-
Turk Psikiyatri Dergisi = Turkish... 2019Many patients with schizophrenia respond partially to treatment with antipsychotic medications. A wide range of pharmaceutical agents are utilized as augmentation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Many patients with schizophrenia respond partially to treatment with antipsychotic medications. A wide range of pharmaceutical agents are utilized as augmentation therapy in order to increase the efficacy of antipsychotic medication treatment. Memantine which is a noncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist is one such agent among these. In this study, by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis we aimed to assess the efficacy of memantine augmentation on psychopathology in patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotic medication.
METHOD
We analyzed double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of memantine add-on treatment in schizophrenia patients receiving antipsychotic medications. The primary outcome measure was amelioration of negative symptoms and the secondary outcome measures were amelioration of positive, total and general psychopathology symptoms. Publication bias was evaluated by Funnel plot and Egger test.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (n=570) were included. Although memantine add-on treatment was superior to placebo for ameliorating negative symptoms (SMD=0.596, 95% CI=0.075-1.118, p=0.025), there were no statistically significant differences in the amelioration of general psychopathology (SMD=0.034, 95% CI=0.419-0.488, p=0.883), positive (SMD=-0.041, 95% CI=0.217-0.135, p=0.650) and overall (SMD=0.315, 95% CI=0.256-0.887, p=0.280) symptoms. No publication bias was observed between studies according to Funnel plots and Egger test results.
CONCLUSION
Memantine augmentation treatment seems to be beneficial for particularly treating negative symptoms in schizophrenia patients. Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up durations are needed.
Topics: Antiparkinson Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Memantine; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 32594486
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2013Antiviral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation is controversial due to unresolved balance between benefits and harms. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Antiviral therapy for recurrent hepatitis C infection after liver transplantation is controversial due to unresolved balance between benefits and harms.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the therapeutic benefits and harms of different antiviral regimens in patients with hepatitis C re-infected grafts after liver transplantation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing various antiviral therapies (alone or in combination) in the treatment of hepatitis C virus recurrence in liver transplantation for the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors collected the data independently. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the fixed-effect and the random-effects models based on available case-analysis. In the presence of only trials for a dichotomous outcome, we performed the Fisher's exact test.
MAIN RESULTS
Overall, 17 trials with 736 patients met the inclusion criteria for this review. All trials had high risk of bias. Five hundred and one patients randomised in 11 trials provided information for various comparisons in this systematic review after excluding post-randomisation drop-outs and patients from trials that did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. The comparisons for which outcomes were available included pegylated (peg) interferon versus control; peg interferon plus ribavirin versus control; ribavirin plus peg interferon versus peg interferon; peg interferon (1.5 μg/kg/week) plus ribavirin versus peg interferon (0.5 μg/kg/week) plus ribavirin; amantadine plus peg interferon plus ribavirin versus peg interferon plus ribavirin; interferon versus control; interferon plus ribavirin versus control; ribavirin versus interferon; and ribavirin versus placebo. Long-term follow-up was not available in these trials. There were no significant differences in mortality, retransplantation, graft rejections requiring retransplantation or medical treatment, or fibrosis worsening between the groups in any of the comparisons in which these outcomes were reported. Quality of life and liver decompensation were not reported in any of the trials. There was a significantly higher proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events in the ribavirin plus peg interferon combination therapy group than in the peg interferon monotherapy group (1 trial; 56 participants; 17/28 (60.7%) in the intervention group versus 5/28 (17.9%) in the control group; RR 3.40; 95% CI 1.46 to 7.94). There was no significant difference in proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events or in the number of serious adverse events between the intervention and control groups in the other comparisons that reported serious adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Considering the lack of clinical benefit, there is currently no evidence to recommend or refute antiviral treatment for recurrent liver graft infection with hepatitis C virus. Further randomised clinical trials with low risk of bias and low risk of random errors with adequate duration of follow-up are necessary.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Genotype; Graft Rejection; Hepacivirus; Hepatitis C; Humans; Interferon alpha-2; Interferon-alpha; Liver Cirrhosis; Liver Transplantation; Polyethylene Glycols; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Recurrence; Reoperation; Ribavirin
PubMed: 24307460
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006803.pub4 -
BMC Geriatrics Jul 2018The risk-benefit relationship of memantine treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains unclear. In addition, variability between the results of clinical trials has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Predictors of discontinuation, efficacy, and safety of memantine treatment for Alzheimer's disease: meta-analysis and meta-regression of 18 randomized clinical trials involving 5004 patients.
BACKGROUND
The risk-benefit relationship of memantine treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains unclear. In addition, variability between the results of clinical trials has been observed. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk-benefit relationship of memantine treatment in patients with AD and to determine the predictor effect of patient, intervention, and study design related covariates.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trials was performed. Primary outcomes were all-cause discontinuation, discontinuation due to adverse events (AE) and efficacy on cognitive function. Odds ratio (OR) and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Meta-regression was conducted to identify related covariates. Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included trials.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies involving 5004 patients were included. No differences between memantine and placebo were found for all-cause treatment discontinuation (OR=0.97 [0.82, 1.14]) and discontinuation due to AE (OR=1.18 [0.91, 1.53]). Memantine showed small improvement on cognitive function (SMD=0.15 [0.08, 0.22]). Baseline functional ability was positively associated with all-cause treatment discontinuation and discontinuation due to AE.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study suggests that memantine has a very small efficacy on AD symptomatology and its safety profile is similar to that of placebo. No evidence of treatment discontinuation improvement with memantine is found, indicating a dubious risk-benefit relationship. No intervention characteristic or subgroup of patients clearly shows a significantly better risk-benefit relationship.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42014015696 .
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Aged; Alzheimer Disease; Dopamine Agents; Double-Blind Method; Forecasting; Humans; Memantine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regression Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 30041625
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-018-0857-5 -
Tremor and Other Hyperkinetic Movements... 2024Opsoclonus is a rare disorder characterized by conjugate multidirectional, horizontal, vertical, and torsional saccadic oscillations, without intersaccadic interval,...
BACKGROUND
Opsoclonus is a rare disorder characterized by conjugate multidirectional, horizontal, vertical, and torsional saccadic oscillations, without intersaccadic interval, resulting from dysfunction within complex neuronal pathways in the brainstem and cerebellum. While most cases of opsoclonus are associated with autoimmune or paraneoplastic disorders, infectious agents, trauma, or remain idiopathic, opsoclonus can also be caused by medications affecting neurotransmission. This review was prompted by a case of opsoclonus occurring in a patient with Multiple System Atrophy, where amantadine, an NMDA-receptor antagonist, appeared to induce opsoclonus.
METHODS
Case report of a single patient and systematized review of toxic/drug-induced opsoclonus, selecting articles based on predefined criteria and assessing the quality of included studies.
RESULTS
The review included 30 articles encompassing 158 cases of toxic/drug-induced opsoclonus. 74% of cases were attributed to bark scorpion poisoning, followed by 9% of cases associated with chlordecone intoxication. The remaining cases were due to various toxics/drugs, highlighting the involvement of various neurotransmitters, including acetylcholine, glutamate, GABA, dopamine, glycine, and sodium channels, in the development of opsoclonus.
CONCLUSION
Toxic/drug-induced opsoclonus is very rare. The diversity of toxics/drugs impacting different neurotransmitter systems makes it challenging to define a unifying mechanism, given the intricate neuronal pathways underlying eye movement physiology and opsoclonus pathophysiology.
Topics: Humans; Male; Amantadine; Multiple System Atrophy; Ocular Motility Disorders; Aged
PubMed: 38737300
DOI: 10.5334/tohm.832