-
PloS One 2015Pyrazinamide (PZA) is crucial for tuberculosis (TB) treatment, given its unique ability to eradicate persister bacilli. The worldwide burden of PZA resistance remains... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pyrazinamide (PZA) is crucial for tuberculosis (TB) treatment, given its unique ability to eradicate persister bacilli. The worldwide burden of PZA resistance remains poorly described.
METHODS
Systematic PubMed, Science Direct and Scopus searches for articles reporting phenotypic (liquid culture drug susceptibility testing or pyrazinamidase activity assays) and/or genotypic (polymerase chain reaction or DNA sequencing) PZA resistance. Global and regional summary estimates were obtained from random-effects meta-analysis, stratified by presence or risk of multidrug resistant TB (MDR-TB). Regional summary estimates were combined with regional WHO TB incidence estimates to determine the annual burden of PZA resistance. Information on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the pncA gene was aggregated to obtain a global summary.
RESULTS
Pooled PZA resistance prevalence estimate was 16.2% (95% CI 11.2-21.2) among all TB cases, 41.3% (29.0-53.7) among patients at high MDR-TB risk, and 60.5% (52.3-68.6) among MDR-TB cases. The estimated global burden is 1.4 million new PZA resistant TB cases annually, about 270,000 in MDR-TB patients. Among 1,815 phenotypically resistant isolates, 608 unique SNPs occurred at 397 distinct positions throughout the pncA gene.
INTERPRETATION
PZA resistance is ubiquitous, with an estimated one in six incident TB cases and more than half of all MDR-TB cases resistant to PZA globally. The diversity of SNPs across the pncA gene complicates the development of rapid molecular diagnostics. These findings caution against relying on PZA in current and future TB drug regimens, especially in MDR-TB patients.
Topics: Antitubercular Agents; Humans; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Pyrazinamide; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant
PubMed: 26218737
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133869 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) drugs, such as evogliptin, as the second-line drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment have been reported to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) drugs, such as evogliptin, as the second-line drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment have been reported to facilitate insulin secretion by reducing glucagon and inhibiting glucagon like peptides. With a vague consensus, the advantageous and non-inferior effects of evogliptin relative to other DPP-4i drugs were recently demonstrated on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and overall adverse events in T2DM patients. Thus, the aim was to evaluate the overall influence of evogliptin on HbA1c levels and the adverse events in T2DM patients compared to sitagliptin and linagliptin.
METHODS
Complying with PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature search in databases and a meta-analysis. Data about HbA1c levels and the adverse events of T2DM patients were collected and analyzed.
RESULTS
From 1,397 studies, we found five matched studies involving 845 subjects (mean age: 54.7 ± 3 years). The meta-analysis revealed that evogliptin was non-inferior to sitagliptin/linagliptin with a mean difference of 0.062 (95% CI: -0.092 to 0.215. I: 0%. = 0.431) regarding the HbA1c level reduction, and the risk ratio was -0.006 (95% CI: -0.272 to 0.260. I: 1.7%. = 0.966) regarding the adverse effects, indicating no significant difference between evogliptin and linagliptin or sitagliptin in affecting the HbA1c level and adverse effects.
CONCLUSION
The study provides preliminary evidence regarding the similarity in the efficacy of evogliptin compared to other DPP-4i drugs, including sitagliptin and linagliptin, for managing HbA1c levels and adverse events.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Linagliptin; Middle Aged; Piperazines; Sitagliptin Phosphate
PubMed: 36060938
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.962385 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2016A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of dulaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Medline, Embase, Cochrane... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of dulaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and www. clinicaltrials. gov (up to February 15(th), 2015) were searched. Randomized controlled trials comparing dulaglutide to other drugs for T2DM were collected. Twelve RCTs were included, and the overall bias was low. As the monotherapy, compared with control (placebo, metformin and liraglutide), dulaglutide resulted in a significant reduction in HbA1c (WMD, -0.68%; 95% CI, -0.95 to -0.40), FPG (WMD, -0.90 mmol/L; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.52), a similar risk of hypoglycemia (7.8% vs. 10.6%), less body weight loss (WMD, 0.51 kg; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.75). As an add-on intervention with oral antihyperglycemic medication (OAM) and insulin, compared with control (placebo, sitagliptin, exenatide, liraglutide and glargine), dulaglutide lowered HbA1c (WMD, -0.51%; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.35) and body weight significantly (WMD, -1.30 kg, 95% CI, -1.85 to -1.02) notably, and elicited a similar reduction in FPG (WMD, -0.19 mmol/L; 95% CI, -1.20 to 0.82), an similar incidence of hypoglycemia (24.5% vs. 24.5%). This meta-analysis revealed the use of dulaglutide as a monotherapy or an add-on to OAM and lispro appeared to be effective and safe for adults with T2DM.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Body Weight; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Exenatide; Glucagon-Like Peptides; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Immunoglobulin Fc Fragments; Insulin; Insulin Glargine; Liraglutide; Metformin; Patient Safety; Peptides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Fusion Proteins; Sitagliptin Phosphate; Treatment Outcome; Venoms
PubMed: 26742577
DOI: 10.1038/srep18904 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Feb 2024Contacts of patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) are at risk of developing TB disease. Tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) is an intervention that... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Contacts of patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) are at risk of developing TB disease. Tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) is an intervention that can potentially reduce this risk.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TPT for contacts of patients with MDR-TB.
DATA SOURCES
EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies on 24 July 2023, without start date restrictions.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included studies that compared TPT with no treatment in contacts of patients with MDR-TB and reported outcomes of progression to TB disease.
PARTICIPANTS
Contacts of patients with MDR-TB.
INTERVENTIONS
TPT.
ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS
A modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used.
METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS
Random-effects meta-analysis was utilized to calculate the relative risk for disease progression to TB in contacts of patients with MDR-TB who received TPT compared to those who did not. Additionally, completion, adverse effect, and discontinued rates were assessed.
RESULTS
Involving 1105 individuals from 11 studies, the pooled relative risk for disease progression in contacts receiving TPT versus those without treatment was 0.34 (95% CI: 0.16-0.72). Subgroup analysis indicated a lower pooled relative risk for regimens based on the drug-resistance profile of the index patients with TB compared to uniform treatment regimens (0.22 [95% CI: 0.06-0.84] vs. 0.49 [95% CI: 0.17-1.35]), although not statistically significant. The pooled completed rate was 83.8%, adverse effect rate was 22.9%, and discontinued rate was 6.5%. After excluding the levofloxacin and pyrazinamide regimen study, the completed rate increased to 88.0%, and adverse effects and discontinued rates decreased to 8.0% and 4.0%, respectively.
DISCUSSION
TPT reduces TB disease progression risk in contacts of patients with MDR-TB. Tailored TPT regimens based on drug-resistance profiles may offer additional benefits. Furthermore, efforts to improve completed rates and manage adverse effects are essential for optimizing effectiveness and safety.
Topics: Humans; Antitubercular Agents; Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant; Pyrazinamide; Levofloxacin; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Disease Progression
PubMed: 37741621
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2023.09.015 -
PloS One 2022Atherosclerosis(AS) is widely recognized as a risk factor for incident cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Tetramethylpyrazine (TMP) is the active ingredient of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Atherosclerosis(AS) is widely recognized as a risk factor for incident cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Tetramethylpyrazine (TMP) is the active ingredient of Ligusticum wallichii that possesses a variety of biological activities against atherosclerosis.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to study the impact of and mechanism of tetramethylpyrazine for atherosclerosis in animal models.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science database, Chinese Biomedical (CBM) database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang data, and Vip Journal Integration Platform, covering the period from the respective start date of each database to December 2021. We used SYRCLE's 10-item checklist and Rev-Man 5.3 software to analyze the data and the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Twelve studies, including 258 animals, met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the control group, TMP significantly reduced aortic atherosclerotic lesion area, and induced significant decreases in levels of TC (SMD = -2.67, 95% CI -3.68 to -1.67, P < 0.00001), TG (SMD = -2.43, 95% CI -3.39 to -1.47, P < 0.00001), and LDL-C (SMD = -2.87, 95% CI -4.16 to -1.58, P < 0.00001), as well as increasing HDL-C (SMD = 2.04, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.03, P = 0.001). TMP also significantly modulated plasma inflammatory responses and biological signals associated with atherosclerosis. In subgroup analysis, the groups of high-dose TMP (≥50 mg/kg) showed better results than those of the control group. No difference between various durations of treatment groups or various assessing location groups.
CONCLUSION
TMP exerts anti-atherosclerosis functions in an animal model of AS mediated by anti-inflammatory action, antioxidant action, ameliorating lipid metabolism disorder, protection of endothelial function, antiplatelet activity, reducing the proliferation and migration of smooth muscle cells, inhibition of angiogenesis, antiplatelet aggregation. Due to the limitations of the quantity and quality of current studies, the above conclusions need to be verified by more high-quality studies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO registration no.CRD42021288874.
Topics: Animals; Aortic Diseases; Atherosclerosis; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Pyrazines
PubMed: 35500001
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267968 -
Journal of Diabetes Investigation Sep 2022The optimal therapy for latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) remains undefined. Increasing evidence has shown that sitagliptin and insulin treatment can benefit... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS/INTRODUCTION
The optimal therapy for latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) remains undefined. Increasing evidence has shown that sitagliptin and insulin treatment can benefit patients with LADA, but the efficacy still lacks systematic evaluation. We carried out this systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the current data on the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin combined with insulin on LADA, providing a reliable reference for the effective therapeutic treatment of LADA patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We retrieved the literature in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science and CNKI from inception to August 2021. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of sitagliptin plus insulin with insulin alone in LADA patients were identified. The outcome measures included parameters of glycemic control, β-cell function, body mass index and adverse events. The Review Manager 5.2 and Stata 14.0 were utilized for data analysis.
RESULTS
Eight randomized controlled trials involving 295 participants were identified. Sitagliptin and insulin treatment lowered hemoglobin A1c (weighted mean difference -0.36, 95% confidence interval -0.61 to -0.10, I = 91.6%), increased fasting C-peptide (weighted mean difference 0.08, 95% confidence interval -0.02 to 0.17, I = 88.8%) and had fewer adverse events compared with insulin alone. The inter-study heterogeneity, potential publication bias and other factors might interpret asymmetrical presentation of funnel plots. There was no significant association between sitagliptin plus insulin treatment and levels of hemoglobin A1c or fasting C-peptide, regardless of the duration of intervention and sample size.
CONCLUSIONS
Sitagliptin combined with insulin can achieve better glycemic control and improve islet β-cell function with lower incidence of hypoglycemia compared with insulin alone, which provides an effective and tolerated therapeutic regimen for LADA patients. However, further well-designed and rigorous randomized controlled trials are required to validate this benefit due to the limited methodology quality of included trials.
Topics: Adult; C-Peptide; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Latent Autoimmune Diabetes in Adults; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sitagliptin Phosphate
PubMed: 35445591
DOI: 10.1111/jdi.13814 -
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Oct 2011Standard culture-based testing of the susceptibility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis to pyrazinamide is difficult to perform. This systematic review with meta-analyses... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Standard culture-based testing of the susceptibility of Mycobacterium tuberculosis to pyrazinamide is difficult to perform. This systematic review with meta-analyses evaluated the roles of molecular assays targeting pncA and of pyrazinamidase assays. PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant publications in English. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated in bivariate random-effects models. Of 128 articles identified, 73 sets of data involving culture isolates were initially included in meta-analyses. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity, respectively, were 87% and 93% for PCR-DNA sequencing (n = 29), 75% and 95% for PCR-single-stranded conformation polymorphism (SSCP) (n = 5), 96% and 97% for a mixture of other molecular assays (n = 6), and 89% and 97% for pyrazinamidase assays using the Wayne method (n = 33). The median prevalence (range) of pyrazinamide resistance was 51% (31% to 89%) in multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis isolates and 5% (0% to 9%) in non-multidrug-resistant isolates. Excluding studies with possibly considerable false resistance in the reference assay gave the following estimates of sensitivity and specificity, respectively: 92% and 93% for PCR-DNA sequencing (n = 20), 98% and 96% for other molecular assays (n = 5), and 91% and 97% for the Wayne assay (n = 27). The Wayne assay had significant funnel plot asymmetry, so the test performance might have been overestimated. Considering the prevalence of pyrazinamide resistance in different clinical settings, PCR-DNA sequencing, and possibly other molecular assays targeting pncA, can detect pyrazinamide resistance in multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis isolates, with predictive values largely exceeding 90%, and rule out pyrazinamide resistance in non-multidrug-resistant isolates, with predictive values exceeding 99%. Molecular assays are probably the way forward for detecting pyrazinamide resistance.
Topics: Amidohydrolases; Antitubercular Agents; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Polymerase Chain Reaction; Pyrazinamide; Sequence Analysis, DNA
PubMed: 21768515
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00630-11 -
PloS One 2014We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the incidence and risk of cardiotoxicity associated with bortezomib in cancer patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the incidence and risk of cardiotoxicity associated with bortezomib in cancer patients.
METHODS
Databases from PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at ASCO meeting up to July 31, 2013 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective phase II and III trials evaluating bortezomib in cancer patients with adequate data on cardiotoxicity. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.
RESULTS
A total of 5718 patients with a variety of malignancies from 25 clinical trials were included in our analysis. The incidence of all-grade and high-grade cardiotoxicity associated with bortezomib was 3.8% (95%CI: 2.6-5.6%) and 2.3% (1.6-3.5%), with a mortality of 3.0% (1.4-6.5%). Patients treated with bortezomib did not significantly increase the risk of all-grade (OR 1.15, 95%CI: 0.82-1.62, p=0.41) and high-grade (OR 1.13, 95%CI: 0.58-2.24, p=0.72) cardiotoxicity compared with patients treated with control medication. Sub-group analysis showed that the incidence of cardiotoxicity varied with tumor types, treatment regimens and phases of trials. No evidence of publication bias was observed.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of bortezomib does not significantly increase the risk of cardiotoxicity compared to control patients. Further studies are recommended to investigate this association and risk differences among different tumor types, treatment regimens and phases of trials.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Boronic Acids; Bortezomib; Heart Diseases; Humans; Incidence; Neoplasms; Odds Ratio; Pyrazines; Risk
PubMed: 24489948
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087671 -
Blood Cancer Journal Jan 2024Extra copies of chromosome 1q21 (+1q: gain = 3 copies, amp >= 4 copies) are associated with worse outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). This systematic review assesses...
Extra copies of chromosome 1q21 (+1q: gain = 3 copies, amp >= 4 copies) are associated with worse outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). This systematic review assesses the current reporting trends of +1q, the efficacy of existing regimens on +1q, and its prognostic implications in MM randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Registry of RCTs were searched from January 2012 to December 2022. Only MM RCTs were included. A total of 124 RCTs were included, of which 29 (23%) studies reported on +1q. Among them, 10% defined thresholds for +1q, 14% reported survival data separately for gain and amp, and 79% considered +1q a high-risk cytogenetic abnormality. Amongst RCTs that met the primary endpoint showing improvement in progression free survival (PFS), lenalidomide maintenance (Myeloma XI), selinexor (BOSTON), and isatuximab (IKEMA and ICARIA) were shown to improve PFS for patients with evidence of +1q. Some additional RCT's such as Myeloma XI+ (carfilzomib), ELOQUENT-3 (elotuzumab), and HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 (bortezomib) met their endpoint showing improvement in PFS and also showed improvement in PFS in the +1q cohort, although the confidence interval crossed 1. All six studies that reported HR for +1q patients vs. without (across both arms) showed worse OS and PFS for +1q. There is considerable heterogeneity in the reporting of +1q. All interventions that have shown to be successful in RCTs and have clearly reported on the +1q subgroup have shown concordant direction of results and benefit of the applied intervention. A more standardized approach to reporting this abnormality is needed.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bortezomib; Chromosome Aberrations; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 1; Lenalidomide; Multiple Myeloma; Prognosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38272897
DOI: 10.1038/s41408-024-00985-0 -
Scientific Reports May 2021The novel coronavirus outbreak began in late December 2019 and rapidly spread worldwide, critically impacting public health systems. A number of already approved and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The novel coronavirus outbreak began in late December 2019 and rapidly spread worldwide, critically impacting public health systems. A number of already approved and marketed drugs are being tested for repurposing, including Favipiravir. We aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of Favipiravir in treatment of COVID-19 patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. We registered the protocol in the PROSPERO (CRD42020180032). All clinical trials which addressed the safety and efficacy of Favipiravir in comparison to other control groups for treatment of patients with confirmed infection with SARS-CoV2 were included. We searched electronic databases including LitCovid/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, Cochrane, and Scientific Information Database up to 31 December 2020. We assessed the risk of bias of the included studies using Cochrane Collaboration criteria. All analyses were performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 2, and the risk ratio index was calculated. Egger and Begg test was used for assessing publication bias. Nine studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis revealed a significant clinical improvement in the Favipiravir group versus the control group during seven days after hospitalization (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.09-1.41; P = 0.001). Viral clearance was more in 14 days after hospitalization in Favipiravir group than control group, but this finding marginally not significant (RR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.98-1.25; P = 0.094). Requiring supplemental oxygen therapy in the Favipiravir group was 7% less than the control group, (RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.67-1.28; P = 0.664). Transferred to ICU and adverse events were not statistically different between two groups. The mortality rate in the Favipiravir group was approximately 30% less than the control group, but this finding not statistically significant. Favipiravir possibly exerted no significant beneficial effect in the term of mortality in the general group of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. We should consider that perhaps the use of antiviral once the patient has symptoms is too late and this would explain their low efficacy in the clinical setting.
Topics: Amides; Antiviral Agents; COVID-19; Clinical Trials as Topic; Disease Progression; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Pyrazines; SARS-CoV-2; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Viral Load; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 34040117
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-90551-6