-
Epileptic Disorders : International... Dec 2022We carried out a systematic review of published information on transfer of antiseizure medications (ASMs) into breastmilk, ASM serum concentrations in breastfed infants,...
We carried out a systematic review of published information on transfer of antiseizure medications (ASMs) into breastmilk, ASM serum concentrations in breastfed infants, and the wellbeing of infants breastfed by mothers on ASM treatment. Information was extracted from 85 relevant articles. No data on ASM levels in breastmilk or in breastfed infants was identified for cannabidiol, cenobamate, clobazam, eslicarbazepine-acetate, everolimus, felbamate, fenfluramine, retigabine, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, and vigabatrin. For ASMs, with available information on levels in breastfed infants, very low concentrations (in the order of 10% or less of maternal serum concentrations) were reported for carbamazepine, gabapentin, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, phenytoin, valproate, and clonazepam. Slightly higher levels (up to approximately 30% of maternal serum concentrations) have been observed with lamotrigine and topiramate, and in single case reports for brivaracetam, lacosamide, and perampanel. High infant levels (30% up to 100% of maternal serum concentrations) have been reported with ethosuximide, phenobarbital and zonisamide. Adverse infant effects during breastfeeding by mothers on ASMs appear to be rare regardless of the type of ASM, but systematic study is limited. Prospective long-term follow-up studies of developmental outcomes among children who have been breastfed by mothers taking ASMs are sparse and have mainly involved children whose mothers were taking carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, phenytoin or valproate as monotherapy while breastfeeding. Although these studies have not indicated poorer outcome among breastfed children compared with those who were not breastfed, further data on long-term outcomes are needed to draw firm conclusions. It is concluded that breastfeeding should in general be encouraged in women taking ASMs, given the well-established benefits of breastfeeding with regard to both short- and long-term infant health in the general population. Counselling needs to be individualized including information on the current knowledge regarding the woman's specific ASM treatment.
Topics: Breast Feeding; Cannabidiol; Carbamazepine; Child; Clobazam; Clonazepam; Epilepsy; Ethosuximide; Everolimus; Felbamate; Female; Fenfluramine; Gabapentin; Humans; Infant; Lacosamide; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Oxcarbazepine; Phenobarbital; Phenytoin; Prospective Studies; Tiagabine; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Vigabatrin; Zonisamide
PubMed: 36193017
DOI: 10.1684/epd.2022.1492 -
Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2023: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent condition with fewer treatments available as the severity increases. Previous systematic reviews have... (Review)
Review
: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent condition with fewer treatments available as the severity increases. Previous systematic reviews have demonstrated the benefits of long-term macrolide use. However, the therapeutic differences between different macrolides and the optimal duration of use remain unclear. : A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the effectiveness of long-term macrolide use in reducing COPD exacerbations, compare the therapeutic differences among macrolides, and determine the appropriate treatment duration. Four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ICHU-SHI) were searched until 20 March 2023, and a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect. : The meta-analysis included nine randomized controlled trials involving 1965 patients. The analysis revealed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19, 0.59, < 0.001) for the reduction in exacerbation frequency. Notably, only azithromycin or erythromycin showed suppression of COPD exacerbations. The ORs for reducing exacerbation frequency per year and preventing hospitalizations were -0.50 (95% CI: -0.81, -0.19; = 0.001) and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.3, 0.97; = 0.04), respectively. Statistical analyses showed no significant differences between three- and six-month macrolide prescriptions. However, studies involving a twelve-month prescription showed an OR of 0.27 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.68; = 0.005; I = 81%). Although a significant improvement in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores was observed with a mean difference of -4.42 (95% CI: -9.0, 0.16; = 0.06; I = 94%), the minimal clinically important difference was not reached. While no adverse effects were observed between the two groups, several studies have reported an increase in bacterial resistance. : Long-term use of azithromycin or erythromycin suppresses COPD exacerbations, and previous studies have supported the advantages of a 12-month macrolide prescription over a placebo.
PubMed: 37987263
DOI: 10.3390/diseases11040152 -
Digestion 2023Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter pylori eradication. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy for H. pylori eradication.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to June 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy and triple therapies for H. pylori eradication. Primary outcomes were cure rates and relative efficacy. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, dropout rate, and subgroup analysis.
RESULTS
Five studies with 1,852 patients were included in the analysis. The cure rates of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were 85.6% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 79.7-91.5% and 88.5% (95% CI: 83.2-93.8%) in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was not inferior to that of triple therapy with pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.10) and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.98-1.08) in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses; while it was significantly superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05-1.25, p = 0.001). For clarithromycin-resistant strains, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy showed superiority to vonoprazan-based triple therapy (86.7% vs. 71.4%, RR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03-1.39, p = 0.02); however, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was significant inferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy for clarithromycin-sensitive strains (83.0% vs. 92.8%, RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.95, p = 0.0002). The adverse effects of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were lower than those of triple therapy (21.2% vs. 26.5%, RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01, p = 0.06), especially the incidence of diarrhea (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy is noninferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy but superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy and has less side effects. Patients with clarithromycin-resistant strains are particularly expected to benefit from vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Clarithromycin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Pyrroles; Lansoprazole; Omeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37015201
DOI: 10.1159/000529622 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Oct 2023Ulcerative proctitis (UP) is a common highly symptomatic form of ulcerative colitis that can be difficult to treat. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ulcerative proctitis (UP) is a common highly symptomatic form of ulcerative colitis that can be difficult to treat.
AIM
To assess the efficacy of medical treatments for UP.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL on 23 November 2022 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of medical therapy for adults with UP. Primary outcomes included induction and maintenance of clinical remission. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome.
RESULTS
We included 53 RCTs (n = 4096) including 46 induction studies (n = 3731) and seven maintenance studies (n = 365). First-line therapies included topical 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA), conventional corticosteroids, budesonide, and oral 5-ASA. Therapy for refractory UP included topical tacrolimus and small molecules. Topical 5-ASA was superior to placebo for induction (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.94-3.82) and maintenance of remission (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.26-3.46). Topical corticosteroids were superior to placebo for induction of remission (RR 2.83, 95% CI 1.62-4.92). Topical budesonide was superior to placebo for induction of remission (RR 2.34, 95% CI 1.44-3.81). Combination therapy with topical 5-ASA and topical corticosteroids was superior to topical monotherapy with either agent. Topical tacrolimus was superior to placebo. Etrasimod was superior to placebo for induction (RR 4.71, 95% CI 1.2-18.49) and maintenance of remission (RR 2.08, 95% CI 1.31-3.32).
CONCLUSIONS
Topical 5-ASA and corticosteroids are effective for active UP. Topical 5-ASA may be effective for maintenance of remission. Tacrolimus may be effective for induction of remission. Etrasimod may be effective for induction and for maintenance of remission. Trials should include UP to expand the evidence base for this under-represented population.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Administration, Oral; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Budesonide; Colitis, Ulcerative; Mesalamine; Proctitis; Remission Induction; Tacrolimus
PubMed: 37589498
DOI: 10.1111/apt.17666 -
European Archives of... Aug 2023This PRISMA-compliant systematic review aimed to assess risks and benefits of sirolimus treatment for paediatric lymphatic malformations by focusing not only on... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This PRISMA-compliant systematic review aimed to assess risks and benefits of sirolimus treatment for paediatric lymphatic malformations by focusing not only on treatment efficacy but also on possible treatment-related adverse events, and treatment combinations with other techniques.
METHODS
Search criteria were applied to MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and included all studies published up to March 2022 reporting paediatric lymphatic malformations treated with sirolimus. We selected all original studies that included treatment outcomes. After the removal of duplicates, selection of abstracts and full-text articles, and quality assessment, we reviewed eligible articles for patient demographics, lymphatic malformation type, size or stage, site, clinical response rates, sirolimus administration route and dose, related adverse events, follow-up time, and concurrent treatments.
RESULTS
Among 153 unique citations, 19 studies were considered eligible, with reported treatment data for 97 paediatric patients. Most studies (n = 9) were case reports. Clinical response was described for 89 patients, in whom 94 mild-to-moderate adverse events were reported. The most frequently administered treatment regimen was oral sirolimus 0.8 mg/m twice a day, with the aim of achieving a blood concentration of 10-15 ng/mL.
CONCLUSION
Despite promising results for sirolimus treatment in lymphatic malformation, the efficacy and safety profile of remains unclear due to the lack of high-quality studies. Systematic reporting of known side effects, especially in younger children, should assist clinicians in minimising treatment-associated risks. At the same time, we advocate for prospective multicentre studies with minimum reporting standards to facilitate improved candidate selection.
Topics: Humans; Child; Sirolimus; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Neck; Head; Lymphatic Abnormalities; Vascular Malformations
PubMed: 37115326
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-023-07991-1 -
Heliyon Feb 2022Adequate comprehension of the genomics of microbial resistance to an antimicrobial agent will advance knowledge on the management of associated pathologies and public... (Review)
Review
Adequate comprehension of the genomics of microbial resistance to an antimicrobial agent will advance knowledge on the management of associated pathologies and public health safety. However, continued emergences and reemergence of pathogens, including species, hallmarks a potential knowledge gap. A clear understanding of the process and forecast of the next trend should be in place to nip in the bud, microbial acquisition of resistance to antibiotics. Therefore, this two-decade (1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019) systematic review and meta-analytical study articulated the prevalence and incidence of antibiotics resistance genes in species isolated from environmental samples. Articles from the Web of Science and PubMed electronic databases was engaged. Heterogeneity of the data and bias were analyzed with random effect model meta-analysis and funnel plot. A total of 1920 sp. were reported by the ten selected articles included in this study; out of which 32.39% of identified isolates displayed antimicrobial resistance and associated genes. The distribution of antibiotics resistance genes in sp., reported within six countries was 21% tetracycline (), and 20% sulphonamide () and β-lactamase () respectively. The quinolone, tetracycline and sulfonamide resistance genes showed 32.97% (95% CI 0.18-0.53) prevalence while chloramphenicol, macrolides and aminoglycoside resistance genes are expressed in percentages as 28.67% (95% CI 0.15-0.47) and β-lactamase resistance genes 27.93% (95% CI 0.11-0.56) respectively. The antibiotics resistance genes (-ARG) distribution depicts no regular trend or pattern from the analyzed data. Consequently, more studies would be required to articulate the structure of cohesion in the distribution of the resistance determinants in microbes.
PubMed: 35265752
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08845 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Various immunosuppressive regimens have been developed for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Various immunosuppressive regimens have been developed for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of immunosuppressive regimens in adults with LN.
METHODS
We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, including conference proceedings, trial registries, and reference lists, from inception until July 10, 2022. The effects of treatment were compared and ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The primary endpoint was total remission. The secondary endpoints were complete remission, systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI), relapse, all-cause mortality, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), infection, herpes zoster, ovarian failure, myelosuppression, and cancer.
RESULTS
Sixty-two trials reported in 172 studies involving 6,936 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. The combination of tacrolimus (TAC), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and glucocorticoid (GC) provided the best result for the total remission rate (SUCRA, 86.63%) and SLEDAI (SUCRA, 91.00%), while the combination of voclosporin (VCS) , MMF and GC gave the best improvement in the complete remission rate (SUCRA, 90.71%). The combination of cyclophosphamide (CYC), MMF and GC was associated with the lowest risk of relapse (SUCRA, 85.57%) and cancer (SUCRA, 85.14%), while the combination of obinutuzumab (OTB), MMF and GC was associated with the lowest risk of all-cause mortality (SUCRA, 84.07%). Rituximab (RTX) plus MMF plus GC was associated with the lowest risk of ESRD (SUCRA, 83.11%), while the risk of infection was lowest in patients treated with azathioprine (AZA) plus CYC plus GC (SUCRA, 68.59%). TAC plus GC was associated with the lowest risk of herpes zoster (SUCRA, 87.67%) and ovarian failure (SUCRA, 73.60%). Cyclosporine (CsA) plus GC was associated with the lowest risk of myelosuppression (SUCRA, 79.50%), while AZA plus GC was associated with the highest risk of myelosuppression (SUCRA, 16.25%).
DISCUSSION
This study showed that a combination of TAC, MMF and GC was the best regimen for improving the total remission rate. The optimal regimen for specific outcomes should be highlighted for high-risk patients.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Immunosuppressive Agents; Lupus Nephritis; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Cyclophosphamide; Tacrolimus; Azathioprine; Mycophenolic Acid; Glucocorticoids; Bone Marrow Diseases; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Recurrence; Herpes Zoster; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37901212
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1232244 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jan 2023Due to increasing resistance rates of () to different antibiotics, failures in eradication therapies are becoming more frequent. Even though eradication criteria and...
BACKGROUND
Due to increasing resistance rates of () to different antibiotics, failures in eradication therapies are becoming more frequent. Even though eradication criteria and treatment algorithms for first-line and second-line therapy against infection are well-established, there is no clear recommendation for third-line and rescue therapy in refractory infection.
AIM
To perform a systematic review evaluating the efficacy and safety of rescue therapies against refractory infection.
METHODS
A systematic search of available rescue treatments for refractory infection was conducted on the National Library of Medicine's PubMed search platform based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized or non-randomized clinical trials and observational studies evaluating the effectiveness of infection rescue therapies were included.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies were included in the analysis of mean eradication rates as rescue therapy, and 21 of these were selected for analysis of mean eradication rate as third-line treatment. For rifabutin-, sitafloxacin-, levofloxacin-, or metronidazole-based triple-therapy as third-line treatment, mean eradication rates of 81.6% and 84.4%, 79.4% and 81.5%, 55.7% and 60.6%, and 62.0% and 63.0% were found in intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. For third-line quadruple therapy, mean eradication rates of 69.2% and 72.1% were found for bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT), 88.9% and 90.9% for bismuth quadruple therapy, three-in-one, Pylera (BQT-Pylera), and 61.3% and 64.2% for non-BQT) in ITT and PP analysis, respectively. For rifabutin-, sitafloxacin-, levofloxacin-, or metronidazole-based triple therapy as rescue therapy, mean eradication rates of 75.4% and 78.8%, 79.4 and 81.5%, 55.7% and 60.6%, and 62.0% and 63.0% were found in ITT and PP analysis, respectively. For quadruple therapy as rescue treatment, mean eradication rates of 76.7% and 79.2% for BQT, 84.9% and 87.8% for BQT-Pylera, and 61.3% and 64.2% for non-BQT were found in ITT and PP analysis, respectively. For susceptibility-guided therapy, mean eradication rates as third-line and rescue treatment were 75.0% in ITT and 79.2% in PP analysis.
CONCLUSION
We recommend sitafloxacin-based triple therapy containing vonoprazan in regions with low macrolide resistance profile. In regions with known resistance to macrolides or unavailability of bismuth, rifabutin-based triple therapy is recommended.
Topics: Humans; Helicobacter Infections; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Metronidazole; Helicobacter pylori; Bismuth; Levofloxacin; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Macrolides; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Tetracycline; Rifabutin
PubMed: 36687120
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i2.390 -
A systematic review and meta-analysis of macrolides in the management of adult patients with asthma.Allergology International : Official... Jul 2024The efficacy of macrolides in the management of asthma has been studied but remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of macrolides in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of macrolides in the management of asthma has been studied but remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of macrolides in the management of adult patients with asthma.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials of macrolides used in adult patients with asthma were searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases to evaluate the efficacy and safety of macrolides.
RESULTS
Seventeen reports with macrolide treatment durations ranging from 6 to 48 weeks were included. Macrolides did not reduce exacerbations requiring hospitalization, severe exacerbations, or rescue use of short-acting beta-2 agonist inhalers; improve lung function; decrease peripheral blood or sputum neutrophil counts; or decrease fractional exhaled nitric oxide compared to placebo. Macrolides statistically improved asthma control and quality of life but by less than the minimal clinically important difference. Peripheral blood eosinophil counts as well as serum and sputum eosinophilic cationic protein concentrations were significantly decreased with macrolides compared to placebo. The improvement of asthma symptoms and airway hyperresponsiveness varied by study. The safety profile of macrolides was comparable to that of placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
Although macrolides have some useful clinical aspects, there is not sufficient evidence to recommend their use in the management of adult patients with asthma.
Topics: Humans; Asthma; Macrolides; Adult; Treatment Outcome; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Quality of Life
PubMed: 38296770
DOI: 10.1016/j.alit.2024.01.002 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Aug 2023Current evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Current evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 among healthy adults.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
ELIGIBILITY
Quantitative experimental and observational intervention studies that evaluated the effectiveness of repurposed drugs for the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease.
DATA SOURCE
PubMed and Embase (1 January 2020-28 September 2022).
RISK OF BIAS
Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tools were applied to assess the quality of studies.
DATA ANALYSIS
Meta-analyses for each eligible drug were performed if ≥2 similar study designs were available.
RESULTS
In all, 65 (25 trials, 40 observational) and 29 publications were eligible for review and meta-analyses, respectively. Most studies pertained to hydroxychloroquine (32), ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (11), statin (8), and ivermectin (8). In trials, hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis reduced laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (risk ratio: 0.82 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90), I=48%), a result largely driven by one clinical trial (weight: 60.5%). Such beneficial effects were not observed in observational studies, nor for prognostic clinical outcomes. Ivermectin did not significantly reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR: 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.26), I=96%) and findings for clinical outcomes were inconsistent. Neither ACEi or ARB were beneficial in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most of the evidence from clinical trials was of moderate quality and of lower quality in observational studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Results from our analysis are insufficient to support an evidence-based repurposed drug policy for SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis because of inconsistency. In the view of scarce supportive evidence on repurposing drugs for COVID-19, alternative strategies such as immunisation of vulnerable people are warranted to prevent the future waves of infection.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021292797.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Hydroxychloroquine; Ivermectin; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Primary Prevention
PubMed: 37640510
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001674