-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biological agents. Although each one of these therapies reduces relapse frequency and slows disability accumulation compared to no treatment, their relative benefit remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety, through network meta-analysis, of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine, immunoglobulins, cladribine, cyclophosphamide, diroximel fumarate, fludarabine, interferon beta 1-a and beta 1-b, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, mycophenolate mofetil, ofatumumab, ozanimod, ponesimod, rituximab, siponimod and steroids for the treatment of people with RRMS.
SEARCH METHODS
CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers were searched on 21 September 2021 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search was conducted on 8 August 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the available immunomodulators and immunosuppressants as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or to another active agent, in adults with RRMS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We considered both direct and indirect evidence and performed data synthesis by pairwise and network meta-analysis. Certainty of the evidence was assessed by the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 50 studies involving 36,541 participants (68.6% female and 31.4% male). Median treatment duration was 24 months, and 25 (50%) studies were placebo-controlled. Considering the risk of bias, the most frequent concern was related to the role of the sponsor in the authorship of the study report or in data management and analysis, for which we judged 68% of the studies were at high risk of other bias. The other frequent concerns were performance bias (34% judged as having high risk) and attrition bias (32% judged as having high risk). Placebo was used as the common comparator for network analysis. Relapses over 12 months: data were provided in 18 studies (9310 participants). Natalizumab results in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.63; high-certainty evidence). Fingolimod (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.57; moderate-certainty evidence), daclizumab (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; moderate-certainty evidence), and immunoglobulins (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months. Relapses over 24 months: data were reported in 28 studies (19,869 participants). Cladribine (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.64; high-certainty evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; high-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.65; high-certainty evidence) result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Fingolimod (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.60; moderate-certainty evidence), dimethyl fumarate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence), and ponesimod (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Glatiramer acetate (RR 0.84, 95%, CI 0.76 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence) and interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91; moderate-certainty evidence) probably moderately decrease people with relapses at 24 months. Relapses over 36 months findings were available from five studies (3087 participants). None of the treatments assessed showed moderate- or high-certainty evidence compared to placebo. Disability worsening over 24 months was assessed in 31 studies (24,303 participants). Natalizumab probably results in a large reduction of disability worsening (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence) at 24 months. Disability worsening over 36 months was assessed in three studies (2684 participants) but none of the studies used placebo as the comparator. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events data were available from 43 studies (35,410 participants). Alemtuzumab probably results in a slight reduction of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence). Daclizumab (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.40 to 4.63; moderate-certainty evidence), fingolimod (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.57; moderate-certainty evidence), teriflunomide (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.79; moderate-certainty evidence), interferon beta-1a (OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.20; moderate-certainty evidence), laquinimod (OR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.00 to 2.15; moderate-certainty evidence), natalizumab (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.05), and glatiramer acetate (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.14; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a slight increase in the number of people who discontinue treatment due to adverse events. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 35 studies (33,998 participants). There was probably a trivial reduction in SAEs amongst people with RRMS treated with interferon beta-1b as compared to placebo (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.54; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are highly confident that, compared to placebo, two-year treatment with natalizumab, cladribine, or alemtuzumab decreases relapses more than with other DMTs. We are moderately confident that a two-year treatment with natalizumab may slow disability progression. Compared to those on placebo, people with RRMS treated with most of the assessed DMTs showed a higher frequency of treatment discontinuation due to AEs: we are moderately confident that this could happen with fingolimod, teriflunomide, interferon beta-1a, laquinimod, natalizumab and daclizumab, while our certainty with other DMTs is lower. We are also moderately certain that treatment with alemtuzumab is associated with fewer discontinuations due to adverse events than placebo, and moderately certain that interferon beta-1b probably results in a slight reduction in people who experience serious adverse events, but our certainty with regard to other DMTs is lower. Insufficient evidence is available to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs in a longer term than two years, and this is a relevant issue for a chronic condition like MS that develops over decades. More than half of the included studies were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced their results. Further studies should focus on direct comparison between active agents, with follow-up of at least three years, and assess other patient-relevant outcomes, such as quality of life and cognitive status, with particular focus on the impact of sex/gender on treatment effects.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Glatiramer Acetate; Interferon beta-1a; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Natalizumab; Interferon beta-1b; Cladribine; Alemtuzumab; Dimethyl Fumarate; Daclizumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Immunologic Factors; Recurrence
PubMed: 38174776
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011381.pub3 -
Jornal de Pediatria 2024To investigate the effectiveness of linezolid and vancomycin for the treatment of nosocomial infections in children under 12 years old. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effectiveness of linezolid and vancomycin for the treatment of nosocomial infections in children under 12 years old.
DATA SOURCES
This is a systematic review in which five randomized clinical trials about the effectiveness of linezolid and vancomycin, involving a total of 429 children with nosocomial infections, were evaluated. They were searched in scientific databases: PubMed, Bvs, and SciELO.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The main nosocomial infections that affected children were bacteremia, skin, and soft tissue infections followed by nosocomial pneumonia. Most infections were caused by Gram-positive bacteria, which all studies showed infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus, with methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci strains being isolated. Both linezolid and vancomycin showed high therapeutic efficacy against different types of nosocomial infections, ranging from 84.4% to 94% for linezolid and 76.9% to 90% for vancomycin. Patients receiving linezolid had lower rates of rash and red man syndrome compared to those receiving vancomycin. However, despite the adverse reactions, antimicrobials can be safely administered to children to treat nosocomial infections caused by resistant Gram-positive bacteria.
CONCLUSION
Both linezolid and vancomycin showed good efficacy in the treatment of bacterial infections caused by resistant Gram-positive bacteria in hospitalized children. However, linezolid stands out regarding its pharmacological safety. Importantly, to strengthen this conclusion, further clinical trials are needed to provide additional evidence.
Topics: Humans; Linezolid; Cross Infection; Vancomycin; Child; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Child, Preschool; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Infant; Staphylococcal Infections; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections
PubMed: 38145631
DOI: 10.1016/j.jped.2023.08.011 -
Pharmacological Research Jan 2024Short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), the main metabolites of gut microbiota, have been associated with lower blood glucose and lipid levels in diabetic mice. However, a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), the main metabolites of gut microbiota, have been associated with lower blood glucose and lipid levels in diabetic mice. However, a comprehensive summary and comparison of the effects of different SCFA interventions on blood glucose and lipid levels in diabetic mice is currently unavailable. This study aims to compare and rank the effects of different types of SCFAs on blood glucose and lipid levels by collecting relevant animal research. A systematic search through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database was conducted to identify relevant studies from inception to March 17, 2023. Both pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis were used for statistical analyses. In total, 18 relevant studies involving 5 interventions were included after screening 3793 citations and 53 full-text articles. Notably, butyrate therapy (mean difference [MD] = -4.52, 95% confidence interval [-6.29, -2.75]), acetate therapy (MD = -3.12, 95% confidence interval [-5.79, -0.46]), and propionate therapy (MD = -2.96, 95% confidence interval [-5.66, -0.26]) significantly reduced the fasting blood glucose levels compared to the control group; butyrate therapy was probably the most effective intervention, with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 85.5%. Additionally, acetate plus propionate therapy was probably the most effective intervention for reducing total cholesterol (SUCRA = 85.8%) or triglyceride levels (SUCRA = 88.1%). These findings underscore the potential therapeutic implications of SCFAs for addressing metabolic disorders, particularly in type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Topics: Animals; Mice; Acetates; Bayes Theorem; Blood Glucose; Butyrates; Diabetes Mellitus, Experimental; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Fatty Acids, Volatile; Network Meta-Analysis; Propionates
PubMed: 38128856
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2023.107041 -
CNS Drugs Jan 2024Studies have suggested that levetiracetam may help improve cognitive function in patients with epilepsy. Recently, its efficacy in improving cognitive function was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Studies have suggested that levetiracetam may help improve cognitive function in patients with epilepsy. Recently, its efficacy in improving cognitive function was reported in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment, schizophrenia, and Alzheimer's disease. However, the specific cognitive domains affected and the degree of evidence supporting these effects remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the effects of levetiracetam on different cognitive domains.
METHODS
This meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. We defined our inclusion criteria for the systematic review as: (1) randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) involving human subjects, (2) double-blinded RCTs, and (3) RCTs evaluating the quantitative differences in cognitive function between levetiracetam and placebo. We excluded: (1) non-RCT studies, (2) open-label studies, and (3) RCTs lacking cognitive assessments for either intervention. Two authors independently searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov, from inception until 2 July 2023. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analytic techniques were applied to examine the impact of levetiracetam on cognitive domain tests, with Hedges' g facilitating the comparison with placebo. The domains analyzed comprised multi-domain, executive function, processing speed, working memory, verbal memory/learning (verbal ML), visuospatial memory/learning (visuospatial ML), and language. We used odds ratios to compare the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events between the groups, including somnolence, fatigue, dizziness, headache, irritability, and cognitive adverse events.
RESULTS
A random-effects model was utilized to perform a meta-analysis of 16 RCTs including 545 participants. Compared with a placebo, levetiracetam was associated with improved executive function [Hedges'g = - 0.390, 95% confidence interval (CI) = - 0.609 to - 0.172, p < 0.001, I = 24.0%]. Subgroup analysis showed that levetiracetam outperformed placebo in patients without epilepsy (Hedges' g = - 0.419, 95% CI = - 0.647 to - 0.191, p < 0.001, I = 26.2%). Meanwhile, low-dose levetiracetam showed a moderate favorable effect over placebo (Hedges' g = -0.544, 95% CI = - 1.085 to - 0.003, p = 0.049, I = 65.3%). In patients without epilepsy, low-dose levetiracetam was associated with improved executive function (Hedges'g = - 0.544, 95% CI = - 1.085 to - 0.003, p = 0.049, I = 65.3%). Concurrently, levetiracetam was associated with more frequent somnolence than a placebo (odds ratio = 4.654, 95% CI = 1.533 to 14.124, p = 0.007, I = 32.9%). Potential publication bias was observed in the executive function domain.
CONCLUSIONS
This exploratory study suggests that levetiracetam might improve executive function in specific populations. However, the diversity in study populations and potential publication bias warrant caution.
Topics: Humans; Cognition; Cognitive Dysfunction; Epilepsy; Levetiracetam; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleepiness
PubMed: 38102532
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-023-01058-9 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023People with Multiple Sclerosis (PwMS) are vulnerable to unfavorable occupational outcomes and the COVID-19 pandemic brought major consequences on people's professional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
People with Multiple Sclerosis (PwMS) are vulnerable to unfavorable occupational outcomes and the COVID-19 pandemic brought major consequences on people's professional lives. In this view, we decided to investigate the occupational outcomes of PwMS during the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis searching key terms in four databases. We initially included any peer-reviewed original article that enrolled adult patients with the diagnosis of MS and assessed any occupational variable during the COVID-19 pandemic. There were no time limits and no language restrictions. The primary outcomes were the prevalence of unemployment, retirement and employment status change among people with MS during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other outcomes included the modality and characteristics of work: type of work, full-time work, part-time work and remote work. We also searched for data from studies that addressed any change in the work status due to the COVID-19 outbreak.
RESULTS
We identified 49 eligible articles comprising a total sample size of 17,364 individuals with MS. The pooled prevalence of unemployment and retirement was 0.47 (95% CI = 0.42-0.53). The pooled prevalence of PwMS who were unemployed or retired was positively associated with the progressive phenotype of the disease ( = 0.017) and the use of glatiramer acetate ( = 0.004), but negatively associated with hospitalization due to COVID-19 ( = 0.008) and the use of immunosuppressants ( = 0.032), siponimod ( < 0.001), and cladribine ( = 0.021). The pooled proportion of PwMS that reported any change of the employment status during the COVID-19 pandemic was 0.43 (95% CI = 0.36-0.50) while the pooled prevalence of PwMS who worked remotely during this period was 0.37 (95% CI = 0.15-0.58). The change in employment status was negatively associated with the duration of MS ( = 0.03) but positively associated with the progressive phenotype of the disease ( < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Our seminal review may serve as an example of how patients with neurological diseases or disabilities in general may have their jobs impacted in a pandemic and foster the context of global socio-economic crisis.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; Multiple Sclerosis; Pandemics; Disease Outbreaks
PubMed: 38089033
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1217843 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system that affects mainly young adults (two to three times more frequently in women than in men) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system that affects mainly young adults (two to three times more frequently in women than in men) and causes significant disability after onset. Although it is accepted that immunotherapies for people with MS decrease disease activity, uncertainty regarding their relative safety remains.
OBJECTIVES
To compare adverse effects of immunotherapies for people with MS or clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), and to rank these treatments according to their relative risks of adverse effects through network meta-analyses (NMAs).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, two other databases and trials registers up to March 2022, together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included participants 18 years of age or older with a diagnosis of MS or CIS, according to any accepted diagnostic criteria, who were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined one or more of the agents used in MS or CIS, and compared them versus placebo or another active agent. We excluded RCTs in which a drug regimen was compared with a different regimen of the same drug without another active agent or placebo as a control arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods for data extraction and pairwise meta-analyses. For NMAs, we used the netmeta suite of commands in R to fit random-effects NMAs assuming a common between-study variance. We used the CINeMA platform to GRADE the certainty of the body of evidence in NMAs. We considered a relative risk (RR) of 1.5 as a non-inferiority safety threshold compared to placebo. We assessed the certainty of evidence for primary outcomes within the NMA according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high.
MAIN RESULTS
This NMA included 123 trials with 57,682 participants Serious adverse events (SAEs) Reporting of SAEs was available from 84 studies including 5696 (11%) events in 51,833 (89.9%) participants out of 57,682 participants in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of SAEs, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 18 additional people would have a SAE compared to placebo. Low-certainty evidence suggested that three drugs may decrease SAEs compared to placebo (relative risk [RR], 95% confidence interval [CI]): interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (0.78, 0.66 to 0.94); dimethyl fumarate (0.79, 0.67 to 0.93), and glatiramer acetate (0.84, 0.72 to 0.98). Several drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo: moderate-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.08, 0.88 to 1.31); low-certainty evidence for ocrelizumab (0.85, 0.67 to 1.07), ozanimod (0.88, 0.59 to 1.33), interferon beta-1b (0.94, 0.78 to 1.12), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (0.96, 0.80 to 1.15), natalizumab (0.97, 0.79 to 1.19), fingolimod (1.05, 0.92 to 1.20) and laquinimod (1.06, 0.83 to 1.34); very low-certainty evidence for daclizumab (0.83, 0.68 to 1.02). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the other drugs: low-certainty evidence for cladribine (1.10, 0.79 to 1.52), siponimod (1.20, 0.95 to 1.51), ofatumumab (1.26, 0.88 to 1.79) and rituximab (1.01, 0.67 to 1.52); very low-certainty evidence for immunoglobulins (1.05, 0.33 to 3.32), diroximel fumarate (1.05, 0.23 to 4.69), peg-interferon beta-1a (1.07, 0.66 to 1.74), alemtuzumab (1.16, 0.85 to 1.60), interferons (1.62, 0.21 to 12.72) and azathioprine (3.62, 0.76 to 17.19). Withdrawals due to adverse events Reporting of withdrawals due to AEs was available from 105 studies (85.4%) including 3537 (6.39%) events in 55,320 (95.9%) patients out of 57,682 patients in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of withdrawals, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 31 additional people would withdraw compared to placebo. No drug reduced withdrawals due to adverse events when compared with placebo. There was very low-certainty evidence (meaning that estimates are not reliable) that two drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo, assuming an upper 95% CI RR limit of 1.5: diroximel fumarate (0.38, 0.11 to 1.27) and alemtuzumab (0.63, 0.33 to 1.19). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the following drugs: low-certainty evidence for ofatumumab (1.50, 0.87 to 2.59); very low-certainty evidence for methotrexate (0.94, 0.02 to 46.70), corticosteroids (1.05, 0.16 to 7.14), ozanimod (1.06, 0.58 to 1.93), natalizumab (1.20, 0.77 to 1.85), ocrelizumab (1.32, 0.81 to 2.14), dimethyl fumarate (1.34, 0.96 to 1.86), siponimod (1.63, 0.96 to 2.79), rituximab (1.63, 0.53 to 5.00), cladribine (1.80, 0.89 to 3.62), mitoxantrone (2.11, 0.50 to 8.87), interferons (3.47, 0.95 to 12.72), and cyclophosphamide (3.86, 0.45 to 33.50). Eleven drugs may have increased withdrawals due to adverse events compared with placebo: low-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.37, 1.01 to 1.85), glatiramer acetate (1.76, 1.36 to 2.26), fingolimod (1.79, 1.40 to 2.28), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (2.15, 1.58 to 2.93), daclizumab (2.19, 1.31 to 3.65) and interferon beta-1b (2.59, 1.87 to 3.77); very low-certainty evidence for laquinimod (1.42, 1.01 to 2.00), interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (1.54, 1.13 to 2.10), immunoglobulins (1.87, 1.01 to 3.45), peg-interferon beta-1a (3.46, 1.44 to 8.33) and azathioprine (6.95, 2.57 to 18.78); however, very low-certainty evidence is unreliable. Sensitivity analyses including only studies with low attrition bias, drug dose above the group median, or only patients with relapsing remitting MS or CIS, and subgroup analyses by prior disease-modifying treatments did not change these figures. Rankings No drug yielded consistent P scores in the upper quartile of the probability of being better than others for primary and secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found mostly low and very low-certainty evidence that drugs used to treat MS may not increase SAEs, but may increase withdrawals compared with placebo. The results suggest that there is no important difference in the occurrence of SAEs between first- and second-line drugs and between oral, injectable, or infused drugs, compared with placebo. Our review, along with other work in the literature, confirms poor-quality reporting of adverse events from RCTs of interventions. At the least, future studies should follow the CONSORT recommendations about reporting harm-related issues. To address adverse effects, future systematic reviews should also include non-randomized studies.
Topics: Male; Female; Young Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Adult; Interferon beta-1a; Immunosuppressive Agents; Glatiramer Acetate; Network Meta-Analysis; Cladribine; Natalizumab; Interferon beta-1b; Alemtuzumab; Dimethyl Fumarate; Daclizumab; Azathioprine; Rituximab; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Multiple Sclerosis; Immunotherapy
PubMed: 38032059
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012186.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023Currently, gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are used to prevent premature ovulation in ART cycles. However, their costs remain high, the route of... (Review)
Review
Progestogens for prevention of luteinising hormone (LH) surge in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation as part of an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle.
BACKGROUND
Currently, gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are used to prevent premature ovulation in ART cycles. However, their costs remain high, the route of administration is invasive and has some adverse effects. Oral progestogens could be cheaper and effective to prevent a premature LH surge.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of using progestogens to avoid spontaneous ovulation in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO in Dec 2021. We contacted study authors and experts to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included progestogens for ovulation inhibition in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane, including the risk of bias (RoB) assessment. The primary review outcomes were live birth rate (LBR) and oocyte pick-up cancellation rate (OPCR). Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), cumulative pregnancy, miscarriage rate (MR), multiple pregnancies, LH surge, total and MII oocytes, days of stimulation, dose of gonadotropins, and moderate/severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate. The primary analyses were restricted to studies at overall low and some concerns RoB, and sensitivity analysis included all studies. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 RCTs (2643 subfertile women undergoing ART, 47 women used oocyte freezing for fertility preservation and 534 oocyte donors). Progestogens versus GnRH antagonists We are very uncertain of the effect of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) 10 mg compared with cetrorelix on the LBR in poor responders (odds ratio (OR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 2.13, one RCT, N = 340, very-low-certainty evidence), suggesting that if the chance of live birth following GnRH antagonists is assumed to be 18%, the chance following MPA would be 14% to 32%. There may be little or no difference in OPCR between progestogens and GnRH antagonists, but due to wide Cs (CIs), we are uncertain (OR 0.92, 95%CI 0.42 to 2.01, 3 RCTs, N = 648, I² = 0%, low-certainty evidence), changing the chance of OPCR from 4% with progestogens to 2% to 8%. Given the imprecision found, no conclusions can be retrieved on CPR and MR. Low-quality evidence suggested that using micronised progesterone in normo-responders may increase by 2 to 6 the MII oocytes in comparison to GnRH antagonists. There may be little or no differences in gonadotropin doses. Progestogens versus GnRH agonists Results were uncertain for all outcomes comparing progestogens with GnRH agonists. One progestogen versus another progestogen The analyses comparing one progestogen versus another progestogen for LBR did not meet our criteria for primary analyses. The OPCR was probably lower in the MPA 10 mg in comparison to MPA 4 mg (OR 2.27, 95%CI 0.90 to 5.74, one RCT, N = 300, moderate-certainty evidence), and MPA 4 mg may be lower than micronised progesterone 100 mg, but due to wide CI, we are uncertain of the effect (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.43 to 1.53, one RCT, N = 300, low-certainty evidence), changing the chance of OPCR from 5% with MPA 4 mg to 5% to22%, and from 17% with micronised progesterone 100 mg to 8% to 24%. When comparing dydrogesterone 20 mg to MPA, the OPCR is probably lower in the dydrogesterone group in comparison to MPA 10 mg (OR 1.49, 95%CI 0.80 to 2.80, one RCT, N = 520, moderate-certainty evidence), and it may be lower in dydrogesterone group in comparison to MPA 4 mg but due to wide confidence interval, we are uncertain of the effect (OR 1.19, 95%CI 0.61 to 2.34, one RCT, N = 300, low-certainty evidence), changing the chance of OPCR from 7% with dydrogesterone 20 to 6-17%, and in MPA 4 mg from 12% to 8% to 24%. When comparing dydrogesterone 20 mg to micronised progesterone 100 mg, the OPCR is probably lower in the dydrogesterone group (OR 1.54, 95%CI 0.94 to 2.52, two RCTs, N=550, I² = 0%, moderate-certainty evidence), changing OPCR from 11% with dydrogesterone to 10% to 24%. We are very uncertain of the effect in normo-responders of micronised progesterone 100 mg compared with micronised progesterone 200 mg on the OPCR (OR 0.35, 95%CI 0.09 to 1.37, one RCT, N = 150, very-low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in CPR and MR between MPA 10 mg and dydrogesterone 20 mg. There may be little or no differences in MII oocytes and gonadotropins doses. No cases of moderate/severe OHSS were reported in most of the groups in any of the comparisons.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Little or no differences in LBR may exist when comparing MPA 4 mg with GnRH agonists in normo-responders. OPCR may be slightly increased in the MPA 4 mg group, but MPA 4 mg reduces the doses of gonadotropins in comparison to GnRH agonists. Little or no differences in OPCR may exist between progestogens and GnRH antagonists in normo-responders and donors. However, micronised progesterone could improve by 2 to 6 MII oocytes. When comparing one progestogen to another, dydrogesterone suggested slightly lower OPCR than MPA and micronised progesterone, and MPA suggested slightly lower OPCR than the micronised progesterone 100 mg. Finally, MPA 10 mg suggests a lower OPCR than MPA 4 mg. There is uncertainty regarding the rest of the outcomes due to imprecision and no solid conclusions can be drawn.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Abortion, Spontaneous; Dydrogesterone; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Gonadotropins; Live Birth; Luteinizing Hormone; Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome; Ovulation Induction; Pregnancy Rate; Progesterone; Progestins; Reproductive Techniques, Assisted
PubMed: 38032057
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013827.pub2 -
Journal of Endodontics Feb 2024Citric acid (CA) conditioning may be a promising alternative to ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in regenerative endodontic procedures, as reported to improve... (Review)
Review
Citric Acid Conditioning as an Alternative to EDTA for Growth Factors Release and Stem Cell Response in Regenerative Endodontics: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies.
INTRODUCTION
Citric acid (CA) conditioning may be a promising alternative to ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in regenerative endodontic procedures, as reported to improve growth factors' release from dentin. This review systematically investigated the effect of CA conditioning on the growth factors release from dentin and cell behavior compared to EDTA conditioning.
METHODS
Searches were conducted (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, SciELO, Cochrane Library, and grey literature) until May-2023. Only in vitro studies that evaluated the effects of CA on growth factors' release from dentin and cell behavior outcomes compared to EDTA were included. The studies were critically appraised using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute's checklist. Meta-analysis was unfeasible.
RESULTS
Out of the 335 articles screened, nine were included. Among these, three studies used dentin discs/roots from permanent human teeth; the rest combined them with stem cells. 10% CA for 5 or 10 minute was the most used protocol. Meanwhile, EDTA concentrations ranged from 10% to 17%. In eight studies examining the release of growth factors, five reported a significant release of transforming growth factor-β after dentin conditioning with 10% CA compared to 17% EDTA. Regarding cell behavior (6 studies), three studies assessed cell viability. The findings revealed that 10% CA conditioning showed cell viability similar to those of 17% EDTA. Additionally, in two out of three studies, it was observed that 10% CA conditioning did not affect cell morphology. The studies had a low risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of 10% CA to condition dentin for 5-10 minutes resulted in a notable transforming growth factor -β1 release, but its cell responses were similar to those of EDTA.
Topics: Humans; Regenerative Endodontics; Edetic Acid; Dentin; Citric Acid; Stem Cells; Transforming Growth Factors
PubMed: 37984798
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2023.11.006 -
Nutritional Neuroscience Aug 2024Available evidence points to a possible role of Short Chain Fatty Acids (SCFAs) in mood disorders. This is the first systematic review to map the associations between... (Review)
Review
Available evidence points to a possible role of Short Chain Fatty Acids (SCFAs) in mood disorders. This is the first systematic review to map the associations between SCFA levels and mood disorder symptoms. Following the PRISMA guidelines, the databases PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched for studies that assessed SCFA levels in human populations with mood disorder symptoms, or animal models of mood disorder. Risk of bias was assessed by the Strengthening of Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. 19 studies were included and could be divided into animal (=8) and human studies (=11), with the animal studies including 166 animals and 100 controls, and the human studies including 662 participants and 330 controls. The studies were characterized by heterogeneity and methodological challenges on multiple parameters, limiting the validity and transferability of findings. Notably, only two of the clinical studies assessed the presence of mood disorder with diagnostic criteria, and no studies of mania or bipolar disorder met the inclusion criteria. Despite significant methodological limitations, associations between SCFA levels and depressive symptoms were reported in most of the studies. However, the direction of these associations and the specific SCFAs identified varied. The quantification of SCFA levels in mood disorders is an emerging yet sparsely studied research field. Although there is some evidence suggesting a link between SCFAs and depressive symptoms, the directionality of effects and mechanisms are unclear and the relation to manic symptoms is uninvestigated.
Topics: Fatty Acids, Volatile; Humans; Mood Disorders; Animals
PubMed: 37976103
DOI: 10.1080/1028415X.2023.2277970 -
European Journal of Clinical... Jan 2024Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are a leading cause of hospital-acquired infections with limited therapeutic options. Combination of at least two antimicrobials... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are a leading cause of hospital-acquired infections with limited therapeutic options. Combination of at least two antimicrobials is a possible strategy to obtain rapid and sustained bactericidal effects and overcome the emergence of resistance. We revised the literature on linezolid synergistic properties from in vitro studies to assess its activity in combination with molecules belonging to other antibiotic classes against Enterococcus spp.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature from three peer-reviewed databases including papers evaluating linezolid synergistic properties in vitro against Enterococcus spp. isolates.
RESULTS
We included 206 Enterococcus spp. isolates (92 E. faecalis, 90 E. faecium, 2 E. gallinarum, 3 E. casseliflavus, 19 Enterococcus spp.) from 24 studies. When an isolate was tested with different combinations, each combination was considered independently for further analysis. The most frequent interaction was indifferent effect (247/343, 72% of total interactions). The highest synergism rates were observed when linezolid was tested in combination with rifampin (10/49, 20.4% of interactions) and fosfomycin (16/84, 19.0%, of interactions). Antagonistic effect accounted for 7/343 (2.0%) of total interactions.
CONCLUSION
Our study reported overall limited synergistic in vitro properties of linezolid with other antibiotics when tested against Enterococcus spp. The clinical choice of linezolid in combination with other antibiotics should be guided by reasoned empiric therapy in the suspicion of a polymicrobial infection or targeted therapy on microbiological results, rather than on an intended synergistic effect of the linezolid-based combination.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Enterococcus faecalis; Enterococcus faecium; Fosfomycin; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Linezolid; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Rifampin; Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci
PubMed: 37975976
DOI: 10.1007/s10096-023-04704-8