-
BJGP Open Sep 2022Tablet splitting can provide dose flexibility and cost savings; however, pharmaceutical representatives typically discourage the practice.
BACKGROUND
Tablet splitting can provide dose flexibility and cost savings; however, pharmaceutical representatives typically discourage the practice.
AIM
To identify and summarise all published concerns related to tablet splitting and to present the experimental evidence that investigates those concerns.
DESIGN & SETTING
Systematic review and qualitative synthesis of tablet-splitting concerns and evidence.
METHOD
Medline and EMBASE databases were searched over all years of publication for articles in English discussing the splitting of tablets. Eligible articles included original research, narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and expert opinion.
RESULTS
After removing duplicates, 1837 potentially relevant articles underwent dual review, whereupon 1612 articles were excluded based on title and abstract. After examination of 225 full texts, 138 articles were included (one systematic review, four narrative reviews, 101 original research articles, and 32 opinion articles). The described concerns included difficulty breaking tablets, loss of mass, weight variability, chemical instability, overly rapid dosing if sustained-release medications are split, non-compliance, and patient confusion resulting in medication errors. No substantive evidence was found to support concerns regarding loss of mass, weight variability, chemical instability, or non-compliance. Evidence does support some older adults struggling to split tablets without tablet splitters, and the inappropriateness of splitting sustained-release preparations, given the potential for alteration of the rate of drug release for some products.
CONCLUSION
With the exception of sustained-release tablets, which should not be split, and excepting those older people who may struggle to split tablets based on physical limitations, there is little evidence to support tablet-splitting concerns.
PubMed: 35193886
DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2022.0001 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular... Sep 2022The clinical efficacy of corticosteroids remains unclear. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the use of high-dose versus low-... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The clinical efficacy of corticosteroids remains unclear. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the use of high-dose versus low- dose corticosteroids on the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Electronic search for randomized controlled trials and observational studies (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL).
PARTICIPANTS
Hospitalized adults ≥ 18 years old who were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive.
INTERVENTIONS
High-dose and low-dose corticosteroids.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
A total of twelve studies (n=2759 patients) were included in this review. The pooled analysis demonstrated no significant difference in mortality rate between the high-dose and low-dose corticosteroids groups (n=2632; OR: 1.07 [95%CI 0.67, 1.72], p=0.77, I=76%, trial sequential analysis=inconclusive). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate (n=1544; OR: 0.77[95%CI 0.43, 1.37], p=0.37, I= 72%), duration of hospital stay (n=1615; MD: 0.53[95%CI -1.36, 2.41], p=0.58, I=87%), respiratory support (n=1694; OR: 1.51[95%CI 0.77, 2.96], p=0.23, I=84%), duration of mechanical ventilation (n=419; MD: -1.44[95%CI -4.27, 1.40], p=0.32, I=93%), incidence of hyperglycemia (n=516, OR: 0.91[95%CI 0.58, 1.43], p=0.68, I=0%) and infection rate (n=1485, OR: 0.86[95%CI 0.64, 1.16], p=0.33, I=29%).
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis demonstrated high-dose corticosteroids did not reduce mortality rate. However, high-dose corticosteroids did not pose higher risk of hyperglycemia and infection rate for COVID-19 patients. Due to the inconclusive trial sequential analysis, substantial heterogeneity and low level of evidence, future large-scale randomized clinical trials are warranted to improve the certainty of evidence for the use of high-dose compared to low-dose corticosteroids in COVID-19 patients.
Topics: Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; COVID-19; Humans; Hyperglycemia; Respiration, Artificial; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35715291
DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2022.05.011 -
BMC Neurology Jun 2023Many drugs are prescribed in relieving acute migraine attacks, we aim to compare metoclopramide with other antimigraine drugs. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The efficacy and safety of metoclopramide in relieving acute migraine attacks compared with other anti-migraine drugs: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Many drugs are prescribed in relieving acute migraine attacks, we aim to compare metoclopramide with other antimigraine drugs.
METHODS
We searched online databases like PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science till June 2022 for RCTs that compared metoclopramide alone with placebo or active drugs. The main outcomes were the mean change in headache score and complete headache relief. The secondary outcomes were the rescue medications need, side effects, nausea and recurrence rate. We qualitatively reviewed the outcomes. Then, we performed the network meta-analyses (NMAs) when it was possible. which were done by the Frequentist method using the MetaInsight online software.
RESULTS
Sixteen studies were included with a total of 1934 patients: 826 received metoclopramide, 302 received placebo, and 806 received other active drugs. Metoclopramide was effective in reducing headache outcomes even for 24 h. The intravenous route was the most chosen route in the included studies and showed significant positive results regarding headache outcomes; however, the best route whether intramuscular, intravenous, or suppository was not compared in the previous studies. Also, both 10 and 20 mg doses of metoclopramide were effective in improving headache outcomes; however, there was no direct comparison between both doses and the 10 mg dose was the most frequently used dosage. In NMA of headache change after 30 min or 1 h, metoclopramide effect came after granisetron, ketorolac, chlorpromazine, and Dexketoprofen trometamol. Only granisetron's effect was significantly higher than metoclopramide's effect which was only significantly higher than placebo and sumatriptan. In headache-free symptoms, only prochlorperazine was non-significantly higher than metoclopramide which was higher than other medications and showed significantly higher effects only with placebo. In rescue medication, metoclopramide's effect was only non-significantly lower than prochlorperazine and chlorpromazine while its effect was higher than other drugs and showed higher significant effects only than placebo and valproate. In the recurrence rate, studies showed no significant difference between metoclopramide and other drugs. Metoclopramide significantly decreased nausea more than the placebo. Regarding side effects, metoclopramide showed a lower incidence of mild side effects than pethidine and chlorpromazine and showed a higher incidence of mild side effects than placebo, dexamethasone, and ketorolac. The reported extrapyramidal symptoms with metoclopramide were dystonia or akathisia.
CONCLUSION
A dose of 10 mg IV Metoclopramide was effective in relieving migraine attacks with minimal side effects. Compared to other active drugs, it only showed a lower significant effect compared with granisetron regarding headache change while it showed significantly higher effects only with placebo in both rescue medication needs and headache-free symptoms and valproate in only rescue medication need. Also, it significantly decreased headache scores more than placebo and sumatriptan. However, more studies are needed to support our results.
Topics: Humans; Metoclopramide; Sumatriptan; Network Meta-Analysis; Prochlorperazine; Chlorpromazine; Granisetron; Valproic Acid; Ketorolac; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Migraine Disorders; Nausea; Headache
PubMed: 37291500
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-023-03259-7 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Sep 2022Chronic pain represents a global health problem with a considerable economic burden. The relation of alcohol intake and chronic pain conditions was assessed in several... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Chronic pain represents a global health problem with a considerable economic burden. The relation of alcohol intake and chronic pain conditions was assessed in several studies with conflicting results. We used dose-response meta-analysis techniques to answer the question of whether alcohol intake is related to chronic pain occurrence.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and other databases to identify cohort and case-control studies on alcohol consumption and chronic pain. Sixteen studies were eligible with a total population of 642 587 individuals. Fixed-effects and random-effects pooled estimates were obtained by weighting log odds ratios (ORs) in case-control studies and log incidence rate ratios in cohort studies by the inverse of their variance. A heterogeneity assessment and a dose-response analysis were carried out. Quality scoring was also performed.
RESULTS
Our results show that any alcohol consumption was related to lower odds of chronic pain (pooled OR=0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.95). The association was non-linear. The ORs by quartile of alcohol doses were as follows: OR=0.74; 95% CI, 0.64-0.87; OR=0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86; and OR quartile=0.75; 95% CI, 0.50-1.14. This association was observed for cohort studies (OR=0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98) and European studies (OR=0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.87) only. Studies with complete adjustment for confounding factors showed a stronger relation than those with incomplete adjustment (OR=0.69; 95% CI, 0.48-0.99 and OR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.65-1.11, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Alcohol consumption presents a non-linear inverse association with the occurrence of chronic pain. Although plausible mechanisms could explain this protective effect, other explanations, including reverse causation, are probable.
Topics: Alcohol Drinking; Case-Control Studies; Chronic Pain; Ethanol; Humans; Risk Factors
PubMed: 35410791
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.03.010 -
Journal of Medical Virology Jun 2022We analyzed published studies on the efficacy and safety of the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in various general population settings. We conducted systematic...
We analyzed published studies on the efficacy and safety of the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in various general population settings. We conducted systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE for series published in the English language through November 15, 2021, using the search terms "third" or "booster" or "three" and "dose" and "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2." All articles were selected according to the MOOSE guidelines. The seroconversion risk after third doses was descriptively expressed as a pooled rate ratio ([seroconversion rate after the third dose]/[seroconversion rate after the second dose]). The search returned 30 studies that included a total of 2 734 437 vaccinated subjects. In more than 2 700 000 Israeli patients extracted from the general population, the reduction in the risk of infection ranged from 88% to 92%. Conversion rates for IgG anti-spike ranged from 95% to 100%. In cancer or immunocompromised patients, mean IgG seroconversion was 39.4% before and 66.6% after third doses. A third dose seems necessary to protect against all COVID-19 infection, severe disease, and death risk.
Topics: Antibodies, Viral; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Humans; Immunoglobulin G; SARS-CoV-2; Seroconversion
PubMed: 35118680
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27644 -
Seizure Nov 2022Perampanel a third-generation antiseizure medication, belongs to a new promising class of drugs called AMPA receptor antagonists, approved to treat focal-onset seizures... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Perampanel a third-generation antiseizure medication, belongs to a new promising class of drugs called AMPA receptor antagonists, approved to treat focal-onset seizures with or without focal to bilateral tonic clonic seizures and primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures.
METHODS
This review included RCTs on patients with epilepsy exposed to perampanel compared with placebo, or one or more pre-existing antiseizure medications. Four databases and two clinical trial registries were searched from inception to July 2021. Included outcomes were 50% responder rate, seizure-free rate, discontinuation due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE)s, having any TEAEs, and most reported TEAEs. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the internal validity of the included RCTs.
RESULTS
From 2211 retrieved citations, eight RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Fifty-percent responder and seizure freedom rates were significantly higher in patients receiving perampanel when compared to placebo (RR 1.57, 95 % CI 1.35 to 1.82, I 15% and RR 2.79, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.93, I 7%, respectively). The 50% responder rates for 8mg and 12 mg, when compared to placebo, were similar. The most-reported TEAEs were dizziness and somnolence with <1% reporting serious psychological outcomes.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review reports significant reduction in seizures and a potential dose-based increase in discontinuations due to TEAE. The most-reported TEAEs were non-threatening, with the possibility of rare but serious adverse psychological outcomes. Further independent RCTs studying the most efficient dose for efficacy and safety are needed.
Topics: Humans; Anticonvulsants; Treatment Outcome; Pyridones; Seizures; Epilepsy; Drug Therapy, Combination; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36206645
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2022.09.020 -
Journal of the ASEAN Federation of... 2023Myo-inositol has emerged as one of the preventive therapies for the development of gestational diabetes mellitus in at-risk populations. This systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Efficacy and Safety of Myo-inositol Supplementation for the Prevention of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Overweight and Obese Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Myo-inositol has emerged as one of the preventive therapies for the development of gestational diabetes mellitus in at-risk populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of myo-inositol in decreasing the incidence of gestational diabetes in overweight and obese pregnant women.
METHODOLOGY
This meta-analysis was conducted using the standard Cochrane methodology and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled overweight and obese pregnant women and used myo-inositol supplementation. The primary outcome was the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus at 24-28 weeks. Secondary outcomes included cesarean section rate, the incidence of pregnancy-induced hypertension, macrosomia and preterm delivery. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used for dichotomous data.
RESULTS
Six RCTs were included. Compared to standard micronutrient supplementation, standard dose of myo-inositol (4 g) may reduce the incidence of GDM (RR 0.54; CI [0.30, 0.96]; n = 887 women), but the certainty of evidence is low to very low. With low-dose myo-inositol however, evidence is uncertain about its benefit on the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus in overweight and obese women with RR 0.71; CI [0.14, 3.50]. No adverse effects were noted. For the secondary outcomes, standard dose myo-inositol appears to reduce the incidence of pregnancy-induced hypertension and preterm delivery, but the certainty of evidence is low to very low.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence is uncertain on the potential benefit of myo-inositol supplementation in overweight and obese pregnant women. While studies show that 4 g myo-inositol per day may decrease the incidence of GDM, pregnancy-induced hypertension and pre-term birth with no associated risk of serious adverse events, the certainty of evidence is low to very low. Future high-quality trials may provide more compelling evidence to support practice recommendations.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Diabetes, Gestational; Vitamin B Complex; Overweight; Pregnant Women; Premature Birth; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Inositol; Obesity; Dietary Supplements; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38045667
DOI: 10.15605/jafes.038.02.11 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as...
Ciprofol (HSK3486) is a novel intravenous anesthetic agent that bears structural similarity to propofol and displays favorable pharmacodynamic characteristics such as rapid onset and offset. The meta-analysis aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol in clinical practice. Medline, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2023. The primary outcome was success rate of sedation/anesthetic induction and differences in sedation/induction time. The secondary outcomes included risks of hemodynamic instability, respiratory complications, and pain on injection, as well as recovery profiles, satisfaction score, and top-up dose requirement. Twelve RCTs (sedation: = 6, anesthetic induction, = 6, all conducted in China) involving 1,793 patients (age: 34-58 years) published from 2021 to 2023 were analyzed. Pooled results revealed no differences in success rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99 to 1.01, I = 0%, 1,106 patients, = 1] and time required for successful anesthetic induction/sedation [mean difference (MD) = 7.95 s, 95% CI: -1.09 to 16.99, I = 97%, 1,594 patients, = 0.08]. The risks of top-up dose requirement (RR = 0.94, = 0.48), cardiopulmonary complications [i.e., bradycardia (RR = 0.94, = 0.67), tachycardia (RR = 0.83, = 0.68), hypertension (RR = 1.28, = 0.2), hypoxemia/pulmonary depression (RR = 0.78, = 0.24)], and postoperative nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.85, = 0.72), as well as discharge time (MD = 1.39 min, = 0.14) and satisfaction score (standardized MD = 0.23, = 0.16) did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the ciprofol group had lower risks of hypotension (RR = 0.85, = 0.02) and pain on injection (RR = 0.17, < 0.00001) than the propofol group. The time to full alertness was statistically shorter in the propofol group (i.e., 0.66 min), but without clinical significance. Our results demonstrated similar efficacy between ciprofol and propofol for sedation and anesthetic induction, while ciprofol was associated with lower risks of hypotension and pain on injection. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofol in pediatric or the elderly populations. (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/), identifier (CRD42023421278).
PubMed: 37818194
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1225288 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Acute limb ischaemia usually is caused by a blood clot blocking an artery or a bypass graft. Severe acute ischaemia will lead to irreversible damage to muscles and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute limb ischaemia usually is caused by a blood clot blocking an artery or a bypass graft. Severe acute ischaemia will lead to irreversible damage to muscles and nerves if blood flow is not restored in a few hours. Once irreversible damage occurs, amputation will be necessary and the condition can be life-threatening. Infusion of clot-busting drugs (thrombolysis) is a useful tool in the management of acute limb ischaemia. Fibrinolytic drugs are used to disperse blood clots (thrombi) to clear arterial occlusion and restore blood flow. Thrombolysis is less invasive than surgery. A variety of techniques are used to deliver fibrinolytic agents. This is an update of a review first published in 2004.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of infusion techniques during peripheral arterial thrombolysis for treatment of patients with acute limb ischaemia.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registries to 20 October 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing infusion techniques for fibrinolytic agents in the treatment of acute limb ischaemia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. We assessed the risk of bias in included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We evaluated certainty of evidence using GRADE. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the odds ratio (OR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We were not able to carry out meta-analyses due to clinical heterogeneity, so we have reported the results and performed the comparisons narratively. The main outcomes of interest were amputation-free survival or limb salvage, amputation, mortality, vessel patency, duration of thrombolysis, and complications such as cerebrovascular accident and major and minor bleeding.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine studies with a total of 671 participants are included in this update. Trials covered a variety of infusion techniques, dosage regimens, and adjunctive agents. We grouped trials according to types of techniques assessed (e.g. intravenous and intra-arterial delivery of the agent, 'high-' and 'low-dose' regimens of the agent, continuous infusion and 'forced infusion' of the agent, use of adjunctive antiplatelet agents). We assessed the certainty of evidence as very low to low due to the limited power of individual studies to deliver clinically relevant results, small and heterogeneous study populations, use of different inclusion criteria by each study in terms of severity and duration of ischaemia, considerably different outcome measures between trials, and use of different fibrinolytic agents. This heterogeneity prevented pooling of data in meta-analyses. No regimen has been shown to confer benefit in terms of amputation-free survival (at 30 days), amputation, or death. For vessel patency, complete success was more likely with intra-arterial (IA) than with intravenous (IV) infusion (odds ratio (OR) 13.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.79 to 62.67; 1 study, 40 participants; low-certainty evidence); radiological failure may be more likely with IV infusion (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38; 1 study, 40 participants; low-certainty evidence). Due to the small numbers involved in each arm and design differences between arms, it is not possible to conclude whether any technique offered any advantage over another. None of the treatment strategies clearly affected complications such as cerebrovascular accident or major bleeding requiring surgery or blood transfusion. Minor bleeding complications were more frequent in systemic (intravenous) therapy compared to intra-arterial infusion (OR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.56; 1 study, 40 participants), and in high-dose compared to low-dose therapy (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.96; 1 study, 63 participants). Limited evidence from individual trials appears to indicate that high-dose and forced-infusion regimens reduce the duration of thrombolysis. In one trial, the median duration of infusion was 4 hours (range 0.25 to 46) for the high-dose group and 20 hours (range 2 to 46) for the low-dose group. In a second trial, treatment using pulse spray was continued for a median of 120 minutes (range 40 to 310) compared with low-dose infusion for a median of 25 hours (range 2 to 60). In a third trial, the median duration of therapy was reduced with pulse spray at 195 minutes (range 90 to 1260 minutes) compared to continuous infusion at 1390 minutes (range 300 to 2400 minutes). However, none of the studies individually showed improvement in limb salvage at 30 days nor benefit for the amputation rate related to the technique of drug delivery. Similarly, no studies reported a clear difference in occurrence of cerebrovascular accident or major bleeding. Although 'high-dose' and 'forced-infusion' techniques achieved vessel patency in less time than 'low-dose' infusion, more minor bleeding complications may be associated (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.96; 1 study, 72 participants; and OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.32; 1 study, 121 participants, respectively). Use of adjunctive platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists did not improve outcomes, and results were limited by inclusion of participants with non-limb-threatening ischaemia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to show that any thrombolytic regimen provides a benefit over any other in terms of amputation-free survival, amputation, or 30-day mortality. The rate of CVA or major bleeding requiring surgery or blood transfusion did not clearly differ between regimens but may occur more frequently in high dose and IV regimens. This evidence was limited and of very low certainty. Minor bleeding may be more common with high-dose and IV regimens. In this context, thrombolysis may be an acceptable therapy for patients with marginally threatened limbs (Rutherford grade IIa) compared with surgery. Caution is advised for patients who do not have limb-threatening ischaemia (Rutherford grade I) because of risks of major haemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident, and death from thrombolysis.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Arteries; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Ischemia; Thrombolytic Therapy
PubMed: 34786692
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000985.pub3 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023To present the pooled quantitative evidence of baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with refractory Takayasu arteritis (TAK). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To present the pooled quantitative evidence of baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with refractory Takayasu arteritis (TAK).
METHODS
A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was performed on all available studies retrieved from the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases, using TCZ in patients with refractory TAK. We applied the commands and in Stata Software to pool overall estimates of continuous data and binomial data, respectively. A random-effects model was recruited for analysis.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies with 466 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The mean age at implementation of TCZ was 34.32 years. Female sex and Numano Type V were the most prominent baseline characteristics. During the 12-month follow-up when receiving TCZ treatment, pooled CRP was 1.17 mg/L (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.18-2.52), pooled ESR was 3.54 mm/h (95% CI 0.51-6.58), and pooled glucocorticoid dose was 6.26 mg/d (95% CI 4.24-8.27). Approximately 76% (95% CI 58-87%) of patients achieved a decrease in glucocorticoid dosage. Meanwhile, patients with TAK had a remission rate of 79% (95% CI 69-86%), a relapse rate of 17% (95% CI 5-45%), an imaging progress rate of 16% (95% CI 9-27%), and a retention rate of 68% (95% CI 50-82%). Adverse events occurred in 16% (95% CI 5-39%) of patients, and infection was the most common adverse event, with a rate of 12% (95% CI 5-28%).
CONCLUSION
TCZ treatment can provide favorable outcomes in terms of inflammatory markers, steroid-sparing effects, clinical response, drug retention and minimizing adverse effects for patients with refractory TAK.
Topics: Humans; Female; Adult; Glucocorticoids; Takayasu Arteritis; Treatment Outcome; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
PubMed: 36845158
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1084558