-
BMC Endocrine Disorders Jun 2024Activating mutation in Ubiquitin-specific peptidase (USP8) is identified to enhance cell proliferation and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) secretion from corticotroph...
OBJECTIVE
Activating mutation in Ubiquitin-specific peptidase (USP8) is identified to enhance cell proliferation and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) secretion from corticotroph pituitary adenoma. We investigated the USP8 variant status in a population of Iranian people with functional corticotroph pituitary adenoma (FCPA). Moreover, a systematic review was conducted to thoroughly explore the role of USP8 variants and the related pathways in corticotroph adenomas, genotype-phenotype correlation in USP8-mutated individuals with FCPA, and the potential role of USP8 and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) as targeted therapies in PFCAs.
METHODS
Genetic analysis of 20 tissue samples from 19 patients with PFCAs was performed using Sanger sequencing. Moreover, a systematic literature review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, web of Sciences, and Cochrane databases were searched. The last search was performed on 20 September 2023 for all databases.
RESULTS
In our series, we found two somatic mutations including a 7-bp deletion variant: c.2151_2157delCTCCTCC, p. Ser718GlnfsTer3, and a missense variant: c.2159 C > G, p. Pro720Arg (rs672601311) in exon 14. The Systematic review indicated USP8 variant in 35% of corticotroph adenomas, with the highest frequency (25%) in 720 code regions, p. Pro720Arg. Data regarding the impact of USP8 mutational status on clinical characteristics and outcomes in FCPAs are inconsistent. Moreover, Pasireotide as well as inhibitors of EGFR such as Gefitinib and Lapatinib, as well as USP8 inhibitors including -ehtyloxyimino9H-indeno (1, 2-b) pyrazine-2, 3-dicarbonitrile, DUBs-IN-2, and RA-9 indicated promising results in treatment of corticotroph adenomas.
CONCLUSION
Although the USP8-EGFR system has been identified as the main trigger and target of corticotroph tumorigenesis, more precise multicenter studies are required to yield more consistent information regarding the phenotype-genotype correlation and to develop effective targeted therapies.
Topics: Humans; Ubiquitin Thiolesterase; Iran; Endosomal Sorting Complexes Required for Transport; Pituitary ACTH Hypersecretion; Adult; Female; Male; Endopeptidases; Mutation; Middle Aged; ACTH-Secreting Pituitary Adenoma; Middle Eastern People
PubMed: 38862897
DOI: 10.1186/s12902-024-01619-z -
Basic & Clinical Pharmacology &... Jul 2024This network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aimed to determine whether any individual dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors increase the risk of acute... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aimed to determine whether any individual dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors increase the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online via PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The primary outcome was AKI. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to account for heterogeneity. Twenty-nine studies involving 56 117 participants were included. There were 918 cases of AKI (1.63%). The risk of bias was generally considered to be low. The only DPP-4 inhibitor that significantly increased the frequency of AKI when compared with placebo was sitagliptin (risk ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 1.22-2.23). However, because one study showed significant outliers in the funnel plot, in a highly heterogeneous population composed solely of patients undergoing surgery for coronary artery bypass graft, we conducted a post-hoc sensitivity analysis to exclude this study. The results showed no statistically significant difference in the risk of AKI between sitagliptin and placebo. Individual DPP-4 inhibitors do not appear to increase the risk of AKI. However, sitagliptin may be associated with AKI in patients with underlying severe cardiovascular disease.
Topics: Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Humans; Acute Kidney Injury; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Sitagliptin Phosphate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Network Meta-Analysis; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38698656
DOI: 10.1111/bcpt.14014 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological malignancy that is characterised by proliferation of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. For adults ineligible to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological malignancy that is characterised by proliferation of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. For adults ineligible to receive high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant, the recommended treatment combinations in first-line therapy generally consist of combinations of alkylating agents, immunomodulatory drugs, and proteasome inhibitors. Daratumumab is a CD38-targeting, human IgG1k monoclonal antibody recently developed and approved for the treatment of people diagnosed with MM. Multiple myeloma cells uniformly over-express CD-38, a 46-kDa type II transmembrane glycoprotein, making myeloma cells a specific target for daratumumab.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of daratumumab in addition to antineoplastic therapy compared to antineoplastic therapy only for adults with newly diagnosed MM who are ineligible for transplant.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, EU Clinical Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and conference proceedings from 2010 to September 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that compared treatment with daratumumab added to antineoplastic therapy versus the same antineoplastic therapy alone in adult participants with a confirmed diagnosis of MM. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials with less than 80% adult participants, unless there were subgroup analyses of adults with MM.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies for eligibility. We documented the process of study selection in a flowchart as recommended by the PRISMA statement. We evaluated the risk of bias in included studies with RoB 1 and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We followed standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four open-label, two-armed randomised controlled trials (34 publications) involving a total of 1783 participants. The ALCYONE, MAIA, and OCTANS trials were multicentre trials conducted worldwide in middle- and high-income countries. The AMaRC 03-16 trial was conducted in one high-income country, Australia. The mean age of participants was 69 to 74 years, and the proportion of female participants was between 40% and 54%. All trials evaluated antineoplastic therapies with or without daratumumab. In the ALCYONE and OCTANS trials, daratumumab was combined with bortezomib and melphalan-prednisone. In the AMaRC 03-16 study, it was combined with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone, and in the MAIA study, it was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. None of the included studies was blinded (high risk of performance and detection bias). One study was published as abstract only, therefore the risk of bias for most criteria was unclear. The other three studies were published as full texts. Apart from blinding, the risk of bias was low for these studies. Overall survival Treatment with daratumumab probably increases overall survival when compared to the same treatment without daratumumab (hazard ratio (HR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.76, 2 studies, 1443 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After a follow-up period of 36 months, 695 per 1000 participants survived in the control group, whereas 792 per 1000 participants survived in the daratumumab group (95% CI 758 to 825). Progression-free survival Treatment with daratumumab probably increases progression-free survival when compared to treatment without daratumumab (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.58, 3 studies, 1663 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After a follow-up period of 24 months, progression-free survival was reached in 494 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 713 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group (95% CI 664 to 760). Quality of life Treatment with daratumumab may result in a very small increase in quality of life after 12 months, evaluated on the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scale (GHS), when compared to treatment without daratumumab (mean difference 2.19, 95% CI -0.13 to 4.51, 3 studies, 1096 participants, low-certainty evidence). The scale is from 0 to 100, with a higher value indicating a better quality of life. On-study mortality Treatment with daratumumab probably decreases on-study mortality when compared to treatment without daratumumab (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.83, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 366 per 1000 participants in the control group and 264 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group died (95% CI 227 to 304). Serious adverse events Treatment with daratumumab probably increases serious adverse events when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 505 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 596 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced serious adverse events (95% CI 515 to 692). Adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade ≥ 3) Treatment with daratumumab probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.02, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 953 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 963 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) (95% CI 943 to 972). Treatment with daratumumab probably increases the risk of infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) when compared to treatment without daratumumab (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.78, 3 studies, 1644 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). After the longest follow-up available (12 to 72 months), 224 per 1000 participants in the control group versus 340 per 1000 participants in the daratumumab group experienced infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) (95% CI 291 to 399).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall analysis of four studies showed a potential benefit for daratumumab in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival and a slight potential benefit in quality of life. Participants treated with daratumumab probably experience increased serious adverse events. There were likely no differences between groups in adverse events (CTCAE grade ≥ 3); however, there are probably more infections (CTCAE grade ≥ 3) in participants treated with daratumumab. We identified six ongoing studies which might strengthen the certainty of evidence in a future update of this review.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bias; Bortezomib; Multiple Myeloma; Progression-Free Survival; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38695605
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013595.pub2 -
Leukemia Research Jun 2024Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a complex disease with diverse mutations, including prevalent mutations in the FMS-like receptor tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) gene that lead... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a complex disease with diverse mutations, including prevalent mutations in the FMS-like receptor tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) gene that lead to poor prognosis. Recent advancements have introduced FLT3 inhibitors that have improved outcomes for FLT3-mutated AML patients, however, questions remain on their application in complex conditions such as relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of second-generation FLT3 inhibitors in treating patients with R/R AML.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Google Scholar databases was made to identify relevant studies up to January 30, 2024. This study was conducted following the guidelines of the PRISMA.
RESULTS
The ADMIRAL trial revealed significantly improved overall survival and complete remission rates with gilteritinib compared to salvage chemotherapy, with manageable adverse effects. Ongoing research explores its potential in combination therapies, showing synergistic effects with venetoclax and promising outcomes in various clinical trials. The QuANTUM-R trial suggested longer overall survival with quizartinib compared to standard chemotherapy, although concerns were raised regarding trial design and cardiotoxicity. Ongoing research explores combination therapies involving quizartinib, such as doublet or triplet regimens with venetoclax, showing promising outcomes in FLT3-mutated AML patients.
CONCLUSION
These targeted therapies offer promise for managing this subgroup of AML patients, but further research is needed to optimize their use. This study underscores the importance of personalized treatment based on genetic mutations in AML, paving the way for more effective and tailored approaches to combat the disease.
Topics: Humans; fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; Mutation; Aniline Compounds; Phenylurea Compounds; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Pyrazines; Benzothiazoles
PubMed: 38692232
DOI: 10.1016/j.leukres.2024.107505 -
American Journal of Hematology Jul 2024In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). Three studies totaling 1597 patients (50% KRd-treated, 50% VRd-treated) were included. Despite similar survival outcomes and overall response rate compared with the VRd arm, KRd-treated subjects showed higher odds of achieving complete responses and measurable residual disease negativity. Among patients with high-risk cytogenetics (n = 348), KRd was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (HR = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.50-0.97; p = .03; I = 0%), suggesting carfilzomib-based induction may be preferable in this NDMM subpopulation.
Topics: Multiple Myeloma; Humans; Lenalidomide; Dexamethasone; Oligopeptides; Bortezomib; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Progression-Free Survival; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38606993
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27314 -
American Journal of Hematology Jun 2024Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Thromboembolic risk of carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.
Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease as well as the therapies themselves. Overall, available evidence is inconclusive about the differential thrombogenicity of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). This meta-analysis compares the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE; including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE; including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) with KRd versus VRd as primary therapy for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Out of 510 studies identified after deduplication, one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective cohort studies were included. We analyzed 2304 patients (VRd: 1380; KRd: 924) for VTE events and 2179 patients (VRd: 1316; KRd: 863) for ATE events. Lower rates of VTE were observed in the VRd group when compared with the KRd group (6.16% vs. 8.87%; odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.88; p = .01). Both treatment groups exhibited minimal ATE incidence, with no significant difference between them (0.91% vs. 1.16%; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.24-4.20; p = .99). In view of potential biases from retrospective studies, heterogeneity of baseline population characteristics, and limited access to patient-level data (e.g., VTE risk stratification and type of thromboprophylaxis regimen used) inherent to this meta-analysis, additional research is warranted to further validate our findings and refine strategies for thrombosis prevention in MM.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Dexamethasone; Oligopeptides; Bortezomib; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Lenalidomide; Thromboembolism; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38488702
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27288 -
Medicine Feb 2024In China, Salvia miltiorrhiza and ligustrazine (SML) injection are widely used as adjunctive therapy for patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In China, Salvia miltiorrhiza and ligustrazine (SML) injection are widely used as adjunctive therapy for patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, different studies have reported conflicting results. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis are necessary to assess the efficacy and safety of SML injection for the treatment of DKD.
METHODS
We searched 6 electronic literature databases comparing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), SML injection in combination with ACEIs/ARBs that were conducted from inception until September 5, 2023. Two reviewers extracted data and independently assessed the risk of bias. Using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Risk Assessment. Mean differences (MD) were combined with random-effects models and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. Review Manager 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. Stata 17.0 software was used for sensitivity analysis and Egger test.
RESULTS
The combined results show that the use of SML injection along with ACEI/ARB led to better outcomes than the use of controls in terms of enhancing recovery: renal function: Serum creatinine (MD = -14.69, 95% CI (-19.38, -10.00)), Blood urea nitrogen (MD = -1.23, 95% CI (-1.72, -0.74)), Urinary β2-microglobulin (MD = -4.58, 95% CI (-7.72, -1.44)); urinary protein: Urinary albumin excretion rate (MD = -45.74, 95% CI (-58.92, -32.56)), Urine albumin-creatinine ratio (MD = -11.93, 95% CI (-13.89, -9.96)), 24-h urine proteinuria (MD = -0.59, 95% CI (-0.86, -0.32)), Urine microalbumin (MD = -13.50, 95% CI (-20.18, -6.83)). Additionally, adjuvant therapy with SML injection enhanced results in blood glucose, blood pressure, lipids, and inflammatory responses, and no significant variations in adverse events were discovered between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with DKD, combining SML injection with ACEI/ARB improves renal function, renal proteinuria, hyperglycemia, blood pressure, dyslipidemia, and inflammatory response.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetic Nephropathies; Salvia miltiorrhiza; Proteinuria; Albumins; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Diabetes Mellitus; Pyrazines
PubMed: 38394516
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035853 -
PloS One 2024To evaluate the efficacy and safety of multi-drug therapy based on eszopiclone in the treatment of insomnia after stroke using a network meta-analysis method and to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of multi-drug therapy based on eszopiclone in the treatment of insomnia after stroke using a network meta-analysis method and to provide evidence for clinical practice.
METHOD
Computer searches of PubMed, Excerpt Medica Database (Embase), Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, APA PsycInfo, CNKI, WanFang, Sinomed and other databases were performed to search for clinical randomized controlled studies (RCTs) on multi-drug therapy based on eszopiclone in the treatment of insomnia patients after stroke. The search time was from the establishment of each database until July 2023. The bias risk assessment tool recommended by Cochrane was used to evaluate the quality of the included RCTs. Stata 14.0 was applied to perform network meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.3 software for traditional meta-analysis.
RESULT
Eighteen RCTs and 1646 patients were ultimately included, involving 11 treatment options. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the ranking of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) decline was eszopiclone combined with sweet dream oral liquid (ESZ+SDOL)>eszopiclone combined with a shugan jieyu capsule (ESZ+SGJYC)>eszopiclone combined with agomelatine (ESZ+AGO)>eszopiclone combined with flupentixol and melitracen tablets (ESZ+FMT)>eszopiclone combined with yangxue qingnao granules (ESZ+YXQNG)>eszopiclone combined with mirtazapine (ESZ+MIR)>ESZ>FMT; the modified Edinburgh Scandinavia Stroke Scale (MESSS) decline ranking was ESZ+SDOL>ESZ+AGO>ESZ; and the clinical total effective rate ranking was eszopiclone combined with a xuefu zhuyu capsule (ESZ+XFZYC)>ESZ+MIR>ESZ+SGJYC>ESZ+SDOL> ESZ+FMT>ESZ+YXQNG>ESZ>FMT. In terms of clinical adverse reactions, in addition to ESZ therapy, ESZ+ESC had the highest number of adverse reactions, with abdominal pain being the most common. ESZ+YXQNG had the most types of adverse reactions, with 8 types.
CONCLUSION
Multi-drug therapy based on eszopiclone can effectively improve the sleep quality of patients with insomnia after stroke, and ESZ+SDOL has significant efficacy and safety. However, due to the limitations of this study, efficacy ranking cannot fully explain the superiority or inferiority of clinical efficacy. In the future, more multicentre, large sample, double-blind randomized controlled trials are needed to supplement and demonstrate the results of this study.
Topics: Humans; Eszopiclone; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Stroke; Double-Blind Method; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38315683
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297064 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2024The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to challenge the health workforce and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to challenge the health workforce and societies worldwide. Favipiravir was suggested by some experts to be effective and safe to use in COVID-19. Although this drug has been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is still unclear if it has a definite role in the treatment of COVID-19.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of favipiravir compared to no treatment, supportive treatment, or other experimental antiviral treatment in people with acute COVID-19.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, MEDLINE, Embase, the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, and three other databases, up to 18 July 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for RCTs evaluating the efficacy of favipiravir in treating people with COVID-19.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures for data collection and analysis. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 25 trials that randomized 5750 adults (most under 60 years of age). The trials were conducted in Bahrain, Brazil, China, India, Iran, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, the UK, and the USA. Most participants were hospitalized with mild to moderate disease (89%). Twenty-two of the 25 trials investigated the role of favipiravir compared to placebo or standard of care, whilst lopinavir/ritonavir was the comparator in two trials, and umifenovir in one trial. Most trials (24 of 25) initiated favipiravir at 1600 mg or 1800 mg twice daily for the first day, followed by 600 mg to 800 mg twice a day. The duration of treatment varied from five to 14 days. We do not know whether favipiravir reduces all-cause mortality at 28 to 30 days, or in-hospital (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.46; 11 trials, 3459 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We do not know if favipiravir reduces the progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; 8 trials, 1383 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Favipiravir may make little to no difference in the need for admission to hospital (if ambulatory) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.46; 4 trials, 670 participants; low-certainty evidence). We do not know if favipiravir reduces the time to clinical improvement (defined as time to a 2-point reduction in patients' admission status on the WHO's ordinal scale) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.83; 4 trials, 721 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Favipiravir may make little to no difference to the progression to oxygen therapy (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.75; 2 trials, 543 participants; low-certainty evidence). Favipiravir may lead to an overall increased incidence of adverse events (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.54; 18 trials, 4699 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may result in little to no difference inserious adverse eventsattributable to the drug (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.42; 12 trials, 3317 participants; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The low- to very low-certainty evidence means that we do not know whether favipiravir is efficacious in people with COVID-19 illness, irrespective of severity or admission status. Treatment with favipiravir may result in an overall increase in the incidence of adverse events but may not result in serious adverse events.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Amides; Pyrazines
PubMed: 38314855
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015219.pub2 -
Vascular Pharmacology Mar 2024Oral prostanoids are recommended in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and an unsatisfactory response to first-line therapy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oral prostanoids are recommended in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and an unsatisfactory response to first-line therapy.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of oral therapies targeting the prostacyclin pathway in PAH patients.
METHODS
An online search of Medline, Cochrane Registry, Scopus and EMBASE libraries (from inception to May, 12,020) was conducted. Eight randomized controlled studies were included in the meta-analysis involving 3023 patients, with 828 receiving oral treprostinil, 607 patients receiving selexipag, 125 patients receiving beraprost, and 1463 patients receiving placebo.
RESULTS
Compared to placebo, oral treprostinil (WMD 9.05, 95% CI 3.0280-15.0839, p = 0.0032) and beraprost (WMD 21.98, 95% CI 5.0536-38.9063, p = 0.0109) were associated with a significant increase in 6-min walking distance (6MWD) at follow-up from baseline, whereas selexipag use was associated with a non-significant increase in 6MWD (WMD 15.41, 95% CI -0.6074; 31.4232, p = 0.0593). Compared to placebo, the risk of clinical worsening was significantly lowered by selexipag (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35-0.65, p < 0.001) and oral treprostinil (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.90, p 0.012), whereas a non-significant reduction of the outcome was related to beraprost use (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.36-1.38, p 0.31). No significant difference in 6MWD change and clinical worsening reduction were found among oral treprostinil and selexipag. Beraprost use less frequently caused adverse events as compared to selexipag and oral treprostinil.
CONCLUSIONS
No differences in 6MWD change, clinical worsening reduction and adverse events rates were found among oral treprostinil and selexipag, resulting in similar efficacy and safety profiles.
Topics: Humans; Acetamides; Antihypertensive Agents; Epoprostenol; Hypertension, Pulmonary; Network Meta-Analysis; Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension; Pyrazines
PubMed: 38309551
DOI: 10.1016/j.vph.2024.107280