-
Skin Research and Technology : Official... Mar 2024The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine,... (Review)
Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, tofacitinib, baricitinib, corticosteroids, statins, zinc, apremilast, etc., for treating vitiligo lesions.
METHOD
Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were meticulously searched for studies spanning from 2010 to August 2023, focusing on systemic oral and injectable therapies for vitiligo, using comprehensive keywords and search syntaxes tailored to each database. Key data extracted included study design, treatment efficacy, patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, and safety profiles.
RESULTS
In a total of 42 included studies, oral mini-pulse corticosteroid therapy (OMP) was the subject of six studies (14.2%). Minocycline was the focus of five studies (11.9%), while methotrexate, apremilast, and tofacitinib each were examined in four studies (9.5%). Antioxidants and Afamelanotide were the subjects of three studies each (7.1%). Cyclosporine, simvastatin, oral zinc, oral corticosteroids (excluding OMP) and injections, and baricitinib were each explored in two studies (4.8%). Azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and Alefacept were the subjects of one study each (2.4%).
CONCLUSION
Systemic treatments for vitiligo have been successful in controlling lesions without notable side effects. OMP, Methotrexate, Azathioprine, Cyclosporine, Mycophenolate mofetil, Simvastatin, Apremilast, Minocycline, Afamelanotide, Tofacitinib, Baricitinib, Antioxidants, and oral/injectable corticosteroids are effective treatment methods. However, oral zinc and alefacept did not show effectiveness.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Azathioprine; Vitiligo; Mycophenolic Acid; Minocycline; Alefacept; Cyclosporine; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Hypopigmentation; Simvastatin; Zinc; Purines; Pyrazoles; Sulfonamides; Azetidines; Thalidomide
PubMed: 38454597
DOI: 10.1111/srt.13642 -
BMJ Open Mar 2024To compare the efficacy and safety of different anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents combined with different delivery methods for neovascular glaucoma... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety of different anti-VEGF agents combined with different delivery methods for neovascular glaucoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and safety of different anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents combined with different delivery methods for neovascular glaucoma (NVG).
DESIGN
Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN and Chinese databases including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science Periodical Database (Wanfang Database), VIP Journal Integration Platform and China Biology Medicine Database were searched from inception to 5 September 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the treatment of NVG using different anti-VEGF agents combined with various methods of drug administration, without any language limitations. All patients included underwent panretinal laser photocoagulation and there were no restrictions on prior glaucoma surgery.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Random-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety and rank priority of anti-VEGF regimens. The source of heterogeneity and the related factors affecting the stability of the results were also explored. CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) was used to assess the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS
Our analysis included 17 RCTs involving a total of 1311 eyes from 1228 patients. We examined five different treatment regimens, which used three different anti-VEGF drugs. The following treatments showed a significant decrease in intraocular pressure (IOP) compared with the control group at 1 month after glaucoma surgery: simultaneous intravitreal and intracameral injection of conbercept (ICCIVC) (mean difference (MD)=-11.56, 95% credible interval (CrI) -20.8 to -2.24), intravitreal injection of conbercept (MD=-8.88, 95% CrI -13.93 to -3.78), intravitreal injection of ranibizumab (MD=-7.62, 95% CrI -10.91 to -4.33) and intravitreal injection of bevacizumab IVB) (MD=-5.51, 95% CrI -10.79 to -0.35). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis indicated that ICCIVC (82.0%) may be the most effective regimen in reducing IOP. In terms of safety, there were no statistically significant differences among the interventions. According to the SUCRA analysis, ICCIVC (68.0%) was considered the safest choice with the fewest complications. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses showed that mean age was the main source of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the study results.
CONCLUSION
ICCIVC was more effective and safer than other anti-VEGF regimens for NVG. Simultaneous intravitreal and intracameral injection was found to be the best route of administration, and conbercept was found to be the superior drug selection when compared with ranibizumab and bevacizumab.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022309676.
Topics: Humans; Glaucoma, Neovascular; Bevacizumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Ranibizumab; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors; Glaucoma
PubMed: 38443085
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080103 -
BMC Oral Health Mar 2024The IL-23/IL-17 axis plays an important role in the immunopathogenesis of periodontal disease. A systematic review was conducted to synthesize all research reporting on...
BACKGROUND
The IL-23/IL-17 axis plays an important role in the immunopathogenesis of periodontal disease. A systematic review was conducted to synthesize all research reporting on the levels of the IL-23/IL-17 axis in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from subjects with gingivits, and periodontitis, compared to healthy controls.
METHODS
The protocol followed the PRISMA, and Cochrane guidelines, and was registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF): https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7495V . A search was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Schoolar, and Cochrane from November 15th, 2005, to May 10th, 2023. The quality of the studies was assessed using the JBI tool for cross-sectional studies.
RESULTS
The search strategy provided a total of 2,098 articles, of which 12 investigations met the inclusion criteria. The total number of patients studied was 537, of which 337 represented the case group (subjects with gingivitis, and chronic periodontitis), and 200 represented the control group (periodontally healthy subjects). The ages of the patients ranged from 20 to 50 years, with a mean (SD) of 36,6 ± 4,2, of which 47% were men, and 53% were women. 75% of the investigations collected GCF samples with absorbent paper strips, and analyzed cytokine IL-17 levels individually. In addition, qualitative analysis revealed that there are differences between IL-23/IL-17 axis levels in subjects with chronic periodontitis, gingivitis and healthy controls.
CONCLUSIONS
Thus, IL-23/IL-17 axis levels could be used in the future as a diagnostic tool to distinguish between periodontal diseases.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Chronic Periodontitis; Gingival Crevicular Fluid; Interleukin-17; Cross-Sectional Studies; Gingivitis; Interleukin-23
PubMed: 38431633
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04077-0 -
The Oncologist May 2024We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil...
We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) combined with other antineoplastic agents in advanced cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a systematic search on May 29, 2021, for studies reporting one or more efficacy or safety outcome with FTD/TPI-containing combinations. Our search yielded 1378 publications, with 38 records meeting selection criteria: 35 studies of FTD/TPI-containing combinations in mCRC (31 studies second line or later) and 3 studies in other tumor types. FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was extensively studied, including 19 studies in chemorefractory mCRC. Median overall survival ranged 8.6-14.4 months and median progression-free survival 3.7-6.8 months with FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Based on one randomized and several retrospective studies, FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was associated with improved outcomes compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy. FTD/TPI combinations with chemotherapy or other targeted agents were reported in small early-phase studies; preliminary data indicated higher antitumor activity for certain combinations. Overall, no safety concerns existed with FTD/TPI combinations; most common grade ≥ 3 adverse event was neutropenia, ranging 5%-100% across all studies. In studies comparing FTD/TPI combinations with monotherapy, grade ≥ 3 neutropenia appeared more frequently with combinations (29%-67%) vs. monotherapy (5%-41%). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events ranged 0%-11% for FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab and 0%-17% with other combinations. This systematic review supports feasibility and safety of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Data on non-bevacizumab FTD/TPI combinations remain preliminary and need further validation.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Colorectal Neoplasms; Drug Combinations; Pyrrolidines; Thymine; Trifluridine
PubMed: 38366864
DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae007 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023The EGFR gene encodes a protein that stimulates molecular pathways that allow the growth and development of the tumor microenvironment. The current preferred tyrosine...
Effectiveness and safety of the bevacizumab and erlotinib combination erlotinib alone in EGFR mutant metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The EGFR gene encodes a protein that stimulates molecular pathways that allow the growth and development of the tumor microenvironment. The current preferred tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) for the first-line treatment of EGFRm metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is osimertinib. However, the combination of angiogenesis inhibitors and TKI has produced discordant results. We aimed to assess the effects of the bevacizumab and erlotinib combination in EGFRm metastatic NSCLC.
METHODS
Using eligibility criteria focused on patients with EGFRm metastatic NSCLC treated with bevacizumab and erlotinib, we searched databases including clinical trial randomized studies and reviews published until April 15, 2023 in Medline (PubMed), Scopus, and Embase. Eight clinical trials (1,052 patients) were selected from 1,343 articles for quantitative and qualitative assessment. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Data were synthesized through random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The bevacizumab and erlotinib combination significantly improved the progression-free survival (PFS) (log(HR) = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.54-0.73, < 0.001) and overall response ratio (ORR) (RR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.97, = 0.03). However, it did not improve the overall survival (log(HR) = 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10, = 0.38) and was associated with higher serious adverse events (SAEs) (OR = 3.48; 95% CI, 1.76-6.88, = 0.005). A subgroup analysis suggested similar benefits in different mutation subtypes and brain metastasis condition. The evidence is limited by a moderate risk of bias across studies and heterogeneity in the reporting of SAEs.
CONCLUSIONS
The bevacizumab and erlotinib combination significantly improved PFS and ORR in EGFRm metastatic NSCLC but were also associated with higher-grade (≥3) adverse events. These results suggest that while the combination therapy may enhance progression-free survival and overall response, it does not improve the overall survival and is associated with higher toxicity. Thus, the treatment should be personalized based on individual patient comorbidities. Further prospective trials are needed to validate these results.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#searchadvanced, identifier CDR 42022364692.
PubMed: 38322283
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1335373 -
BMC Gastroenterology Feb 2024To evaluate the benefit of bevacizumab under the comprehensive treatment strategy and its advantages over other drugs, so as to provide reference for the formulation of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the benefit of bevacizumab under the comprehensive treatment strategy and its advantages over other drugs, so as to provide reference for the formulation of clinical plans.
METHODS
As of October 1, 2022, the randomized controlled clinical trials of bevacizumab in combination with metastatic colorectal cancer published in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Medline databases were searched. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the short-term disease control effect and long-term survival of the treatment strategy.
RESULTS
21 RCTs (6665 patients; 3356 patients in the experimental group and 3309 patients in the control group; average age, 55-75 years) were treated with bevacizumab as the experimental group for metastatic colorectal cancer. BEV has stronger anti-tumor activity than the single treatment scheme (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.11-1.52). And Benefits of the BEV group were 0.73 (0.55, 0.96), 1.26 (0.71, 2.24), 1.63 (0.92, 2.87) and 0.07 (0.02, 0.25) compared with CET, VAN, CED and PAN respectively. The disease control of BEV combined therapy was better (OR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.78). The same as compared with cediranib (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.06-3.55). However, the long-term prognosis of BEV, including the overall survival (HRs = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84-1.15) and progression-free survival (HRs = 1.05,95% CI: 0.97-1.13) were not prolonged. The survival benefits of cetuximab and panitumumab were not reflected.
CONCLUSION
The addition of BEV can enhance the anti-tumor ability and disease control, while cetuximab and panitumumab may have stronger ability. However, it did not effectively improve the survival of patients. A more reasonable and effective treatment plan needs more clinical experimental support.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; Bevacizumab; Cetuximab; Panitumumab; Colorectal Neoplasms; Colonic Neoplasms; Rectal Neoplasms; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
PubMed: 38302922
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-024-03134-w -
Clinical Medicine & Research Dec 2023Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic autoimmune disease of skin and mucous membranes. World Health Organization has announced oral lichen planus (OLP) as a premalignant... (Review)
Review
Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic autoimmune disease of skin and mucous membranes. World Health Organization has announced oral lichen planus (OLP) as a premalignant lesion. The exact etiology of OLP remains unknown; however, different mechanisms may be involved in its immunopathogenesis. The upregulation of cytokines, chemokines, and adhesion molecules is consistent with a persistent and erratic immunological response to OLP-mediated antigens generated by oral keratinocytes and innate immune cells. These molecules attract T cells, and mast cells to the disease site and regulate complex interactions among cells that lead to death of keratinocytes, degradation of basement membrane, and chronicity of the disease. It is believed that CD8+ and CD4+ T helper 1 (Th1) cells are the main lymphocytes involved in this process, although recent evidence suggests implication of other T helper subgroups, such as Th23, Th17, and regulatory T cells (Tregs), proposing a more complex cellular immunity process to be involved in its pathogenesis. The emphasis of this research review is on the function of IL-17 in the pathophysiology of OLP and how current discoveries may point to future treatment strategies. This research protocol will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA 2020) checklist. An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles published from 1960 to June 2022. Based on the eligibility criteria, 21 articles were enrolled. In comparison to healthy controls, the findings of this review demonstrated greater expression of IL-17 and Th-17 in the blood, saliva, and tissues of OLP and LP patients. Additionally, there was a strong link between the relative levels of IL-17 and IL-23 expression. Treatment with monoclonal antibodies against Th-17/Tc-17, IL-12/IL-23, and IL-23 would result in significant long-term improvement of LP symptoms.
Topics: Humans; Lichen Planus, Oral; Interleukin-17; Cytokines; Lichen Planus; Interleukin-23
PubMed: 38296640
DOI: 10.3121/cmr.2023.1822 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2024We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the visual, anatomical, and safety outcomes of the intravitreal faricimab, a novel vascular endothelial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the visual, anatomical, and safety outcomes of the intravitreal faricimab, a novel vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) bispecific agent, in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) patients. The follow-up times in the included studies ranged from a minimum of 36 weeks to a maximum of 52 weeks. EMBASE, Ovid-Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, Scopus, the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrial.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) were searched (The last literature search was performed on August 17, 2023) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing faricimab with control groups for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). The risk of bias for eligible RCTs was independently assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool by two authors (W.-T.Y. and C.-S.W.). The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4 software. The mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), total choroidal neovascularization (CNV) area, and total lesion leakage were analyzed as continuous variables and the outcome measurements were reported as the weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The ocular adverse events and ocular serious adverse events were analyzed as dichotomous variables and the outcome measurements were analyzed as the odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% CI. Random-effects model was used in our study for all outcome synthesizing due to different clinical characteristics. Four RCTs with 1,486 patients were eligible for quantitative analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between intravitreal faricimab and anti-VEGF in BCVA [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.47; 95% CI: (- 0.17, 1.11)]. The intravitreal faricimab group showed numerically lower CST [WMD = - 5.96; 95% CI = (- 7.11, - 4.82)], total CNV area [WMD = - 0.49; 95% CI = (- 0.68, - 0.30)], and total lesion leakage [WMD = - 0.88; 95% CI = (- 1.08, - 0.69)] after intravitreal therapy compared with the intravitreal anti-VEGF group. There were no statistically significant differences between intravitreal faricimab and anti-VEGF in ocular adverse events (AEs) [pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.10; 95% CI = (0.81, 1.49)] and serious adverse events (SAEs) [pooled OR = 0.84; 95% CI = (0.37, 1.90)]. The intravitreal bispecific anti-VEGF/angiopoietin 2 (Ang2) antibody faricimab with a extended injection interval was non-inferior to first-line anti-VEGF agents in BCVA. It was safe and had better anatomical recovery. Large, well-designed RCTs are needed to explore the potential benefit of extended faricimab for nAMD. This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42022327450).
Topics: Humans; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Bispecific; Intravitreal Injections; Macular Degeneration
PubMed: 38291069
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-52942-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) can reduce oedema, improve vision, and prevent further visual loss. These drugs have replaced laser photocoagulation as the standard of care for people with DMO. In the previous update of this review, we found moderate-quality evidence that, at 12 months, aflibercept was slightly more effective than ranibizumab and bevacizumab for improving vision in people with DMO, although the difference may have been clinically insignificant (less than 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), or five Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters, or one ETDRS line).
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this updated review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the different anti-VEGF drugs in RCTs at longer followup (24 months).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched various electronic databases on 8 July 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any anti-angiogenic drug with an anti-VEGF mechanism of action versus another anti-VEGF drug, another treatment, sham, or no treatment in people with DMO.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods for pairwise meta-analysis and we augmented this evidence using network meta-analysis (NMA) methods. We used the Stata 'network' meta-analysis package for all analyses. We used the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) web application to grade the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 studies (13 with industry funding) that enrolled 3513 people with DMO (median central retinal thickness (CRT) 460 microns, interquartile range (IQR) 424 to 482) and moderate vision loss (median best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) 0.48 logMAR, IQR 0.42 to 0.55. One study that investigated ranibizumab versus sham and one study that mainly enrolled people with subclinical DMO and normal BCVA were not suitable for inclusion in the efficacy NMA. Consistent with the previous update of this review, we used ranibizumab as the reference drug for efficacy, and control (including laser, observation, and sham) as the reference for systemic safety. Eight trials provided data on the primary outcome (change in BCVA at 24 months, in logMAR: lower is better). We found no evidence of a difference between the following interventions and ranibizumab alone: aflibercept (mean difference (MD) -0.05 logMAR, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12 to 0.02; moderate certainty); bevacizumab (MD -0.01 logMAR, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10; low certainty), brolucizumab (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.07; low certainty), ranibizumab plus deferred laser (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.10; low certainty), and ranibizumab plus prompt laser (MD 0.03 logMAR, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.09; very low certainty). We also analysed BCVA change at 12 months, finding moderate-certainty evidence of increased efficacy with brolucizumab (MD -0.07 logMAR, 95%CI -0.10 to -0.03 logMAR), faricimab (MD -0.08 logMAR, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.05), and aflibercept (MD -0.07 logMAR, 95 % CI -0.10 to -0.04) compared to ranibizumab alone, but the difference could be clinically insignificant. Compared to ranibizumab alone, NMA of six trials showed no evidence of a difference with aflibercept (moderate certainty), bevacizumab (low certainty), or ranibizumab with prompt (very low certainty) or deferred laser (low certainty) regarding improvement by three or more ETDRS lines at 24 months. There was moderate-certainty evidence of greater CRT reduction at 24 months with brolucizumab (MD -23 microns, 95% CI -65 to -1 9) and aflibercept (MD -26 microns, 95% CI -53 to 0.9) compared to ranibizumab. There was moderate-certainty evidence of lesser CRT reduction with bevacizumab (MD 28 microns, 95% CI 0 to 56), ranibizumab plus deferred laser (MD 63 microns, 95% CI 18 to 109), and ranibizumab plus prompt laser (MD 72 microns, 95% CI 25 to 119) compared with ranibizumab alone. Regarding all-cause mortality at the longest available follow-up (20 trials), we found no evidence of increased risk of death for any drug compared to control, although effects were in the direction of an increase, and clinically relevant increases could not be ruled out. The certainty of this evidence was low for bevacizumab (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 0.75 to 5.88), brolucizumab (RR 2.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 12.58), faricimab (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.45 to 8.00), ranibizumab (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.34), and very low for conbercept (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.81) and aflibercept (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.77). Estimates for Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration arterial thromboembolic events at 24 months did not suggest an increase with any drug compared to control, but the NMA was overall incoherent and the evidence was of low or very low certainty. Ocular adverse events were rare and poorly reported and could not be assessed in NMAs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence of the comparative efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF drugs beyond one year of follow-up. We found no clinically important differences in visual outcomes at 24 months in people with DMO, although there were differences in CRT change. We found no evidence that any drug increases all-cause mortality compared to control, but estimates were very imprecise. Evidence from RCTs may not apply to real-world practice, where people in need of antiangiogenic treatment are often under-treated, and the individuals exposed to these drugs may be less healthy than trial participants.
Topics: Humans; Ranibizumab; Bevacizumab; Macular Edema; Diabetic Retinopathy; Endothelial Growth Factors; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Network Meta-Analysis; Laser Coagulation; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 38275741
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007419.pub7 -
Blood Cancer Journal Jan 2024Extra copies of chromosome 1q21 (+1q: gain = 3 copies, amp >= 4 copies) are associated with worse outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). This systematic review assesses...
Extra copies of chromosome 1q21 (+1q: gain = 3 copies, amp >= 4 copies) are associated with worse outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). This systematic review assesses the current reporting trends of +1q, the efficacy of existing regimens on +1q, and its prognostic implications in MM randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Registry of RCTs were searched from January 2012 to December 2022. Only MM RCTs were included. A total of 124 RCTs were included, of which 29 (23%) studies reported on +1q. Among them, 10% defined thresholds for +1q, 14% reported survival data separately for gain and amp, and 79% considered +1q a high-risk cytogenetic abnormality. Amongst RCTs that met the primary endpoint showing improvement in progression free survival (PFS), lenalidomide maintenance (Myeloma XI), selinexor (BOSTON), and isatuximab (IKEMA and ICARIA) were shown to improve PFS for patients with evidence of +1q. Some additional RCT's such as Myeloma XI+ (carfilzomib), ELOQUENT-3 (elotuzumab), and HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 (bortezomib) met their endpoint showing improvement in PFS and also showed improvement in PFS in the +1q cohort, although the confidence interval crossed 1. All six studies that reported HR for +1q patients vs. without (across both arms) showed worse OS and PFS for +1q. There is considerable heterogeneity in the reporting of +1q. All interventions that have shown to be successful in RCTs and have clearly reported on the +1q subgroup have shown concordant direction of results and benefit of the applied intervention. A more standardized approach to reporting this abnormality is needed.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bortezomib; Chromosome Aberrations; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 1; Lenalidomide; Multiple Myeloma; Prognosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38272897
DOI: 10.1038/s41408-024-00985-0