-
Panminerva Medica Mar 2024Sepsis-related mortality is decreasing over time after the introduction of "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" Guidelines in 2004. The last Guidelines version collects 93...
INTRODUCTION
Sepsis-related mortality is decreasing over time after the introduction of "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" Guidelines in 2004. The last Guidelines version collects 93 recommendations, but several interventions supported by randomized evidence of mortality reduction are not included.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials reporting a statistically significant mortality reduction in septic patients and compared the identified studies to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines 2021 to highlight discrepancies.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We identified 83 randomized controlled trials (58 interventions) influencing mortality in sepsis. Only 9/58 of these interventions were included in the Guidelines: lactate measurement and lactate-guided hemodynamic management, procalcitonin-guided antibiotics discontinuation, balanced crystalloids as first choice fluids, albumin infusion, avoidance of starches, noradrenaline as first line vasopressor, vasopressin as an adjunctive vasopressor to noradrenaline, neuromuscular blocking agents in moderate-severe sepsis-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome, and corticosteroids use. Only 11/93 Guidelines recommendations were supported by randomized evidence with mortality difference. Five of the interventions with survival benefit in literature (vitamin C, terlipressin, polymyxin B, liberal transfusion strategy and immunoglobulins) were recommended to avoid in the Guidelines, while 44 interventions were not mentioned, including three interventions (esmolol, omega 3, and external warming) with at least two randomized controlled trials with a documented survival benefit.
CONCLUSIONS
Several discrepancies exist between the randomized controlled trials with mortality difference in septic patients and the latest Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines. This systematic review can be of help for improving future guidelines and may guide research on specific promising topics.
Topics: Humans; Shock, Septic; Sepsis; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Norepinephrine; Lactic Acid
PubMed: 38093626
DOI: 10.23736/S0031-0808.23.04986-8 -
The Journal of Maternal-fetal &... Dec 2023The optimal drug management strategy for severe hypertension during pregnancy remains inconclusive. Some randomized controlled trials found that oral nifedipine was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The optimal drug management strategy for severe hypertension during pregnancy remains inconclusive. Some randomized controlled trials found that oral nifedipine was more effective than intravenous labetalol in hypertensive emergencies during pregnancy, while others found otherwise. As a result, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of oral nifedipine versus intravenous labetalol for hypertensive emergencies during pregnancy. We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials that compared oral nifedipine versus IV labetalol in hypertensive emergencies during pregnancy. 12 RCTs enrolling 1151 participants (573 in the labetalol group and 578 in the nifedipine group) were included in the meta-analysis. Patients who received oral nifedipine reached their target blood pressure more rapidly than those who received intravenous labetalol (MD 7.64, 95%CI 4.08-11.20, < .0001). The nifedipine group required fewer doses to achieve the target blood pressure (MD 0.62, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.88, < .00001). There were no meaningful differences on the maternal complications between the two groups, mainly including eclampsia (OR 1.51; 95% CI, 0.75-3.05; = .25), headache (OR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.52-1.44; = .57), nausea/vomiting (OR 1.50; 95% CI, 0.76-2.93; = .24), hypotension (OR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.12-1.99; = .32), dizziness (OR 2.01; 95% CI, 0.77-5.25; = .16), HELLP (OR 0.27; 95% CI, 0.05-1.64; = .16), palpitations (OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.32-1.27; = .20), flushing (OR 0.77; 95%CI, 0.18-3.22; = .72). There were no significant difference in the neonatal complications, including NICU admission (OR 1.24; 95% CI, 0.87-1.77; = .23), 5 min Apgar score < 7 (OR 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82-1.39; = .63), neonatal deaths (OR 1.08; 95%CI, 0.66-1.76; = .77), FHR abnormality (OR 0.94; 95%CI, 0.47-1.88; = .86). In conclusion, oral nifedipine could achieve target blood pressure more rapidly and required fewer doses than intravenous labetalol in the management of hypertensive emergencies during pregnancy.
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Labetalol; Nifedipine; Emergencies; Blood Pressure; Hypotension
PubMed: 37487762
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2023.2235057 -
Psychopharmacology Feb 2024The selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor venlafaxine is among the most prescribed antidepressant drugs worldwide and, according to guidelines, its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor venlafaxine is among the most prescribed antidepressant drugs worldwide and, according to guidelines, its dose titration should be guided by drug-level monitoring of its active moiety (AM) which consists of venlafaxine (VEN) plus active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV). This indication of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), however, assumes a clear concentration/effect relationship for a drug, which for VEN has not been systematically explored yet.
OBJECTIVES
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the relationship between blood levels, efficacy, and adverse reactions in order to suggest an optimal target concentration range for VEN oral formulations for the treatment of depression.
METHODS
Four databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched in March 2022 for relevant articles according to a previously published protocol. Reviewers independently screened references and performed data extraction and critical appraisal.
RESULTS
High-quality randomized controlled trials investigating concentration/efficacy relationships and studies using a placebo lead-in phase were not found. Sixty-eight articles, consisting mostly of naturalistic TDM studies or small noncontrolled studies, met the eligibility criteria. Of them, five cohort studies reported a positive correlation between blood levels and antidepressant effects after VEN treatment. Our meta-analyses showed (i) higher AM and (ii) higher ODV concentrations in patients responding to VEN treatment when compared to non-responders (n = 360, k = 5). AM concentration-dependent occurrence of tremor was reported in one study. We found a linear relationship between daily dose and AM concentration within guideline recommended doses (75-225 mg/day). The population-based concentration ranges (25-75% interquartile) among 11 studies (n = 3200) using flexible dosing were (i) 225-450 ng/ml for the AM and (ii) 144-302 ng/ml for ODV. One PET study reported an occupancy of 80% serotonin transporters for ODV serum levels above 85 ng/ml. Based on our findings, we propose a therapeutic reference range for AM of 140-600 ng/ml.
CONCLUSION
VEN TDM within a range of 140 to 600 ng/ml (AM) will increase the probability of response in nonresponders. A titration within the proposed reference range is recommended in case of non-response at lower drug concentrations as a consequence of VEN's dual mechanism of action via combined serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. Drug titration towards higher concentrations will, however, increase the risk for ADRs, in particular with supratherapeutic drug concentrations.
Topics: Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Norepinephrine; Reference Values; Serotonin; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 37857898
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-023-06484-7 -
PloS One 2022Clinical Depression and the subsequent low immunity is a comorbidity that can act as a risk factor for the severity of COVID-19 cases. Antidepressants such as Selective... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Clinical Depression and the subsequent low immunity is a comorbidity that can act as a risk factor for the severity of COVID-19 cases. Antidepressants such as Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors are associated with immune-modulatory effects, which dismiss inflammatory responses and reduce lung tissue damage. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of antidepressant drugs on the prognosis and severity of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.
METHODS
A systematic search was carried out in PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus up to June 14, 2022. The following keywords were used: "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "2019-nCoV", "SSRI", "SNRI", "TCA", "MAOI", and "Antidepressant". A fixed or random-effect model assessed the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We considered P < 0.05 as statistically significant for publication bias. Data were analyzed by Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, Version 2.0 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ).
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included in our systematic review. Five of them were experimental with 2350, and nine of them were observational with 290,950 participants. Eight out of fourteen articles revealed the effect of antidepressants on reducing the severity of COVID-19. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors drugs, including Fluvoxamine, Escitalopram, Fluoxetine, and Paroxetine, and among the Serotonin-norepinephrine inhibitors medications Venlafaxine, are reasonably associated with reduced risk of intubation or death. Five studies showed no significant effect, and only one high risk of bias article showed the negative effect of antidepressants on the prognosis of Covid-19. The meta-analysis of clinical trials showed that fluvoxamine could significantly decrease the severity outcomes of COVID-19 (RR: 0.763; 95% CI: 0.602-0.966, I2: 0.0).
FINDINGS
Most evidence supports that the use of antidepressant medications, mainly Fluvoxamine, may decrease the severity and improve the outcome in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. Some studies showed contradictory findings regarding the effects of antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19. Further clinical trials should be conducted to clarify the effects of antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Fluoxetine; Fluvoxamine; Humans; Norepinephrine; Paroxetine; SARS-CoV-2; Serotonin; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 36201406
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267423 -
Medicine Nov 2019Our objective is to assess the effects of epinephrine for out of hospital cardiac arrest. (Review)
Review
AIM
Our objective is to assess the effects of epinephrine for out of hospital cardiac arrest.
BACKGROUND
Cardiac arrest was the most serious medical incidents with an estimated incidence in the United States of 95.7 per 100,000 person years. Though epinephrine improved coronary and cerebral perfusion, improving a return of spontaneous circulation, potentially harmful effects on the heart lead to greater myocardial oxygen demand. Concerns about the effect of epinephrine for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were controversial and called for a higher argument to determine whether the effects of epinephrine is safe and effective for shor and long terms outcomes.
METHOD
Searching databases consist of all kinds of searching tools, such as Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, etc. All the included studies should meet our demand of this meta-analysis. In the all interest outcomes blow we take the full advantage of STATA to assess, the main measure is Risk Ratio (RR) with 95% confidence, the publication bias are assessed by Egger Test.
RESULT
In current systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials investigating epinephrine for out of hospital cardiac arrest, we found that epinephrine was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of ROSC (RR = 3.05, I = 23.1%, P = .0001) and survival to hospital discharge (RR = 1.40, I = 36.3%, P = .008) compared with non-adrenaline administration. Conversely, epinephrine did not increase CPC 1 or 2 (RR = 1.15, I = 40.5%, P = .340) and hospital admission (RR = 2.07, I = 88.2%, P = .0001).
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, in this systematic review and meta-analysis involving studies, the use of epinephrine resulted in a significantly higher likelihood of survival to hospital discharge and ROSC than the non-epinephrine administration, but, there was no significant between group difference in the rate of a favorable neurologic outcome.
Topics: Aged; Epinephrine; Hospitalization; Humans; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest; Patient Discharge; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31702610
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017502 -
Medical Sciences (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2021: Antidepressants are one of the most prescribed medications, particularly for patients with mental disorders. Nevertheless, there are still limited data regarding the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
: Antidepressants are one of the most prescribed medications, particularly for patients with mental disorders. Nevertheless, there are still limited data regarding the risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) associated with these medications. Thus, we performed systemic review and meta-analysis to characterize the risks of VA and SCD among patients who used common antidepressants. A literature search for studies that reported risk of ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in antidepressant use from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database from inception through September 2020. A random-effects model network meta-analysis model was used to analyze the relation between antidepressants and VA/SCD. Surface Under Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) was used to rank the treatment for each outcome. The mean study sample size was 355,158 subjects. Tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) patients were the least likely to develop ventricular arrhythmia events/sudden cardiac deaths at OR 0.24, 0.028-1.2, OR 0.32 (95% CI 0.038-1.6) for serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI), and OR 0.36 (95% CI 0.043, 1.8) for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), respectively. According to SUCRA analysis, TCA was on a higher rank compared to SNRI and SSRI considering the risk of VA/SCD. Our network meta-analysis demonstrated the low risk of VA/SCD among patients using antidepressants for SNRI, SSRI and especially, TCA. Despite the relatively lowest VA/SCD in TCA, drug efficacy and other adverse effects should be taken into account in patients with mental disorders.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Norepinephrine; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 33922524
DOI: 10.3390/medsci9020026 -
Neurology(R) Neuroimmunology &... Nov 2022No evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-4 has been suggested as a treatment target for disease-modifying therapy (DMT) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
No evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-4 has been suggested as a treatment target for disease-modifying therapy (DMT) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). However, the ability of NEDA-4 to discriminate long-term outcomes in MS and how its performance compares with NEDA-3 remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate (1) the association between NEDA-4 and no long-term disability progression in MS and (2) the comparative performance of NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 in predicting no long-term disability progression.
METHODS
English-language abstracts and manuscripts were systematically searched in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane databases from January 2006 to November 2021 and reviewed independently by 2 investigators. We selected studies that assessed NEDA-4 at 1 or 2 years after DMT start and had at least 4 years of follow-up for determination of no confirmed disability progression. We conducted a meta-analysis using random-effects model to determine the pooled odds ratio (OR) for no disability progression with NEDA-4 vs EDA-4. For the comparative analysis, we selected studies that evaluated both NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 with at least 4 years of follow-up and examined the difference in the association of NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 with no disability progression.
RESULTS
Five studies of 1,000 patients (3 interferon beta and 2 fingolimod) met inclusion criteria for both objectives. The median duration of follow-up was 6 years (interquartile range: 4-6 years). The prevalence of NEDA-4 ranged from 4.2% to 13.9% on interferon beta therapy and 24.9% to 25.1% on fingolimod therapy. The pooled OR for no long-term confirmed disability progression with NEDA-4 vs EDA-4 was 2.14 (95% confidence interval: 1.36-3.37; I = 0). We did not observe any significant difference between NEDA-4 and NEDA-3 in the comparative analyses.
DISCUSSION
In patients with RRMS, NEDA-4 at 1-2 years was associated with 2 times higher odds of no long-term disability progression, at 6 years compared with EDA-4, but offered no advantage over NEDA-3.
Topics: Disease Progression; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Humans; Interferon-beta; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting
PubMed: 36224046
DOI: 10.1212/NXI.0000000000200032 -
Chinese Medical Journal Nov 2021Despite the recommendation of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) plus long-acting beta 2-agonist (LABA) and leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) or ICS/LTRA as stepwise... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of salmeterol/fluticasone compared with montelukast alone (or add-on therapy to fluticasone) in the treatment of bronchial asthma in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Despite the recommendation of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) plus long-acting beta 2-agonist (LABA) and leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) or ICS/LTRA as stepwise approaches in asthmatic children, there is a lack of published systematic review comparing the efficacy and safety of the two therapies in children and adolescents aged 4 to 18 years. This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of salmeterol/fluticasone (SFC) vs. montelukast (MON), or combination of montelukast and fluticasone (MFC) in children and adolescents aged 4 to 18 years with bronchial asthma.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China BioMedical Literature Database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodical, and Wanfang for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from inception to May 24, 2021. Interventions are as follows: SFC vs. MON, or combination of MFC, with no limitation of dosage or duration. Primary and secondary outcome measures were as follows: the primary outcome of interest was the risk of asthma exacerbation. Secondary outcomes included risk of hospitalization, pulmonary function, asthma control level, quality of life, and adverse events (AEs). A random-effects (I2 ≥ 50%) or fixed-effects model (I2 < 50%) was used to calculate pooled effect estimates, comparing the outcomes between the intervention and control groups where feasible.
RESULTS
Of the 1006 articles identified, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria with 2643 individuals; two were at low risk of bias. As no primary outcomes were similar after an identical treatment duration in the included studies, meta-analysis could not be performed. However, more studies favored SFC, instead of MON, owing to a lower risk of asthma exacerbation in the SFC group. As for secondary outcome, SFC showed a significant improvement of peak expiratory flow (PEF)%pred after 4 weeks compared with MFC (mean difference [MD]: 5.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.57-9.34; I2 = 95%; P = 0.006). As for asthma control level, SFC also showed a higher full-controlled level (risk ratio [RR]: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.24-1.85; I2 = 0; P < 0.001) and higher childhood asthma control test score after 4 weeks of treatment (MD: 2.30; 95% CI: 1.39-3.21; I2 = 72%; P < 0.001) compared with MFC.
CONCLUSIONS
SFC may be more effective than MFC for the treatment of asthma in children and adolescents, especially in improving asthma control level. However, there is insufficient evidence to make firm conclusive statements on the use of SFC or MON in children and adolescents aged 4 to 18 years with asthma. Further research is needed, particularly a combination of good-quality long-term prospective studies and well-designed RCTs.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42019133156.
Topics: Acetates; Administration, Inhalation; Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Albuterol; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Child; Cyclopropanes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fluticasone; Humans; Quinolines; Salmeterol Xinafoate; Sulfides
PubMed: 34784306
DOI: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001853 -
Clinical and Applied... 2022There is no medical treatment proven to limit abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) progression. This systematic review aimed to summarise available trial evidence on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
There is no medical treatment proven to limit abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) progression. This systematic review aimed to summarise available trial evidence on the efficacy of pharmacotherapy in limiting AAA growth and AAA-related events.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed to examine the efficacy of pharmacotherapy in reducing AAA growth and AAA-related events. Pubmed, Embase (Excerpta Medica Database), and the Cochrane library were searched from March, 1999 to March 29, 2022. AAA growth (mm/year) in the intervention and control groups was expressed as mean and standard deviation (SD). The results of AAA growth were expressed as mean difference (MD) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for the AAA-related events.Heterogeneity was quantified using the I statistic. Forest plots were created to show the pooled results of each outcome.
OUTCOMES
A total of 1373 articles were found in different databases according to the search strategy, and 10 articles were identified by hand searching. A total of 26 articles were included in our systematic review after the screening. For the studies of metformin, the meta-analysis demonstrated that metformin use was associated with a lower AAA growth rate (MD: -0.81 mm/y, 95% CI: -1.19 to -0.42, P < 0.0001, I = 87%), Metformin use also was related to the lower rates of AAA-related events (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.76, P = 0.0007, I = 60%). The hypotensive drugs of the studies mainly included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARB), and propranolol. The overall meta-analysis of blood pressure-lowering drugs reported no significant effect in limiting the AAA growth (MD: 0.31mm/year, 95%CI: -0.03 to 0.65, P = 0.07, I = 66%) and AAA-related events (OR: 1.33, 95%CI: 0.76 to 2.32, P = 0.32, I = 98%), In the subgroup analysis of the hypotensive drugs, the ACEI/ARB and propranolol also showed no significant in reducing the AAA growth and AAA-related events. The meta-analysis of the antibiotics demonstrated that the antibiotics were not associated with a lower AAA growth rate (MD: -0.27 mm/y, 95% CI: -0.88 to 0.34, P = 0.39, I = 77%) and AAA-related events (OR: 0.94, 95%CI: 0.65 to 1.35, P = 0.72, I = 0%). The results of statins also showed no significant effect in limiting AAA growth (MD: -1.11mm/year, 95%CI: -2.38 to 0.16, P = 0.09, I = 96%) and AAA-related events (OR: 0.53, 95%CI: 0.26 to 1.06, P = 0.07, I = 92%).
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, effective pharmacotherapy for AAA was still lacking. Although the meta-analysis showed that metformin use was associated with lower AAA growth and AAA-related events, all of the included studies about metformin were cohort studies or case-control studies. More randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed for further verification.
Topics: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Humans; Metformin; Propranolol
PubMed: 36083182
DOI: 10.1177/10760296221120423 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2021Psoriasis is an autoimmune skin disease associated with lipid metabolism. Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) is a bioactive lipid that plays a key role in the development of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis is an autoimmune skin disease associated with lipid metabolism. Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) is a bioactive lipid that plays a key role in the development of autoimmune diseases. However, there is currently a lack of comprehensive evidence of the effectiveness of S1P on psoriasis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy and possible mechanism of S1P and its signal modulators in the treatment of psoriasis-like dermatitis.
METHODS
Six databases were searched through May 8, 2021, for studies reporting S1P and its signal modulators. Two reviewers independently extracted information from the enrolled studies. Methodological quality was assessed using SYRCLE's risk of bias tool. RevMan 5.3 software was used to analyze the data. For clinical studies, the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score were the main outcomes. For preclinical studies, we clarified the role of S1P and its regulators in psoriasis in terms of phenotype and mechanism.
RESULTS
One randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial and nine animal studies were included in this study. The pooled results showed that compared with control treatment, S1P receptor agonists [mean difference (MD): -6.80; 95% confidence interval (CI): -8.23 to -5.38; p<0.00001], and sphingosine kinase 2 inhibitors (MD: -0.95; 95% CI: -1.26 to -0.65; p<0.00001) alleviated psoriasis-like dermatitis in mice. The mechanism of S1P receptor agonists in treating psoriasis might be related to a decrease in the number of white blood cells, topical lymph node weight, interleukin-23 mRNA levels, and percentage of CD3 T cells (p<0.05). Sphingosine kinase 2 inhibitors ameliorated psoriasis in mice, possibly by reducing spleen weight and cell numbers (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
S1P receptor agonists and sphingosine kinase 2 inhibitors could be potential methods for treating psoriasis by decreasing immune responses and inflammatory factors.
Topics: Animals; Enzyme Inhibitors; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Lysophospholipids; Mice; Phosphotransferases (Alcohol Group Acceptor); Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Lysosphingolipid; Software; Sphingosine
PubMed: 34992595
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.759276