgG1k monoclonal antibody recently developed and approved for the treatment of people diagnosed with MM. Multiple myeloma cells uniformly over-express CD-38, a 46-kDa type II transmembrane glycoprotein, making myeloma cells a specific target for daratumumab.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of daratumumab in addition to antineoplastic therapy compared to antineoplastic therapy only for adults with newly diagnosed MM who are ineligible for transplant.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, EU Clinical Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and conference proceedings from 2010 to September 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared treatment with daratumumab added to antineoplastic therapy versus the same antineoplastic therapy alone in adult participants with a confirmed diagnosis of MM. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials with less than 80% adult participants, unless there were subgroup analyses of adults with MM.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies for eligibility. We documented the process of study selection in a flowchart as recommended by the PRISMA statement. We evaluated the risk of bias in included studies with RoB 1 and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four open-label, two-armed randomised controlled trials (34 publications) involving a total of 1783 participants. The ALCYONE, MAIA, and OCTANS trials were multicentre trials conducted worldwide in middle- and high-income countries. The AMaRC 03-16 trial was conducted in one high-income country, Australia. The mean age of participants was 69 to 74 years, and the proportion of female participants was between 40% and 54%. All trials evaluated antineoplastic therapies with or without daratumumab. In the ALCYONE and OCTANS trials, daratumumab was combined with bortezomib and melphalan-prednisone. In the AMaRC 03-16 study, it was combined with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone, and in the MAIA study, it was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. None of the included studies was blinded (high risk of performance and detection bias). One study was published as abstract only, therefore the risk of bias for most criteria was unclear. The other three studies were published as full texts. Apart from blinding, the risk of bias was low for these studies. Overall survival Treatment with daratumumab probably increases overall survival when compared to the same treatment without daratumumab (hazard ratio (HR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.76, 2 studies, 1443 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After a follow-up period of 36 months, 695 per 1000 participants survived in the control group, whereas 792 per 1000 participants survived in the daratumumab group (95% CI 758 to 825). Progression-free survival Treatment with daratumumab probably increases progression-free survival when compared to treatment without daratumumab (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.58, 3 studies, 1663 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After a follow-up period of 24 months, progression-free survival was reached in 494 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 713 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group (95% CI 664 to 760). Quality of life Treatment with daratumumab may result in a very small increase in quality of life after 12 months, evaluated on the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scale (GHS), when compared to treatment without daratumumab (mean difference 2.19, 95% CI -0.13 to 4.51, 3 studies, 1096 participants, low-certainty evidence). The scale is from 0 to 100, with a higher value indicating a better quality of life. On-study mortality Treatment with daratumumab probably decreases on-study mortality when compared to treatment without daratumumab (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.83, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 366 per 1000 participants in the control group and 264 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group died (95% CI 227 to 304). Serious adverse events Treatment with daratumumab probably increases serious adverse events when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 505 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 596 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced serious adverse events (95% CI 515 to 692). Adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade ≥ 3) Treatment with daratumumab probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.02, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 953 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 963 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) (95% CI 943 to 972). Treatment with daratumumab probably increases the risk of infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.78, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 224 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 340 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) (95% CI 291 to 399).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall analysis of four studies showed a potential benefit for daratumumab in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival and a slight potential benefit in quality of life. Participants treated with daratumumab probably experience increased serious adverse events. There were likely no differences between groups in adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3); however, there are probably more infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) in participants treated with daratumumab. We identified six ongoing studies which might strengthen the certainty of evidence in a future update of this review.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bias; Bortezomib; Multiple Myeloma; Progression-Free Survival; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38695605
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013595.pub2 -
Vascular Medicine (London, England) Feb 2022Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an important vascular disease carrying significant mortality implications due to the risk of aneurysm rupture. Current management...
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an important vascular disease carrying significant mortality implications due to the risk of aneurysm rupture. Current management relies exclusively on surgical repair as there is no effective medical therapy. A key element of AAA pathogenesis is the chronic inflammation mediated by inflammatory cells releasing proteases, including the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-IV). This review sought to recapitulate available evidence on the involvement of DPP-IV in AAA development. Further, we assessed the experimental use of currently available DPP-IV inhibitors for AAA management in murine models. Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were utilised to access the relevant studies. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). A narrative synthesis approach was used. Sixty-four studies were identified from the searched databases; a final 11 were included in the analysis. DPP-IV was reported to be significantly increased in both AAA tissue and plasma of patients and correlated with AAA growth. DPP-IV inhibitors (sitagliptin, vildagliptin, alogliptin, and teneligliptin) were all shown to attenuate AAA formation in murine models by reducing monocyte differentiation, the release of reactive oxygen species (ROS), and metalloproteinases (MMP-2 and MMP-9). DPP-IV seems to play a role in AAA pathogenesis by propagating the inflammatory microenvironment. This is supported by observations of decreased AAA formation and reduction in macrophage infiltration, ROS, matrix MMPs, and interleukins following the use of DPP-IV inhibitors in murine models. There is an existing translational gap from preclinical observations to clinical trials in this important and novel mechanism of AAA pathogenesis. This prior literature highlights the need for further research on molecular targets involved in AAA formation.
Topics: Animals; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Humans; Macrophages; Mice; Sitagliptin Phosphate
PubMed: 34392748
DOI: 10.1177/1358863X211034574