Comparative efficacy and safety of different pharmacological therapies to medication overuse headache: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists whether prophylactic drugs are necessary in the treatment of medication overuse headache (MOH). OBJECTIVES: To determine comparative benefits and safety of available drugs for the treatment of MOH including elimination of medication overuse (MO). METHODS: We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials though an extensive literature search comparing different drug effects on MOH. A random-effect network meta-analysis was conducted to rank comparative effects of interventions. Outcome improvements from baseline include responder rate defined as ≥ 50% reduction of headache frequency, proportion of patients who revert to no acute medication overuse (nMO), and reduction in monthly headache and acute medication intake frequency. Certainty of evidence was classified using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development & Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Of 8,248 screened publications, 28 were eligible for analysis. Topiramate was found to be beneficial based on its responder rate (odds ratios [OR] 4.93), headache frequency (weighted mean difference [WMD] -5.53) and acute medication intake frequency (WMD - 6.95), with fewer safety issues (i.e., tolerability, or more adverse events) than placebo (OR 0.20). Fremanezumab, galcanezumab and botulinum toxin type A (BTA) were beneficial for increased responder rates (OR 3.46 to 3.07, 2.95, and 2.57, respectively). For reversion to nMO, eptinezumab, fremanezumab and BTA were superior to placebo (OR 2.75 to 2.64, 1.87 to1.57, and 1.55, respectively). Eptinezumab, fremanezumab, erenumab 140 mg, and BTA were more efficacious than erenumab 70 mg (OR 3.84 to 3.70, 2.60 to 2.49, 2.44 and 2.16, respectively) without differences in safety and tolerability. CONCLUSION: Despite lower safety and greater intolerability issues, topiramate has large beneficial effects probably on increasing responder rates, reducing headache frequency, and might reduce monthly medication intake frequency. Fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab are promising for increasing responder rates. For reversion to nMO, eptinezumab has large beneficial effects, fremanezumab has a smaller effect. BTA might have a moderate effect on responder rates and probably has a small effect on reversion to nMO. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021193370.

Effects of different treatment measures on the efficacy of diabetic foot ulcers: a network meta-analysis.

Introduction: Through a network meta-analysis, we compared different treatment measures for patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), assessing their impact on the healing of DFU and ranking them accordingly. Methods: We searched the PubMed, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Embase, the WanFang and the WeiPu database. The retrieval time was from database establishment to January 2024, and retrieval entailed subject and free words. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with different treatment measures for DFU were included. Data extraction and evaluation were based on the PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analyses using pairwise and network methods were employed to compare and rank the effectiveness of different treatments for DFU. Results: Ultimately, we included 57 RCTs involving a total of 4,826 patients with DFU. When it comes to ulcer healing rates, compared to standard of care(SOC),platelet-rich plasma(PRP), hyperbaric oxygen therapy(HBOT), topical oxygen therapy(TOT), acellular dermal matrix(ADM), and stem cells(SCs) in both direct meta-analysis(DMA) and network meta-analysis(NMA) can effectively increase the complete healing rate. For Scs+PRP, a statistically significant improvement was only observed in the NMA. Moreover, when compared to the negative pressure wound therapy(NPWT) group, the PRP+NPWT group was more effective in promoting the complete healing of ulcers. In terms of promoting the reduction of ulcer area, no statistical differences were observed among various treatment measures. When it comes to ulcer healing time, both PRP and NPWT can effectively shorten the healing time compared to SOC. Furthermore, when compared to the NPWT group, the combined treatment of PRP and ultrasonic debridement(UD) with NPWT is more effective in reducing healing time. In terms of amputation rates and adverse reactions, the PRP group effectively reduced the amputation rate and adverse reactions for patients with DFU. Additionally, compared to the NPWT group, the combined treatment of PRP and UD with NPWT reduced the incidence of adverse reactions. However, no significant differences were observed among other treatment measures in terms of amputation rates and adverse reactions. The ranking results showed that the efficacy of PRP+NPWT and UD+NPWT in promoting ulcer healing, reducing ulcer area, shortening healing time, decreasing amputation rates and adverse reactions is superior to that of the alone PRP group, NPWT group, and UD group. Conversely, the SOC group demonstrates the least effective performance in all aspects. Conclusion: Due to the particularity of the wound of DFU, the standard of care is not effective, but the new treatment scheme has a remarkable effect in many aspects. And the treatment of DFU is not a single choice, combined with a variety of methods often achieve better efficacy, and will not bring more adverse reactions.

Short term efficacy of biological treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease that is debilitating, particularly in its more severe forms. Multiple systemic therapies are used in moderate-to-severe psoriasis, but the development of biological interventions has revolutionized its management and improved its outcomes. To compare the effectiveness and safety of the different biological interventions approved for use in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Multiple databases were searched for relevant articles and a prospectively planned network meta-analysis was conducted on randomized controlled trials that assessed biological treatments in moderate-to-severe psoriasis. The search yielded 84 trials that encompassed 39,798 patients. Infliximab 5 mg/kg had the highest probability of achieving 75% reduction on PASI scale in comparison to placebo (RR = 18.76, 95% CI [12.31; 28.57], high certainty), while Ixekizumab 80 mg and Brodalumab 210 mg had the highest probability at achieving PASI90 and PASI100 (37.81, [28.57; 50.03] and 81.04, [26.16; 251.01], respectively, with moderate certainty) On the other hand, Risankizumab 150 mg and Ustekinumab 90 mg were the only regimens with significantly less withdrawal rates due to adverse events (0.41, [0.18-0.96], and 0.57, [0.35-0.91], respectively with High certainty) compared to placebo. Anti-IL17 and Infliximab were among the most effective in ameliorating the symptoms of psoriasis, however, anti-IL17 were better at achieving full or almost full improvement on the PASI scale. Real life decision-making is not so clear-cut and should remain patient centered, taking into consideration factors such as safety, comorbidities, biologic naivety, dosing preferences and insurance considerations.

Comparative effects of behaviour change techniques using eHealth and mHealth in promoting dietary behaviour: protocol for a systematic review and component network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, it is estimated that dietary habits contribute to 22% of adult deaths and 15% of disability-adjusted life years, highlighting the critical role of dietary behaviour in public health. Despite the known benefits of healthy eating, many individuals find it challenging to change their diet for disease prevention. eHealth and mHealth interventions using behaviour change techniques (BCTs) have emerged as promising strategies to address this issue. However, the specific BCTs that are most effective in promoting dietary behaviour are not well established. This systematic review and component network meta-analysis (CNMA) aims to estimate the effect size of each BCT on fostering healthy eating. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include randomised controlled trials that assess the effects of eHealth and mHealth interventions on promoting changes in dietary behaviours among healthy adults. Studies with a minimum follow-up period of 3 weeks will be considered. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE [PubMed], Embase [Dialogue], Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo [Dialogue], ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry on 27 January 2024. Two independent reviewers will conduct title and abstract screening followed by a full-text review. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or consultation with a third reviewer. The primary outcome is dietary behaviour, as measured by changes in the diet quality score and the intake of a specific food. Our data synthesis will apply a frequentist random-effects model for pairwise meta-analysis, network meta-analysis and an additive CNMA model to compute the effect size of each BCT. This methodological approach will reveal the positive and negative effects of each BCT and provide a ranking of these techniques, considering both direct and indirect evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review because it uses existing published data. These results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The current protocol was submitted to PROSPERO on 16 January 2024 (CRD 42024502217).

Network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of management for resectable stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment for stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to address this crucial issue through a frequentist network meta-analysis. METHODS: We conducted a literature database search for randomized controlled trials comparing the following treatment modalities before March 1st, 2023: surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and various combinations of these treatments. Summary data on overall survival (OS) and treatment-related deaths (trDeath) were analyzed using frequentist methods. RESULTS: Twenty-two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 3269 participants were included, covering 17 treatment regimens. In terms of overall survival, surgery followed by adjuvant targeted therapy (S-T), neoadjuvant targeted therapy followed by surgery and adjuvant targeted therapy (T-S-T), and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy (C-S-C) were relatively more advantageous than other treatment regimens. Overall, S-T is the most likely treatment option to prolong OS, with a 59.8% likelihood, while immunotherapy plus chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy (IC-S-C) demonstrates good safety. CONCLUSION: S-T and T-S-T treatments have the greatest potential to be the optimal overall survival treatments for stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC patients with positive driver genes, demonstrating significant clinical application prospects. While for patients with negative driver genes, C-S-C treatments benefit the most. The protocol was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO (CRD42022372711).

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Currently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to investigate the efficacy of combining immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer; however, the optimal treatment strategy remains undetermined. METHODS: A comprehensive search of online databases was conducted to identify RCTs published until December 31, 2023. Network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate PFS, OS, TRAEs, irAEs, and the ranking of different treatment regimens. RESULTS: A total of 2702 patients from five RCTs (six reports) were included in the analysis. The combination therapy of ICIs significantly prolonged PFS (HR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.63-0.76, p < 0.0001) and OS (HR = 0.73, 95%CI 0.63-0.85, p < 0.0001) in the overall population. Among the different ICIs combinations evaluated, Durva-Olap-CP exhibited superior efficacy for both PFS and OS outcomes. In the pMMR population, both Durva-Olap-CP and Pembro-CP significantly reduced the risk of disease progression or death compared to Avelu-CP and Atezo-CP treatments; however, no significant differences were observed among various ICI combination therapies in patients with dMMR. In the dMMR population, Dostar-CP demonstrates a 42.2% probability of achieving first rank in terms of PFS, whereas in the pMMR population, Pembro-CP exhibits a 60% likelihood of securing the top position. Importantly, the toxicity associated with ICIs combination therapy was manageable and well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ICIs and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer has demonstrated superior survival outcomes compared to chemotherapy alone. Durva-Olap-CP exhibited the most favorable PFS and OS benefits in the overall population. In patients with dMMR, Dostar-CP showed the greatest improvement in PFS, while Pembro-CP demonstrated the most pronounced PFS benefit in patients with pMMR.

Efficacy and safety of immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies in adults with myasthenia gravis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Numerous clinical trials for myasthenia gravis (MG) treatment have been conducted recently, with satisfactory cognitive and clinical results. However, due to the limited evidence for direct comparison of the safety and effectiveness of various drugs, there is a need for further exploration of the advantages and disadvantages of different monoclonal antibodies and immunosuppressants. Thus, in the present network meta-analysis (NMA), we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies in treating MG. We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library between January 1, 2000 and March 6, 2024. Statistical analyses were performed using R software (version 4.2.3), JAGS, and STATA (version 15.0). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value was calculated to assess the potential efficacy of each drug and the likelihood of adverse events (AEs), with higher SUCRA values indicating better efficacy or a lower likelihood of AEs. This NMA included 21 randomized controlled trials involving 13 drugs and 1,657 patients. Based on changes in Quantitative MG and MG Composite scores, batoclimab was most likely to exert the best therapeutic effects, with SUCRA values of 99% and 92%, respectively. Rozanolixzumab performed better than the other drugs in terms of the MG Activities of Daily Living score (85%). Eculizumab exhibited the highest potential in reducing the 15-item revised version of the MG Quality of Life score (96%). Regarding safety, belimumab had the highest SUCRA value (85%), demonstrating the lowest likelihood of AEs. In conclusion, all immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies analyzed in this study were more effective than the placebo in treating MG, with rozanolixzumab and batoclimab potentially being the most effective. Regarding safety, rozanolixzumab exhibited a higher likelihood of AEs than did placebo. The conclusions guide the clinical selection of effective drugs and offer insights for future drug experiments.

The Optimal First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer Based on Liver Metastasis Status: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of first-line regimens based on programmed cell death (or ligand) [PD-(L)1] blockade in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients with or without liver metastases (LM), and to identify optimal treatment strategies. METHODS: Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chemo-immunotherapy (CIT) and chemotherapy (CT) in ES-SCLC patients stratified by LM. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 3658 ES-SCLC patients (1243 with LM, 2415 without LM) were analyzed. For patients with LM, the combination therapies of anti-PD-1 + CT (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54%-0.82%; p < 0.001) and anti-PD-L1 + CT + anti-angiogenesis (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71%-0.99%; p = 0.042) demonstrated superior efficacy in prolonging OS compared to CT alone. The anti-PD-1 + CT regimen had the highest cumulative probability of 91.6% for extending OS in patients with LM. For patients without LM, all CIT regimens resulted in improved OS compared to CT alone, with the regimen of anti-angiogenesis + anti-PD-L1 + CT ranking first and having the highest cumulative probability of 95.5% for prolonging OS. CONCLUSIONS: CIT is effective for ES-SCLC patients regardless of LM status. For patients with LM, PD-1 blockade combined with CT is the best option. For patients without LM, the most beneficial regimen is the combination of anti-angiogenesis, PD-L1 blockade, and CT.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of first- and second-line immunotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

Background: A multitude of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in both the initial and subsequent treatment settings for patients diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have provided clinical evidence supporting the efficacy of immunotherapy with the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In light of these findings, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has authorized the use of several ICIs in specific subpopulations of mCRC patients. Nevertheless, there remains a dearth of direct comparative RCTs evaluating various treatment options. Consequently, the most effective ICI therapeutic strategy for microsatellite-stable (MSS) subgroup and microsatellite instability (MSI) subgroup in the first- and second-line therapies remains undefined. To address this gap, the present study employs a Bayesian network meta-analysis to ascertain the most effective first- and second-line ICI therapeutic strategies. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, with the retrieval date ranging from the databases' inception to August 20, 2024. A total of 875 studies were identified, and seven were ultimately included in the analysis after a screening process. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted on the basis of the search results. Results: This comprehensive analysis, comprising seven RCTs, evaluated first-line and second-line immunotherapy regimens in 1,358 patients diagnosed with mCRC. The treatments under investigation consisted of five initial treatments, including three focusing on MSS patients and two on MSI patients, as well as two secondary immunotherapy regimens, both focusing on MSS patients. A total of 1051 individuals underwent first-line treatment, while 307 received second-line treatment. The application of ICIs proved to offer varying degrees clinical benefits when compared to standard-of-care therapy alone, both in two subgroups of the first and the second treatment phases. Of particular note is the performance of Nivolumab combination with ipilimumab, which demonstrated superior efficacy in improving progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.21; 95% CI, 0.13-0.34),. Moreover, the treatment demonstrated an optimal safety profile, with a relatively low risk of adverse events (OR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.56), compared to other first-line treatment modalities for MSI subgroup. Regarding MSS subgroup, the improvement of PFS by Nivolumab plus standard-of-care (SOC) was relatively significant (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53-1.02). In the realm of second-line therapies for MSS subgroup, the administration of Atezolizumab plus SOC has proven to be an effective approach for prolonging PFS, exhibiting an HR of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.99). These findings underscore the clinical benefits and safety profiles of ICIs in the treatment of mCRC across various treatment lines. Conclusions: The clinical application of ICIs in both first- and second-line treatment strategies for patients with mCRC yields substantial therapeutic benefits. A detailed assessment in this study indicates that first-line treatment with Nivolumab combination with ipilimumab may represent an efficacious and well-tolerated therapeutic approach for MSI subgroup. In terms of MSS subgroup in first-line therapy, Nivolumab plus SOC may be a relative superior choice. In the context of second-line therapy for MSS subgroup, it is evident that a combination of Atezolizumab and SOC represents a preferable option for enhancing PFS. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that other ICIs treatment regimens also exhibit great value in various aspects, with the potential to inform the development of future clinical treatment guidelines and provide a stronger rationale for the selection of ICIs in both first- and second-line therapeutic strategies for mCRC. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42024543400.

Network Meta-Analysis: Histologic and Histo-Endoscopic Improvement and Remission With Advanced Therapy in Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Histology has prognostic value in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, direct comparisons of histological endpoints are lacking. AIM: To perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare histological endpoints with biologics and small molecules. METHODS: We searched four databases up until July 2024 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on advanced therapies for moderate-to-severe UC reporting histological endpoints. Outcomes included histological improvement or remission, and histo-endoscopic improvement after induction or during maintenance. We used a random-effects frequentist model and have reported outcomes as relative risk and 95% confidence interval. We estimated relative drug efficacy with the P-score. We conducted subgroup analysis by trial phase and evaluated risk of bias and evidence certainty. RESULTS: We included 24 RCTs (15 therapies, 8874 patients). Nineteen provided data on induction and 10 on maintenance; outcome definitions were similar. Etrasimod 2 mg/day ranked highest in achieving histologic improvement (P-score 0.98) and remission (P-score 0.90) following induction. Globally, guselkumab 200-400 mg ranked first for histo-endoscopic improvement, while etrasimod 2 mg/day and upadacitinib 45 mg/day were superior in the subgroup analysis. During maintenance, upadacitinib 30 mg/day was superior in achieving histologic improvement and remission (P-score 0.88 for both) and histo-endoscopic improvement (P-score 0.94). Etrasimod 2 mg/day ranked second for histologic remission (P-score 0.70) and histo-endoscopic improvement (P-score 0.73), while mirikizumab 200 mg/month ranked second for histologic improvement. CONCLUSION: These results support the ability of small molecules to achieve stringent endpoints in moderate-to-severe UC. Histological outcome data for biologics was sparser, particularly during maintenance. Head-to-head RCTs are imperative to better inform clinical practice.

Preventive drug treatments for adults with chronic migraine: a systematic review with economic modelling.

Background: Chronic migraine is a disabling condition, affecting 2-4% of adults globally. With the introduction of expensive calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, it is timely to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preventive drugs for chronic migraine. Objective: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medications used for chronic migraine through systematic reviews and economic modelling. Eligibility criteria: Randomised controlled trials of drug treatments for efficacy with > 100 participants with chronic migraine per arm; for adverse events > 100 participants with episodic or chronic migraine per arm. Previous economic analyses of preventive drugs for chronic migraine. Data sources: Eight databases. Reviews methods: Systematic reviews, network meta-analysis and economic modelling. Outcomes: Monthly headache days, monthly migraine days, headache-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness. Results: We found 51 individual articles, reporting 11 randomised controlled trials, testing 6 drugs (topiramate, Botox, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab), versus placebo, on 7352 adults with chronic migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, Botox and topiramate reduced headache/migraine days by 2.0-2.5, just under two, or by less than 1.5 days per month, respectively. In the network meta-analysis, eptinezumab 300 mg and fremanezumab monthly ranked in first place in both monthly headache day and monthly migraine day analyses. The calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies were consistently the best choices for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life. Topiramate was very unlikely to be the best choice for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life when compared to calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies or Botox. We found no trials of the commonly used drugs, such as propranolol or amitriptyline, to include in the analysis. The adverse events review included 40 randomised controlled trials with 25,891 participants; 3 additional drugs, amitriptyline, atogepant and rimegepant, were included. There were very few serious adverse events - none of which were linked to the use of these medications. Adverse events were common. Most people using some calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies reported injection site issues; and people using topiramate or amitriptyline had nervous system or gastrointestinal issues. The cost-effectiveness review identified 16 studies evaluating chronic migraine medications in adults. The newer, injected drugs are more costly than the oral preventatives, but they were cost-effective. Our economic model showed that topiramate was the least costly option and had the fewest quality-adjusted life-year gains, whereas eptinezumab 300 mg was more costly but generated the most quality-adjusted life-year gains. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showed that topiramate was the most cost-effective medication if the decision maker is willing to pay up to £50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Our consensus workshop brought together people with chronic migraine and headache experts. Consensus was reached on the top three recommendations for future research on medications to prevent chronic migraine: (1) calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and Botox versus calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, (2) candesartan versus placebo and (3) flunarizine versus placebo. Limitations: Topiramate was the only oral drug for which we were able to include data. We did not find sufficient quality evidence to support the use of other oral drugs. Conclusions: We did not find evidence that the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies are more clinically and cost-effective when compared to topiramate or Botox. We identified directions for future research these drugs might take. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021265990, CRD42021265993 and CRD42021265995. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132803) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 63. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Chronic migraine is a disabling condition that can destroy work and family life. Treatments include cheap tablets (e.g. amitriptyline, propranolol and topiramate), Botox and expensive new drugs (the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies). It is not known which of these drugs is the best choice. We wanted to find out which of these drugs works best. We wanted to know if they reduced the number of headache/migraine days and improved headache-related quality of life, how many side effects people experienced, and if they provided good value for the National Health Service. We first looked for research comparing these drugs to placebo (fake) drugs, and to each other. We then worked out which provide best value for money. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies reduced headache/migraine days by 2.0­2.5 days per month; Botox reduced headache/migraine days per month by around 1.9; and topiramate reduced headache/migraine days by 1.1­1.5 days per month. Many people taking topiramate or amitriptyline have nervous system and/or stomach/bowel side effects. Some people using calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies reported side effects associated with injections. Some calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and Botox provide worthwhile benefits on headache-related quality of life. We were not able to identify any studies of sufficient quality to assess the effectiveness of other oral drugs. The best value drug was topiramate which gave better health outcomes at a lower cost than the placebos. After sharing the results with a panel of people with chronic migraine and headache experts, we identified a need for new studies comparing commonly used cheap oral drugs with placebo, Botox and calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies.

Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.

Background: Chronic pain is common and costly. Antidepressants are prescribed to reduce pain. However, there has not been a network meta-analysis examining all antidepressants across all chronic pain conditions, so effectiveness and safety for most antidepressants for pain conditions remain unknown. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for chronic pain (except headache) in adults. Our primary outcomes were as follows: substantial pain relief (50%), pain intensity, mood and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were as follows: moderate pain relief (30%), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, serious adverse events and withdrawal. Design: This was a systematic review with a network meta-analysis. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED and PsycINFO databases for randomised controlled trials of antidepressants for chronic pain conditions up until 4 January 2022. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020171855), and the protocol was published in the Cochrane Library (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014682). Setting: We analysed trials from all settings. Participants: We included trials in which participants had chronic pain, defined as longer than 3 months, from any condition excluding headache. Interventions: We included all antidepressants. Main outcome measures: Our primary outcome was substantial pain relief, defined as a reduction ˃ 50%. We also measured pain intensity, mood and adverse events. Secondary measures included moderate pain relief (above 30% reduction), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Global Impression of Change, serious adverse events, and withdrawal from trial. Results: We identified 176 studies with a total of 28,664 participants. Most studies were placebo-controlled (n = 83) and parallel armed (n = 141). The most common pain conditions examined were fibromyalgia (59 studies), neuropathic pain (49 studies) and musculoskeletal pain (40 studies). The average length of randomised controlled trials was 10 weeks. Most studies measured short-term outcomes only and excluded people with low mood and other mental health conditions. Across efficacy outcomes, duloxetine was consistently the highest-ranked antidepressant with moderate- to high-certainty evidence. Standard dose was equally efficacious as high dose for the majority of outcomes. Milnacipran was often ranked as the next most efficacious antidepressant, although the certainty of evidence was lower than that for duloxetine. There was insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions for the efficacy and safety of any other antidepressant for chronic pain. Limitations: The evidence for antidepressants other than duloxetine is poor. For duloxetine, it is not clear whether the effect applies to groups with both pain and low mood, since these groups were excluded from trials. There is also insufficient evidence on long-term outcomes and on adverse effects. Conclusions: There is only reliable evidence for duloxetine in the treatment of chronic pain. Duloxetine was moderately efficacious across all outcomes at standard dose. There is also promising evidence for milnacipran, although further high-quality research is needed to be confident in these conclusions. Data for all other antidepressants were of low certainty. However, the findings should not be read as an encouragement to prescribe antidepressants where other non-pharmacological intervention could be equally effective, especially in the absence of good evidence on side effects and safety. Future work: There is a need for large, methodologically sound trials testing the effectiveness of antidepressants for chronic pain. These trials should examine long-term outcomes (> 6 months) and include people with low mood. There should also be better reporting of adverse events, tolerance of drugs, and long-term compliance. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020171855. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128782) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 62. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Chronic pain is pain that lasts for more than 3 months. Over one-third of people across the world experience chronic pain. This often has a detrimental impact on people's mood, disability and well-being. Antidepressants are often prescribed to reduce pain, but we are not sure which antidepressants work best for different types of pain, or whether they are safe. We wanted to find out whether antidepressants were effective and safe for management of chronic pain. We searched for studies that had compared any antidepressant with any other treatment for any type of chronic pain (except headache). We compared all the treatments against each other using a statistical method called network meta-analysis. This method allows us to rank the treatments in order of best to worst for each outcome. We found 176 studies that included a total of 28,664 people with chronic pain. Most of the studies (83/176) compared an antidepressant with a placebo (which looks like the real medicine but does not have any medicine in it). The evidence from our analysis suggests that: Duloxetine is the antidepressant that we have the most confidence in. It was the best antidepressant for reducing pain and improving physical function. A standard dose of duloxetine was equally as effective for reducing pain as a high dose of duloxetine. Milnacipran was also effective at reducing pain, but we are not as confident in this result as in the one for duloxetine because there were fewer studies with fewer people involved. Aside from duloxetine and milnacipran, we do not have confidence in the results from any other antidepressant included in this review, and even for duloxetine and milnacipran, we do not know the long-term effects. It is important to recognise that the lack of evidence for the majority of antidepressants in this review does not necessarily equal a lack of benefit. Rather, this means that the large, high-quality trials required for us to be certain of an antidepressant's effectiveness have not been undertaken. Altogether, although duloxetine and milnacipran are effective, the results of this review should not be read as an encouragement to prescribe antidepressants where other non-pharmacological intervention could be equally effective, especially in the absence of good evidence on side effects and safety. These conclusions were informed by our patient and public involvement group.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis on the optimal wavelength of low-level light therapy (LLLT) in treating knee osteoarthritis symptoms.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of the various wavelengths of low-level light therapy (LLLT) in alleviating knee pain, dysfunction, and stiffness in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and to compare the effectiveness of LLLT versus sham treatment in reducing knee pain, dysfunction, and stiffness. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 12 December 2023. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of different wavelengths of LLLT on alleviating pain of patients with KOA were included. A conventional meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were preformed, and standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 673 participants with KOA met inclusion criteria. Overall, LLLT was superior to sham LLLT for relieving pain (SMD = 0.96, 95% CI 0.31-1.61) but not for improving function (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI - 0.11 to 0.53) or stiffness (SMD = 0.07, 95% CI - 0.25 to 0.39). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value ranking showed the most effective wavelength of LLLT in reducing KOA pain was 904-905 nm (SUCRA, 86.90%), followed by multi-wavelengths (MWL) (SUCRA, 56.43%) and 785-850 nm (SUCRA, 54.97%). Compared to sham LLLT, L2 (SMD = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.31-2.53) and L1 (SMD = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.11-1.50) showed a significant reduction in KOA pain. However, MWL (SMD = 0.83; 95% CI = - 0.06 to 1.72) showed similar KOA pain reduction compared to sham LLLT. The certainty of evidence showed that the quality of evidence regarding the effectiveness of overall LLLT versus sham, and 904-905 nm versus sham were low, while the quality of evidence for MWL versus sham, and 785-850 nm versus sham was very low. CONCLUSION: While the 904-905 nm wavelength showed potential benefits in reducing KOA pain, the overall quality of the evidence was low. LLLT with 904-905 nm or 785-850 nm wavelengths yielded significantly better reduction in KOA pain compared to sham LLLT, but further high-quality research is warranted to validate these findings.

Theta Burst Stimulation Protocols for Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Importance: To date, several theta burst stimulation (TBS) protocols, such as intermittent TBS (iTBS), have been proposed; however, previous systematic reviews have revealed inconsistent efficacy findings in individual TBS studies for schizophrenia. Objective: To examine which TBS protocols are associated with the most favorable and acceptable outcomes in adults with schizophrenia. Data Sources: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched for studies published before May 22, 2024. Study Selection: The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) published and unpublished randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of any TBS treatment and (2) RCTs including individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, other psychotic disorders, or both. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study followed the Cochrane standards for data extraction and data quality assessment and used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline for reporting. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the second version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis application was used to rate the certainty of evidence for meta-analysis results. At least 2 authors double-checked the literature search, data transfer accuracy, and calculations. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of this study was improvement in scores related to negative symptoms. Our frequentist network meta-analysis used a random-effects model. The standardized mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio for continuous or dichotomous variables, respectively, was calculated with 95% CIs. Results: A total of 30 RCTs of 9 TBS protocols, with 1424 participants, were included. Only iTBS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-DLPFC) was associated with reduced negative symptom scores (SMD, -0.89; 95% CI, -1.24 to -0.55), overall symptom scores (SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.48), Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale general subscale scores (SMD, -0.57; 95% CI, -0.89 to -0.25), depressive symptom scores (SMD, -0.70; 95% CI, -1.04 to -0.37), and anxiety symptom scores (SMD, -0.58; 95% CI, -0.92 to -0.24) and improved overall cognitive impairment scores (SMD, -0.52; 95% CI, -0.89 to -0.15) compared with a sham. However, positive symptom score changes, all-cause discontinuation rate, discontinuation rate due to adverse events, headache incidence, and dizziness incidence did not significantly differ between any TBS protocols and sham. Conclusions and Relevance: In this network meta-analysis, iTBS over the L-DLPFC was associated with improved scores for negative, depressive, anxiety, and cognitive symptoms in individuals with schizophrenia and was well tolerated by the participants. Other forms of TBS were not associated with benefit. Further research is needed to assess the potential role of TBS in the treatment of schizophrenia.

Therapeutic effects of different acupuncture methods on chronic nonspecific low back pain: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain has become a globally challenging health problem, and about 90% of cases are nonspecific. Due to the risks associated with opioid use and the limited effectiveness of drug treatment, acupuncture and other non-drug methods have become the first-line treatment for this disease. However, the best acupuncture method has not yet been determined. In this study, the effects of different acupuncture methods on chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) were compared by network meta-analysis, aiming at identifying the best option and providing a basis for precise treatment of CNLBP. METHODS: Clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on acupuncture in the treatment of NSLBP were searched in eight databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, Wanfang Data and VIP from the inception of databases to January 21, 2024. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2.0 (RoB 2.0) and Stata 15.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, Texas, USA) were used to evaluate the literature quality and meta-analysis, and the evidence quality was assessed based on GRADE guidelines. This systematic review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: A total of 27 articles were included, involving 2579 patients. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the top three treatment schemes were warm needle acupuncture, intensive silver needle therapy and meridian-sinew theory-based treatment. In terms of relieving pain, the top three treatments were electrical warm needling, intensive silver needle therapy and warm needle acupuncture. In improving mobility, the top three were meridian-sinew theory-based treatment, routine acupuncture and electroacupuncture. CONCLUSION: For CNLBP patients, warm needle acupuncture, electrical warm needling and meridian-sinew theory-based treatment are mainly recommended. If patients have significant pain, electroacupuncture is strongly suggested. On the contrary, for patients with decreased joint mobility, meridian-sinew theory-based treatment is advocated.

[A Guide to Network Meta-Analysis Using Generative AI and No-Code Tools].

Network meta-analysis (NMA), an increasingly appealing method of statistical analysis, is superior to traditional analysis methods in terms of being able to compare multiple medical treatment methods in one analysis run. In recent years, the prevalence of NMA in the medical literature has increased significantly, while advances in NMA-related statistical methods and software tools continue to improve the effectiveness of this approach. Various commercial and free statistical software packages, some of which employ generative artificial intelligence (GAI) to generate code, have been developed for NMA, leading to numerous innovative developments. In this paper, the use of generative AI for writing R programming language scripts and the netmeta package for performing NMA are introduced. Also, the web-based tool ShinyNMA is introduced. ShinyNMA allows users to conduct NMA using an intuitive "clickable" interface accessible via a standard web browser, with visual charts employed to present results. In the first section, we detail the netmeta package documentation and use ChatGPT (chat generative pre-trained transformer) to write the R scripts necessary to perform NMA with the netmeta package. In the second section, a user interface is developed using the Shiny package to create a ShinyNMA tool. This tool provides a no-code option for users unfamiliar with programming to conduct NMA statistical analysis and plotting. With appropriate prompts, ChatGPT can produce R scripts capable of performing NMA. Using this approach, an NMA analysis tool is developed that meets the research objectives, and potential applications are demonstrated using sample data. Using generative AI and existing statistical packages or no-code tools is expected to make conducting NMA analysis significantly easier for researchers. Moreover, greater access to results generated by NMA analyses will enable decision-makers to review analysis results intuitively in real-time, enhancing the importance of statistical analysis in medical decision-making. Furthermore, enabling non-specialists to conduct clinically meaningful systematic reviews may be expected to sustainably improve analytical capabilities and produce higher-quality evidence.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis on the effectiveness of exercise-based interventions for reducing the injury incidence in youth team-sport players. Part 1: an analysis by classical training components.

OBJECTIVES: The primary purposes were (a) to estimate the pooled effects of injury prevention programs (IPPs) on reducing overall and some specific body regions (lower extremity, thigh, knee, and ankle) injury incidence rates (IIRs) and (b) to compare the effects of single- and multi-component IPPs on mitigating injury risk in youth team sport athletes. A secondary objective was to explore the individual effects of different components on these IIRs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Searches were performed up to 15 January 2024 in PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Library. Eligible criteria were: exercise-based interventions evaluated against a control group, overall IIRs were reported, and youth (≤19 years old) team sport players. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale (PEDro), and a risk of bias tool (Cochrane Back and Neck Group). Pooled effects were calculated by Frequentist random effects pairwise and network meta-analyses. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included. IPPs reduced overall, lower extremities, thigh, knee, and ankle IIRs by an average of approximately 35%. Most of the IPPs demonstrated statistically significant risk mitigation effects for overall and lower extremity injuries compared to control group. Interventions comprised exclusively of strength ([IRR = 0.3 [95%CI = 0.10-0.93]) and flexibility (IRR = 0.49 [95%CI = 0.36-0.68]), as well as those including stability exercises, were the most effective measures for reducing injuries in youth team sports. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of current IPPs in training sessions for several weeks has shown to be an effective strategy for reducing the risk of injury in youth team sport athletes by one-third. Indirect evidence suggests that strength, flexibility, and stability might be exercise components with the highest risk mitigation effects; however, more research is crucial to confirm our estimates with direct evidence.

Injury prevention programs could reduce around one-third the incidence of injuries occurring in youth team sport athletes.Strength, flexibility, and stability seem to be key exercise-based components to be included in any training program aimed at minimizing the risk of injury in youth.Further research comparing head-to-head injury prevention programs in youth athletes is needed to make more founded conclusions on their true risk mitigation effects.

Efficacy and safety of shorter multidrug-resistant or rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis regimens: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) remains a threat to public health. Shorter regimens have been proposed as potentially valuable treatments for multidrug or rifampicin resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB). We undertook a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of shorter MDR/RR-TB regimens. METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Center for Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, US Food and Drug Administration, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry for primary articles published from 2013 to July 2023. Favorable (cured and treatment completed) and unfavorable (treatment failure, death, loss to follow-up, and culture conversion) outcomes were assessed as the main efficacy outcomes, while adverse events were assessed as the safety outcomes. The network meta-analysis was performed using R Studio version 4.3.1 and the Netmeta package. The study protocol adhered to the PRISMA-NMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023434050). RESULT: We included 11 eligible studies (4 randomized control trials and 7 cohorts) that enrolled 3,548 patients with MDR/RR-TB. Treatment with a 6-month combination of BdqLzdLfxZTrd/Eto/H had two times more favorable outcomes [RR 2.2 (95% CI 1.22, 4.13), P = 0.0094], followed by a 9-11 month combination of km/CmMfx/LfxPtoCfzZEHh [RR1.67 (95% CI 1.45, 1.92), P < 0.001] and a 6-month BdqPaLzdMfx [RR 1.64 (95% CI 1.24, 2.16), P < 0.0005] compared to the standard longer regimens. Treatment with 6 months of BdqPaLzdMfx [RR 0.33 (95% CI 0.2, 0.55), P < 0.0001] had a low risk of severe adverse events, followed by 6 months of BdqPaLzd [RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.22, 0.59), P ≤ 0.001] and BdqPaLzdCfz [RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.37, 0.80), P < 0.0001] than standard of care. CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with RR/MDR-TB using shorter regimens of 6 months BdqLzdLfxZTrd/Eto/H, 9-11 months km/CmMfx/LfxPtoCfzZEHh, and 6 months BdqPaLzdMfx provides significantly higher cure and treatment completion rates compared to the standard longer MDR/RR-TB. However, 6BdqPaLzdMfx, 6BdqPaLzd, and 6BdqPaLzdCfz short regimens are significantly associated with decreased severity of adverse events. The findings are in support of the current WHO-recommended 6-month shorter regimens.

Effect of non-pharmacological interventions in people with cognitive frailty: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

ABSRTACT: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of various non-pharmacological interventions on patients with cognitive impairment by systematic search and network meta-analysis, and to rank the effects of the included non-pharmacological interventions. METHODS: The databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WANFANG, and SinoMed were searched by computer. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions for people with cognitive frailty were collected. The search was conducted from 2000 to February 2024. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies, and then used Stata15 and R4.3.1 software to conduct network meta-analysis, with physical function and cognitive function as the main outcome indicators. RESULTS: A total of 19 randomized controlled trials involving 1738 patients were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that among the non-pharmacological interventions, nutritional support had the best effect on improving frailty scores and cognitive function scores in patients with cognitive frailty. Aerobic training combined with resistance training is best for improving grip strength. For improving the patient's motor status, cognitive training had the best effect on improving TUG test scores. High-speed resistance training is best for improving walking speed. CONCLUSION: This review analyses the current study of non-pharmacological interventions to improve physical performance in patients with cognitive frailty. Current evidence suggests that nutritional support is most effective at improving physical frailty and cognitive decline in patients with cognitive frailty, and that exercise and cognitive training interventions significantly improve grip strength and motor ability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This meta-analysis was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42023486881).

Efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: The first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma has evolved significantly. This study aimed to identify the most beneficial regimen. Methods: A systematic search was conducted from July 2012 to August 2024 across the following four databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. This search focused on phase III prospective randomized controlled trials that compared first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Results: Seventeen studies involving 10322 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. Of the studies we included, twelve studies were global multicenter clinical studies, four were initiated in China, and one was initiated in Korea. The results of our statistical analysis suggest that Hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy with oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil (HAIC-FO) demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefits compared with most treatments, including various immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF-TKIs). In terms of OS, HAIC had shown similar efficacy with sorafenib plus FOLFOX (HR, 0.88; 95% CI: 0.37-2.09) and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with lenvatinib (HR, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.30-1.56). Notably, immune-related treatments, such as ICIs combined with anti-VEGF therapies, also showed improved OS compared with anti-VEGF-TKIs alone. In terms of progression-free survival (PFS), HAIC-FO outperformed anti-VEGF-TKI monotherapy, ICI monotherapy, and several ICI combinations. However, it was not superior to lenvatinib plus TACE or lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab. Based on the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) values, HAIC-FO was ranked the most effective in terms of OS (SUCRA = 0.961) and objective response rate (ORR) (SUCRA = 0.971). The results of the subgroup analysis suggested that HAIC-FO achieved the best OS benefit in the macrovascular invasion (MVI) and extrahepatic spread (EHS) subgroup (SUCRA = 0.99) and that tremelimumab combined with durvalumab achieved the best OS benefit in the Asian subgroup (SUCRA = 0.88). Conclusion: This systematic review and network meta-analysis suggest that HAIC-based therapies may become a potential first-line treatment option for advanced HCC, especially for patients in Mainland China with MVI and EHS. Additionally, immune-related treatments may be more suitable for Asian populations.