-
The Lancet. Haematology Oct 2016Whether high-dose dexamethasone has long-term efficacy and safety in previously untreated patients with immune thrombocytopenia is unclear. We did a systematic review... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
Whether high-dose dexamethasone has long-term efficacy and safety in previously untreated patients with immune thrombocytopenia is unclear. We did a systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomised trials to establish the effect of high-dose dexamethasone compared with prednisone for long-term platelet count response.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Library Database for papers published from 1970 to July, 2016, and abstracts from American Society of Hematology annual meetings published from 2004 to 2015 for randomised trials comparing different corticosteroid regimens for patients with previously untreated immune thrombocytopenia who achieved a platelet count response. Trials that compared corticosteroids exclusively with other interventions were excluded. The primary endpoint was overall (platelets >30 × 10/L) and complete (platelets >100 × 10/L) platelet count response at 6 months with high-dose dexamethasone compared with standard-dose prednisone. Children and adults were analysed separately. Estimates of effect were pooled with a random-effects model.
FINDINGS
Nine randomised trials (n=1138) were included. Of those, five (n=533) compared one to three cycles of dexamethasone (40 mg per day for 4 days) with prednisone (1 mg per kg) for 14-28 days followed by dose tapering in adults. We found no difference in overall platelet count response at 6 months (pooled proportions 54% vs 43%, relative risk [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·79-1·71; p=0·44). At 14 days, overall platelet count response was higher with dexamethasone (79% vs 59%, RR 1·22, 95% CI 1·00-1·49; p=0·048). The dexamethasone group had fewer reported toxicities. Long-term response rates were similar when the data were analysed by cumulative corticosteroid dose over the course of treatment. No difference in initial platelet count response was observed with different high-dose corticosteroid regimens in children.
INTERPRETATION
In adults with previously untreated immune thrombocytopenia, high-dose dexamethasone did not improve durable platelet count responses compared with standard-dose prednisone. High-dose dexamethasone might be preferred over prednisone for patients with severe immune thrombocytopenia who require a rapid rise in platelet count.
FUNDING
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and Canadian Blood Services, and Health Canada.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Child; Dexamethasone; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Humans; Male; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Middle Aged; Platelet Count; Prednisone; Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 27658982
DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3026(16)30109-0 -
Pediatric Nephrology (Berlin, Germany) Aug 2022Edema is one of the cardinal clinical features of nephrotic syndrome (NS). It may vary from mild periorbital edema to severe generalized edema (anasarca). In patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Edema is one of the cardinal clinical features of nephrotic syndrome (NS). It may vary from mild periorbital edema to severe generalized edema (anasarca). In patients where edema does not improve with prednisone therapy, the most common supportive medications are diuretics and albumin. However, due to the complex pathophysiology of edema formation in NS patients resulting in intravascular normovolemia or hypovolemia, optimal therapy for edema is still debated. We conducted a systematic review with the objective of evaluating the change in urine volume and urine sodium excretion after treatment with furosemide only versus furosemide with albumin in edematous patients with NS.
OBJECTIVES
(1) To evaluate efficacy of furosemide alone versus furosemide with albumin in the treatment of nephrotic edema in adults and children. (2) To compare the harms and benefits of different doses of furosemide for treating nephrotic edema.
SEARCH METHODS
The search included all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in English and French using MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL Trials Registry of the Cochrane Collaboration using the Ovid interface.
CLINICALTRIALS
gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all RCTs and randomized cross-over studies in which furosemide and furosemide plus albumin are used in the treatment of children or adults with nephrotic edema. We excluded patients with hypoalbuminemia of non-renal origin and severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) with a glomerular filtration rate below 30 ml/min/1.74 m and patients with congenital NS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All abstracts were independently assessed by at least two authors to determine which studies met the inclusion criteria. Information on study design, methodology, and outcome data (urine volume, urine sodium excretion, adverse effects) from each identified study was entered into a separate data sheet. The differences in outcomes between the types of therapy were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
The search yielded 525 records, and after screening, five studies were included in the systematic review and four of those studies in the meta-analysis. One study had high risk of bias and the remaining three studies were deemed to have some concerns. Urine excretion was greater after treatment with furosemide and albumin versus furosemide (SMD 0.85, 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.38). Results for sodium excretion were inconclusive (SMD 0.37, 95%CI = - 0.28 to 1.02).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The current evidence is not sufficient to make definitive conclusions about the role of albumin in treating nephrotic edema. High-quality randomized studies with adequate samples sizes are needed. Including an assessment of intravascular volume status may be helpful.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Prospero: CRD4201808979. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.
Topics: Adult; Albumins; Child; Edema; Furosemide; Humans; Nephrotic Syndrome; Sodium
PubMed: 35239032
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-021-05358-4 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2016Remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting oedema (RS(3)PE) syndrome is a rare inflammatory arthritis, characterised by symmetrical distal synovitis,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Remitting seronegative symmetrical synovitis with pitting oedema (RS(3)PE) syndrome is a rare inflammatory arthritis, characterised by symmetrical distal synovitis, pitting oedema of the hands and feet, absence of rheumatoid factor, and favourable response to glucocorticoids. The aim of our study is to further delineate the clinical and laboratory features, and response to treatment.
METHODS
We performed a systematic electronic search of Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, ACR and EULAR databases for case reports, case series, and related articles of RS(3)PE. Statistical analysis was done comparing categorical variables with Chi-square tests and frequencies of means via t-tests. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of erosions, recurrence, malignancy and rheumatologic disorders.
RESULTS
331 cases of RS(3)PE were identified from 121 articles. RS(3)PE was found in older patients (71±10.42 years) predominantly in males (n= 211, 63.36%), was symmetrical (n=297/311, 95.50%) involved the hands (n=294/311, 94.53%) A concurrent rheumatologic condition was reported in 22 cases (6.65%), and malignancy in 54 cases (16.31%). Radiographic joint erosions were found in 5.5%. Most patients responded to medium-dose glucocorticoids (16.12±9.5 mg/day). Patients with concurrent malignancy requiring non-significantly higher doses of prednisone (18.12 vs. 15.76 mg, p 0.304) and higher likelihood of recurrence of disease (OR 4.04, 95% CI 1.10-14.88, p=0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
The symptoms and unique findings that make up RS(3)PE appear to represent a steroid-responsive disease that may be a harbinger of an underlying malignancy. More study is needed to understand the molecular origins of RS(3)PE in order to determine whether it is a separate disease process. Patients with concurrent cancer tend to have more severe presentations and higher rates of recurrence.
Topics: Disease Management; Edema; Foot; Glucocorticoids; Hand; Humans; Recurrence; Serologic Tests; Symptom Assessment; Syndrome; Synovitis
PubMed: 27050250
DOI: No ID Found -
JAMA Jun 2016Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and giant cell arteritis (GCA) are related inflammatory disorders occurring in persons aged 50 years and older. Diagnostic and therapeutic... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and giant cell arteritis (GCA) are related inflammatory disorders occurring in persons aged 50 years and older. Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches are heterogeneous in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize current evidence regarding optimal methods for diagnosing and treating PMR and GCA.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from their inception dates to March 30, 2016. Screening by 2 authors resulted in 6626 abstracts, of which 50 articles met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool or American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association methodology.
FINDINGS
Twenty randomized clinical trials for therapy (n = 1016 participants) and 30 imaging studies for diagnosis and/or assessing response to therapy (n = 2080 participants) were included. The diagnosis of PMR is based on clinical features such as new-onset bilateral shoulder pain, including subdeltoid bursitis, muscle or joint stiffness, and functional impairment. Headache and visual disturbances including loss of vision are characteristic of GCA. Constitutional symptoms and elevated inflammatory markers (>90%) are common in both diseases. Ultrasound imaging enables detection of bilateral subdeltoid bursitis in 69% of PMR patients. In GCA, temporal artery biopsy remains the standard for definitive diagnosis. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of large vessels revealing inflammation-induced wall thickening support the diagnosis of GCA (specificity 78%-100% for ultrasound and 73%-97% for MRI). Glucocorticoids remain the primary treatment, but the optimal initial dose and tapering treatment regimens are unknown. According to consensus-based recommendations, initial therapy for PMR is prednisone, 12.5 to 25 mg/day or equivalent, and 40 to 60 mg/day for GCA, followed by individualized tapering regimens in both diseases. Adjunctive methotrexate may reduce cumulative glucocorticoid dosage by 20% to 44% and relapses by 36% to 54% in both PMR and GCA. Use of tocilizumab as additional treatment with prednisone showed a 2- to 4-fold increase in remission rates of GCA in a randomized clinical trial (N = 30).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Diagnosis of PMR/GCA is made by clinical features and elevated inflammatory markers. In PMR, ultrasound imaging may improve diagnostic accuracy. In GCA, temporal artery biopsy may not be required in patients with typical disease features accompanied by characteristic ultrasound or MRI findings. Consensus-based recommendations suggest glucocorticoids as the most effective therapy for PMR/GCA. Methotrexate may be added to glucocorticoids in patients at risk for relapse and in those with glucocorticoid-related adverse effects or need for prolonged glucocorticoid therapy.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Diagnostic Imaging; Drug Administration Schedule; Giant Cell Arteritis; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Methotrexate; Middle Aged; Polymyalgia Rheumatica; Prednisone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27299619
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.5444 -
Clinical Kidney Journal Apr 2021The efficacy and safety of rituximab (RTX) in adult frequent-relapsing (FR) or steroid-dependent (SD) nephrotic syndrome (NS), including minimal change disease (MCD) or... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and safety of rituximab in adult frequent-relapsing or steroid-dependent minimal change disease or focal segmental glomerulosclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The efficacy and safety of rituximab (RTX) in adult frequent-relapsing (FR) or steroid-dependent (SD) nephrotic syndrome (NS), including minimal change disease (MCD) or focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), are still inconclusive.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019148102) by pooling data of cohort studies or case series on adult patients with difficult-to-treat NS. Steroid-resistant NS was excluded. The primary outcomes were the complete remission (CR) rate and the relapse rate. Partial remission (PR) rate, no response (NR) rate and adverse events were the secondary outcomes. A random-effects model was performed for all the outcomes.
RESULTS
We included 21 studies involving 382 adult MCD/FSGS subjects with a median follow-up duration from 12 to 43 months. RTX treatment induced a pooled 84.2% CR rate [95% confidence interval (CI): 67.7-96.3%], while MCD patients had a high 91.6% CR rate and FSGS patients a moderate 43% CR rate. However, 27.4% (95% CI 20.7-34.5%) of the patients relapsed during the follow-up. The pooled PR and NR rates were 5.8% (95% CI 1.2-12.5%) and 5.2% (95% CI 0.0-15.0%), respectively. RTX was associated with trivial adverse events and good tolerance.
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, by pooling results of current pilot studies, RTX may be an effective and relatively safe alternative for most adult FR or SD MCD/FSGS to displace calcineurin inhibitors or prednisone in the hierarchy of treatment. More clinical trials comparing RTX with other immunosuppressants and concerning the long-term adverse events are needed.
PubMed: 34094516
DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfaa191 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Jan 2023This systematic literature review (SLR) regarding the efficacy, duration of use and safety of glucocorticoids (GCs), was performed to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR... (Review)
Review
Efficacy, duration of use and safety of glucocorticoids: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.
This systematic literature review (SLR) regarding the efficacy, duration of use and safety of glucocorticoids (GCs), was performed to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Studies on GC efficacy were identified from a separate search on the efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). A combined search was performed for the duration of use and safety of GCs in RA patients. Dose-defined and time-defined GC treatment of any dose and duration (excluding intra-articular GCs) prescribed in combination with other DMARDs were considered. Results are presented descriptively. Two included studies confirmed the efficacy of GC bridging as initial therapy, with equal efficacy after 2 years of initial doses of 30 mg/day compared with 60 mg/day prednisone. Based on a recently performed SLR, in clinical trials most patients starting initial GC bridging are able to stop GCs within 12 (22% patients continued on GCs) to 24 months (10% patients continued on GCs). The safety search included 12 RCTs and 21 observational studies. Well-known safety risks of GC use were confirmed, including an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures, serious infections, diabetes and mortality. Data on cardiovascular outcomes were Inconsistent. Overall, safety risks increased with increasing dose and/or duration, but evidence on which dose is safe was conflicting. In conclusion, this SLR has confirmed the efficacy of GCs in the treatment of RA. In clinical trials, most patients have shown to be able to stop GCs within 12-24 months. Well-known safety risks of GC use have been confirmed, but with heterogeneity between studies.
Topics: Humans; Glucocorticoids; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Antirheumatic Agents; Prednisone; Drug Therapy, Combination
PubMed: 36410794
DOI: 10.1136/ard-2022-223358 -
Current Rheumatology Reports May 2023Undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD) is characterized by the presence of clinical symptoms of a systemic autoimmune disease in addition to laboratory... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Undifferentiated connective tissue disease (UCTD) is characterized by the presence of clinical symptoms of a systemic autoimmune disease in addition to laboratory evidence of autoimmunity with the patients not fulfilling any of the widely used classification criteria for classic autoimmune diseases. The presence of UCTD as a separate entity versus an early stage of such diseases as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) or scleroderma has long been debated. Given the uncertainty regarding this condition, we performed a systematic review on the topic.
RECENT FINDINGS
UCTD can be subcategorized as evolving (eUCTD) or stable UCTD (sUCTD) based on its evolution towards a definable autoimmune syndrome. Analyzing the data from six UCTD cohorts published in the literature, we found that 28% of patients have an evolving course with the majority developing SLE or rheumatoid arthritis within 5-6 years of the UCTD diagnosis. From the remaining patients, 18% do achieve remission. Published treatment regimens were similar to other mild autoimmune diseases with low-dose prednisone, hydroxychloroquine, and NSAID. One-third of patients did need immune suppressive medications. Importantly, the reported outcomes were excellent with survival rates of more than 90% over 10 years. It has to be noted though that as data on patient related outcomes are not available to date, the exact impact of this condition on quality of life is unclear. UCTD is a mild autoimmune condition with generally good outcomes. There is still great uncertainty though regarding diagnosis and management. Going forward, consistent classification criteria are needed to advance UCTD research and eventually provide authoritative guidance on the management of the condition.
Topics: Humans; Undifferentiated Connective Tissue Diseases; Quality of Life; Autoimmune Diseases; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Connective Tissue Diseases
PubMed: 36884206
DOI: 10.1007/s11926-023-01099-5 -
Advances in Therapy May 2022Many treatment regimens have been evaluated in transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The objective of this study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Many treatment regimens have been evaluated in transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of relevant therapies for the treatment of TIE patients with NDMM.
METHODS
Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating different treatment options for TIE patients with NDMM were compared in a network meta-analysis (NMA). The NMA includes recent primary and long-term OS readouts from SWOG S0777, ENDURANCE, MAIA, and ALCYONE. Relevant trials were identified through a systematic literature review. Relative efficacy measures (i.e., hazard ratios [HRs] for PFS and OS) were extracted and synthesised in random-effects NMAs.
RESULTS
A total of 122 publications describing 45 unique RCTs was identified. Continuous lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) was selected as the referent comparator. Daratumumab-containing treatments (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd], daratumumab/bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [D-VMP]) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd) had the highest probabilities of being more effective than Rd continuous for PFS (HR: D-Rd, 0.53; D-VMP, 0.57, VRd, 0.77) and OS (HR: D-Rd, 0.68; VRd, 0.77, D-VMP, 0.78). D-Rd had the highest chance of being ranked as the most effective treatment with respect to PFS and OS. Results using a smaller network focusing on only those regimens that are relevant in Europe were consistent with the primary analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
These comparative effectiveness data may help inform treatment selection in TIE patients with NDMM.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bortezomib; Dexamethasone; Humans; Lenalidomide; Multiple Myeloma; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35246820
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-022-02083-8 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Oct 2018To provide an updated joint ASCO/Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline on antimicrobial prophylaxis for adult patients with immunosuppression...
PURPOSE
To provide an updated joint ASCO/Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline on antimicrobial prophylaxis for adult patients with immunosuppression associated with cancer and its treatment.
METHODS
ASCO and IDSA convened an update Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of relevant studies from May 2011 to November 2016. The guideline recommendations were based on the review of evidence by the Expert Panel.
RESULTS
Six new or updated meta-analyses and six new primary studies were added to the updated systematic review.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Antibacterial and antifungal prophylaxis is recommended for patients who are at high risk of infection, including patients who are expected to have profound, protracted neutropenia, which is defined as < 100 neutrophils/µL for > 7 days or other risk factors. Herpes simplex virus-seropositive patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation or leukemia induction therapy should receive nucleoside analog-based antiviral prophylaxis, such as acyclovir. prophylaxis is recommended for patients receiving chemotherapy regimens that are associated with a > 3.5% risk for pneumonia as a result of this organism (eg, those with ≥ 20 mg prednisone equivalents daily for ≥ 1 month or on the basis of purine analog usage). Treatment with a nucleoside reverse transcription inhibitor (eg, entecavir or tenofovir) is recommended for patients at high risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation. Recommendations for vaccination and avoidance of prolonged contact with environments that have high concentrations of airborne fungal spores are also provided within the updated guideline. Additional information is available at .
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Humans; Immunocompromised Host; Infection Control; Infections; Neoplasms
PubMed: 30179565
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.18.00374 -
Pediatrics Mar 2014Dexamethasone has been proposed as an equivalent therapy to prednisone/prednisolone for acute asthma exacerbations in pediatric patients. Although multiple small trials... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Dexamethasone has been proposed as an equivalent therapy to prednisone/prednisolone for acute asthma exacerbations in pediatric patients. Although multiple small trials exist, clear consensus data are lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine whether intramuscular or oral dexamethasone is equivalent or superior to a 5-day course of oral prednisone or prednisolone. The primary outcome of interest was return visits or hospital readmissions.
METHODS
A search of PubMed (Medline) through October 19, 2013, by using the keywords dexamethasone or decadron and asthma or status asthmaticus identified potential studies. Six randomized controlled trials in the emergency department of children ≤18 years of age comparing dexamethasone with prednisone/prednisolone for the treatment of acute asthma exacerbations were included. Data were abstracted by 4 authors and verified by a second author. Two reviewers evaluated study quality independently and interrater agreement was assessed.
RESULTS
There was no difference in relative risk (RR) of relapse between the 2 groups at any time point (5 days RR 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-1.78, Q = 1.86, df = 3, I2 = 0.0%, 10-14 days RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.77-1.67, Q = 0.84, df = 2, I2 = 0.0%, or 30 days RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.03-56.93). Patients who received dexamethasone were less likely to experience vomiting in either the emergency department (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12-0.69, Q = 3.78, df = 3, I2 = 20.7%) or at home (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.14-0.74, Q = 2.09, df = 2, I2 = 4.2%).
CONCLUSIONS
Practitioners should consider single or 2-dose regimens of dexamethasone as a viable alternative to a 5-day course of prednisone/prednisolone.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Asthma; Child; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dexamethasone; Humans
PubMed: 24515516
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2013-2273