-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023Oral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) aims to avoid severe COVID-19 in asymptomatic people or those with mild symptoms, thereby decreasing hospitalization and death. It... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Oral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) aims to avoid severe COVID-19 in asymptomatic people or those with mild symptoms, thereby decreasing hospitalization and death. It remains to be evaluated for which indications and patient populations the drug is suitable.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus standard of care (SoC) compared to SoC with or without placebo, or any other intervention for treating COVID-19 or preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. To explore equity aspects in subgroup analyses. To keep up to date with the evolving evidence base using a living systematic review (LSR) approach and make new relevant studies available to readers in-between publication of review updates.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Scopus, and World Health Organization COVID-19 Research Database, identifying completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions and incorporating studies up to 15 May 2023. This is a LSR. We conduct update searches every two months and make them publicly available on the open science framework (OSF) platform.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC to SoC with or without placebo, or any other intervention for treatment of people with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis, irrespective of disease severity or treatment setting, and for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We screened all studies for research integrity. Studies were ineligible if they had been retracted, or if they were not prospectively registered including appropriate ethics approval.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard Cochrane methodology and used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: 1. to treat outpatients with mild COVID-19; 2. to treat inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19: mortality, clinical worsening or improvement, quality of life, (serious) adverse events, and viral clearance; 3. to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in postexposure prophylaxis (PEP); and 4. pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) scenarios: SARS-CoV-2 infection, development of COVID-19 symptoms, mortality, admission to hospital, quality of life, and (serious) adverse events. We explored inequity by subgroup analysis for elderly people, socially-disadvantaged people with comorbidities, populations from low-income countries and low- to middle-income countries, and people from different ethnic and racial backgrounds.
MAIN RESULTS
As of 15 May 2023, we included two RCTs with 2510 participants with mild and mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 in outpatient and inpatient settings comparing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC to SoC with or without placebo. All trial participants were without previous confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and at high risk for progression to severe disease. Randomization coincided with the Delta wave for outpatients and Omicron wave for inpatients. Outpatient trial participants and 73% of inpatients were unvaccinated. Symptom onset in outpatients was no more than five days before randomisation and prior or concomitant therapies including medications highly dependent on CYP3A4 were not allowed. We excluded two studies due to concerns with research integrity. We identified 13 ongoing studies. Three studies are currently awaiting classification. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for treating people with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 in outpatient settings Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC compared to SoC plus placebo may reduce all-cause mortality at 28 days (risk ratio (RR) 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.68; 1 study, 2224 participants; low-certainty evidence) and admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.27; 1 study, 2224 participants; low-certainty evidence). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC may reduce serious adverse events during the study period compared to SoC plus placebo (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41; 1 study, 2224 participants; low-certainty evidence). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC probably has little or no effect on treatment-emergent adverse events (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.10; 1 study, 2224 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably increases treatment-related adverse events such as dysgeusia and diarrhoea during the study period compared to SoC plus placebo (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.95; 1 study, 2224 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC probably decreases discontinuation of study drug due to adverse events compared to SoC plus placebo (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.80; 1 study, 2224 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported improvement of clinical status, quality of life, or viral clearance. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for treating people with moderate to severe COVID-19 in inpatient settings We are uncertain whether nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC compared to SoC reduces all-cause mortality at 28 days (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.86; 1 study, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or increases viral clearance at seven days (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.58; 1 study, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and 14 days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.20; 1 study, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported improvement or worsening of clinical status and quality of life. We did not include data for safety outcomes due to insufficient and inconsistent information. Subgroup analyses for equity For outpatients, the outcome 'admission to hospital or death' was investigated for equity regarding age (less than 65 years versus 65 years or greater) and ethnicity. There were no subgroup differences for age or ethnicity. For inpatients, the outcome 'all-cause mortality' was investigated for equity regarding age (65 years or less versus greater than 65 years). There was no difference between subgroups of age. No further equity-related subgroups were reported, and no subgroups were reported for other outcomes. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection (PrEP and PEP) No studies available.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-certainty evidence suggests nirmatrelvir/ritonavir reduces the risk of all-cause mortality and hospital admission or death in high-risk, unvaccinated COVID-19 outpatients infected with the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. There is low- to moderate-certainty evidence of the safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Very low-certainty evidence exists regarding the effects of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir on all-cause mortality and viral clearance in mildly to moderately affected, mostly unvaccinated COVID-19 inpatients infected with the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2. Insufficient and inconsistent information prevents the assessment of safety outcomes. No reliable differences in effect size and direction were found regarding equity aspects. There is no available evidence supporting the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. We are continually updating our search and making search results available on the OSF platform.
Topics: Humans; Aged; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Ritonavir; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 38032024
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015395.pub3 -
Cureus Oct 2023With the advent of modern antiretroviral therapy (ART), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has been modified into a chronic manageable condition, prolonging... (Review)
Review
With the advent of modern antiretroviral therapy (ART), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has been modified into a chronic manageable condition, prolonging the lifespan of people living with HIV (PLHIV). This has resulted in an increased non-AIDS-related morbidity in the HIV-infected population. Our aim is to study the role of contemporary ART in tackling the risk of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in PLHIV. We searched through the databases of PubMed, PubMed Central, and Cochrane Library for pertinent articles using the medical subject headings (MeSH) "HIV infection", "Atherosclerosis", and "Antiretroviral agents". The articles published in the past five years were retrieved, screened for relevance, and assessed for quality before being included in the review. This review was performed following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The results indicate that the incidence of dyslipidemia with integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) is greater than with non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and lesser than with protease inhibitors (PIs). INSTIs are indispensably associated with weight gain and obesity. High triglyceride (TG) and oxidized low-density lipoproteins to low-density lipoproteins (oxLDL/LDL) ratio levels and low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels are seen in patients taking PIs. A higher incidence of hypertension and metabolic syndrome (MetS) was noticed with INSTIs compared to NNRTIs. PI intake for >5 years increases the risk of subclinical atherosclerosis. Increased risk of myocardial infarction with INSTIs was observed in a study, while another study reported decreased risk. HIV infection independently increases the risk for atherosclerosis and CVD. Although contemporary ART decreases this enhanced risk, it inherently increases the risk for abnormal lipid profile, MetS, weight gain, and obesity. Further research into the risk of atherosclerosis and CVD with newer ART drugs is essential for decoding the underlying mechanisms and preventing adverse cardiac outcomes in PLHIV.
PubMed: 38021858
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.47730 -
ESC Heart Failure Feb 2024Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has improved outcomes in patients with heart failure, including the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The efficacy and safety of new potassium binders on renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor optimization in heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has improved outcomes in patients with heart failure, including the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, which can hinder the excretion of potassium, resulting in hyperkalaemia. New potassium binders (NPBs) can prevent this adverse effect; however, the efficacy and safety of NPB for this indication have not been fully established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane through 26 April 2023. The risk of bias assessment was conducted, following Cochrane's updated Risk of Bias 2 assessment tool. We used the fixed-effects model to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using mean difference (MD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI) (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023426113). We included six RCTs with a total of 1432 patients. NPB was significantly associated with successful mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) optimization [RR: 1.13 with 95% CI (1.02-1.25), P = 0.02], decreased patients with MRA at less than the target dose [RR: 0.72 with 95% CI (0.57-0.90), P = 0.004], and decreased hyperkalaemic episodes [RR: 0.42 with 95% CI (0.24-0.72), P = 0.002]. However, there was no difference between NPB and placebo regarding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ANRi) optimization [RR: 1.02 with 95% CI (0.89-1.17), P = 0.76] and serum potassium change [MD: -0.31 with 95% CI (-0.61 to 0.00), P = 0.05], with an acceptable safety profile except for the increased incidence of hypokalaemia with NPB [RR: 1.57 with 95% CI (1.12-2.21), P = 0.009]. NPB has been shown to improve GDMT outcomes by enhancing MRA optimization and reducing hyperkalaemic episodes. However, there are limited data on the effects of NPB on ACEi/ARB/ANRi optimization. Future RCTs should investigate ACEi/ARB/ANRi optimization and conduct head-to-head comparisons of NPB (patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate).
Topics: Humans; Aldosterone; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Heart Failure; Hyperkalemia; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Potassium; Renin-Angiotensin System
PubMed: 38012095
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14588 -
Journal of the Formosan Medical... May 2024The introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), with a non-inferior or superior clinical efficacy profile compared to vitamin K antagonists... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
The introduction of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), with a non-inferior or superior clinical efficacy profile compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), has significantly improved the safety profile and treatment adherence of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, few studies have compared the effectiveness and safety of NOACs. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the safety and clinical effectiveness of NOACs and VKAs in patients with non-valvular AF.
METHODS
An online bibliographic search was conducted to retrieve real-world evidence studies published between January 2019 and June 2022.
RESULTS
Dabigatran was associated with lower risks of major bleeding, ischemic stroke, and intracranial hemorrhage than warfarin. Among the NOACs, only dabigatran had a lower risk of all-cause mortality than warfarin. Dabigatran was also associated with lower risks of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage than rivaroxaban.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis confirms that dabigatran's real-world safety and clinical effectiveness align with the results of pivotal clinical trials.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Warfarin; Anticoagulants; Network Meta-Analysis; Dabigatran; Administration, Oral; Hemorrhage; Stroke; Rivaroxaban; Vitamin K
PubMed: 37996330
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2023.10.014 -
Cardiology Journal 2024Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of concomitant glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, routine femoral artery access, and less potent effects of clopidogrel limits meaningful comparisons. The present study is a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare bivalirudin to heparin in contemporary practice.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched for relevant studies, including comparisons between bivalirudin and heparin in the current medical era from inception to December 23, 2021. Studies reporting incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and net adverse clinical events (NACE) in patients undergoing PCI and meeting the inclusion criteria were retained. Data extraction was performed by three independent reviewers.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included 8 studies. Compared to heparin, bivalirudin during PCI was associated with a lower NACE risk, lower all-cause death, and similar MACE risk, with a pooled risk ratio of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.97, p = 0.02), 0.83 (95% CI 0.74-0.94, p = 0.002), and 0.93 (95% CI 0.78-1.10, p = 0.38), respectively. Moreover, the reduction in NACE was mainly attributed to reduced bleeding (22% reduction in the risk of major bleeding, 95% CI 0.63-0.97, p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
These findings suggest that bivalirudin use during PCI reduced the risk of NACE and all-cause death but did not reduce the risk of MACE compared with heparin use in PCI. More studies specifically designed for anticoagulation strategies and a personalized anticoagulation regimen to comprehensively balance bleeding and ischemia risks are required.
Topics: Humans; Hirudins; Heparin; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Peptide Fragments; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Recombinant Proteins; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Hemorrhage; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37964648
DOI: 10.5603/cj.90956 -
Genetics Research 2023Pharmacogenetics is a potential approach that can be applied to decline the burden of rivaroxaban's ADRs. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to identify... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Pharmacogenetics is a potential approach that can be applied to decline the burden of rivaroxaban's ADRs. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to identify genetic variants correlated with rivaroxaban exposure and evaluate their importance.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for all observational and interventional studies. The fixed effect method was used to pool the data when the Q-test's value was higher than 0.1. We used random models when the value was less than 0.1.
RESULTS
Data from ten studies (4721 participants) were analyzed in the current review. Qualitative synthesis from included studies found that two variants of ABCB1 (rs1045642 and rs2032582) and one variant of APOB (rs13306198) are potential contributors to rivaroxaban concentrations. Both wild homozygotes (AA) and heterozygotes (AC) of rs1045642 have significantly lower rivaroxaban concentrations compared to mutated homozygotes (CC) (SMD = 0.516, 95% CI: 0.115 to 0.917; SMD = 0.772, 95% CI: 0.088 to 1.455, respectively). Nevertheless, pooling unadjusted odds ratios did not yield a statistically significant correlation between rivaroxaban ADRs and genetic mutations.
CONCLUSION
This study revealed that being an AC or CC for rs1045642 is attributed to a considerably higher rivaroxaban level in participants using rivaroxaban. That is to say, rs1045642 is a remarkable predictor of rivaroxaban metabolism. We concluded that identifying rs1045642 before drug administration might decrease ADRs although further studies adjusted for potential confounders are strongly suggested.
Topics: Humans; Rivaroxaban; Pharmacogenetics; Homozygote; Heterozygote; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37942082
DOI: 10.1155/2023/6105320 -
Alternative Therapies in Health and... Apr 2024Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a prevalent and clinically significant condition characterized by limited treatment options. In this context,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a prevalent and clinically significant condition characterized by limited treatment options. In this context, the objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in managing HFpEF.
METHODS
A systematic search of relevant studies was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials comparing sacubitril/valsartan to ACEIs or ARBs in HFpEF patients were included. Inclusion criteria: LVEF>45%, NYHA II-IV, Sac/Val vs ACEI/ARB, RCTs, treatment duration >3 months, sample size ≥25 per group. Exclusion criteria: Animal studies, unclear/missing data, poor quality, case studies/expert opinions.Hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular mortality were the primary outcomes, while the additional results included mortality from all causes, improvement of NYHA class, modifications in NT-proBNP, and with LVEF.
RESULTS
Sacubitril/valsartan substantially reduced heart failure hospitalization rates compared to ACEIs and ARBs, according to a total of six studies involving 5,201 participants (Relative Risk, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85; P = .001). Nonetheless, there were no significant improvements in mortality due to cardiovascular disease (Relative Risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.12; P = .563). Sacubitril/valsartan did not affect total mortality from all causes significantly (Relative Risk, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.84-1.09; P = .453), but it did enhance NYHA classification (Relative Risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43; P = .001). NT-proBNP levels decreased substantially (Weighted Mean Difference, -266.67; 95% CI, -525.86 to -7.47), whereas there had been little major shift in LVEF (Weighted Mean Difference, 1.49; 95% CI, -1.33 to 4.21; P = .342).
CONCLUSIONS
Sacubitril/valsartan may provide superior benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization rates, NT-proBNP levels, and improving NYHA classification in patients with HFpEF compared to ACEIs and ARBs. Sacubitril/valsartan might be considered as a preferred treatment option for HFpEF patients due to its benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization rates and improving symptom severity.
Topics: Humans; Valsartan; Heart Failure; Biphenyl Compounds; Aminobutyrates; Drug Combinations; Stroke Volume; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Tetrazoles; Aged; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
PubMed: 37917889
DOI: No ID Found -
PloS One 2023Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a health burden of rising importance. Slowing progression to end stage kidney disease is the main goal of drug treatment. The aim of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a health burden of rising importance. Slowing progression to end stage kidney disease is the main goal of drug treatment. The aim of this analysis is to compare drug treatments of DKD by means of a systemic review and a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched Medline, CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov for randomized, controlled studies including adults with DKD treated with the following drugs of interest: single angiotensin-converting-enzyme-inhibitor or angiotensin-receptor-blocker (single ACEi/ARB), angiotensin-converting-enzyme-inhibitor and angiotensin-receptor-blocker combination (ACEi+ARB combination), aldosterone antagonists, direct renin inhibitors, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid-receptor-antagonists (nsMRA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). As primary endpoints, we defined: overall mortality and end-stage kidney disease, as secondary endpoints: renal composite outcome and albuminuria and as safety endpoints: acute kidney injury, hyperkalemia and hypotension. Under the use of a random effects model, we computed the overall effect estimates using the statistic program R4.1 and the corresponding package "netmeta". Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool and the quality of evidence of each pairwise comparison was rated according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
RESULTS
Of initial 3489 publications, 38 clinical trials were found eligible, in total including 42346 patients. Concerning the primary endpoints overall mortality and end stage kidney disease, SGLT2i on top of single ACEi/ARB compared to single ACEi/ARB was the only intervention significantly reducing the odds of mortality (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.70-0.95) and end-stage kidney disease (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.54-0.88). The indirect comparison of nsMRA vs SGLT2i in our composite endpoint suggests a superiority of SGLT2i (OR 0.60, 95%CI 0.47-0.76). Concerning safety endpoints, nsMRA and SGLT2i showed benefits compared to the others.
CONCLUSIONS
As the only drug class, SGLT2i showed in our analysis beneficial effects on top of ACEi/ARB treatment regarding mortality and end stage kidney disease and by that reconfirmed its position as treatment option for diabetic kidney disease. nsMRA reduced the odds for a combined renal endpoint and did not raise any safety concerns, justifying its application.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetic Nephropathies; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Angiotensins; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37917640
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293183 -
Pharmaceutics Oct 2023The clinical outcomes of antiretroviral drugs may be modified through drug interactions; thus, it is important to update the drug interactions in people living with HIV... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The clinical outcomes of antiretroviral drugs may be modified through drug interactions; thus, it is important to update the drug interactions in people living with HIV (PLHIV).
AIM
To update clinically relevant drug interactions in PLHIV on antiretroviral therapy with novel drug interactions published from 2017 to 2022.
METHODS
A systematic review in Medline/PubMed database from July 2017 to December 2022 using the Mesh terms antiretroviral agents and drug interactions or herb-drug interactions or food-drug interactions. Publications with drug interactions in humans, in English or Spanish, and with full-text access were retrieved. The clinical relevance of drug interactions was grouped into five levels according to the gravity and probability of occurrence.
RESULTS
A total of 366 articles were identified, with 219 (including 87 citation lists) were included, which allowed for the identification of 471 drug interaction pairs; among them, 291 were systematically reported for the first time. In total 42 (14.4%) and 137 (47.1%) were level one and two, respectively, and 233 (80.1%) pairs were explained with the pharmacokinetic mechanism. Among these 291 pairs, protease inhibitors (PIs) and ritonavir/cobicistat-boosted PIs, as well as integrase strand transfer inhibitors (InSTIs), with 70 (24.1%) and 65 (22.3%) drug interaction pairs of levels one and two, respectively, were more frequent.
CONCLUSIONS
In PLHIV on antiretroviral therapy, we identify 291 drug interaction pairs systematically reported for the first time, with 179 (61.5%) being assessed as clinically relevant (levels one and two). The pharmacokinetic mechanism was the most frequently identified. PIs, ritonavir/cobicistat-boosted PIs, and InSTIs were the antiretroviral groups with the highest number of clinically relevant drug interaction pairs (levels one and two).
PubMed: 37896248
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15102488 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Oct 2023: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients. Anticoagulant therapy with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in cancer patients. Anticoagulant therapy with low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as dalteparin and apixaban, have demonstrated efficacy and safety. However, more comparative research of these drugs is still needed. This study aimed to synthesize evidence on the efficacy of apixaban compared to dalteparin in reducing recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding associated with cancer. : We systematically searched the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials databases up to 5 January 2023, for randomized controlled trials comparing apixaban versus dalteparin as treatment for cancer-associated VTE. Five studies were included. Effects according to meta-analyses were reported as relative risks (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). : It was found that 33 of 734 (4.5%) patients treated with apixaban and 56 of 767 (7.3%) with dalteparin had recurrent VTE as the efficacy outcome (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.15-1.58, I 38%). Major bleeding occurred in 25 of 734 patients treated with apixaban (3.4%) and 27 of 767 with dalteparin (3.5%) (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.31-5.27, I 59%). Likewise, clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 64 of 734 patients treated with apixaban (8.7%) and 46 of 767 (5.9%) with dalteparin (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.19, I 0%). : Apixaban showed a lower risk of recurrent VTE than dalteparin in patients with cancer-associated VTE, albeit with no statistical difference. Statistical significance was observed for no major clinically relevant bleeding but not for major bleeding.
Topics: Humans; Dalteparin; Venous Thromboembolism; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37893585
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59101867