-
Drugs Feb 2022Brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) are antiseizure medications (ASMs) approved for adjunctive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) are antiseizure medications (ASMs) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures. So far, no randomised controlled trial directly compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs.
OBJECTIVE
We estimated the comparative efficacy and safety of these ASMs for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults with epilepsy using a network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS
We systematically searched (June week 4, 2021) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomised, double-blinded, controlled, parallel-group, add-on studies that compared oral BRV, CNB, ESL, LCM, and PER versus any comparator over maintenance periods of at least 12 weeks and included adult patients with focal seizures uncontrolled by concomitant ASMs were identified. The efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients with ≥ 50% and 100% reduction in baseline seizure frequency during the maintenance period. The tolerability outcomes were the proportions of participants who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation. Effect sizes were estimated by network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework. The hierarchy of competing interventions was established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).
RESULTS
Sixteen trials (BRV: n = 3, CNB: n = 1, ESL: n = 4, LCM: n = 4, PER: n = 4) were included, overall enrolling 4507 patients randomised to add-on active treatments (BRV = 803, CNB = 221, ESL =9 90, LCM = 1104, and PER = 1389) and 2246 to add-on placebo. Cenobamate was associated with a higher rate of ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction than BRV [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.66], ESL (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.07-3.48), LCM (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04-3.32), and PER (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.16-3.70). There was a not statistically significant trend favouring CNB over ESL, LCM and PER for the seizure freedom outcome. Brivaracetam (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.86) and LCM (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.88) were associated with a lower proportion of participants experiencing TEAEs compared to ESL, and patients treated with PER were associated with a higher risk to experience at least one TEAE (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02-1.96) than BRV. According to SUCRA, CNB had the greatest likelihood of being the best option for the ≥ 50% and 100% seizure frequency reduction, and BRV and LCM had the highest probabilities of being the best-tolerated treatments.
CONCLUSIONS
Cenobamate ranked best for efficacy, and BRV and LCM were best tolerated over the other comparators. Although NMAs cannot replace direct comparisons, they may support physicians in clinical decision making.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Carbamates; Chlorophenols; Dibenzazepines; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Lacosamide; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Nitriles; Pyridones; Pyrrolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Seizures; Tetrazoles
PubMed: 35061214
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-021-01661-4 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2010External genital warts (EGWs) are sexually transmitted benign epidermal growths caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV), on the anogenital areas of both females and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
External genital warts (EGWs) are sexually transmitted benign epidermal growths caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV), on the anogenital areas of both females and males. About 50% to 60% of sexually active women aged 18 to 49 years have been exposed to HPV infection, but only 10% to 15% will have genital warts.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for external genital warts? What are the effects of interventions to prevent transmission of external genital warts? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to December 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 55 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: bi- and trichloroacetic acid; condoms; cryotherapy; electrosurgery; imiquimod; intralesional, topical, or systemic interferons; laser surgery; podophyllin; podophyllotoxin; surgical excision; and vaccines.
Topics: Condylomata Acuminata; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Papillomaviridae; Papillomavirus Infections; Papillomavirus Vaccines; Podophyllin
PubMed: 21418685
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Feb 2010Colic in infants causes one in six families (17%) with children to consult a health professional. One systematic review of 15 community-based studies found a wide... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Colic in infants causes one in six families (17%) with children to consult a health professional. One systematic review of 15 community-based studies found a wide variation in prevalence, which depended on study design and method of recording.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for colic in infants? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 27 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: advice to increase carrying, advice to reduce stimulation, casein hydrolysate milk, cranial osteopathy, crib vibrator device, focused counselling, gripe water, infant massage, low-lactose milk, simethicone, soya-based infant feeds, spinal manipulation, and whey hydrolysate milk.
Topics: Animals; Colic; Crying; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Infant; Manipulation, Osteopathic; Milk; Research Design; Simethicone
PubMed: 21729336
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Sep 2009Herpes simplex virus type 1 infection usually causes a mild, self-limiting painful blistering around the mouth, with 20% to 40% of adults affected at some time. Primary... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Herpes simplex virus type 1 infection usually causes a mild, self-limiting painful blistering around the mouth, with 20% to 40% of adults affected at some time. Primary infection usually occurs in childhood, after which the virus is thought to remain latent in the trigeminal ganglion. Recurrence may be triggered by factors such as exposure to bright light, stress, and fatigue.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of antiviral treatments for the first attack of herpes labialis? What are the effects of interventions aimed at preventing recurrent attacks of herpes labialis? What are the effects of treatments for recurrent attacks of herpes labialis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to February 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 27 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: oral antiviral agents, sunscreen, topical anaesthetic agents, topical antiviral agents, and zinc oxide cream.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anesthetics, Local; Antiviral Agents; Dermatologic Agents; Double-Blind Method; Herpes Labialis; Humans
PubMed: 21726482
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Mar 2008Acute sinusitis is defined pathologically, by transient inflammation of the mucosal lining of the paranasal sinuses lasting less than 4 weeks. Clinically, it is... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acute sinusitis is defined pathologically, by transient inflammation of the mucosal lining of the paranasal sinuses lasting less than 4 weeks. Clinically, it is characterised by nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, facial pain, hyposmia, sneezing, and, if more severe, additional malaise and fever. It affects 1-5% of the adult population each year in Europe.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis, and with radiologically or bacteriologically confirmed acute sinusitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to August 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 19 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (amoxicillin, co-amoxiclav, doxycycline, cephalosporins, macrolides, different doses [amoxicillin, co-amoxiclav, doxycycline, cephalosporins, macrolides], long-course regimens), antihistamines, cephalosporins or macrolides, decongestants (xylometazoline, phenylephrine, pseudoephedrine), doxycycline, saline nasal washes, steam inhalation, and topical corticosteroids (intra-nasal).
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Amoxicillin; Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Double-Blind Method; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Macrolides; Sinusitis
PubMed: 19450327
DOI: No ID Found -
Systematic Reviews Mar 2017A rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-individualised homeopathic treatment has not previously been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-individualised homeopathic treatment has not previously been reported. We tested the null hypothesis that the main outcome of treatment using a non-individualised (standardised) homeopathic medicine is indistinguishable from that of placebo. An additional aim was to quantify any condition-specific effects of non-individualised homeopathic treatment.
METHODS
Literature search strategy, data extraction and statistical analysis all followed the methods described in a pre-published protocol. A trial comprised 'reliable evidence' if its risk of bias was low or it was unclear in one specified domain of assessment. 'Effect size' was reported as standardised mean difference (SMD), with arithmetic transformation for dichotomous data carried out as required; a negative SMD indicated an effect favouring homeopathy.
RESULTS
Forty-eight different clinical conditions were represented in 75 eligible RCTs. Forty-nine trials were classed as 'high risk of bias' and 23 as 'uncertain risk of bias'; the remaining three, clinically heterogeneous, trials displayed sufficiently low risk of bias to be designated reliable evidence. Fifty-four trials had extractable data: pooled SMD was -0.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.44, -0.21), which was attenuated to -0.16 (95% CI -0.31, -0.02) after adjustment for publication bias. The three trials with reliable evidence yielded a non-significant pooled SMD: -0.18 (95% CI -0.46, 0.09). There was no single clinical condition for which meta-analysis included reliable evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
The quality of the body of evidence is low. A meta-analysis of all extractable data leads to rejection of our null hypothesis, but analysis of a small sub-group of reliable evidence does not support that rejection. Reliable evidence is lacking in condition-specific meta-analyses, precluding relevant conclusions. Better designed and more rigorous RCTs are needed in order to develop an evidence base that can decisively provide reliable effect estimates of non-individualised homeopathic treatment.
Topics: Double-Blind Method; Homeopathy; Humans; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28340607
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0445-3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence May 2007Essential tremor is one of the most common movement disorders throughout the world, with prevalence in the general population of 0.4-3.9%. Although most people with... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Essential tremor is one of the most common movement disorders throughout the world, with prevalence in the general population of 0.4-3.9%. Although most people with essential tremor are only mildly affected, those who seek medical care are disabled to some extent, and most are socially handicapped by the tremor.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of drug treatments in people with essential tremor of the hand? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to December 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 41 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: adding mirtazepine to other antitremor drugs; benzodiazepines; beta-blockers other than propranolol; botulinum A toxin-haemagglutinin complex; calcium channel blockers; carbonic anhydrase inhibitors; clonidine; flunarizine; gabapentin; isoniazid; Phenobarbital; primidone; propranolol; and topiramate.
Topics: Double-Blind Method; Essential Tremor; Humans; Primidone; Propranolol; Tremor
PubMed: 19454072
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2007Bipolar disorder, with mood swings between depression and mania, may affect up to 1.5% of adults, and increases the risk of suicide and disability. Most people improve... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Bipolar disorder, with mood swings between depression and mania, may affect up to 1.5% of adults, and increases the risk of suicide and disability. Most people improve over time, but two thirds may have residual dysfunction, and at least 40% may have recurrent episodes.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with mania associated with bipolar disorder? What are the effects of treatments in bipolar depression? What are the effects of interventions to prevent relapse of mania or bipolar depression? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to July 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 60 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antidepressants, carbamazepine, chlorpromazine, clonazepam, cognitive therapy, education, family-focused psychoeducation, gabapentin, haloperidol, lamotrigine, lithium, olanzapine, psychological treatments, quetiapine, risperidone, topiramate, valproate, and ziprasidone.
Topics: Acute Disease; Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Risperidone; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 19454110
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Jan 2023The efficacy of etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols for universal adhesives in follow-ups of over 12 months was compared in a network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy of adhesive strategies for restorative dentistry: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials over 12 months of follow-up.
PURPOSE
The efficacy of etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols for universal adhesives in follow-ups of over 12 months was compared in a network meta-analysis.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1998 to 2022 that compared marginal staining, marginal adaptation, retention and fractures, post-operative sensitivity, or recurrence of caries that took place over 12-months post-restoration were selected. A network meta-analysis determined the performance of each adhesive protocol.
RESULTS
After screening 981 articles, 16 RCTs were subjected to data extraction. Of which, 674 patients with 2816 restorations, were included in the network meta-analysis. The pooled risk of marginal discoloration following self-etching was significantly higher than that following etch-and-rinse at over 12, 24, and 36 months, which was time-dependent. The pooled risks of unfavorable marginal adaptation and unfavorable retention and fractures following self-etching were also significantly higher than that following etch-and-rinse, with the rates of unfavorable retention and fractures in non-carious cervical lesions increasing in a time-dependent manner. The pooled risks of marginal discoloration, unfavorable marginal adaptation, retention and fractures were similar between etch-and-rinse and selective enamel-etching protocols. Post-operative hypersensitivity and recurrence of caries were not significantly different among etch-and-rinse, selective enamel-etching, and self-etching protocols.
CONCLUSIONS
In follow-ups over 12 months, esthetic and functional outcomes of restorations completed with an etch-and-rinse adhesive protocol were superior to the ones achieved with a self-etching strategy without selective enamel-etching. Selective enamel etching is recommended for self-etching systems. Biological responses were similar for all three adhesive strategies.
Topics: Humans; Dental Caries; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Follow-Up Studies; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Adhesives; Denture Retention; Double-Blind Method; Dental Etching
PubMed: 35691823
DOI: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_21_00279 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2007Up to one in five people may have generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) at some point, and most have other health problems. Less than half of people have full remission... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Up to one in five people may have generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) at some point, and most have other health problems. Less than half of people have full remission after 5 years. GAD may have a genetic component, and has also been linked to previous psychological or other trauma.
METHODS AND OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for GAD? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to February 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 52 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: abecarnil, antidepressants (imipramine, opipramol, paroxetine, sertraline, escitalopram and venlafaxine), antipsychotic drugs (trifluoperazine), applied relaxation, benzodiazepines, buspirone, cognitive behavioural therapy, hydroxyzine, kava, and pregabalin.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Citalopram; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Paroxetine; Remission Induction; Sertraline
PubMed: 19450347
DOI: No ID Found