-
BMC Geriatrics Sep 2022Adrenergic alpha-1 receptor antagonists (alpha-1 antagonists) are frequently used medications in the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of adrenergic alpha-1 receptor antagonists in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis supporting the development of recommendations to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing.
BACKGROUND
Adrenergic alpha-1 receptor antagonists (alpha-1 antagonists) are frequently used medications in the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and in the management of therapy-resistant arterial hypertension, two conditions frequently found in older adults. This systematic review aims at presenting a complete overview of evidence over the benefits and risks of alpha-1 antagonist treatment in people ≥ 65 years, and at deriving recommendations for a safe application of alpha-1 antagonists in older adults from the evidence found.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed (last update March 25 2022) including multiple databases (Medline/Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library) and using the PICOS framework to define search terms. The selection of the studies was done by two independent reviewers in a two-step approach, followed by a systematic data extraction. Quality appraisal was performed for each study included using standardised appraisal tools. The studies retrieved and additional literature were used for the development of recommendations, which were rated for strength and quality according to the GRADE methodology.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies were included: 3 meta-analyses, 6 randomised controlled trials and 9 observational trials. Doxazosin in the management of arterial hypertension was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, particularly heart failure, than chlorthalidone. Regarding treatment of LUTS suggestive of BPH, alpha-1 antagonists appeared to be effective in the relief of urinary symptoms and improvement of quality of life. They seemed to be less effective in preventing disease progression. Analyses of the risk profile indicated an increase in vasodilation related adverse events and sexual adverse events for some agents. The risk of falls and fractures as well as the effects of long-term treatment remained unclear. All meta-analyses and 5 out of 6 interventional studies were downgraded in the quality appraisal. 7 out of 9 observational studies were of good quality.
CONCLUSIONS
It cannot be recommended to use doxazosin as first-line antihypertensive agent neither in older adults nor in younger patients. In the management of BPH alpha-1 antagonists promise to effectively relieve urinary symptoms with uncertainty regarding their efficacy in preventing long-term progression events.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor Antagonists; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists; Aged; Antihypertensive Agents; Chlorthalidone; Doxazosin; Humans; Hypertension; Inappropriate Prescribing; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Quality of Life
PubMed: 36171560
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-022-03415-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2023Different first-line drug classes for patients with hypertension are often assumed to have similar effectiveness with respect to reducing mortality and morbidity... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Different first-line drug classes for patients with hypertension are often assumed to have similar effectiveness with respect to reducing mortality and morbidity outcomes, and lowering blood pressure. First-line low-dose thiazide diuretics have been previously shown to have the best mortality and morbidity evidence when compared with placebo or no treatment. Head-to-head comparisons of thiazides with other blood pressure-lowering drug classes would demonstrate whether there are important differences.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of first-line diuretic drugs with other individual first-line classes of antihypertensive drugs on mortality, morbidity, and withdrawals due to adverse effects in patients with hypertension. Secondary objectives included assessments of the need for added drugs, drug switching, and blood pressure-lowering.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Hypertension's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers to March 2021. We also checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search of the Specialized Register was carried out in June 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized active comparator trials of at least one year's duration were included. Trials had a clearly defined intervention arm of a first-line diuretic (thiazide, thiazide-like, or loop diuretic) compared to another first-line drug class: beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, alpha adrenergic blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, direct renin inhibitors, or other antihypertensive drug classes. Studies had to include clearly defined mortality and morbidity outcomes (serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), congestive heart failure, and withdrawals due to adverse effects).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 20 trials with 26 comparator arms randomizing over 90,000 participants. The findings are relevant to first-line use of drug classes in older male and female hypertensive patients (aged 50 to 75) with multiple co-morbidities, including type 2 diabetes. First-line thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics were compared with beta-blockers (six trials), calcium channel blockers (eight trials), ACE inhibitors (five trials), and alpha-adrenergic blockers (three trials); other comparators included angiotensin II receptor blockers, aliskiren (a direct renin inhibitor), and clonidine (a centrally acting drug). Only three studies reported data for total serious adverse events: two studies compared diuretics with calcium channel blockers and one with a direct renin inhibitor. Compared to first-line beta-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.10; 5 trials, 18,241 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (5.4% versus 4.8%; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6%, moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.09; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), CHD (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.07; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), or heart failure (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.19; 1 trial, 6569 participants; low-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (10.1% versus 7.9%; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.85; 5 trials, 18,501 participants; ARR 2.2%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line calcium channel blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 7 trials, 35,417 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.24; 2 trials, 7204 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (14.3% versus 13.3%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.18; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty) or CHD (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (4.4% versus 3.2%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.2%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (7.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.88; 7 trials, 33,908 participants; ARR 1.4%; low-certainty). Compared to first-line ACE inhibitors, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; 3 trials, 30,961 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in total cardiovascular events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce stroke slightly (4.7% versus 4.1%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; ARR 0.6%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.12; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; moderate-certainty) or heart failure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 2 trials, 30,392 participants; moderate-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (3.9% versus 2.9%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.84; 3 trials, 25,254 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line alpha-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (12.1% versus 9.0%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 3.1%; moderate-certainty) and stroke (2.7% versus 2.3%; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 0.4%; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (5.4% versus 2.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.58; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; ARR 2.6%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (1.3% versus 0.9%; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 3 trials, 24,772 participants; ARR 0.4%; low-certainty). For the other drug classes, data were insufficient. No antihypertensive drug class demonstrated any clinically important advantages over first-line thiazides.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When used as first-line agents for the treatment of hypertension, thiazides and thiazide-like drugs likely do not change total mortality and likely decrease some morbidity outcomes such as cardiovascular events and withdrawals due to adverse effects, when compared to beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, and alpha-blockers.
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Coronary Disease; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diuretics; Heart Failure; Hypertension; Stroke; Thiazides; Middle Aged
PubMed: 37439548
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008161.pub3 -
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice Jul 2017The association of ADRB3 polymorphism with the risk of T2DM remains unclear perhaps due to different ethnicities and small study sizes. We systemically evaluated the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
The association of ADRB3 polymorphism with the risk of T2DM remains unclear perhaps due to different ethnicities and small study sizes. We systemically evaluated the association of β3-adrenergic receptor(ADRB3)rs4994 and type 2 diabetes(T2DM) by pooling all of the case-control studies reported, and also elucidated the association according to the ethnicity and obesity of the subjects.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Korean scientific database, Chinese medical databases, and the Indian medical database to identify eligible studies for determining the association of ADRB3 rs4994 and T2DM risk. The association was examined in five genetic models: the allelic(AG), recessive(RG), dominant(DG), homozygous(HMG), and heterozygous(HTG) genetic models. Subgroup analyses stratified by ethnicity(Asians and others) were assessed.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 17 eligible studies meeting Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium consisting of 4864 patients with T2DM(cases) and 8779 people without diabetes(controls). All models had no heterogeneity or publication bias in the meta-analysis including all subjects. ADRB3 rs4994 polymorphism of all subjects was significantly associated with an increased risk of T2DM in all genetic models with random effects: AG(OR=1.18, 95% CI: 1.05-1.32), RG(OR=1.76, 95% CI: 1.27-2.42), DG(OR=1.16, 95% CI: 1.03-1.30), HMG (OR=1.78, 95% CI: 1.25-2.52), and HTG(OR=1.11, 95% CI: 1.01-1.23). Furthermore, in sub-group analysis all models except HTG exhibited significant associations between T2DM and ADRB3 in Asians. However, the non-Asian group had no significant association in any genetic models with random effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Middle-age adult Asians with the ADRB3 rs4994 minor alleles are at increased risk of T2DM.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Genotype; Humans; Middle Aged; Polymorphism, Genetic; Receptors, Adrenergic, beta-3; Young Adult
PubMed: 28521197
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2017.03.034 -
European Journal of Heart Failure Jan 2008Heart Failure (HF) is a common disorder associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. beta adrenergic receptors (betaAR) are the primary pathway through which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Heart Failure (HF) is a common disorder associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. beta adrenergic receptors (betaAR) are the primary pathway through which cardiac function is influenced. Chronic beta(1)AR activation is implicated in the pathogenesis of HF and betaAR blockade improves survival in left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Common functional polymorphisms in beta adrenergic receptor genes (ADRB) have been associated with HF phenotypes, and with pharmacogenetic interaction with beta adrenergic receptor blockers (beta blockers). However, these associations have not been consistently replicated. The evidence for ADRB variant involvement in pathogenesis, progression and response to beta blockers in HF is reviewed. In addition, a meta-analysis of three studies analysing the effect of ADRB1 Arg389Gly polymorphism on left ventricular remodelling with the use of beta blockers, demonstrating a 5% improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction in Arg389 homozygotes, is presented. There is now accumulating molecular evidence for a different functional response to beta blockers associated with this polymorphism. In the future, confirmed genotypic associations may enable patients to be identified who are either at greater risk of developing HF, whose HF may rapidly progress, or who are unlikely to benefit from beta blockers, and such patients may benefit from targeted aggressive therapy.
Topics: Exercise Tolerance; Haplotypes; Heart Failure; Humans; Polymorphism, Genetic; Receptors, Adrenergic, beta
PubMed: 18158268
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2007.11.008 -
The Lancet. Child & Adolescent Health Feb 2023In clinical practice guidelines there is no consensus about the medications that should be initially offered to children and young people with Tourette's syndrome. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of children, adolescents, and young adults with Tourette's syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
In clinical practice guidelines there is no consensus about the medications that should be initially offered to children and young people with Tourette's syndrome. To provide a rigorous evidence base that could help guide decision making and guideline development, we aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of pharmacological interventions for Tourette's syndrome.
METHODS
For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov, for published and unpublished studies from database inception to Nov 19, 2021. We included double-blind randomised controlled trials of any medication administered as a monotherapy for at least 1 week against another medication or placebo in children and adolescents (aged ≥4 years and ≤18 years), adults (>18 years), or both, diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome according to standardised criteria. We excluded studies that exclusively recruited participants with comorbid attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder. The primary outcome was change in severity of tic symptoms (efficacy). Secondary outcomes were treatment discontinuations due to adverse events (tolerability) and for any reason (acceptability). Pharmacological interventions were examined considering medication categories and medications individually in separate analyses. Summary data were extracted and pooled with a random-effects network meta-analysis to calculate standardised mean differences for efficacy and odds ratios for tolerability and acceptability, with 95% CIs. The Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework was used to assess the certainty of evidence. The protocol was pre-registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022296975).
FINDINGS
Of the 12 088 records identified through the database search, 88 records representing 39 randomised controlled trials were included in the network meta-analysis; these 39 randomised controlled trials comprised 4578 participants (mean age 11·8 [SD 4·5] years; 3676 [80·8%] male participants) and evaluated 23 individual medications distributed across six medication categories. When considering medication categories, first-generation (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0·65 [95% CI -0·79 to -0·51]; low certainty of evidence) and second-generation (-0·71 [-0·88 to -0·54]; moderate certainty of evidence) antipsychotic drugs, as well as α-2 agonists (-0·21 [-0·39 to -0·03]; moderate certainty of evidence), were more efficacious than placebo. First-generation and second-generation antipsychotic drugs did not differ from each other (SMD 0·06 [95% CI -0·14 to 0·25]; low certainty of evidence). However, both first-generation (SMD 0·44 [95% CI 0·21 to 0·66]) and second-generation (0·49 [0·25 to 0·74]) antipsychotic drugs outperformed α-2 agonists, with moderate certainty of evidence. Similar findings were observed when individual medications were considered: aripiprazole (SMD -0·60 [95% CI -0·83 to -0·38]), haloperidol (-0·51 [-0·88 to -0·14]), olanzapine (-0·83 [-1·49 to -0·18]), pimozide (-0·48 [-0·84 to -0·12]), risperidone (-0·66 [-0·98 to -0·34]), and clonidine (-0·20 [-0·37 to -0·02]) all outperformed placebo, with moderate certainty of evidence. Antipsychotic medications did not differ from each other, but there was low to very low certainty of evidence for these comparisons. However, aripiprazole (SMD -0·40 [95% CI -0·69 to -0·12]) and risperidone (-0·46 [-0·82 to -0·11]) outperformed clonidine, with moderate certainty of evidence. Heterogeneity or inconsistency only emerged for a few comparisons. In terms of tolerability and acceptability, there were no relevant findings for any of the efficacious medication categories or individual medications against each other or placebo, but there was low to very low certainty of evidence associated with these comparisons.
INTERPRETATION
Our analyses show that antipsychotic drugs are the most efficacious intervention for Tourette's syndrome, while α-2 agonists are also more efficacious than placebo and could be chosen by those who elect not to take antipsychotic drugs. Shared decision making about the degree of tic-related severity and distress or impairment, the trade-offs of efficacy and safety between antipsychotic drugs and α-2 agonists, and other highly relevant individual factors that could not be addressed in the present analysis, should guide the choice of medication for children and young people with Tourette's syndrome.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Male; Adolescent; Child; Young Adult; Humans; Female; Tourette Syndrome; Antipsychotic Agents; Clonidine; Aripiprazole; Risperidone; Network Meta-Analysis; Tics; Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Agonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36528030
DOI: 10.1016/S2352-4642(22)00316-9 -
Clinical and Experimental Medicine Jul 2023Preclinical data have revealed that beta-adrenergic stimulation can affect the growth and progression of different types of malignancies. Beta-adrenergic receptor... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Preclinical data have revealed that beta-adrenergic stimulation can affect the growth and progression of different types of malignancies. Beta-adrenergic receptor blockers have been associated with improved survival in patients with many types of cancer. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the association between beta-blocker use and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis.
METHODS
In this meta-analysis, a full search was conducted using PubMed, the Cochrane library and Embase to identify all relevant studies published up to May 2021. Available hazard ratios (HRs) were extracted for overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Four studies involving 7252 patients with HCC met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systemic review. Three studies that reported OS data of 5148 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The random-effects model showed that beta-blocker use was associated with significantly improved OS in HCC (HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.54-0.88, P = 0.0031), without significant heterogeneity (I = 41%; Q = 6.42, P = 0.18).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggested that beta-blocker use can be associated with prolonged OS of patients with HCC.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Prognosis; Proportional Hazards Models; Receptors, Adrenergic, beta
PubMed: 35737170
DOI: 10.1007/s10238-022-00842-z -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jul 2015Acute bronchitis affects more than 40 in 1000 adults per year in the UK. The causes are usually considered to be infective, but only around half of people have... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acute bronchitis affects more than 40 in 1000 adults per year in the UK. The causes are usually considered to be infective, but only around half of people have identifiable pathogens. The role of smoking or of environmental tobacco smoke inhalation in predisposing to acute bronchitis is unclear. One third of people may have longer-term symptoms or recurrence.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for acute bronchitis in people without chronic respiratory disease? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2015 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 420 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 306 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 245 studies and the further review of 61 full publications. Of the 61 full articles evaluated, three updated systematic reviews and three RCTs were added at this update. We performed a GRADE evaluation for 12 PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we categorised the efficacy for six intervention-comparison combinations, based on information about the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics, antihistamines, antitussives, beta2 agonists (inhaled), and expectorants/mucolytics.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Inhalation; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antitussive Agents; Bronchitis; Expectorants; Histamine Antagonists; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26186368
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2011Heart failure occurs in 3% to 4% of adults aged over 65 years, usually as a consequence of coronary artery disease or hypertension, and causes breathlessness, effort... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Heart failure occurs in 3% to 4% of adults aged over 65 years, usually as a consequence of coronary artery disease or hypertension, and causes breathlessness, effort intolerance, fluid retention, and increased mortality. The 5-year mortality in people with systolic heart failure ranges from 25% to 75%, often owing to sudden death following ventricular arrhythmia. Risks of cardiovascular events are increased in people with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) or heart failure.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of multidisciplinary interventions for heart failure? What are the effects of exercise in people with heart failure? What are the effects of drug treatments for heart failure? What are the effects of devices for treatment of heart failure? What are the effects of coronary revascularisation for treatment of heart failure? What are the effects of drug treatments in people at high risk of heart failure? What are the effects of treatments for diastolic heart failure? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to August 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 80 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: aldosterone receptor antagonists, amiodarone, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, anticoagulation, antiplatelet agents, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, cardiac resynchronisation therapy, coronary revascularisation, digoxin (in people already receiving diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors), exercise, hydralazine plus isosorbide dinitrate, implantable cardiac defibrillators, multidisciplinary interventions, non-amiodarone antiarrhythmic drugs, and positive inotropes (other than digoxin).
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy; Heart Failure; Humans; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left
PubMed: 21878135
DOI: No ID Found -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Sep 2021Activation of the HPA-axis and SNS are widely accepted to link chronic stress with elevated levels of peripheral pro-inflammatory markers in blood. Yet, empirical...
Glucocorticoid resistance and β2-adrenergic receptor signaling pathways promote peripheral pro-inflammatory conditions associated with chronic psychological stress: A systematic review across species.
Activation of the HPA-axis and SNS are widely accepted to link chronic stress with elevated levels of peripheral pro-inflammatory markers in blood. Yet, empirical evidence showing that peripheral levels of glucocorticoids and/or catecholamines mediate this effect is equivocal. Recent attention has turned to the possibility that cellular sensitivity to these ligands may contribute to inflammatory mediators that accompany chronic stress. We review current evidence for the association of chronic stress with glucocorticoid receptor (GR) and β-adrenergic receptor (β-AR) signaling sensitivity. Across 15 mouse, 7 primate, and 19 human studies, we found that chronic stress reliably associates with downregulation in cellular GR sensitivity, alterations in intracellular β-AR signaling, and upregulation in pro-inflammatory biomarkers in peripheral blood. We also present evidence that alterations in GR and β-AR signaling may be specific to myeloid progenitor cells such that stress-related signaling promotes release of cells that are inherently less sensitive to glucocorticoids and differentially sensitive to catecholamines. Our findings have broad implications for understanding mechanisms by which chronic stress may contribute to pro-inflammatory phenotypes.
Topics: Animals; Glucocorticoids; Hypothalamo-Hypophyseal System; Mice; Pituitary-Adrenal System; Receptors, Adrenergic; Receptors, Glucocorticoid; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 34116126
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.06.013 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence May 2011Acetylcholinesterase inhibition by organophosphorus pesticides or organophosphate nerve agents can cause acute parasympathetic system dysfunction, muscle weakness,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acetylcholinesterase inhibition by organophosphorus pesticides or organophosphate nerve agents can cause acute parasympathetic system dysfunction, muscle weakness, seizures, coma, and respiratory failure. Prognosis depends on the dose and relative toxicity of the specific compound, as well as pharmacokinetic factors.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for acute organophosphorus poisoning? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 62 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: activated charcoal (single or multiple doses), alpha(2) adrenergic receptor agonists, atropine, benzodiazepines, butyrylcholinesterase replacement therapy, cathartics, extracorporeal clearance, gastric lavage, glycopyrronium bromide (glycopyrrolate), ipecacuanha (ipecac), magnesium sulphate, milk or other home remedy immediately after ingestion, N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists, organophosphorus hydrolases, oximes, removing contaminated clothes and washing the poisoned person, and sodium bicarbonate.
Topics: Acute Disease; Atropine; Charcoal; Gastric Lavage; Humans; Organophosphate Poisoning; Pesticides; Poisoning; Receptors, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate
PubMed: 21575287
DOI: No ID Found