-
Cephalalgia : An International Journal... Jun 2023Currently, only a few specific blood pressure-lowering medications are recommended for migraine prevention. Whether benefits extend to other classes or drugs is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Currently, only a few specific blood pressure-lowering medications are recommended for migraine prevention. Whether benefits extend to other classes or drugs is uncertain.
METHODS
Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized control trials on the effect of blood pressure-lowering medications compared with placebo in participants with episodic migraine. Data were collected on four outcomes - monthly headache or migraine days, and monthly headache or migraine attacks, with a standardised mean difference calculated for overall. Random effect meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS
In total, 50 trials (70% of which were crossover) were included, comprising 60 comparisons. Overall mean age was 39 years, and 79% were female. Monthly headache days were fewer in all classes compared to placebo, and this was statistically significant for all but one class: alpha-blockers -0.7 (95% CI: -1.2, -0.1), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors -1.3 (95% CI: -2.9, 0.2), angiotensin II receptor blockers -0.9 (-1.6, -0.1), beta-blocker -0.4 (-0.8, -0.0) and calcium channel blockers -1.8 (-3.4, -0.2). Standardised mean difference was significantly reduced for all drug classes and was separately significant for numerous specific drugs: clonidine, candesartan, atenolol, bisoprolol, metoprolol, propranolol, timolol, nicardipine and verapamil.
CONCLUSION
Among people with episodic migraine, a broader number of blood pressure-lowering medication classes and drugs reduce headache frequency than those currently included in treatment guidelines. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42017079176).
Topics: Humans; Female; Adult; Male; Blood Pressure; Migraine Disorders; Calcium Channel Blockers; Propranolol; Headache
PubMed: 37350141
DOI: 10.1177/03331024231183166 -
PLoS Medicine Jun 2023Bloodstream infections (BSIs) produced by antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB) cause a substantial disease burden worldwide. However, most estimates come from high-income... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bloodstream infections (BSIs) produced by antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB) cause a substantial disease burden worldwide. However, most estimates come from high-income settings and thus are not globally representative. This study quantifies the excess mortality, length of hospital stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and economic costs associated with ARB BSIs, compared to antibiotic-sensitive bacteria (ASB), among adult inpatients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We conducted a systematic review by searching 4 medical databases (PubMed, SCIELO, Scopus, and WHO's Global Index Medicus; initial search n = 13,012 from their inception to August 1, 2022). We only included quantitative studies. Our final sample consisted of n = 109 articles, excluding studies from high-income countries, without our outcomes of interest, or without a clear source of bloodstream infection. Crude mortality, ICU admission, and LOS were meta-analysed using the inverse variance heterogeneity model for the general and subgroup analyses including bacterial Gram type, family, and resistance type. For economic costs, direct medical costs per bed-day were sourced from WHO-CHOICE. Mortality costs were estimated based on productivity loss from years of potential life lost due to premature mortality. All costs were in 2020 USD. We assessed studies' quality and risk of publication bias using the MASTER framework. Multivariable meta-regressions were employed for the mortality and ICU admission outcomes only. Most included studies showed a significant increase in crude mortality (odds ratio (OR) 1.58, 95% CI [1.35 to 1.80], p < 0.001), total LOS (standardised mean difference "SMD" 0.49, 95% CI [0.20 to 0.78], p < 0.001), and ICU admission (OR 1.96, 95% CI [1.56 to 2.47], p < 0.001) for ARB versus ASB BSIs. Studies analysing Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter baumanii, and Staphylococcus aureus in upper-middle-income countries from the African and Western Pacific regions showed the highest excess mortality, LOS, and ICU admission for ARB versus ASB BSIs per patient. Multivariable meta-regressions indicated that patients with resistant Acinetobacter baumanii BSIs had higher mortality odds when comparing ARB versus ASB BSI patients (OR 1.67, 95% CI [1.18 to 2.36], p 0.004). Excess direct medical costs were estimated at $12,442 (95% CI [$6,693 to $18,191]) for ARB versus ASB BSI per patient, with an average cost of $41,103 (95% CI [$30,931 to $51,274]) due to premature mortality. Limitations included the poor quality of some of the reviewed studies regarding the high risk of selective sampling or failure to adequately account for relevant confounders.
CONCLUSIONS
We provide an overview of the impact ARB BSIs in limited resource settings derived from the existing literature. Drug resistance was associated with a substantial disease and economic burden in LMICs. Although, our results show wide heterogeneity between WHO regions, income groups, and pathogen-drug combinations. Overall, there is a paucity of BSI data from LMICs, which hinders implementation of country-specific policies and tracking of health progress.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Developing Countries; Inpatients; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Sepsis; Bacteria; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 37347726
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004199 -
Iranian Journal of Kidney Diseases May 2023Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed in pediatric hypertension because of the fundamental role of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in the...
Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed in pediatric hypertension because of the fundamental role of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in the pathogenesis of hypertension. We, therefore, aimed to systematically review articles that investigated efficacy and safety of ARB agents in the pediatric population aged over six years. To do so, the databases of Web of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus were searched to conduct a systematic review by using the following keywords: ("angiotensin receptor blocker" OR "valsartan" OR "losartan") AND ("pediatric" OR "children" OR "child") AND ("high blood pressure" OR "hypertension"). Finally, 12 studies were included in our review, and we found that almost all of them supported the effectiveness and tolerability of different ARB agents. Candesartan cilexetil lowered blood pressure (BP), with a 9 mmHg decline in both systolic and diastolic BP, and proteinuria after four months of treatment. Valsartan and Losartan similarly were shown to be effective in lowering BP in a dose-dependent manner. Headache, dizziness, upper respiratory infection, and cough were the most reported side effects. However, almost all reviewed studies indicated that the safety profile was satisfactory. In conclusion, ARBs are beneficial and well-tolerated antihypertensive medications. DOI: 10.52547/ijkd.7228.
Topics: Child; Humans; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Hypertension; Antihypertensive Agents; Losartan; Tetrazoles; Blood Pressure; Receptors, Angiotensin
PubMed: 37337795
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023The incidence and risk factors of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with malignancies receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are being extensively reported... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The incidence and risk factors of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with malignancies receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are being extensively reported with their widespread application.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to quantify the incidence and identify risk factors of AKI in cancer patients treated with ICIs.
METHODS
We searched the electronic databases of PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Embase before 1 February 2023 on the incidence and risk factors of AKI in patients receiving ICIs and registered the protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42023391939). A random-effect meta-analysis was performed to quantify the pooled incidence estimate of AKI, identify risk factors with pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and investigate the median latency period of ICI-AKI in patients treated with ICIs. Assessment of study quality, meta-regression, and sensitivity and publication bias analyses were conducted.
RESULTS
In total, 27 studies consisting of 24048 participants were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall pooled incidence of AKI secondary to ICIs was 5.7% (95% CI: 3.7%-8.2%). Significant risk factors were older age (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.03), preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD) (OR: 2.90, 95% CI: 1.65-5.11), ipilimumab (OR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.42-4.98), combination of ICIs (OR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.40-4.31), extrarenal immune-related adverse events (irAEs) (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.53-3.59), and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (OR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.88-2.64), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (OR: 2.61, 95% CI: 1.90-3.57), fluindione (OR: 6.48, 95% CI: 2.72-15.46), diuretic (OR: 1.78, 95% CI: 1.32-2.40) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) (pooled OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.15-2.68) use. Median time from ICIs initiation to AKI was 108.07 days. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses indicated robust results for this study.
CONCLUSION
The occurrence of AKI following ICIs was not uncommon, with an incidence of 5.7% and a median time interval of 108.07 days after ICIs initiation. Older age, preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD), ipilimumab, combined use of ICIs, extrarenal irAEs, and PPI, NSAID, fluindione, diuretics and ACEI/ARB use are risk factors for AKI in patients receiving ICIs.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023391939.
Topics: Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Ipilimumab; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Incidence; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Neoplasms; Acute Kidney Injury; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal
PubMed: 37313406
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1173952 -
Archives of Medical Science : AMS 2023Heart failure (HF) is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Aim of the study was to assess the benefits and harms of sacubitril/valsartan... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure compared to renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
INTRODUCTION
Heart failure (HF) is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Aim of the study was to assess the benefits and harms of sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) in patients with HF.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating S/V vs. ACEI or ARB in acute or chronic HF in August 2021. Primary outcomes were HF hospitalisations and cardiovascular (CV) mortality; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, biomarkers, and renal function.
RESULTS
We selected 11 RCTs ( = 18766) with 2-48 months follow-up. Five RCTs had ACEIs as control, 5 RCTs had ARBs as control, and one RCT had both ACEI and ARB as control. Compared to ACEI or ARB, S/V reduced HF hospitalisations by 20% (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.68-0.94; 3 RCTs; = 65%; high CoE), CV mortality by 14% (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01; 2 RCTs; = 57%; high CoE), and all-cause mortality by 11% (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.78-1.00; 3 RCTs; = 36%; high CoE). S/V reduced NTproBNP (SMD = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.16; 3 RCTs; = 62%) and hs-TNT (ratio of differences = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.79-0.88; 2 RCTs; = 0%), and caused a decline in renal function by 33% (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.39-1.14; 2 RCTs; = 78%; high CoE). S/V increased hypotension (RR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.33-2.15; 9 RCTs; = 65%; high CoE). Hyperkalaemia and angioedema events were similar. Effects were in the same direction when stratified by type of control (ACEI vs. ARB).
CONCLUSIONS
Sacubitril/valsartan had better clinical, intermediate, and renal outcomes in HF in comparison to ACEI or ARB. There was no difference in angioedema and hyperkalaemia events, but there were more hypotension events.
PubMed: 37313196
DOI: 10.5114/aoms/159113 -
Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation :... Oct 2023Dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade involves dual therapy with a combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The association between dual RAAS inhibition and risk of acute kidney injury and hyperkalemia in patients with diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Dual renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade involves dual therapy with a combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), direct renin inhibitors (DRIs), or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). It is hypothesized that dual RAAS blockade would result in a more complete inhibition of the RAAS cascade. However, large clinical trials on dual RAAS inhibition have shown increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyperkalemia without additional benefit on mortality, cardiovascular events, or chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression compared to RAAS inhibitor monotherapy in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). The development of newer, more selective non-steroidal MRAs as cardiorenal protective therapies has created a new opportunity for dual RAAS inhibition. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risks of AKI and hyperkalemia with dual RAAS blockade in patients with DKD.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS
This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from 1 January 2006 to 30 May 2022. The study population included adult patients with DKD receiving dual RAAS blockade. A total of 31 RCTs and 33 048 patients were included in the systematic review. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects.
RESULTS
There were 208 AKI events in 2690 patients on ACEi + ARB versus 170 in 4264 patients with ACEi or ARB monotherapy (pooled RR 1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.39). There were 304 hyperkalemia events in 2818 patients on ACEi + ARB versus 208 in 4396 patients with ACEi or ARB monotherapy (pooled RR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.32-2.94). A non-steroidal MRA + ACEi or ARB showed no increase in the risk of AKI (pooled RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.81-1.16) compared to ACEi or ARB monotherapy but had a 2-fold higher risk of hyperkalemia with 953 events in 7837 patients in dual therapy versus 454 events in 6895 patients in monotherapy (pooled RR 2.05, 95% CI: 1.84-2.28). A steroidal MRA + ACEi or ARB had a 5-fold higher risk of hyperkalemia with 28 events in 245 at risk in dual therapy versus five events in 248 at risk in monotherapy (pooled RR 5.42 95% CI: 2.15-13.67).
CONCLUSION
Dual therapy with RAASi is associated with an increased risk of AKI and hyperkalemia compared to RAASi monotherapy. Conversely, dual therapy with RAAS inhibitors and non-steroidal MRAs have no additional risk of AKI but a similar risk of hyperkalemia, which is lower than dual therapy with RAAS inhibitors and steroidal MRAs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Renin-Angiotensin System; Diabetic Nephropathies; Hyperkalemia; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Acute Kidney Injury; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37309038
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfad101 -
American Journal of Nephrology 2023Discontinuation of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the potential danger has been reported in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Discontinuation of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the potential danger has been reported in several studies. However, a comprehensive analysis has not been conducted.
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to evaluate the effects of discontinuation of RAS inhibitors in CKD.
METHOD
Relevant studies up to November 30, 2022, were identified in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Efficacy outcomes included the composite of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Results were combined using a random-effects or fixed-effects model, and sensitivity analysis used the leave-one-out method.
RESULTS
Six observational studies and one randomized clinical trial including 244,979 patients met the inclusion criteria. Pooled data demonstrated that discontinuation of RAS inhibitors was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.23-1.63), cardiovascular event risk (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.17-1.22), and ESKD (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02-1.49). In sensitivity analyses, the risk for ESKD was reduced. Subgroup analysis showed that the risk of mortality was more pronounced in patients with eGFR above 30 mL/min/m2 and in patients with hyperkalemia-related discontinuation. In contrast, patients with eGFR below 30 mL/min/m2 were at great risk of cardiovascular events.
CONCLUSIONS
The discontinuation of RAS inhibitors in patients with CKD was associated with a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events. These data suggest that RAS inhibitors should be continued in CKD if the clinical situation allows.
Topics: Humans; Renin-Angiotensin System; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Enzyme Inhibitors; Cardiovascular Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37231791
DOI: 10.1159/000531000 -
High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular... May 2023COVID-19 related mortality is about 2%, and it increases with comorbidities, like hypertension. Regarding management, there is debatable evidence about the benefits of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
COVID-19 related mortality is about 2%, and it increases with comorbidities, like hypertension. Regarding management, there is debatable evidence about the benefits of continuation vs. discontinuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB).
AIM
We performed a systematic review to assess the effects and safety of in-hospital discontinuation compared to continuation of ACEI/ARB in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS
We systematically searched on PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE from inception to June 19, 2021. We included observational studies and trials that compared the effects and safety of continuing ACEI/ARB compared to discontinuing it in COVID-19 patients. Effects sizes for dichotomous variables were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals. For continuous variables, effects were expressed as mean difference (MD). We used random effect models with the inverse variance method. We assessed certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
We included three open-label randomized controlled trials and five cohort studies. We found that the continuation group had lower risk of death compared with the discontinuation group only in the cohort group (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.24-0.90), but not in the RCT group (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.75-2.00). The ICU admission rate was significantly lower in the continuation group (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.68) in the cohort group, but not in RCT group (RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.67-1.59). We did not find significant differences between groups regarding hospitalization length, hypotension, AKI needing renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation, new or worsening heart failure, myocarditis, renal replacement therapy, arrhythmias, thromboembolic events and SOFA AUC. The GRADE approach revealed that the certainty ranged from moderate to high level.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no significant difference in mortality and other outcomes between continuation and discontinuation groups.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; COVID-19; Hypertension
PubMed: 37171528
DOI: 10.1007/s40292-023-00579-0 -
PloS One 2023The incidence of heart failure (HF) is increasing year by year, posing a great threat to human health. Although pharmacotherapy has been able to significantly prolong... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The incidence of heart failure (HF) is increasing year by year, posing a great threat to human health. Although pharmacotherapy has been able to significantly prolong patient survival, pharmacotherapy for HF still has limitations due to its complex pathogenesis and considerable individual variability, there is a great need to explore complementary and alternative therapies to slow down the progression of HF. Danshen decoction is used to treat several cardiovascular diseases including HF, but the efficacy of stabilization is uncertain. This meta-analysis evaluated the clinical efficacy of Danshen Decoction for the treatment of HF.
METHODS
The registration number assigned to this meta-analysis on the PROSPERO platform is CRD42022351918. Four databases were searched, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Danshen decoction combined with conventional treatment (CT) of HF were screened, CT included medical treatments other than Danshen Decoction to which the patient was treated (including but not limited to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, β-blockers, diuretics, mineralcorticoid recept antagonist etc.). The clinical efficacy rate (CER), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD), left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) were included as outcome indicators. The GRADE grading scale was used to grade the above indicators. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Jadad quality scale were used to assess the methodological quality of RCTs. Finally, RevMan V.4.5 software was used for data synthesis, 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data, risk ratios (RR), and mean differences (MD) for continuous variables were calculated, Chi-square and I2 were used for heterogeneity assessment.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs with a total of 855 patients were included in this study, and all included RCTs had a low overall quality risk of bias and high quality of reported information. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared with the use of CT, CER (%) was significantly improved due to Danshen decoction combined with CT (MD = 3.95, 95% CI [2.58, 6.04], P < 0.00001), LVEF (%) was significantly improved (MD = 5.46, 95% CI [5.32, 5.60], P < 0.00001), LVEDD (mm) was significantly reduced (MD = -5.27, 95% CI [-6.21, -4.32], P < 0.00001), LVESD (mm) was significantly reduced (MD = -4.60, 95% CI [-5.87, -3.32], P < 0.00001), BNP (pg/mL) was significantly reduced (MD = -88.61, 95% CI [-121.98, -55.24], P < 0.00001), NT-proBNP (pg/mL) was significantly decreased (SMD = -3.33, 95% CI [-5.92, -0.73], P = 0.01), hs-CRP (mg/L) was significantly decreased (MD = -2.73, 95% CI [-4.11, -1.34], P = 0.0001). The quality of the GRADE evidence for all outcomes was moderate to low and no RCTs reported adverse events.
CONCLUSION
Our research demonstrates that Danshen decoction is an effective and safe treatment option for HF. Nevertheless, considering the limitations of methodological and the quality of RCTs, more rigorous, large-scale, multicenter randomized clinical trials are needed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of Danshen decoction in the treatment of HF patients.
Topics: Humans; Salvia miltiorrhiza; C-Reactive Protein; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Heart Failure; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37146072
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284877 -
BMC Nephrology Apr 2023Several risk factors of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) have been reported sporadically. To identify the risk factors of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several risk factors of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) have been reported sporadically. To identify the risk factors of ICIs-associated AKI in a large-scale population, therefore we conducted a systematic review and a real-world retrospective study.
METHODS
We search literature concerning risk factors of ICIs-associated AKI in ClinicalTrials.gov and electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase) up to January 2022. Meta-analysis was performed by using odds ratios (ORs) with 95%CIs. In a separate retrospective pharmacovigilance study by extracting data from US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, disproportionality was analyzed using the reporting odds ratio (ROR).
RESULTS
A total of 9 studies (5927 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The following factors were associated with increased risk of ICIs-associated AKI, including proton pump inhibitors(PPIs) (OR = 2.07, 95%CI 1.78-2.42), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/ angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR = 1.56, 95%CI 1.24-1.95), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (OR = 1.29, 95%CI 1.01-1.65), diuretics (OR = 2.00, 95%CI 1.38-2.89), diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.28, 95%CI 1.04-1.57), genitourinary cancer (OR = 1.46, 95%CI 1.15-1.85), combination therapy of ICIs (OR = 1.93, 95%CI 1.25-2.97) and extrarenal immune-related adverse events(irAEs) (OR = 2.51, 95%CI 1.96-3.20). Furthermore, analysis from FAERS database verified that concurrent exposures of PPIs (ROR = 2.10, 95%CI 1.91-2.31), ACEIs/ARBs (ROR = 3.25, 95%CI 2.95-3.57), NSAIDs (ROR = 3.06, 95%CI 2.81-3.32) or diuretics (ROR = 2.82, 95%CI 2.50-3.19) were observed significant signals associated with AKI in ICIs-treated patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Concurrent exposures of PPIs, ACEIs/ARBs, NSAIDs or diuretics, diabetes mellitus, genitourinary cancer, combination therapy, and extrarenal irAEs seem to increase the risk of AKI in ICIs-treated patients.
Topics: Humans; Retrospective Studies; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Pharmacovigilance; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Risk Factors; Acute Kidney Injury; Diuretics; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal
PubMed: 37087434
DOI: 10.1186/s12882-023-03171-9