-
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2023Patients treated with anticonvulsant mood stabilizers have a higher incidence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, there is no comparison between different...
Comparison of the probability of four anticonvulsant mood stabilizers to facilitate polycystic ovary syndrome in women with epilepsies or bipolar disorder-A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Patients treated with anticonvulsant mood stabilizers have a higher incidence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, there is no comparison between different anticonvulsant mood stabilizers. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the prevalence of PCOS in women taking anticonvulsant mood stabilizers and compare the probability of PCOS caused by different anticonvulsant mood stabilizers.
METHODS
Five databases, namely PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials, were searched for literature on anticonvulsant mood stabilizers and PCOS published up to October 28, 2022. This meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4, Stata 14.0, and R4.1.0, and effect size pooling was performed in fixed- or random-effects models based on the results of and Q-test, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used for analysis to assess the cumulative probability of drug-induced PCOS. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot Egger's test and meta regression.
RESULTS
Twenty studies with a total of 1,524 patients were included in a single-arm analysis, which showed a combined effect size (95% CI) of 0.21 (0.15-0.28) for PCOS in patients taking anticonvulsant mood stabilizers. Nine controlled studies, including 500 patients taking medication and 457 healthy controls, were included in a meta-analysis, which showed OR = 3.23 and 95% CI = 2.19-4.76 for PCOS in women taking anticonvulsant mood stabilizers. Sixteen studies with a total of 1416 patients were included in a network meta-analysis involving four drugs, valproate (VPA), carbamazepine (CBZ), oxcarbazepine (OXC), and lamotrigine (LTG), and the results of the network meta-analysis showed that VPA (OR = 6.86, 95% CI = 2.92-24.07), CBZ (OR = 3.28, 95% CI = 0.99-12.64), OXC (OR = 4.30, 95% CI = 0.40-49.49), and LTG (OR = 1.99, 95% CI = 0.16-10.30), with cumulative probabilities ranked as VPA (90.1%), OXC (63.9%), CBZ (50.1%), and LTG (44.0%).
CONCLUSION
The incidence of PCOS was higher in female patients treated with anticonvulsant mood stabilizers than in the healthy population, with VPA having the highest likelihood of causing PCOS. The most recommended medication when considering PCOS factors is LTG.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
identifier: CRD42022380927.
PubMed: 37229383
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1128011 -
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences... 2023Febrile convulsion (FC) is the most common and preventable seizure in children. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the diazepam and phenobarbital for... (Review)
Review
Comparing the effect of intermittent diazepam and continuous phenobarbital in preventing recurrent febrile seizures among children under 6 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Febrile convulsion (FC) is the most common and preventable seizure in children. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the diazepam and phenobarbital for preventing recurrent FC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this systematic review study, literature published in English language were carefully searched in biological databases (Cochrane Library, Medline, Scopus, CINHAL, Psycoinfo, and Proquest) by February 2020.Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and Quasi randomized trial were included in the review. Two researchers checked the literature independently. The quality of studies was assessed using the JADAD score. The potential risk for publication bias was assessed by Funnel plot and Egger's test. Meta regression test and sensitivity analysis were used to identify the reasons for heterogeneity. Given the results of assessing heterogeneity, the random effect model in RevMan5.1 software was used for meta analysis.
RESULTS
Four out of 17 studies had compared the effect of diazepam and phenobarbital in preventing recurrent FC. The result of the meta analysis showed that the use of diazepam in comparison with phenobarbital reduces the risk of recurrence FC by 34% (risk ratio = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.36-1.21]), but the relationship was not statistically significant. In assessing the effect of diazepam or phenobarbital versus placebo, the results showed that the use of diazepam and phenobarbital has reduced the risk of recurrent FC by 49% (risk ratio = 0.51, 95% CI = [0.32-0.79]) and 37% (risk ratio = 0.63, 95% CI = [0.42-0.96)]), respectively, and these relationships were statistically significant ( < 0.05). Results of the meta regression test showed that the follow up time can be a reason for the heterogeneity between trials with the comparison of diazepam versus phenobarbital ( = 0.047, = 0.049) and Phenobarbital versus placebo ( = 0.022, = 0.016). According to the results of Funnel plot and Egger's test, there was evidence of publication bias ( = 0.0584 for comparison of diazepam vs. phenobarbital; = 0.0421 for comparison of diazepam vs. placebo; = 0.0402 for comparison of phenobarbital vs. placebo).
CONCLUSION
The results of this meta analysis indicated that preventive anticonvulsants can be useful in preventing recurrent convulsions in cases of febrile seizures.
PubMed: 37213451
DOI: 10.4103/jrms.jrms_1114_21 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain May 2023While there are several trials that support the efficacy of various drugs for migraine prophylaxis against placebo, there is limited evidence addressing the comparative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
While there are several trials that support the efficacy of various drugs for migraine prophylaxis against placebo, there is limited evidence addressing the comparative safety and efficacy of these drugs. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to facilitate comparison between drugs for migraine prophylaxis.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to August 13, 2022, for randomized trials of pharmacological treatments for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to screen references, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and rated the certainty (quality) of evidence as either high, moderate, low, or very low using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
We identified 74 eligible trials, reporting on 32,990 patients. We found high certainty evidence that monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene related peptide or its receptor (CGRP(r)mAbs), gepants, and topiramate increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo. We found moderate certainty evidence that beta-blockers, valproate, and amitriptyline increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, and low certainty evidence that gabapentin may not be different from placebo. We found high certainty evidence that, compared to placebo, valproate and amitriptyline lead to substantial adverse events leading to discontinuation, moderate certainty evidence that topiramate, beta-blockers, and gabapentin increase adverse events leading to discontinuation, and moderate to high certainty evidence that (CGRP(r)mAbs) and gepants do not increase adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
(CGRP(r)mAbs) have the best safety and efficacy profile of all drugs for migraine prophylaxis, followed closely by gepants.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Gabapentin; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Network Meta-Analysis; Amitriptyline; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Migraine Disorders
PubMed: 37208596
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01594-1 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Apr 2023Chiari Malformation Type I (CM) includes a range of cranial abnormalities at the junction of the skull with the spine, with common symptoms including pain and headaches.... (Review)
Review
Chiari Malformation Type I (CM) includes a range of cranial abnormalities at the junction of the skull with the spine, with common symptoms including pain and headaches. Currently, CM pain is managed medically through anti-inflammatory drugs, muscle relaxants, and opioids, while surgical management includes posterior fossa decompression. Given the adverse effects of opioid use, and an ongoing opioid epidemic, there is a need for safe, non-opioid alternatives for clinical pain management. This systematic review was performed to provide an update on the current literature pertaining to the treatment of CM pain with non-opioid alternatives. A literature search was performed in June 2022 utilizing the PubMed and Google Scholar databases, and articles were identified that included information regarding non-opioid pain management in CM patients. A total of 90 articles were obtained from this search, including 10 relevant, drug-specific studies. Two independent reviewers selected and included all relevant articles based on the chosen search criteria to minimize bias risk. Currently available treatments for neurosurgical pain management include anticonvulsants, corticosteroids, NSAIDs, anti-inflammatory drugs, NMDA receptor antagonists, local anesthetics, nerve blocks, scalp blocks, and neuromuscular blocks. While more information is needed on the use of non-opioid pain management, the present literature provides potential evidence of its efficacy amongst the CM patient population, on account of the success that non-opioid pain management has demonstrated within other neurological pain syndromes. Further research into non-pharmacological pain management would also benefit the CM population and could be generalized to related conditions.
PubMed: 37176505
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12093064 -
Complementary Therapies in Clinical... Aug 2023Few systematic reviews have examined the effects of acupuncture on trigeminal neuralgia. This review aims to provide up-to-date evidence on the efficacy of acupuncture... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Few systematic reviews have examined the effects of acupuncture on trigeminal neuralgia. This review aims to provide up-to-date evidence on the efficacy of acupuncture for managing pain in patients with trigeminal neuralgia.
METHODS
Eleven databases were searched from inception until November 2022 for relevant articles Two researchers independently conducted study selection, data extraction, and evaluation. The present review solely targeted randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool 2.0 was employed to assess the risk of bias. Data were compiled using RevMan 5.4.1 software, and the quality of the evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
Thirty studies involving 2295 patients were included in this review. Compared with carbamazepine, acupuncture led to improvements in pain scores (15 RCTs, mean difference (MD) - 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI)-1.82 to -0.98 [95% prediction interval, -3.137,0.343], p < 0.00001, low certainty of evidence (CoE)), response rates (29 RCTs, risk ratio (RR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.25 [95% prediction interval, 1.067, 1.346], p < 0.00001, low CoE), frequency of pain attacks (2 RCTs, MD -2.53, 95% CI -4.11 to -0.96, P = 0.002, low CoE), and adverse effects (13 RCTs, risk difference (RD) -0.15, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.11 [95% prediction interval, -0.193, -0.108], P < 0.00001, very low CoE).
CONCLUSION
Although the quality of evidence is low, compared with carbamazepine, acupuncture may improve trigeminal neuralgia-related pain. Further rigorously designed studies are warranted to confirm the effects of acupuncture on patients with trigeminal neuralgia.
Topics: Humans; Trigeminal Neuralgia; Acupuncture Therapy; Carbamazepine; Pain Management; Pain
PubMed: 37159979
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2023.101763 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Harmful alcohol use is defined as unhealthy alcohol use that results in adverse physical, psychological, social, or societal consequences and is among the leading risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Harmful alcohol use is defined as unhealthy alcohol use that results in adverse physical, psychological, social, or societal consequences and is among the leading risk factors for disease, disability and premature mortality globally. The burden of harmful alcohol use is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and there remains a large unmet need for indicated prevention and treatment interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in these settings. Evidence regarding which interventions are effective and feasible for addressing harmful and other patterns of unhealthy alcohol use in LMICs is limited, which contributes to this gap in services.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial and pharmacologic treatment and indicated prevention interventions compared with control conditions (wait list, placebo, no treatment, standard care, or active control condition) aimed at reducing harmful alcohol use in LMICs.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indexed in the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group (CDAG) Specialized Register, the Cochrane Clinical Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) through 12 December 2021. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Web of Science, and Opengrey database to identify unpublished or ongoing studies. We searched the reference lists of included studies and relevant review articles for eligible studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All RCTs comparing an indicated prevention or treatment intervention (pharmacologic or psychosocial) versus a control condition for people with harmful alcohol use in LMICs were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 66 RCTs with 17,626 participants. Sixty-two of these trials contributed to the meta-analysis. Sixty-three studies were conducted in middle-income countries (MICs), and the remaining three studies were conducted in low-income countries (LICs). Twenty-five trials exclusively enrolled participants with alcohol use disorder. The remaining 51 trials enrolled participants with harmful alcohol use, some of which included both cases of alcohol use disorder and people reporting hazardous alcohol use patterns that did not meet criteria for disorder. Fifty-two RCTs assessed the efficacy of psychosocial interventions; 27 were brief interventions primarily based on motivational interviewing and were compared to brief advice, information, or assessment only. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to brief interventions given the high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Studies reporting continuous outcomes: Tau² = 0.15, Q =139.64, df =16, P<.001, I² = 89%, 3913 participants, 17 trials, very low certainty; Studies reporting dichotomous outcomes: Tau²=0.18, Q=58.26, df=3, P<.001, I² =95%, 1349 participants, 4 trials, very low certainty). The other types of psychosocial interventions included a range of therapeutic approaches such as behavioral risk reduction, cognitive-behavioral therapy, contingency management, rational emotive therapy, and relapse prevention. These interventions were most commonly compared to usual care involving varying combinations of psychoeducation, counseling, and pharmacotherapy. We are uncertain whether a reduction in harmful alcohol use is attributable to psychosocial treatments due to high levels of heterogeneity among included studies (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 1.15; Q = 444.32, df = 11, P<.001; I²=98%, 2106 participants, 12 trials, very low certainty). Eight trials compared combined pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions with placebo, psychosocial intervention alone, or another pharmacologic treatment. The active pharmacologic study conditions included disulfiram, naltrexone, ondansetron, or topiramate. The psychosocial components of these interventions included counseling, encouragement to attend Alcoholics Anonymous, motivational interviewing, brief cognitive-behavioral therapy, or other psychotherapy (not specified). Analysis of studies comparing a combined pharmacologic and psychosocial intervention to psychosocial intervention alone found that the combined approach may be associated with a greater reduction in harmful alcohol use (standardized mean difference (standardized mean difference (SMD))=-0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.24; 475 participants; 4 trials; low certainty). Four trials compared pharmacologic intervention alone with placebo and three with another pharmacotherapy. Drugs assessed were: acamprosate, amitriptyline, baclofen disulfiram, gabapentin, mirtazapine, and naltrexone. None of these trials evaluated the primary clinical outcome of interest, harmful alcohol use. Thirty-one trials reported rates of retention in the intervention. Meta-analyses revealed that rates of retention between study conditions did not differ in any of the comparisons (pharmacologic risk ratio (RR) = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.44, 247 participants, 3 trials, low certainty; pharmacologic in addition to psychosocial intervention: RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.40, 363 participants, 3 trials, moderate certainty). Due to high levels of heterogeneity, we did not calculate pooled estimates comparing retention in brief (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.00; Q = 172.59, df = 11, P<.001; I = 94%; 5380 participants; 12 trials, very low certainty) or other psychosocial interventions (Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.01; Q = 34.07, df = 8, P<.001; I = 77%; 1664 participants; 9 trials, very low certainty). Two pharmacologic trials and three combined pharmacologic and psychosocial trials reported on side effects. These studies found more side effects attributable to amitriptyline relative to mirtazapine, naltrexone and topiramate relative to placebo, yet no differences in side effects between placebo and either acamprosate or ondansetron. Across all intervention types there was substantial risk of bias. Primary threats to validity included lack of blinding and differential/high rates of attrition.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In LMICs there is low-certainty evidence supporting the efficacy of combined psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use relative to psychosocial interventions alone. There is insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of pharmacologic or psychosocial interventions on reducing harmful alcohol use largely due to the substantial heterogeneity in outcomes, comparisons, and interventions that precluded pooling of these data in meta-analyses. The majority of studies are brief interventions, primarily among men, and using measures that have not been validated in the target population. Confidence in these results is reduced by the risk of bias and significant heterogeneity among studies as well as the heterogeneity of results on different outcome measures within studies. More evidence on the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions, specific types of psychosocial interventions are needed to increase the certainty of these results.
Topics: Humans; Male; Acamprosate; Alcoholism; Amitriptyline; Developing Countries; Disulfiram; Mirtazapine; Naltrexone; Ondansetron; Topiramate
PubMed: 37158538
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013350.pub2 -
Brain and Behavior Jun 2023Sydenham's chorea (SC), prevalent in developing countries and occasionally affecting developed ones, poses a clinical challenge due to the lack of systematic guidelines... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Sydenham's chorea (SC), prevalent in developing countries and occasionally affecting developed ones, poses a clinical challenge due to the lack of systematic guidelines for diagnosis and treatment. Resulting from Group A Beta-Hemolytic Streptococcus infection, SC presents various symptoms. This review aims to collect and evaluate available data on SC management to propose a cohesive treatment plan.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov for literature on SC management from inception until 24th July 2022. Studies were screened by titles and abstracts. Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool (RoB-1) assessed Randomized Controlled Trials, while the Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool evaluated nonrandomized studies.
RESULTS
The review includes 11 articles assessing 579 patients. Excluding one study with 229 patients, of the remaining 550 patients, 338 (61.5%) were females. Treatments used were dopamine antagonists in 118 patients, antiepileptics in 198, corticosteroids in 134, IVIG in 7, and PE in 8 patients. Dopamine antagonists, particularly haloperidol, were the primary treatment choice, while valproic acid (VPA) was favored among antiepileptics. Prednisolone, a corticosteroid, showed promising results with weight gain as the only side-effect. Our review emphasizes the importance of immunomodulators in SC, contrasting previous literature.
CONCLUSION
Despite limitations, dopamine antagonists can serve as first-line agents in SC management, followed by antiepileptics. The role of immunomodulators warrants further investigation for conclusive recommendations.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Chorea; Anticonvulsants; Valproic Acid; Haloperidol; Dopamine Antagonists
PubMed: 37150977
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.3035 -
Research and Practice in Thrombosis and... Mar 2023Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely used in patients with atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. However, DOACs have important potential drug-drug... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely used in patients with atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. However, DOACs have important potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with several classes of drugs. In particular, antiepileptic (AE) drugs may induce cytochrome P450 3A4 or P-glycoprotein. Co-administration of DOACs and AE drugs may result in lower DOAC drug levels and reduced DOAC efficacy. However, the clinical significance of such DDIs is uncertain.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to generate an updated review of these DDIs and their clinical relevance, given the rapidly evolving knowledge relating to DOAC and AE DDIs.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE and Embase databases for studies reporting clinical adverse outcomes (thrombotic events, bleeding events, and all-cause mortality) in patients concomitantly taking DOACs and AE drugs.
RESULTS
We retrieved 874 studies of which 15 were deemed eligible for this review, including 4 congress abstracts, 3 case reports, 2 letters to the editor, 5 retrospective cohorts, and 1 prospective cohort study. No randomized clinical trials were found. Most of the included studies reported thrombotic events, 3 studies reported major bleeding, and one study reported all-cause mortality associated with DOAC and AE drug administration. Substantial differences in the study designs did not allow for a meta-analysis to be performed.
CONCLUSION
The current literature assessing these adverse clinical outcomes from DOAC and AE drug co-administration is limited. Although the available data point to a possible increased risk of thrombotic events, they are insufficient to draw definitive conclusions. Well-designed clinical studies are of utmost importance.
PubMed: 37122531
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpth.2023.100137 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Jul 2023The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for anxiety-reduction by compounds that facilitate endocannabinoid signaling in humans and animals. To identify areas of specific potential, effects of moderators were assessed. Literature was searched in Pubmed and Embase up to May 2021. A placebo/vehicle-control group was required and in human studies, randomization. We excluded studies that co-administered other substances. Risk of bias was assessed with SYRCLE's RoB tool and Cochrane RoB 2.0. We conducted three-level random effects meta-analyses and explored sources of heterogeneity using Bayesian regularized meta-regression (BRMA). The systematic review yielded 134 studies. We analyzed 120 studies (114 animal, 6 human) that investigated cannabidiol (CBD, 61), URB597 (39), PF-3845 (6) and AM404 (14). Pooled effects on conditioned and unconditioned anxiety in animals (with the exception of URB597 on unconditioned anxiety) and on experimentally induced anxiety in humans favored the investigational drugs over placebo/vehicle. Publication year was negatively associated with effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety. Compared to approach avoidance tests, tests of repetitive-compulsive behavior were associated with larger effects of CBD and URB597, and the social interaction test with smaller effects of URB597. Larger effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety were observed when anxiety pre-existed. Studies reported few side effects at therapeutic doses. The evidence quality was low with indications of publication bias. More clinical trials are needed to translate the overall positive results to clinical applications.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Endocannabinoids; Bayes Theorem; Anxiety; Cannabidiol
PubMed: 37094409
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2023.04.001 -
JAMA Network Open Apr 2023Epilepsy is one of the most common neurologic disorders globally. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been approved for the treatment of epilepsy, but its use has been associated with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Epilepsy is one of the most common neurologic disorders globally. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been approved for the treatment of epilepsy, but its use has been associated with several different adverse events (AEs).
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the frequency and risk of AEs developing in patients with epilepsy who are using CBD.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies published from database inception up to August 4, 2022. The search strategy included a combination of the following keywords: (cannabidiol OR epidiolex) AND (epilepsy OR seizures).
STUDY SELECTION
The review included all randomized clinical trials that investigated at least 1 AE from the use of CBD in patients with epilepsy.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Basic information about each study was extracted. I2 statistics were calculated using Q statistics to assess the statistical heterogeneity among the included studies. A random-effects model was used in cases of substantial heterogeneity, and a fixed-effects model was used if the I2 statistic for the AEs was lower than 40%. This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Frequency of each AE and risk of developing each AE in patients with epilepsy using CBD.
RESULTS
Nine studies were included. Overall incidences of 9.7% in the CBD group and 4.0% in the control group were found for any grade AEs. The overall risk ratios (RRs) for any grade and severe grade AEs were 1.12 (95% CI, 1.02-1.23) and 3.39 (95% CI, 1.42-8.09), respectively, for the CBD group compared with the control group. Compared with the control group, the CBD group had a greater risk for incidence of serious AEs (RR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.83-3.88), AEs resulting in discontinuation (RR, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.86-8.37), and AEs resulting in dose reduction (RR, 9.87; 95% CI, 5.34-14.40). Because most of the included studies had some risk of bias (3 raised some concerns and 3 were at high risk of bias), these findings should be interpreted with some caution.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials, the use of CBD to treat patients with epilepsy was associated with an increased risk of several AEs. Additional studies are needed to determine the safe and effective CBD dosage for treating epilepsy.
Topics: Humans; Cannabidiol; Epilepsy; Seizures; Bias
PubMed: 37079302
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.9126