RESUMO
PURPOSE: To assess the prospective association between metabolic syndrome (MetS), its components, and incidence of thyroid disorders by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in Ovid Medline, Embase.com, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to February 22, 2023. Publications from prospective studies were included if they provided data on baseline MetS status or one of its components and assessed the incidence of thyroid disorders over time. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for developing thyroid disorders. RESULTS: After full-text screening of 2927 articles, seven studies met our inclusion criteria. Two of these studies assessed MetS as an exposure (N = 71,727) and were included in our meta-analysis. The association between MetS at baseline and incidence of overt hypothyroidism at follow-up yielded an OR of 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.16 for two studies, I2 = 0%). Pooled analysis was not possible for subclinical hypothyroidism, due to large heterogeneity (I2 = 92.3%), nor for hyperthyroidism, as only one study assessed this association. We found evidence of an increased risk of overt (RR: 3.10 (1.56-4.64, I2 = 0%) and subclinical hypothyroidism (RR 1.50 (1.05-1.94), I2 = 0%) in individuals with obesity at baseline. There was a lower odds of developing overt hyperthyroidism in individuals with prediabetes at baseline (OR: 0.68 (0.47-0.98), I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to draw firm conclusions regarding the association between MetS and the incidence of thyroid disorders due to the limited number of available studies and the presence of important heterogeneity in reporting results. However, we did find an association between obesity at baseline and incidence of overt and subclinical hypothyroidism.
RESUMO
Introduction: Older and multimorbid adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Estimating risk and preventing CVD is a challenge in this population notably because it is underrepresented in clinical trials. Our study aims to (1) assess if T2D and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) are associated with the risk of CVD events and mortality in older adults, (2) develop a risk score for CVD events and mortality for older adults with T2D, (3) evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of novel antidiabetics. Methods and analysis: For Aim 1, we will analyse individual participant data on individuals aged ≥65 years from five cohort studies: the Optimising Therapy to Prevent Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Multimorbid Older People study; the Cohorte Lausannoise study; the Health, Aging and Body Composition study; the Health and Retirement Study; and the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. We will fit flexible parametric survival models (FPSM) to assess the association of T2D and HbA1c with CVD events and mortality. For Aim 2, we will use data on individuals aged ≥65 years with T2D from the same cohorts to develop risk prediction models for CVD events and mortality using FPSM. We will assess model performance, perform internal-external cross validation, and derive a point-based risk score. For Aim 3, we will systematically search randomized controlled trials of novel antidiabetics. Network meta-analysis will be used to determine comparative efficacy in terms of CVD, CKD, and retinopathy outcomes, and safety of these drugs. Confidence in results will be judged using the CINeMA tool. Ethics and dissemination: Aims 1 and 2 were approved by the local ethics committee (Kantonale Ethikkommission Bern); no approval is required for Aim 3. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented in scientific conferences.
RESUMO
Aim: To conduct indirect treatment comparisons between risdiplam and other approved treatments for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). Patients & methods: Individual patient data from risdiplam trials were compared with aggregated data from published studies of nusinersen and onasemnogene abeparvovec, accounting for heterogeneity across studies. Results: In Type 1 SMA, studies of risdiplam and nusinersen included similar populations. Indirect comparison results found improved survival and motor function with risdiplam versus nusinersen. Comparison with onasemnogene abeparvovec in Type 1 SMA and with nusinersen in Types 2/3 SMA was challenging due to substantial differences in study populations; no concrete conclusions could be drawn from the indirect comparison analyses. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons support risdiplam as a superior alternative to nusinersen in Type 1 SMA.