-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Topical cyclosporine A (also known as ciclosporin A) (CsA) is an anti-inflammatory that has been widely used to treat inflammatory ocular surface diseases. Two CsA...
BACKGROUND
Topical cyclosporine A (also known as ciclosporin A) (CsA) is an anti-inflammatory that has been widely used to treat inflammatory ocular surface diseases. Two CsA eyedrops have been approved by US Food and Drug Administration for managing dry eye: Restasis (CsA 0.05%, Allergan Inc, Irvine, CA, USA), approved in 2002, and Cequa (CsA 0.09%, Sun Pharma, Cranbury, NJ, USA), approved in 2018. Numerous clinical trials have been performed to assess the effectiveness and safety of CsA for dry eye; however, there is no universal consensus with regard to its effect.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of topical CsA in the treatment of dry eye.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2018, Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 16 February 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people with dry eye regardless of age, sex, severity, etiology, or classification of dry eye. We included RCTs in which different concentrations of topical CsA were compared with one another or with artificial tears, placebo, or vehicle. We also included RCTs in which CsA in combination with artificial tears was compared to artificial tears alone.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed the standard Cochrane methodology and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 30 RCTs (4009 participants) with follow-up periods ranging from 6 weeks to 12 months. We studied dry eye of various severity and underlying causes. The interventions investigated also varied across RCTs: CsA versus artificial tears; CsA with artificial tears versus artificial tears alone; and in some studies, more than one concentration of CsA. Artificial tears were used as adjunctive to study medication in all but five trials. Almost all trials had deficiencies in the reporting of results (e.g. reporting P values or direction only), precluding the calculation of between-group estimates of effect or meta-analysis.Eighteen trials compared topical CsA 0.05% plus artificial tears versus vehicle plus artificial tears or artificial tears alone. One trial reported subjective symptoms of dry eye at 6 months and the results were in favor of CsA (mean difference (MD) -4.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.41 to -3.19; low-certainty evidence). Two trials reported MD in ocular surface dye staining at 6 months, but the results were inconsistent in these two trials (MD -0.35, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.01 in one and MD 0.58, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.10 in the other; low-certainty evidence). Four trials reported MD in Schirmer test scores at 6 months and the estimates ranged from -4.05 (95% CI -6.67 to -1.73) to 3.26 (95% CI -1.52 to 5.00) (low-certainty evidence). Three trials reported risk ratio (RR) of improved Schirmer test scores at 6 months; estimates ranged from 0.98 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.17) to 3.50 (95% CI 2.09 to 5.85) (low-certainty evidence). Four trials reported MD in tear film stability measured by tear break-up time at 6 months and the estimates ranged from -1.98 (95% CI -3.59 to -0.37) to 1.90 (95% CI 1.44 to 2.36) (low-certainty evidence). Three trials reported RR of improved tear break-up time at 6 months and the estimates ranged from 0.90 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.04) to 4.00 (95% CI 2.25 to 7.12) (low-certainty evidence). Three trials reported frequency of artificial tear usage at 6 months without providing any estimates of effect; the direction of effect seem to be in favor of CsA (low-certainty evidence). Because of incomplete reporting of the results data or considerable statistical heterogeneity, we were only able to perform a meta-analysis on mean conjunctival goblet cell density. Mean conjunctival goblet cell density in the CsA treated group may be greater than that in the control group at the end of follow-up at four and 12 months (MD 22.5 cells per unit, 95% CI 16.3 to 28.8; low-certainty evidence). All but two trials reported adverse events that included burning and stinging. Participants treated with CsA may be more likely to have treatment-related adverse events than those who treated with vehicle (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.78; low-certainty evidence).Other comparisons evaluated were CsA 0.05% plus artificial tears versus higher concentrations of CsA plus artificial tears (4 trials); CsA 0.05% versus placebo or vehicle (4 trials); CsA 0.1% plus artificial tears versus placebo or vehicle plus artificial tears (2 trials);CsA 0.1% cationic emulsion plus artificial tears versus vehicle plus artificial tears (2 trials); CsA 1% plus artificial tears versus placebo plus artificial tears (3 trials); and CsA 2% plus artificial tears versus placebo plus artificial tears (3 trials). Almost all of these trials reported P value or direction of effect only (mostly in favor of CsA), precluding calculation of between-group effect estimates or meta-analyses.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the widespread use of topical CsA to treat dry eye, we found that evidence on the effect of CsA on ocular discomfort and ocular surface and tear film parameters such as corneal fluorescein staining, Schirmer's test, and TBUT is inconsistent and sometimes may not be different from vehicle or artificial tears for the time periods reported in the trials. There may be an increase in non-serious, treatment-related adverse effects (particularly burning) in the CsA group. Topical CsA may increase the number of conjunctival goblet cells. However, current evidence does not support that improvements in conjunctival mucus production (through increased conjunctival goblet cells) translate to improved symptoms or ocular surface and tear film parameters. All published trials were short term and did not assess whether CsA has longer-term disease-modifying effects. Well-planned, long-term, large clinical trials are needed to better assess CsA on long-term dry eye-modifying effects. A core outcome set, which ideally includes both biomarkers and patient-reported outcomes in the field of dry eye, is needed.
Topics: Cyclosporine; Dry Eye Syndromes; Humans; Lubricant Eye Drops; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31517988
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010051.pub2 -
Clinical Nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland) Apr 2023Accumulating scientific evidence supports the benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) with fish oil (FO) containing intravenous lipid emulsions (ILEs) on clinical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Accumulating scientific evidence supports the benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) with fish oil (FO) containing intravenous lipid emulsions (ILEs) on clinical outcomes. Yet, the question of the most effective ILE remains controversial. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank different types of ILEs in terms of their effects on infections, sepsis, ICU and hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality in adult patients.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to May 2022, investigating ILEs as a part of part of PN covering at least 70% of total energy provision. Lipid emulsions were classified in four categories: FO-ILEs, olive oil (OO)-ILEs, medium-chain triglyceride (MCT)/soybean oil (SO)-ILEs, and pure SO-ILEs. Data were statistically combined through Bayesian NMA and the Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking (SUCRA) was calculated for all outcomes.
RESULTS
1651 publications were retrieved in the original search, 47 RCTs were included in the NMA. For FO-ILEs, very highly credible reductions in infection risk versus SO-ILEs [odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 90% credibility interval (CrI) (0.29-0.63)], MCT/soybean oil-ILEs [0.59 (0.43-0.82)], and OO-ILEs [0.56 (0.33-0.91)], and in sepsis risk versus SO-ILEs [0.22 (0.08-0.59)], as well as substantial reductions in hospital length of stay versus SO-ILEs [mean difference (MD) = -2.31 (-3.14 to -1.59) days] and MCT/SO-ILEs (-2.01 (-2.82 to -1.22 days) were shown. According to SUCRA score, FO-ILEs were ranked first for all five outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
In hospitalized patients, FO-ILEs provide significant clinical benefits over all other types of ILEs, ranking first for all outcomes investigated.
REGISTRATION NO
PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022328660.
Topics: Humans; Soybean Oil; Network Meta-Analysis; Parenteral Nutrition; Fat Emulsions, Intravenous; Fish Oils; Olive Oil; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Sepsis
PubMed: 36878111
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2023.02.008 -
The British Journal of Dermatology Jul 2019Rosacea is a common chronic facial dermatosis. Classification of rosacea has evolved from subtyping to phenotyping.
BACKGROUND
Rosacea is a common chronic facial dermatosis. Classification of rosacea has evolved from subtyping to phenotyping.
OBJECTIVES
To update our systematic review on interventions for rosacea.
METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index and ongoing trials registers (March 2018) for randomized controlled trials. Study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment and analyses were carried out independently by two authors. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to assess certainty of evidence.
RESULTS
We included 152 studies (46 were new), comprising 20 944 participants. Topical interventions included brimonidine, oxymetazoline, metronidazole, azelaic acid, ivermectin and other topical treatments. Systemic interventions included oral antibiotics, combinations with topical treatments or other systemic treatments. Several studies evaluated laser or light-based treatment. We present the most current evidence for rosacea management based on a phenotype-led approach.
CONCLUSIONS
For reducing temporarily persistent erythema there was high-certainty evidence for topical brimonidine and moderate certainty for topical oxymetazoline; for erythema and mainly telangiectasia there was low-to-moderate-certainty evidence for laser and intense pulsed light therapy. For reducing papules/pustules there was high-certainty evidence for topical azelaic acid and topical ivermectin; moderate-to-high-certainty evidence for doxycycline 40 mg modified release (MR) and isotretinoin; and moderate-certainty evidence for topical metronidazole, and topical minocycline and oral minocycline being equally effective as doxycycline 40 mg MR. There was low-certainty evidence for tetracycline and low-dose minocycline. For ocular rosacea, there was moderate-certainty evidence that oral omega-3 fatty acids were effective and low-certainty evidence for ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion and doxycycline.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Administration, Oral; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Brimonidine Tartrate; Combined Modality Therapy; Dermatologic Agents; Dermatology; Drug Therapy, Combination; Evidence-Based Medicine; Facial Dermatoses; Humans; Intense Pulsed Light Therapy; Low-Level Light Therapy; Oxymetazoline; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rosacea; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30585305
DOI: 10.1111/bjd.17590 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur together in the same people. They can be associated with an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur together in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective in preventing eczema or food allergy.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objective To assess effects of skin care interventions, such as emollients, for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to July 2020: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers and checked reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We contacted field experts to identify planned trials and to seek information about unpublished or incomplete trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (0 to 12 months) without pre-existing diagnosis of eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition were included. Comparison was standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions included moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured by the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen.
MAIN RESULTS
This review identified 33 RCTs, comprising 25,827 participants. A total of 17 studies, randomising 5823 participants, reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review. Eleven studies randomising 5217 participants, with 10 of these studies providing IPD, were included in one or more meta-analysis (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis). Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported our outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to two years. We assessed most of this review's evidence as low certainty or had some concerns of risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. Evidence for the primary food allergy outcome was rated as high risk of bias due to inclusion of only one trial where findings varied when different assumptions were made about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change risk of eczema by one to two years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) nor time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). It is unclear whether skin care interventions during infancy change risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to two years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.47; 996 participants, 1 trial) or allergic sensitisation to a food allergen at age one to two years (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.69; 1055 participants, 2 trials) due to very low-certainty evidence for these outcomes. Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial). However, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to significant over-reporting of cow's milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.77; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) or stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although confidence intervals for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions are wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses show that effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, FLG mutation, or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and risk of developing eczema or food allergy.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema, and probably increase risk of skin infection. Effects of skin care interventions on risk of food allergy are uncertain. Further work is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might promote or prevent eczema and to evaluate effects on food allergy based on robust outcome assessments.
Topics: Bias; Eczema; Emollients; Female; Filaggrin Proteins; Food Hypersensitivity; Humans; Hypersensitivity, Immediate; Immunoglobulin E; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Male; Milk Hypersensitivity; Skin Care; Skin Diseases, Infectious; Soaps
PubMed: 33545739
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013534.pub2 -
Frontiers in Nutrition 2021Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common digestive tract cancers and ranks fifth in the incidence of malignant tumors worldwide. oil emulsion injection (BJOEI), a... (Review)
Review
Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common digestive tract cancers and ranks fifth in the incidence of malignant tumors worldwide. oil emulsion injection (BJOEI), a Chinese patent medicine extracted from (Yadanzi in Chinese Pinyin), is widely used as an adjuvant treatment for GC in China. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the available data on the efficacy and safety of BJOEI in the treatment of GC and assess the quality of the synthesized evidence. A comprehensive search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database and Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP database), and other potential resources, such as the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to July 31, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the therapeutic effects of BJOEI combined with conventional therapy to those of conventional therapy alone were included. We used RevMan 5.3 for data analysis and quality evaluation of the included studies and assessed the evidence quality based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Eighteen RCTs involving 1,210 patients were included, and the meta-analysis results demonstrated that compared with the control group (conventional therapy), the experimental group (BJOEI combined with conventional therapy) showed a significantly improved overall response rate (ORR) (risk ratio [RR] = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.36-1.69, < 0.00001), clinical benefit rate (CBR) (RR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.11-1.23, < 0.00001), performance status (RR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.46-2.01, < 0.00001), and reduced incidence of the following adverse drug reactions (ADRs): neutropenia, leukopenia, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, liver damage, hand-foot syndrome, and peripheral sensory nerve toxicity. Subgroup analysis showed that the BJOEI intervention could significantly improve the ORR and CBR in patients with GC when combined with FOLFOX4, XELOX, and other chemotherapeutics. The evidence presented in this study supports the fact that BJOEI combined with conventional chemotherapy provides a statistically significant and clinically important effect in the improvement of ORR, CBR, performance status, and ADR reduction in patients with GC. To further support this conclusion, more rigorously designed, large-scale, and multicenter RCTs are needed in the future.
PubMed: 34957186
DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2021.784164 -
Bioactive Materials Dec 2019Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, relapsing, non-contiguous, exudative eczema/dermatitis, which represents a complex, multi-factorial disorder, due to an impairment of the... (Review)
Review
Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, relapsing, non-contiguous, exudative eczema/dermatitis, which represents a complex, multi-factorial disorder, due to an impairment of the barrier. Currently available drugs have a low skin bioavailability and may give rise to severe adverse events. Nanotechnologies, including nano-particles, liposomes, nano-gels, nano-mixtures, nano-emulsions and other nano-carriers, offer unprecedented solutions to these issues, enabling: i) the management of different clinical forms of atopic dermatitis, especially the recalcitrant ones, i) a better bio-availability and trans-dermal drug targeted delivery at the inflammation site, ii) dose control, iii) significant improvements both in clinical symptoms and immune responses, iv) with less adverse events being reported and a better safety profile. However, some nano-sized structures could amplify and even worsen symptoms in particularly susceptible individuals. Furthermore, most studies included in the present systematic review have been conducted or , with few randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). Future investigations should adopt this design in order to enable scholars achieving robust findings and evidence. Therefore, given the above-mentioned shortcomings, further research in the field is urgently warranted.
PubMed: 31872162
DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2019.11.003 -
Nature Communications Jan 2020Standard inactivated influenza vaccines are poorly immunogenic in immunologically naive healthy young children, who are particularly vulnerable to complications from... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Standard inactivated influenza vaccines are poorly immunogenic in immunologically naive healthy young children, who are particularly vulnerable to complications from influenza. For them, there is an unmet need for better influenza vaccines. Oil-in-water emulsion-adjuvanted influenza vaccines are promising candidates, but clinical trials yielded inconsistent results. Here, we meta-analyze randomized controlled trials with efficacy data (3 trials, n = 15,310) and immunogenicity data (17 trials, n = 9062). Compared with non-adjuvanted counterparts, adjuvanted influenza vaccines provide a significantly better protection (weighted estimate for risk ratio of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza: 0.26) and are significantly more immunogenic (weighted estimates for seroprotection rate ratio: 4.6 to 7.9) in healthy immunologically naive young children. Nevertheless, in immunologically non-naive children, adjuvanted and non-adjuvanted vaccines provide similar protection and are similarly immunogenic. These results indicate that oil-in-water emulsion adjuvant improves the efficacy of inactivated influenza vaccines in healthy young children at the first-time seasonal influenza vaccination.
Topics: Adjuvants, Immunologic; Antibodies, Viral; Antibody Formation; Child; Databases, Factual; Emulsions; Humans; Immunity; Influenza Vaccines; Influenza, Human; Oils; Orthomyxoviridae; Vaccination; Water
PubMed: 31949137
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-14230-x -
Medicine Feb 2020Influenza is a severe disease burden among all age groups. This study aimed to review the efficacy of inactivated influenza vaccines with MF59 adjuvant and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Influenza is a severe disease burden among all age groups. This study aimed to review the efficacy of inactivated influenza vaccines with MF59 adjuvant and non-adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccines among all age groups against specific influenza vaccine strains.
METHODS
Literature search of PubMed, Embase, Medline, OVID, and Cochrane Library Trials (CENTRAL) was implemented up to March 1, 2019. Homogeneity qualified studies were included forData were extracted such as study country location, demographic characteristics, and measure outcomes, and were analyzed by a random effect model and sensitivity analyses to identify heterogeneity. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.
RESULTS
We retrieved 1,021 publications and selected 31 studies for full review, including 17 trials for meta-analysis and 6 trials for qualitative synthesis. MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccines demonstrated better immunogenicity against specific vaccine virus strains compared to non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine both in healthy adult group (RR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.28-3.44) and the healthy aged (RR = 1.26; 95% CI: 1.10-1.44).
CONCLUSION
The quality of evidence is moderate to high for seroconversion and seroprotection rates of influenza vaccine. MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccines are superior to non-adjuvanted influenza vaccines to enhance immune responses of vaccination in healthy adults and older adults, and could be considered for routine use especially the monovalent prepandemic influenza vaccines.
Topics: Adjuvants, Immunologic; Adolescent; Adult; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Child; Female; Humans; Immunogenicity, Vaccine; Influenza Vaccines; Influenza, Human; Male; Middle Aged; Polysorbates; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seroconversion; Squalene; Vaccines, Inactivated; Young Adult
PubMed: 32049815
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019095 -
European Review For Medical and... Jun 2020Intravenous lipid emulsions (ILE) were developed many decades ago to supply nutritional requirements to patients unable to obtain adequate enteral nutrition. The utility...
OBJECTIVE
Intravenous lipid emulsions (ILE) were developed many decades ago to supply nutritional requirements to patients unable to obtain adequate enteral nutrition. The utility of ILE was extended to therapeutics, facilitating the delivery of drugs. More recently, the potential for ILE to act as an antidote for inversion of drug toxicity has been recognized. This review aims to summarize the literature on ILE therapy as an antidote. Suggested mechanisms of action, safety profile, and recommendations on the administration of ILE in cases of drug intoxication are highlighted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A complete literature survey was performed using the PubMed database search to collect available information regarding mechanisms of ILE action as an antidote, ILE administration for drug toxicity, and presentation of adverse events.
RESULTS
A total of 102 studies met the selection criteria for inclusion in the review. Mainly used for local anesthetics toxicity, ILE therapy has been expanded in clinical toxicology involving overdose treatment of drugs other than local anesthetics. Partitioning in a lipid phase of fat droplets is a mechanism named the lipid sink phenomenon that has primarily been described to explain this action of ILE and remains the most widely accepted. At the same time, recent research has also revealed several molecular mechanisms that may contribute to ILE efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS
ILE therapy comprises a recognized approach in clinical toxicology. Due to the lack of randomized clinical trials, recommendations on administration are based on animal studies and published cases. Thus, the constantly increased knowledge about ILE therapy supports the need for a detailed appraisal.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Animals; Antidotes; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Fat Emulsions, Intravenous; Humans
PubMed: 32633409
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202006_21708 -
Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2020Microemulsions drug delivery systems (MDDS) have been known to increase the bioavailability of hydrophobic drugs. The main challenge of the MDDS is the development of an... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Microemulsions drug delivery systems (MDDS) have been known to increase the bioavailability of hydrophobic drugs. The main challenge of the MDDS is the development of an effective and safe system for drug carriage and delivery. Biosurfactants are preferred surface-active molecules because of their lower toxicity and safe characteristics when compared to synthetic surfactants. Glycolipid and lipopeptide are the most common biosurfactants that were tested for MDDS. The main goal of the present systematic review was to estimate the available evidence on the role of biosurfactant in the development of MDDS.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Literature searches involved the main scientific databases and were focused on the period from 2005 until 2017. The Search filter composed of two items: "Biosurfactant" and/or "Microemulsion."
INCLUSION CRITERIA
Twenty-four studies evaluating the use of biosurfactant in MDDS were eligible for inclusion. Among these 14 were related to the use of glycolipid biosurfactants in the MDDS formulations, while four reported using lipopeptide biosurfactants and six other related review articles.
RESULTS
According to the output study parameters, biosurfactants acted as active stabilizers, hydrophilic or hydrophobic linkers and safety carriers in MDDS, and among them glycolipid biosurfactants had the most application in MDDS formulations.
CONCLUSION
Synthetic surfactants could be replaced by biosurfactants as an effective bio-source for MDDS due to their excellent self-assembling and emulsifying activity properties.
Topics: Drug Carriers; Drug Delivery Systems; Emulsions; Glycolipids; Humans; Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions; Lipopeptides; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Surface-Active Agents
PubMed: 32103896
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S232325