Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Pharmacol Res ; 174: 105955, 2021 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34715330

RESUMEN

Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by numerous complications, complex disease, and high mortality, making its treatment a top priority in the treatment of COVID-19. Integrated traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and western medicine played an important role in the prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation of COVID-19 during the epidemic. However, currently there are no evidence-based guidelines for the integrated treatment of severe COVID-19 with TCM and western medicine. Therefore, it is important to develop an evidence-based guideline on the treatment of severe COVID-19 with integrated TCM and western medicine, in order to provide clinical guidance and decision basis for healthcare professionals, public health personnel, and scientific researchers involved in the diagnosis, treatment, and care of COVID-19 patients. We developed and completed the guideline by referring to the standardization process of the "WHO handbook for guideline development", the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, and the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT).


Asunto(s)
Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Medicamentos Herbarios Chinos/uso terapéutico , Infectología/tendencias , Medicina Tradicional China/tendencias , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de los fármacos , Antivirales/efectos adversos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/virología , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Medicamentos Herbarios Chinos/efectos adversos , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/tendencias , Interacciones Huésped-Patógeno , Humanos , Gravedad del Paciente , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidad , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Heliyon ; 9(5): e15839, 2023 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37215854

RESUMEN

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in combination with methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: Trials were identified from four electronic databases: PubMed, Web of science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE from inception to April 2022. Two independent reviewers evaluated each database to scan the title, abstract and keywords of each record retrieved. Full articles were further assessed when the information suggested that the study was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing tofacitinib combined with MTX vs. MTX monotherapy in patients with active RA. Data were extracted from the literature, and the methodological quality of the included literature were evaluated and screened by two reviewers independently. The results were analyzed using RevMan5.3 software. The full text of the studies and extracted data were reviewed independently according to PRISMA guidelines. The outcome indicators were ACR 20, ACR 50, ACR 70, Disease activity score 28 (DAS28), erythrocyte sedimentation Rate (ESR) and adverse events (AEs). Results: Of 1152 studies yielded by the search, 4 were retained, totaling 1782 patients (1345 treated with tofacitinib combined with MTX vs 437 received MTX. In the trial of insufficient response to MTX treatment, tofacitinib combined with MTX had significant advantages compared with MTX monotherapy. Numerically higher ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 response rates were observed in the tofacitinib combined with MTX groups versus MTX monotherapy. ACR20 (odds ratio (OR), 3.62; 95% CI, 2.84-4.61; P < 0.001), ACR50 (OR, 5.17; 95% CI, 3.62-7.38; P < 0.001), and ACR70 (OR, 8.44; 95% CI, 4.34-16.41; P < 0.001), DAS28 (ESR) < 2.6 (OR, 4.71, 95% CI, 2.06-10.77; P < 0.001). The probability of adverse events of tofacitinib combined with MTX was lower than that of MTX monotherapy (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.08-1.88; P = 0.01). The number of cases discontinued due to lack of efficacy or adverse events was similar in both groups (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.52-1.68). The probability of abnormal liver enzymes in the treatment of tofacitinib combined with MTX was significantly lower than that of MTX monotherapy (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.35-2.56). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in severe adverse reactions, neutropenia, anemia and cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: In terms of ACR20/50/70 and DAS28 (ESR), tofacitinib combined with MTX demonstrated superiority to MTX monotherapy in the treatment of patients with refractory RA. Considering the hepatoprotective and observably therapeutic efficacy, tofacitinib combined with MTX could be effective in treating refractory RA. However, in terms of hepatoprotective, it requires further large-scale and high-quality clinical trials to confirm.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA