-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that causes acute attacks of swelling, pain and reduced quality of life. People with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that causes acute attacks of swelling, pain and reduced quality of life. People with Type I HAE (approximately 80% of all HAE cases) have insufficient amounts of C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) protein; people with Type II HAE (approximately 20% of all cases) may have normal C1-INH concentrations, but, due to genetic mutations, these do not function properly. A few people, predominantly females, experience HAE despite having normal C1-INH levels and C1-INH function (rare Type III HAE). Several new drugs have been developed to treat acute attacks and prevent recurrence of attacks. There is currently no systematic review and meta-analysis that included all preventive medications for HAE.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of interventions for the long-term prevention of HAE attacks in people with Type I, Type II or Type III HAE.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 3 August 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials in children or adults with HAE that used medications to prevent HAE attacks. The comparators could be placebo or active comparator, or both; approved and experimental drug trials were eligible for inclusion. There were no restrictions on dose, frequency or intensity of treatment. The minimum length of four weeks of treatment was required for inclusion; this criterion excluded the acute treatment of HAE attacks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. HAE attacks (number of attacks per person, per population) and change in number of HAE attacks; 2. mortality and 3. serious adverse events (e.g. hepatic dysfunction, hepatic toxicity and deleterious changes in blood tests). Our secondary outcomes were 4. quality of life; 5. severity of breakthrough attacks; 6. disability and 7. adverse events (e.g. weight gain, mild psychological changes and body hair). We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 15 studies (912 participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies included people with Type I and II HAE. The studies investigated avoralstat, berotralstat, subcutaneous C1-INH, plasma-derived C1-INH, nanofiltered C1-INH, recombinant human C1-INH, danazol, and lanadelumab for the prevention of HAE attacks. We did not find any studies on the use of tranexamic acid for prevention of HAE attacks. All drugs except avoralstat reduced the number of HAE attacks compared with placebo. For breakthrough attacks that occurred despite prophylactic treatment, intravenous and subcutaneous forms of C1-INH and lanadelumab reduced attack severity. It is not known whether other drugs have a similar effect, as the severity of breakthrough attacks in people taking drugs other than C1-INH and lanadelumab was not reported. For quality of life, avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increased quality of life compared with placebo; there were no data for danazol. Four studies reported on changes in disability during treatment with C1-INH, berotralstat and lanadelumab; all three drugs decreased disability compared with placebo. Adverse events, including serious adverse events, did not occur at a rate higher than placebo. However, serious adverse event data and other adverse event data were not available for danazol, which prevented us from drawing conclusions about the absolute or relative safety of this drug. No deaths were reported in the included studies. The analysis was limited by the small number of studies, the small number of participants in each study and the lack of data on older drugs, therefore the certainty of the evidence is low. Given the rarity of HAE, it is not surprising that drugs were rarely directly compared, which does not allow conclusions on the comparative efficacy of the various drugs for people with HAE. Finally, we did not identify any studies that included people with Type III HAE. Therefore, we cannot draw any conclusions about the efficacy or safety of any drug in people with this form of HAE.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available data suggest that berotralstat, C1-INH (subcutaneous, plasma-derived, nanofiltered and recombinant), danazol and lanadelumab are effective in lowering the risk or incidence (or both) of HAE attacks. In addition, C1-INH and lanadelumab decrease the severity of breakthrough attacks (data for other drugs were not available). Avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increase quality of life and do not increase the risk of adverse events, including serious adverse events. It is possible that danazol, subcutaneous C1-INH and recombinant human C1-INH are more effective than berotralstat and lanadelumab in reducing the risk of breakthrough attacks, but the small number of studies and the small size of the studies means that the certainty of the evidence is low. This and the lack of head-to-head trials prevented us from drawing firm conclusions on the relative efficacy of the drugs.
Topics: Adult; Child; Female; Humans; Male; Angioedemas, Hereditary; Quality of Life; Danazol; Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein; Administration, Intravenous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36326435
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013403.pub2 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Jan 2014Despite the large body of literature on breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP), an accurate estimate of BTcP prevalence is still not available. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Despite the large body of literature on breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP), an accurate estimate of BTcP prevalence is still not available.
OBJECTIVES
To provide an estimate of BTcP prevalence and investigate the association between different prevalence rates and possible determinants.
METHODS
We conducted MEDLINE and EMBASE searches for studies published from 1990 to 2012 reporting data on BTcP prevalence in adult cancer populations. Pooled prevalence rates from observational studies with an acceptable methodological quality were computed. The association between BTcP prevalence and possible predictors was investigated using subgroup analyses and meta-regression.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven observational studies were identified. When quality criteria were applied, only 19 studies were included in the pooled analysis. The overall pooled prevalence was 59.2%, with high heterogeneity. The lowest prevalence rates were detected in studies conducted in outpatient clinics (39.9%), and the highest prevalence was reported in studies conducted in hospice (80.5%). The association between BTcP prevalence and other determinants such as publication year, age, gender, metastatic disease prevalence, or baseline pain intensity did not reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSION
In the context of a large between-studies heterogeneity, more than one in two patients with cancer pain also experiences BTcP, with some variability according to clinical and organizational variables.
Topics: Breakthrough Pain; Humans; Neoplasms; Prevalence
PubMed: 23796584
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.02.015 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Oct 2023Breakthrough cancer pain (BtCP) is a prevalent health issue which is difficult to manage. A plethora of quantitative research in this area exists. There is a paucity of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Breakthrough cancer pain (BtCP) is a prevalent health issue which is difficult to manage. A plethora of quantitative research in this area exists. There is a paucity of research on the perspectives of health professionals and patients surrounding domains impacting effective treatment, including definitions of BtCP, treatment, and education opportunities. This review aims to identify and synthesize the extent of qualitative research exploring health professional and patient perspectives of BtCP.
METHODS
A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach was undertaken. The approach was registered with Prospero. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for peer-reviewed literature published any date prior to May 19, 2022. Eligible sources must have considered health professional and/or patient perspectives of BtCP. A narrative synthesis approach was utilized.
RESULTS
Three sources met the review criteria. One source explored nurse perspectives, while two sources explored patient perspectives. Study quality was moderate to high. Overlapping themes across the three studies included communication, defining BtCP, impact of BtCP, management of BtCP, perceptions of BtCP, analgesia and pain relief, and training and professional development.
CONCLUSION
Given limited research investigating clinician and patient perspectives of BtCP, a rich understanding informed by exploratory qualitative methods around identification, best management strategies, professional development, and factors promoting and inhibiting best practice remains unclear. Further qualitative inquiry is warranted, and it is expected such research will inform BtCP clinical guidelines.
Topics: Humans; Cancer Pain; Pain Management; Treatment Outcome; Breakthrough Pain; Qualitative Research; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37812248
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08076-9 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022(CR) is the dry rhizome of L., a Cyperaceae plant. It has a long history of clinical medication and is known as the "holy medicine" of gynecology. CR smells sweet and... (Review)
Review
(CR) is the dry rhizome of L., a Cyperaceae plant. It has a long history of clinical medication and is known as the "holy medicine" of gynecology. CR smells sweet and bitter. It has the effect of soothing the liver and relieving depression, regulating qi, regulating meridian and relieving pain. It can be used to treat liver qi stagnation, chest pain, spleen and stomach qi stagnation, hernia pain, irregular menstruation and other diseases. At present, the main chemical constituents isolated from CR are volatile oil, flavonoids and terpenes. Modern pharmacological studies have shown that CR has a wide range of pharmacological activities, including antidepressant, hypoglycemic, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antipyretic and analgesic effects. In this paper, the botany, traditional application, phytochemistry, pharmacological effects, processing and other aspects of CR are reviewed. At the same time, the shortcomings of current research of CR are discussed in depth, and the possible solutions are put forward in order to find a breakthrough point for future research of CR.
PubMed: 36278199
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.965902 -
Journal of Medical Virology Sep 2022To provide a comparative meta-analysis and systematic review of the risk and clinical outcomes of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection between fully vaccinated and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
To provide a comparative meta-analysis and systematic review of the risk and clinical outcomes of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Eighteen studies of COVID-19 infections in fully vaccinated ("breakthrough infections") and unvaccinated individuals were reviewed from Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The meta-analysis examined the summary effects and between-study heterogeneity regarding differences in the risk of infection, hospitalization, treatments, and mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. he overall risk of infection was lower for the fully vaccinated compared to that of the unvaccinated (relative risk [RR] 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.19-0.21), especially for variants other than Delta (Delta: RR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.13-0.65; other variants: RR 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04-0.08). The risk of asymptomatic infection was not statistically significantly different between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated (RR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.27-1.19). There were neither statistically significant differences in risk of hospitalization (RR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.38-2.93), invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 1.65, 95% CI: 0.90-3.06), or mortality (RR 1.19, 95% CI: 0.79-1.78). Conversely, the risk of supplemental oxygen during hospitalization was significantly higher for the unvaccinated (RR 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08-1.82). Unvaccinated people were more vulnerable to COVID-19 infection than fully vaccinated for all variants. Once infected, there were no statistically significant differences in the risk of hospitalization, invasive mechanical ventilation, or mortality. Still, unvaccinated showed an increased need for oxygen supplementation. Further prospective analysis, including patients' risk factors, COVID-19 variants, and the utilized treatment strategies, would be warranted.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Coronavirus Infections; Humans; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35588301
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27871 -
Frontiers in Pain Research (Lausanne,... 2022Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is a special type of cancer pain and lacks safe and effective treatments. Acupuncture is a potentially valuable treatment for CIBP,...
BACKGROUND
Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is a special type of cancer pain and lacks safe and effective treatments. Acupuncture is a potentially valuable treatment for CIBP, studies evaluating the effect of acupuncture on CIBP have increased significantly, but the safety and efficacy of acupuncture to control CIBP remains controversial.
OBJECTIVE
To provide the first meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of acupuncture in CIBP management.
DATA SOURCES
CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, VIP Database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 1 June 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
RCTs with primary bone tumor patients or other types of primary cancer companied by bone metastases as the research subjects and to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture treatment alone or combined with the control treatment were included. Meanwhile, RCTs should choose the pain score as the primary outcome and pain relief rate, frequency of breakthrough pain, analgesic onset time, analgesia duration, quality of life, and adverse events as reference outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We designed a data-extraction form that was used to extract key information from the articles. Data extraction study evaluation was conducted independently by two reviewers, and a third reviewer would resolve any disagreements. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk bias. The quality of the evidence for main outcomes was evaluated by the GRADE system. Mean differences (MD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The forest plots were performed using the Review Manager Software (5.3 version). Subgroup analysis was used to investigate the possible sources of potential heterogeneity. Descriptive analysis was performed in case of unacceptable clinical heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs (with 1,069 patients) were included, and all studies were at high risk of bias owing to lack of blinding or other bias. Eleven studies evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture as a complementary therapy, and showed that acupuncture plus control treatment (compared with control treatment) was connected with reduced pain intensity (MD = -1.34, 95% CI -1.74 to -0.94; Q < 0.1; = 98%, < 0.01). Subgroup analyses based on acupoints type partly explain the potential heterogeneity. The results also showed that acupuncture plus control treatment (compared with control treatment) was connected with relieving pain intensity, increasing the pain relief rate, reducing the frequency of breakthrough pain, shortening analgesic onset time, extending the analgesic duration, and improving the quality of life. We have no sufficient evidence to prove the effectiveness of acupuncture alone. Four RCTs reported only adverse events related to opioids' side effects. Evidence was qualified as "very low" because of low methodological quality, considerable heterogeneity, or a low number of included studies.
CONCLUSION
Acupuncture has a certain effect as a complementary therapy on pain management of CIBP, which not only mitigates the pain intensity but also improves the quality of life and reduces the incidence of opioids' side effects, although the evidence level was very low. In future, a larger sample size and rigorously designed RCTs are needed to provide sufficient evidence to identify the efficacy and safety of acupuncture as a treatment for CIBP.
PubMed: 35978992
DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2022.925013 -
Critical Care Research and Practice 2018In lab-based studies, buprenorphine appears to have a ceiling effect on respiratory depression but not on analgesia. There is increasing evidence in adult patients that... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
In lab-based studies, buprenorphine appears to have a ceiling effect on respiratory depression but not on analgesia. There is increasing evidence in adult patients that buprenorphine has no ceiling effect on analgesia or side effects. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and adverse effects of buprenorphine versus morphine in paediatric acute pain.
METHODS
A systematic review of five databases was performed until May 2018. Only randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. The outcomes of interest included pain, respiratory depression, nausea, sedation, dizziness, and pruritus.
RESULTS
Four randomised controlled trials (=195) were included. The only outcome measuring analgesic efficacy was time to breakthrough analgesia. Buprenorphine had a significant increase in time to breakthrough analgesia by 114.98 minutes compared to morphine (95% CI = 42.94 to 187.01; = 0; =0.002). There was no significant difference in the rates of adverse effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Buprenorphine provided a longer duration of analgesia than morphine. This in combination with its unique sublingual preparation could prove particularly advantageous in the paediatric population. The studies included are likely underpowered to detect differences in the incidence of adverse effects; therefore, the same precautions should be taken as with any other opioid.
PubMed: 30159170
DOI: 10.1155/2018/3792043 -
Anesthesia and Analgesia Nov 2022The prevalence of pregnant people with opioid use disorder (OUD), including those receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), is increasing. Challenges...
A Systematic Scoping Review of Peridelivery Pain Management for Pregnant People With Opioid Use Disorder: From the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology and Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine.
The prevalence of pregnant people with opioid use disorder (OUD), including those receiving medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), is increasing. Challenges associated with pain management in people with OUD include tolerance, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, and risk for return to use. Yet, there are few evidence-based recommendations for pain management in the setting of pregnancy and the postpartum period, and many peripartum pain management studies exclude people with OUD. This scoping review summarized the available literature on peridelivery pain management in people with OUD, methodologies used, and identified specific areas of knowledge gaps. PubMed and Embase were comprehensively searched for publications in all languages on peripartum pain management among people with OUD, both treated with MOUD and untreated. Potential articles were screened by title, abstract, and full text. Data abstracted were descriptively analyzed to map available evidence and identify areas of limited or no evidence. A total of 994 publications were imported for screening on title, abstracts, and full text, yielding 84 publications identified for full review: 32 (38.1%) review articles, 14 (16.7%) retrospective studies, and 8 (9.5%) case reports. There were 5 randomized controlled trials. Most studies (64%) were published in perinatology (32; 38.1%) journals or anesthesiology (22; 26.2%) journals. Specific areas lacking trial or systematic review evidence include: (1) methods to optimize psychological and psychosocial comorbidities relevant to acute pain management around delivery; (2) alternative nonopioid and nonpharmacologic analgesia methods; (3) whether or not to use opioids for severe breakthrough pain and how best to prescribe and monitor its use after discharge; (4) monitoring for respiratory depression and sedation with coadministration of other analgesics; (5) optimal neuraxial analgesia dosing and adjuncts; and (6) benefits of abdominal wall blocks after cesarean delivery. No publications discussed naloxone coprescribing in the labor and delivery setting. We observed an increasing number of publications on peripartum pain management in pregnant people with OUD. However, existing published works are low on the pyramid of evidence (reviews, opinions, and retrospective studies), with a paucity of original research articles (<6%). Opinions are conflicting on the utility and disutility of various analgesic interventions. Studies generating high-quality evidence on this topic are needed to inform care for pregnant people with OUD. Specific research areas are identified, including utility and disutility of short-term opioid use for postpartum pain management, role of continuous wound infiltration and truncal nerve blocks, nonpharmacologic analgesia options, and the best methods to support psychosocial aspects of pain management.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Pain Management; Analgesics, Opioid; Perinatology; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Retrospective Studies; Opioid-Related Disorders; Analgesics; Naloxone
PubMed: 36135926
DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006167 -
Advances in Therapy Mar 2021Micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes are leading morbidities in the world population. They are responsible not only for increased mortality but also severe... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes are leading morbidities in the world population. They are responsible not only for increased mortality but also severe disabilities, which jeopardize quality of life (e.g., blindness, walking limitations, and renal failure requiring dialysis). The new antidiabetic agents (e.g., glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors) are increasingly recognized as breakthrough agents in the treatment of diabetes and prevention of diabetic complications. However, drugs effective in preventing and treating diabetic disabilities are still needed and sulodexide could be one of those able to address the unmet clinical needs of the new antidiabetic agents.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal. We also manually searched potentially relevant journals, conference proceedings, and journal supplements. Any study monitoring any effect of sulodexide in subjects with diabetes, in relation to renal, vascular, and ocular complication, was considered. Treatment effects were estimated using standardized mean differences (SMDs), mean differences (MDs), and risk ratios (RRs), as appropriate. We calculated 95% confidence interval (CIs) and heterogeneity (Q, tau, and I).
RESULTS
The search found 45 studies with 2817 participants (mean age 57 years; 63% male). The 26 randomized controlled studies included 2074 participants (mean age 58.8 years; 66% male). Sulodexide reduced the impact of diabetic retinopathy; increased the pain-free and maximal walking distance in peripheral arterial disease; accelerated the healing of diabetes-associated trophic ulcers; and decreased the rate of albumin excretion in subjects with nephropathy. The risk of adverse events (AEs) was not different between sulodexide and controls.
CONCLUSION
Sulodexide has a beneficial effect on the ocular, peripheral arterial disease, trophic ulcers, and renal complications of diabetes without increasing the risk of AEs.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Female; Glycosaminoglycans; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Male; Middle Aged; Quality of Life
PubMed: 33502688
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-021-01620-1 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Jun 2016Cancer pain can appear with spikes of higher intensity. Breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) is the most common term for the transient exacerbations of pain, but the ability... (Review)
Review
From "Breakthrough" to "Episodic" Cancer Pain? A European Association for Palliative Care Research Network Expert Delphi Survey Toward a Common Terminology and Classification of Transient Cancer Pain Exacerbations.
CONTEXT
Cancer pain can appear with spikes of higher intensity. Breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) is the most common term for the transient exacerbations of pain, but the ability of the nomenclature to capture relevant pain variations and give treatment guidance is questionable.
OBJECTIVES
To reach consensus on definitions, terminology, and subclassification of transient cancer pain exacerbations.
METHODS
The most frequent authors on BTCP literature were identified using the same search strategy as in a systematic review and invited to participate in a two-round Delphi survey. Topics with a low degree of consensus on BTCP classification were refined into 20 statements. The participants rated their degree of agreement with the statements on a numeric rating scale (0-10). Consensus was defined as a median numeric rating scale score of ≥7 and an interquartile range of ≤3.
RESULTS
Fifty-two authors had published three or more articles on BTCP over the past 10 years. Twenty-seven responded in the first round and 24 in the second round. Consensus was reached for 13 of 20 statements. Transient cancer pain exacerbations can occur without background pain, when background pain is uncontrolled, and regardless of opioid treatment. There exist cancer pain exacerbations other than BTCP, and the phenomenon could be named "episodic pain." Patient-reported treatment satisfaction is important with respect to assessment. Subclassification according to pain pathophysiology can provide treatment guidance.
CONCLUSION
Significant transient cancer pain exacerbations include more than just BTCP. Patient input and pain classification are important factors for tailoring treatment.
Topics: Breakthrough Pain; Cancer Pain; Delphi Technique; Europe; Humans; Palliative Care; Societies, Medical; Terminology as Topic
PubMed: 26921493
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.12.329