-
The Journal of Dermatological Treatment Feb 2022Various treatments exist for androgenetic alopecia (AGA); we determined the relative efficacies of non-surgical AGA monotherapies separately for men and women. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Various treatments exist for androgenetic alopecia (AGA); we determined the relative efficacies of non-surgical AGA monotherapies separately for men and women.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were systematically searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and clinicaltrials.gov. Separate networks were used for men and women; for each network, a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of mean change in hair count from baseline (in units of hairs per square centimeter) was performed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
The networks for male and female AGA included 30 and 10 RCTs, respectively. We identified the following treatments for male AGA in decreasing rank of efficacy: platelet-rich plasma (PRP), low-level laser therapy (LLLT), 0.5 mg dutasteride, 1 mg finasteride, 5% minoxidil, 2% minoxidil, and bimatoprost. For female AGA the following were identified in decreasing rank of efficacy: LLLT, 5% minoxidil, and 2% minoxidil. The evidence quality of the highest ranked therapies, for male and female AGA, was judged to be low.
CONCLUSIONS
While newer treatments like LLLT may be more efficacious than more traditional therapies like 5% minoxidil, the efficacy of the more recent treatment modalities needs to be further validated by future RCTs.
Topics: Alopecia; Female; Finasteride; Humans; Male; Minoxidil; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32250713
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2020.1749547 -
American Journal of Clinical Oncology Apr 2020To indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used for patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used for patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).
METHODS
The relevant randomized controlled trials were retrieved from PubMed and the Cochrane Library. Network meta-analyses were used to compare multiple drugs simultaneously for the outcomes of nmCRPC. Direct evidence in trials and indirect evidence across trials were combined by the network meta-analyses to estimate the treatment efficiency.
OUTCOME
Eight studies were included in our research. For prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival, the rate of progression was significantly decreased following apalutamide, enzalutamide, bicalutamide+dutasteride, and bicalutamide treatment compared with placebo. Compared with placebo treatment, metastases-free survival was significantly increased in patients who received apalutamide (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.35), enzalutamide (HR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.24-0.35), and darolutamide (HR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.35-0.50). Direct comparison showed significant survival benefits in patients who received second-generation anti-androgen therapy (apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide: HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61-0.91) compared with patients who received placebo. With respect to metastases-free survival, based on SUCRA analysis, there was 80% and 78% probability that apalutamide and enzalutamide were preferred treatment, while darolutamide was likely to be second-best choice. Compared with placebo, all agents were not associated with significantly higher likelihood of serious adverse events and grade 3 to 4 adverse events.
CONCLUSION
Our outcomes support equivalent efficacy and similar risk of adverse effects between apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide, supporting the use of these antiandrogen agents in high-risk of progression nmCRPC.
Topics: Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31972568
DOI: 10.1097/COC.0000000000000660 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Dec 2019This systematic review aims to examine surgical and non-surgical treatments and identify those procedures that are most effective in terms of patient satisfaction.
INTRODUCTION
This systematic review aims to examine surgical and non-surgical treatments and identify those procedures that are most effective in terms of patient satisfaction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review protocol was developed a priori in accordance with the Preferred Reporting for Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. The search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, the Cochrane handbook. A multistep search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, PreMEDLINE, Ebase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies on hair loss causes and hair loss treatment with different surgical and non-surgical techniques RESULTS: Our search generated a total of 781 articles; 646 studies were excluded based on the content of the abstracts, and an additional 105 studies were excluded based on the content of the complete article. We performed a review of the 30 remaining studies, which had sufficient data for inclusion, and met all the aforementioned inclusion criteria. Of the 30 studies, four were about minoxidil, four about finasteride, two about dutasteride, three about phototherapy, six about platelet-rich plasma injection, four about follicular unit transplantation technique, six about follicular unit extraction technique, and one about patient satisfaction following surgical treatment without a specified surgical technique. Only three studies used a patient-reported outcome measurement.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study is the first comprehensive systematic review of hair loss, looking at the problem from different points of view, and focusing on finding the best solution for the patient. In the literature, there is currently no algorithm for the management of patients who go to a plastic surgeon for a solution to the problem of hair loss.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
Topics: Alopecia; Humans; Patient Satisfaction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31451851
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-019-01480-9 -
Clinical Interventions in Aging 2019We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dutasteride and finasteride in treating men with androgenetic alopecia (AGA) during a 24-week...
AIM
We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dutasteride and finasteride in treating men with androgenetic alopecia (AGA) during a 24-week treatment cycle.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials of dutasteride and finasteride for treating AGA were searched using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. The data were calculated using Rev Man v5.3.0. The reference lists of retrieved studies were also investigated.
RESULTS
Three articles including 576 participants which compared dutasteride with finasteride were selected for our analysis. The mean change in total hair count (mean difference [MD], 28.57; 95% CI, 18.75-38.39; <0.00001), investigator's assessment of global photographs for the vertex (MD, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.13-1.23; =0.02) and frontal (MD, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.13-1.13; =0.01) views, panel global photographic assessment for the vertex (MD, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.24; <0.00001) and frontal (MD, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.18-0.31; <0.00001) views, and subjects' assessment (MD, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.18-0.94; =0.003) suggested that dutasteride provided a better efficacy in treating men with AGA compared with finasteride. With regard to the assessment of safety, altered libido (=0.54), erectile dysfunction (=0.07), and ejaculation disorders (=0.58), dutasteride did not show a significant difference compared with finasteride.
CONCLUSION
Dutasteride seems to provide a better efficacy compared with finasteride in treating AGA. The two drugs appear to show similar rates of adverse reactions, especially in sexual dysfunction.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Adult; Alopecia; Dutasteride; Finasteride; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Safety; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 30863034
DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S192435 -
JAMA Surgery Feb 2019A growing number of transgender patients are receiving gender-affirming hormone treatments. It is unclear whether the evidence supports the current practice of routinely...
IMPORTANCE
A growing number of transgender patients are receiving gender-affirming hormone treatments. It is unclear whether the evidence supports the current practice of routinely discontinuing these hormones prior to surgery.
OBJECTIVE
To determine how medications used in cross-sex hormone treatment (CSHT) affect perioperative risk.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A series of searches were carried out in PubMed and Excerpta Medica Database to identify articles using each of the terms testosterone, estrogen, estradiol, oral contraceptive, spironolactone, cyproterone acetate, finasteride, dutasteride, leuprolide, goserelin, and histrelin, in combination with the terms surgery, perioperative, thrombosis, thromboembolism, and operative. The search was not restricted to perioperative outcomes in transgender populations because many surgeons routinely discontinue hormone use prior to surgery in this population, which makes it impossible to study how hormones affect outcomes. Additional sources were also identified from the texts of reviewed articles. Articles were excluded if they were animal studies or case reports, did not explicitly discuss surgical outcomes, or were restricted to removal of hormonally sensitive tissues.
FINDINGS
Eighteen articles addressing perioperative outcomes were identified by this systematic review, including 1 on CSHT, 12 on estrogens and progesterones, 1 on testosterone, and 4 on spironolactone and antiandrogens. Data were limited, but use of exogenous testosterone was not found to be associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism or other complications during surgery. Moderate evidence suggests that spironolactone is not associated with negative surgical outcomes. The data linking estrogen use and thrombosis is inconsistent in the perioperative period and does not address the types of estrogens most often used for CSHT.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Current evidence does not support routine discontinuation of all CSHT prior to surgery, particularly given the lack of information on risks associated with resuming these medications after they have been stopped. Evidence suggests there is no need to discontinue either testosterone or spironolactone, although their association with perioperative outcome quality has not been studied in depth. Most of the evidence that supports discontinuation of estrogen prior to surgery is based on oral estrogen regimens that are not typically used in transgender patients, and even with those formulations, there are conflicting reports on perioperative risk. Further research is needed to determine the safety of continuing hormone treatment and elucidate risks of short-term discontinuation.
Topics: Drug Substitution; Female; Gender Dysphoria; Gonadal Steroid Hormones; Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Preoperative Care; Transgender Persons; Transsexualism
PubMed: 30516808
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.4598 -
Acta Dermato-venereologica Jan 2019Treatment of male androgenetic alopecia with 5α-reductase inhibitors is efficacious. However, the risk of adverse sexual effects remains controversial. This systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Treatment of male androgenetic alopecia with 5α-reductase inhibitors is efficacious. However, the risk of adverse sexual effects remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the risk of adverse sexual effects due to treatment of androgenetic alopecia in male patients with finasteride, 1 mg/day, or dutasteride, 0.5 mg/day. Fifteen randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trials (4,495 subjects) were meta-analysed. Use of 5α-reductase inhibitors carried a 1.57-fold risk of sexual dysfunction (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.19-2.08). The relative risk was 1.66 (95% CI 1.20-2.30) for finasteride and 1.37 (95% CI 0.81-2.32) for dutasteride. Both drugs were associated with an increased risk, although the increase was not statistically significant for dutasteride. As studies into dutasteride were limited, further trials are required. It is important that physicians are aware of, and assess, the possibility of sexual dysfunction in patients treated with 5α-reductase inhibitors.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Administration, Oral; Alopecia; Dutasteride; Ejaculation; Erectile Dysfunction; Finasteride; Humans; Libido; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Sexual Behavior; Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological
PubMed: 30206635
DOI: 10.2340/00015555-3035 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Jan 2019Many studies have reported that 5α-reductase inhibitors (finasteride and dutasteride) raise serum testosterone (T) levels, yet there is lack of consistency among... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Many studies have reported that 5α-reductase inhibitors (finasteride and dutasteride) raise serum testosterone (T) levels, yet there is lack of consistency among studies on this point.
AIM
To review and meta-analyze available studies reporting changes in serum T concentrations in men treated with 5α-reductase inhibitors (5α-RIs).
METHODS
A Medline search using PubMed and EMBASE was performed including the following key words: "finasteride," "dutasteride," "testosterone and 5α-reductases."
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
Relevant studies were extracted, evaluated, and analyzed. Of these, 40 studies were analyzed qualitatively and 11 were included in the meta-analysis. A random effects model was used to conduct the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
In 11 studies comprising 1,784 patients with age ranging between 18 and 83 years and average treatment follow-up of 17 months, meta-analytic estimate of the mean baseline change was 27 (95% confidence interval 1-54). The meta-analysis did not demonstrate unequivocal significant increase in serum T levels. The increase was not uniform among all studies reported. Sensitivity analysis showed that no single study contributed decisively to the outcome or could be attributed to drug action. The reported increases in T levels with finasteride or dutasteride in men with low baseline serum T may be attributed, in part, to increased trapping of T by unsaturated sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) due to dissociation of 5α-dihydrotestosterone. In men with high baseline T levels, there appears to be no change in serum T levels. 10 studies reported luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, SHBG, and estradiol values and none reported significant changes in their levels, suggesting that observed changes in serum T levels are unlikely mediated by gonadotropins levels or peripheral conversion of T to estradiol.
CONCLUSION
5α-RI therapy is not associated with consistent and significant increases in serum T levels. Traish AM, Krakowsky Y, Doros G, et al. Do 5α-reductase inhibitors raise circulating serum testosterone levels? A comprehensive review and meta-analysis to explaining paradoxical results. Sex Med Rev 2019;7:95-114.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dutasteride; Finasteride; Humans; Luteinizing Hormone; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Testosterone
PubMed: 30098986
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2018.06.002 -
European Journal of Pharmacology Aug 2018Fesoterodine (as one of three drugs: dutasteride, finasteride and fesoterodine) was classified B (beneficial) by LUTS-FORTA 2014, indicating that it is a medicinal... (Review)
Review
Fesoterodine (as one of three drugs: dutasteride, finasteride and fesoterodine) was classified B (beneficial) by LUTS-FORTA 2014, indicating that it is a medicinal product with proven or obvious efficacy in the elderly, with limited side effects and/or safety concerns. A systematic literature review was undertaken in January 2018 using the PubMed and Google Scholar databases with the following individual and combined keywords: "fesoterodine", "pharmacology", "overactive bladder" and "antimuscarinics". The aim of the review was to determine which of fesoterodine's pharmacological properties explains its clinical benefits in general patient populations with OAB and the elderly in particular. The articles in the results were then selected by publication language (English and French only), methodology (off-topic studies, reported cases and literature reviews were excluded), relevance to the subject matter and publication date prior to 31 January 2018. A total of 205 articles was initially obtained, with 115 read and 45 selected. It appears that the association of four pharmacological properties specific to fesoterodine can explain that this drug has a good balance between efficacy and tolerability. These properties are namely the drug's high and nearly equal affinity for both the M2 and M3 muscarinic receptors, poor penetration of the blood-brain barrier, lack of hepatic first-pass activation -fesoterodine being rapidly and extensively converted to its active metabolite, 5-hydroxymethyl tolterodine, by ubiquitous esterases-, and its extended-release formulation. Fesoterodine's pharmacological profile is optimal for the treatment of overactive bladder. It is now recognized as one of the leading first-line treatment for this indication.
Topics: Animals; Benzhydryl Compounds; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Receptor, Muscarinic M2; Receptor, Muscarinic M3; Urinary Bladder, Overactive; Urological Agents
PubMed: 29803689
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2018.05.036 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Dec 2018Androgenetic alopecia, or male/female pattern baldness, is the most common type of progressive hair loss disorder. The aim of this study was to review recent advances in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Androgenetic alopecia, or male/female pattern baldness, is the most common type of progressive hair loss disorder. The aim of this study was to review recent advances in non-surgical treatments for androgenetic alopecia and identify the most effective treatments. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted of the available literature of the six most common non-surgical treatment options for treating androgenetic alopecia in both men and women; dutasteride 0.5 mg, finasteride 1 mg, low-level laser therapy (LLLT), minoxidil 2%, minoxidil 5% and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Seventy-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and 22 studies had the data necessary for a network meta-analysis. Relative effects show LLLT as the superior treatment. Relative effects show PRP, finasteride 1 mg (male), finasteride 1 mg (female), minoxidil 5%, minoxidil 2% and dutasteride (male) are approximately equivalent in mean change hair count following treatment. Minoxidil 5% and minoxidil 2% reported the most drug-related adverse events (n = 45 and n = 23, respectively). The quality of evidence of minoxidil 2% vs. minoxidil 5% was high; minoxidil 5% vs. placebo was moderate; dutasteride (male) vs. placebo, finasteride (female) vs. placebo, minoxidil 2% vs. placebo and minoxidil 5% vs. LLLT was low; and finasteride (male) vs. placebo, LLLT vs. sham, PRP vs. placebo and finasteride vs. minoxidil 2% was very low. Results of this NMA indicate the emergence of novel, non-hormonal therapies as effective treatments for hair loss; however, the quality of evidence is generally low. High-quality randomized controlled trials and head-to-head trials are required to support these findings and aid in the development of more standardized protocols, particularly for PRP. Regardless, this analysis may aid physicians in clinical decision-making and highlight the variety of non-surgical hair restoration options for patients.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Alopecia; Dutasteride; Finasteride; Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Minoxidil; Network Meta-Analysis; Platelet-Rich Plasma; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 29797431
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.15081 -
The Canadian Journal of Hospital... 2017Finasteride and dutasteride are competitive inhibitors of 5α-reductase enzymes and are commonly used to treat symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Finasteride and dutasteride are competitive inhibitors of 5α-reductase enzymes and are commonly used to treat symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and safety of finasteride and dutasteride in terms of clinically important outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
A literature search was performed using the search terms "prostatic hyperplasia", "prostatic hypertrophy", "dutasteride", "finasteride", "quality of life", "adverse drug reaction", and "mortality". The Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases were searched from inception to December 2015.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized trials, and systematic reviews comparing finasteride with dutasteride, either as monotherapy or in combination with α-blockers, for treatment of men with BPH were included. The outcomes of interest included need for prostate-related surgery, episodes of acute urinary retention, withdrawals due to adverse events, number of patients experiencing serious adverse events, mortality, and sexual dysfunction.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Four studies involving a total of 1879 patients were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in any of the clinically important outcomes examined: for prostate-related surgery, odds ratio (OR) 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-22.24); for episodes of acute urinary retention, OR 1.47 (95% CI 0.68-3.19); for number of withdrawals due to adverse events, OR 1.10 (95% CI 0.68-1.75); for total number of patients experiencing adverse events, OR 0.94 (95% CI 0.78-1.14); for number of patients experiencing serious adverse events, OR 1.31 (95% CI 0.87-1.97); and for sexual dysfunction, OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.08).
CONCLUSION
There is insufficient evidence to suggest that either finasteride or dutasteride offers an advantage in efficacy or safety over the other, in terms of clinically important outcomes.
PubMed: 28487578
DOI: 10.4212/cjhp.v70i2.1643