-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015Non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases, such as asbestosis and silicosis, are similar to other chronic respiratory diseases and may be characterised by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases, such as asbestosis and silicosis, are similar to other chronic respiratory diseases and may be characterised by breathlessness, reduced exercise capacity and reduced health-related quality of life. Some non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases are a global health issue and very few treatment options, including pharmacological, are available. Therefore, examining the role of exercise training is particularly important to determine whether exercise training is an effective treatment option in non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of exercise training for people with non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases compared with control, placebo or another non-exercise intervention on exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and levels of physical activity.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and AMED (all searched from inception until February 2015), national and international clinical trial registries, reference lists of relevant papers and we contacted experts in the field for identification of suitable studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared exercise training of at least four weeks duration with no exercise training, placebo or another non-exercise intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We employed the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of evidence for each outcome and to interpret findings. We synthesized study results using a random-effects model based on the assessment of heterogeneity. We conducted subgroup analyses on participants with dust-related interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) and participants with asbestos related pleural disease (ARPD).
MAIN RESULTS
Two RCTs including a combined total of 40 participants (35 from one study and five from a second study) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one participants were randomised to the exercise training group and 19 participants were randomised to the control group. The included studies evaluated the effects of exercise training compared to a control group of no exercise training in people with dust-related ILDs and ARPD. The exercise training programme in both studies was in an outpatient setting for an eight-week period. The risk of bias was low in both studies. There were no reported adverse events of exercise training. Following exercise training, six-minute walk distance (6MWD) increased with a mean difference (MD) of 53.81 metres (m) (95% CI 34.36 to 73.26 m). Improvements were also seen in the domains of health-related quality of life: Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) Dyspnoea domain (MD 2.58, 95% CI 0.72 to 4.44); CRQ Fatigue domain (MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.89); CRQ Emotional Function domain (MD 2.61, 95% CI 0.74 to 4.49); and CRQ Mastery domain (MD 1.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 2.72). Improvements in exercise capacity and health-related quality of life were also evident six months following the intervention period: 6MWD (MD 52.68 m, 95% CI 27.43 to 77.93 m); CRQ Dyspnoea domain (MD 3.03, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.66); CRQ Emotional Function domain (MD 5.57, 95% CI 2.34 to 8.81); and CRQ Mastery domain (MD 2.66, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.23). Exercise training did not result in improvements in the Modified Medical Research Council (MMRC) dyspnoea scale immediately following exercise training or six months following exercise training. The improvements following exercise training were similar in a subgroup of participants with dust-related ILDs and in a subgroup of participants with ARPD compared to the control group, with no statistically significant differences in treatment effects between the subgroups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence examining exercise training in people with non-malignant dust-related respiratory diseases is of very low quality. This is due to imprecision in the results from the small number of trials and the small number of participants, the indirectness of evidence due to a paucity of information on disease severity and the data from one study being from a subgroup of participants, and inconsistency from high heterogeneity in some results. Therefore, although the review findings indicate that an exercise training programme is effective in improving exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in the short-term and at six months follow-up, we remain unsure of these findings due to the very low quality evidence. Larger, high quality trials are needed to determine the strength of these findings.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Asbestosis; Dust; Exercise Tolerance; Health Status; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Physical Conditioning, Human; Pneumoconiosis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration Disorders; Time Factors
PubMed: 26544672
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009385.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2013Preventing active tuberculosis (TB) from developing in people with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is important for global TB control. Isoniazid (INH) for six to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Preventing active tuberculosis (TB) from developing in people with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is important for global TB control. Isoniazid (INH) for six to nine months has 60% to 90% protective efficacy, but the treatment period is long, liver toxicity is a problem, and completion rates outside trials are only around 50%. Rifampicin or rifamycin-combination treatments are shorter and may result in higher completion rates.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of rifampicin monotherapy or rifamycin-combination therapy versus INH monotherapy for preventing active TB in HIV-negative people at risk of developing active TB.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; clinical trials registries; regional databases; conference proceedings; and references, without language restrictions to December 2012; and contacted experts for relevant published, unpublished and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HIV-negative adults and children at risk of active TB treated with rifampicin, or rifamycin-combination therapy with or without INH (any dose or duration), compared with INH for six to nine months.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two authors independently screened and selected trials, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We sought clarifications from trial authors. We pooled relative risks (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using a random-effects model if heterogeneity was significant. We assessed overall evidence quality using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Ten trials are included, enrolling 10,717 adults and children, mostly HIV-negative (2% HIV-positive), with a follow-up period ranging from two to five years. Rifampicin (three/four months) vs. INH (six months)Five trials published between 1992 to 2012 compared these regimens, and one small 1992 trial in adults with silicosis did not detect a difference in the occurrence of TB over five years of follow up (one trial, 312 participants; very low quality evidence). However, more people in these trials completed the shorter course (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.30; five trials, 1768 participants; moderate quality evidence). Treatment-limiting adverse events were not significantly different (four trials, 1674 participants; very low quality evidence), but rifampicin caused less hepatotoxicity (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.30; four trials, 1674 participants; moderate quality evidence). Rifampicin plus INH (three months) vs. INH (six months)The 1992 silicosis trial did not detect a difference between people receiving rifampicin plus INH compared to INH alone for occurrence of active TB (one trial, 328 participants; very low quality evidence). Adherence was similar in this and a 1998 trial in people without silicosis (two trials, 524 participants; high quality evidence). No difference was detected for treatment-limiting adverse events (two trials, 536 participants; low quality evidence), or hepatotoxicity (two trials, 536 participants; low quality evidence). Rifampicin plus pyrazinamide (two months) vs. INH (six months)Three small trials published in 1994, 2003, and 2005 compared these two regimens, and two reported a low occurrence of active TB, with no statistically significant differences between treatment regimens (two trials, 176 participants; very low quality evidence) though, apart from one child from the 1994 trial, these data on active TB were from the 2003 trial in adults with silicosis. Adherence with both regimens was low with no statistically significant differences (four trials, 700 participants; very low quality evidence). However, people receiving rifampicin plus pyrazinamide had more treatment-limiting adverse events (RR 3.61, 95% CI 1.82 to 7.19; two trials, 368 participants; high quality evidence), and hepatotoxicity (RR 4.59, 95% 2.14 to 9.85; three trials, 540 participants; moderate quality evidence). Weekly, directly-observed rifapentine plus INH (three months) vs. daily, self-administered INH (nine months)A large trial conducted from 2001 to 2008 among close contacts of TB in the USA, Canada, Brazil and Spain found directly observed weekly treatment to be non-inferior to nine months self-administered INH for the incidence of active TB (0.2% vs 0.4%, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.07, one trial, 7731 participants; moderate quality evidence). The directly-observed, shorter regimen had higher treatment completion (82% vs 69%, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.22, moderate quality evidence), and less hepatotoxicity (0.4% versus 2.4%; RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.27; high quality evidence), though treatment-limiting adverse events were more frequent (4.9% versus 3.7%; RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.64 moderate quality evidence)
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Trials to date of shortened prophylactic regimens using rifampicin alone have not demonstrated higher rates of active TB when compared to longer regimens with INH. Treatment completion is probably higher and adverse events may be fewer with shorter rifampicin regimens. Shortened regimens of rifampicin with INH may offer no advantage over longer INH regimens. Rifampicin combined with pyrazinamide is associated with more adverse events. A weekly regimen of rifapentine plus INH has higher completion rates, and less liver toxicity, though treatment discontinuation due to adverse events is probably more likely than with INH.
Topics: Adult; Antibiotics, Antitubercular; Child; Directly Observed Therapy; Drug Administration Schedule; HIV Seronegativity; Humans; Isoniazid; Latent Tuberculosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rifabutin; Rifampin; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary
PubMed: 23828580
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007545.pub2 -
Scandinavian Journal of Work,... Dec 2005This study examined the association between silicosis and lung cancer in a systematic review (and meta-analysis) of the epidemiologic literature, with special reference... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
This study examined the association between silicosis and lung cancer in a systematic review (and meta-analysis) of the epidemiologic literature, with special reference to the methodological quality of observational studies.
METHODS
We searched Medline, Toxline, BIOSIS and Embase (1966-May 2004) for original articles published in any language and systematically reviewed the bibliographies of the retrieved articles. Observational studies (cohort and case-control studies) were selected if they reported a measure of association [standardized mortality ratio (SMR), relative risk or odds ratio] relating lung cancer to silicosis.
RESULTS
Thirty-one studies (27 cohort studies, 4 case-control studies) met the inclusion criteria of the meta-analysis. Without any adjustment for smoking, the meta-analysis of the cohort studies indicated that the common SMR was 2.45 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.63-3.66; homogeneity P<0.0001]. When the results of the cohorts for which mortality data were adjusted for smoking were pooled, the common SMR was 1.60 (95% CI 1.33-1.93; homogeneity P=0.52). In a "dose-response" analysis, the profusion of small and large opacities found in chest X-rays correlated with the risk of death from lung cancer. Overall, the case-control studies were more conservative in their conclusions.
CONCLUSIONS
Because of biases inherent to observational studies, it is likely that the risk of lung cancer among silicosis patients is overestimated in the current literature. There is nevertheless evidence, from data restricted to never-smokers and from a "dose-response" analysis, that silicosis and lung cancer are associated.
Topics: Bias; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Silicosis; Smoking
PubMed: 16425586
DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.949 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... Jul 2006In 1997, a Monograph from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified occupational exposure to crystalline silica as carcinogenic to humans. Large... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In 1997, a Monograph from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified occupational exposure to crystalline silica as carcinogenic to humans. Large amounts of epidemiological data have been published subsequently.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of epidemiological investigations on silica exposure and lung cancer risk published after the IARC Monograph, including 28 cohort, 15 case-control and two proportionate mortality ratio (PMR) studies. These were identified in the available literature.
RESULTS
The pooled RR of lung cancer, calculated using random effects models, from all cohort studies considering occupational exposure to silica was 1.34. The RRs were 1.69 in cohort studies of silicotics only, 1.25 in studies where silicosis status was undefined and 1.19 among non silicotic subjects. The pooled RR was 1.41 for all case-control studies. The RRs were 3.27 in case-control studies of silicotics only, 1.41 in studies where silicosis status was undefined and 0.97 among non silicotic subjects. The RR was 1.24 for PMR studies.
CONCLUSIONS
In this re-analysis, the association with lung cancer was consistent for silicotics, but the data were limited for non silicotic subjects and not easily explained for undefined silicosis status workers. This leaves open the issue of dose-risk relation and pathogenic mechanisms and supports the conclusion that the carcinogenic role of silica per se in absence of silicosis is still unclear.
Topics: Case-Control Studies; Cohort Studies; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Occupational Exposure; Risk Assessment; Silicon Dioxide; Silicosis
PubMed: 16403810
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdj125