-
BMC Medicine Dec 2022Sacubitril/valsartan and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) therapies were reported to affect glycaemic control and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sacubitril/valsartan and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) therapies were reported to affect glycaemic control and the development of diabetes mellitus (DM), but the findings are inconsistent. We examined the evidence for the effects of sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB in DM by conducting a meta-analysis.
METHODS
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), Embase, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for data from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB in patients, as of May 25, 2022. Patients were grouped by their disease background at baseline. The main outcomes were the number of new-onset DM and hypoglycaemia, elevated glycaemia, inadequate DM control, diabetes treatment, and diabetic complications, from baseline to the end of the trials. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (ROB 2). The quality of the evidence was evaluated according to the Recommendations for Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines. The meta-analysis of the incidence of various outcomes was conducted using fixed or random effects models. The results are expressed as binary risk, 95% confidence interval (CI), and relative risk (RR). The Mantel-Haenszel method and Z test were used to determine the overall results and determine the significance of the RR.
RESULTS
This study included 31 RCTs and 86,809 subjects. Compared with placebo, sacubitril/valsartan treatment significantly reduced the risk of new-onset DM among all patients (RR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.95), patients with heart failure (HF) (RR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.12-0.48), HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (RR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.12-0.50), and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (RR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.85). In contrast, sacubitril/valsartan treatment significantly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia among all patients (RR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.05-3.47), patients with not all-DM (defined as part of the study population having DM at baseline) (RR = 5.71, 95% CI: 2.02-16.21), and patients with HFpEF (RR = 7.06, 95% CI: 2.10-23.76). Compared with ACEI/ARB, sacubitril/valsartan treatment significantly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia among patients with HF (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.12-3.06, p = 0.02) and HFpEF (RR 3.59, 95% CI 1.51-8.55, p = 0.004). Compared with placebo, ACEI/ARB treatment did significantly reduce the risk of new-onset DM among all patients (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.93, p = 0.0007) and patients with not all-HF (defined as part of the study population having HF at baseline) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.93, p<0.0001) and HFpEF (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.83, p = 0.002), diabetes complications among patients with non-HF (/not all-DM) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76-0.99, p = 0.04), and subsequent diabetes treatment among patients with new-onset DM (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.84, p = 0.0002) and significantly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia among patients with not all-DM (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.172-3.61, p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of our study, especially in reducing glycaemia and new-onset DM, revealed that sacubitril/valsartan had a positive effect on the control of glycaemia and the development of DM. ACEI/ARB also had a beneficial effect but the effect was weaker than that of sacubitril/valsartan. The above effects varied across diseases but the evidence was strongest in patients with HF.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CRD42022336311.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Tetrazoles; Stroke Volume; Aminobutyrates; Valsartan; Heart Failure; Drug Combinations; Diabetes Mellitus; Hypoglycemia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36527023
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02682-w -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Aug 2022To update our previously reported systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes by focusing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To update our previously reported systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes by focusing on newly published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
More than 500 databases were searched between 1 November 2020 and 2 October 2021 to identify RCTs that were published after our baseline review. One reviewer extracted data with other reviewers verifying the extracted data for accuracy and completeness.
RESULTS
After screening 22 414 records, we included 24 and 21 RCTs in the qualitative and quantitative syntheses, respectively. The most investigated drug classes were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs) and anticoagulants, investigated by 10 and 11 studies respectively. In meta-analyses, ACEI/ARBs did not affect hospitalization length (mean difference -0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.83; 0.98 d, n = 1183), COVID-19 severity (risk ratio/RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.71; 1.15, n = 1661) or mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.58; 1.47, n = 1646). Therapeutic anticoagulation also had no effect (hospitalization length mean difference -0.29, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.56 d, n = 1449; severity RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70; 1.04, n = 2696; and, mortality RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77; 1.13, n = 5689). Other investigated drug classes were antiplatelets (aspirin, 2 trials), antithrombotics (sulodexide, 1 trial), calcium channel blockers (amlodipine, 1 trial) and lipid-modifying drugs (atorvastatin, 1 trial).
CONCLUSION
Moderate- to high-certainty RCT evidence suggests that cardiovascular drugs such as ACEIs/ARBs are not associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes, and should therefore not be discontinued. These cardiovascular drugs should also not be initiated to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless they are needed for an underlying currently approved therapeutic indication.
Topics: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Cardiovascular Agents; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 35322889
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15331 -
Journal of the American Medical... Jul 2021To systematically review and synthesize the evidence on differential associations between antihypertensive medication (AHM) classes and the risk of incident dementia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and synthesize the evidence on differential associations between antihypertensive medication (AHM) classes and the risk of incident dementia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and random effects frequentist network meta-analysis. Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane library were searched from origin to December 2019.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies that compared associations of different AHM classes with incident all-cause dementia and/or Alzheimer's disease over at least 1 year of follow-up.
MEASURES
All cause dementia and/or Alzheimer's disease.
RESULTS
Fifteen observational studies and 7 RCTs were included. Data on AHM classes were available for 649,790 participants and dementia occurred in 19,600 (3.02%). Network meta-analysis showed that in observational studies, treatment with either calcium channel blockers (CCBs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) was associated with lower dementia risks than treatment with other antihypertensives: CCBs vs angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) (HR=0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.95), beta blockers (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95) and diuretics (HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.78-1.01) and ARBs vs ACE inhibitors (HR=0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.97), beta blockers (HR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99), and diuretics (HR=0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.05). There were insufficient RCTs to create a robust network based on randomized data alone.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Recommending CCBs or ARBs as preferred first-line antihypertensive treatment may significantly reduce the risk of dementia. If corroborated in a randomized setting, these findings reflect a low-cost and scalable opportunity to reduce dementia incidence worldwide.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Dementia; Humans; Hypertension; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 33460618
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2020.12.019 -
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics Jul 2023Serpin is a superfamily of serine proteinase inhibitors. They have anticoagulative activities and immunoregulatory effects. The family has been widely studied in stroke... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Serpin is a superfamily of serine proteinase inhibitors. They have anticoagulative activities and immunoregulatory effects. The family has been widely studied in stroke patients and animal stroke models. However, results from clinical and preclinical studies are controversial. The systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine whether serpin activities are affected by stroke and whether members of the serpin family could be used in stroke treatment.
METHODS
Literature was systematically searched in six databases until September 5, 2022. In the included studies, 47 clinical studies (8276 subjects) reported concentrations of serpin proteins in stroke patients and healthy controls. In total, 41 preclinical studies (742 animals) reported neurological outcomes in animal models with serpin treatment and vehicle.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis of clinical studies showed that both ischemic (IS) and hemorrhagic stroke patients had higher thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT) levels and lower antithrombin (AT) levels which were persistent in the acute and subacute phase of IS. Meta-analysis of preclinical studies reported the efficacy of serpins in treating stroke. C1-INH and FUT175 reduced brain infarct size and improved sensorimotor and motor behavior in a dose- and time-dependent manner in the MCAO models.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study confirmed the important roles serpin family proteins played in the onset, progression, and treatment of stroke. Among serpins, AT and TAT may be used as blood biomarkers in the early diagnosis of stroke. C1-INH and FUT175 could be potential medications for IS.
Topics: Animals; Serpins; Biomarkers; Models, Animal; Stroke
PubMed: 37017398
DOI: 10.1111/cns.14205 -
Heart Failure Reviews Nov 2023Anthracyclines and trastuzumab are widely used to treat breast cancer but increase the risk of cardiomyopathy and heart failure. With the use of trastuzumab and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Anthracyclines and trastuzumab are widely used to treat breast cancer but increase the risk of cardiomyopathy and heart failure. With the use of trastuzumab and anthracycline-containing medications, this study intends to evaluate the effectiveness and security of current treatments against cardiotoxicity. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which used at least one angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), or beta-blocker (BB) to prevent cardiotoxicity of antineoplastic agents for breast cancer, in 4 databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science) from inception to 11 May 2022, without language restrictions. The outcome of interest was left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and adverse events. Stata 15 and R software 4.2.1 were used to perform all statistical analyses. The Cochrane version 2 of the risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) assessment was used to appraise the quality of the evidence. Fifteen randomized clinical studies with a total of 1977 patients were included in the analysis. The included studies demonstrated statistically significant LVEF in the ACEI/ARB and BB treatment groups (χ = 184.75, I = 88.6%, p = 0.000; SMD 0.556, 95% CI 0.299 to 0.813). In an exploratory subgroup analysis, the benefit of experimental agents on LVEF, whether anthracyclines or trastuzumab, was prominent in patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs, and BBs. Compared to placebo, ACEI/ARB and BB treatments in breast cancer patients protect against cardiotoxicity after trastuzumab and anthracycline-containing medication treatment, indicating a benefit for both.
Topics: Humans; Female; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Cardiotoxicity; Antineoplastic Agents; Breast Neoplasms; Trastuzumab; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Anthracyclines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37414918
DOI: 10.1007/s10741-023-10328-z -
Diabetes & Vascular Disease Research 2023To compare the cardiovascular and renal outcomes of GLP-1 RA versus DPP4i and basal insulin in the management of T2DM. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To compare the cardiovascular and renal outcomes of GLP-1 RA versus DPP4i and basal insulin in the management of T2DM.
METHODS
Data from 22 studies involving over 200,000 participants were pooled using the inverse variance method and random-effects meta-analysis. The review was reported in accordance with PRISMA.
RESULTS
Compared with DPP4i, treatment with GLP-1 RA was associated with a greater benefit on composite cardiovascular outcomes (HR:0.77, 95% CI:0.69-0.87), myocardial infarction (HR:0.82, 95% CI:0.69-0.97), stroke (HR:0.83, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93), cardiovascular mortality (HR:0.76, 95% CI:0.68-0.85) and all-cause mortality (HR:0.65, 95% CI:0.48-0.90). There was no difference in effect on heart failure (HR:0.97, 95% CI:0.82-1.15). Compared with basal insulin, GLP-1 RA was associated with better effects on composite cardiovascular outcomes (HR:0.62, 95% CI:0.48-0.79), heart failure (HR:0.57, 95% CI:0.35-0.92), myocardial infarction (HR:0.70, 95% CI:0.58-0.85), stroke (HR:0.50, 95% CI:0.40-0.63) and all-cause mortality (HR:0.31, 95% CI:0.20-0.48). Evidence from a small number of studies suggests that GLP-1 RA had better effects on composite and individual renal outcomes, such as eGFR, compared with either DPP4i and basal insulin.
CONCLUSION
Available evidence suggests that treating T2DM with GLP-1 RA can yield better benefits on composite and specific cardiorenal outcomes than with DPP4i and basal insulin.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022335504.
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists; Heart Failure; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulins; Myocardial Infarction; Stroke
PubMed: 38111352
DOI: 10.1177/14791641231221740 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2022Currently, there is no specific pharmaceutical agent for treating acute pancreatitis (AP). Somatostatin and its analogues have been used to prevent the autolysis of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Currently, there is no specific pharmaceutical agent for treating acute pancreatitis (AP). Somatostatin and its analogues have been used to prevent the autolysis of the pancreas in AP, however, their effectiveness has not been confirmed. This investigation aimed to examine the efficacy of ulinastatin, a protease inhibitor, combined with somatostatin analogues in the treatment of AP. We conducted a systematic database search in 4 databases to identify randomized controlled trials in which the efficacy of ulinastatin in combination with somatostatin analogue was compared to somatostatin analogue alone in patients with AP. Since the patient populations of analysed papers were slightly different, we used random effect models to pool odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 9 articles comprising 1037 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The combination therapy significantly reduced the complication rates for acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury, and multiple organ dysfunction. Symptoms were relieved threefold with the combination therapy compared to somatostatin alone, and combination therapy significantly shortened the length of hospital stay. The decrease in mortality was not statistically significant..
Topics: Humans; Acute Disease; Pancreatitis; Protease Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Somatostatin
PubMed: 36289288
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-22341-7 -
Journal of the American Heart... Jun 2022Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID-19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor-COVID-19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias. Methods and Results Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID-19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed-effects meta-analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID-19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta-analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87; <0.001; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; =0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85; =0.002; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95; =0.019) with COVID-19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant. Conclusions This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID-19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer-review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID-19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic-based research? Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.
Topics: Aldosterone; Angiotensin II; Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; COVID-19; Humans; Hypertension; Renin; Renin-Angiotensin System; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35624081
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.025289 -
JAMA Dermatology Aug 2020The association between the use of medications and the development of bullous pemphigoid (BP) is unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The association between the use of medications and the development of bullous pemphigoid (BP) is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the associations between previous exposure to certain medications and BP.
DATA SOURCES
For this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase were searched for relevant studies from inception to February 20, 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Case-control or cohort studies and randomized clinical trials that examined the odds or risk of BP in patients with previous medication use were included. No geographic or language limitations were imposed.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guideline was followed. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included observational studies; Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used for randomized clinical trials. Aggregate data were used to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis if the included studies were sufficiently homogenous. Subgroup analyses were performed for use of various medications of the same category.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio, and risk ratio of bullous pemphigoid in association with medication use.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 13 case-control studies, 1 cohort study, and 1 randomized clinical trial with a total of 285 884 participants. The meta-analysis of case-control studies showed a significant association of BP with previous use of aldosterone antagonists (pooled OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.28-2.40), dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (pooled OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.55-2.38), anticholinergics (pooled OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.54-6.33), and dopaminergic medications (pooled OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.34-3.05). One cohort study found an increased risk of BP among patients receiving dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (hazard ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.16-4.88; P = .02). One trial found a higher occurrence of BP in patients with diabetes receiving linagliptin (0.2% in diabetes group vs 0% in the placebo group).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that aldosterone antagonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, anticholinergics, and dopaminergic medications are associated with BP. These medications should be judiciously prescribed, particularly in high-risk patients who are elderly and have disabling neurologic disorders.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Cholinergic Antagonists; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Diuretics; Dopamine Agents; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Odds Ratio; Pemphigoid, Bullous; Psychotropic Drugs; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32584924
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.1587 -
European Stroke Journal Mar 2023Recent anticoagulant intake represents a contraindication for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. Idarucizumab reverses the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Recent anticoagulant intake represents a contraindication for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. Idarucizumab reverses the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran, potentially allowing for thrombolysis. This nation-wide observational cohort study, systematic review, and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis preceded by dabigatran-reversal in people with acute ischemic stroke.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We recruited people undergoing thrombolysis following dabigatran-reversal at 17 stroke centers in Italy (reversal-group), people on dabigatran treated with thrombolysis without reversal (no-reversal group), and age, sex, hypertension, stroke severity, and reperfusion treatment-matched controls in 1:7 ratio (control-group). We compared groups for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH, main outcome), any brain hemorrhage, good functional outcome (mRS 0-2 at 3 months), and death. The systematic review followed a predefined protocol (CRD42017060274), and odds ratio (OR) meta-analysis was implemented to compare groups.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine patients in dabigatran-reversal group and 300 matched controls were included. Reversal was associated with a non-significant increase in sICH (10.3% vs 6%, aOR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.39-4.52), death (17.9% vs 10%, aOR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.12-4.93) and good functional outcome (64.1% vs 52.8%, aOR = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.63-3.19). No hemorrhagic events or deaths were registered in no-reversal group (n = 12). Pooling data from 3 studies after systematic review (n = 1879), reversal carried a non-significant trend for sICH (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 0.67-3.50), death (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 0.73-3.24) and good functional outcome (OR = 2.46, 95% CI = 0.85-7.16).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
People treated with reperfusion strategies after dabigatran reversal with idarucizumab seem to have a marginal increase in the risk of sICH but comparable functional recovery to matched patients with stroke. Further studies are needed to define treatment cost-effectiveness and potential thresholds in plasma dabigatran concentration for reversal.
Topics: Humans; Dabigatran; Antithrombins; Ischemic Stroke; Brain Ischemia; Thrombolytic Therapy; Stroke; Anticoagulants; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Observational Studies as Topic; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37021155
DOI: 10.1177/23969873221131635