Sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators as an induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: One sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulator is approved (ozanimod) and another (etrasimod) is under investigation for the induction and maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis (UC). We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of S1P modulators in patients with active UC. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching: PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through May 13th, 2023. We used the fixed-effect model to pool dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Five RCTs with a total of 1990 patients were included. S1P receptor modulators were significantly associated with increased clinical response during both the induction (RR 1.71 with 95% CI [1.50, 1.94], P = 0.00001) and maintenance phases (RR 1.89 with 95% CI [1.33, 2.69], P = 0.0004); clinical remission rates during both induction (RR 2.76 with 95% CI [1.88, 4.05], P = 0.00001) and maintenance phases (RR 3.34 with 95% CI [1.41, 7.94], P = 0.006); endoscopic improvement during both induction (RR 2.15 with 95% CI [1.71, 2.70], P = 0.00001) and maintenance phases (RR 2.41 with 95% CI [1.15, 5.05], P = 0.02); and histologic remission during both induction (RR 2.60 with 95% CI [1.89, 3.57] [1.17, 2.10], P = 0.00001) and maintenance phases (RR 2.52 with 95% CI [1.89, 3.37], P = 0.00001). Finally, there was no difference regarding safety outcomes as compared to placebo in both the induction and maintenance phases. CONCLUSION: S1P receptor modulators are effective in inducing and maintaining remission in patients with moderate to severe UC.

Dual antiplatelet therapy versus intravenous tissue plasminogen activator with acute minor ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) and Intravenous (IV) Tissue Plasminogen Activator (t-PA) in minor Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines, we analyzed observational studies and clinical trials comparing DAPT and IV t-PA in patients with minor AIS. Databases included PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Data extraction included study characteristics, patient demographics, and analyzed outcomes. RevMan 5.3 and OpenMetaAnalyst 2021 were used to analyze the data and assess heterogeneity, respectively. The risk of bias was determined using RoB 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included five studies with 3,978 DAPT-treated patients and 2,224 IV t-PA-treated patients. We found no significant differences in achieving modified Rankin scale (mRS) scores of 0-1 (OR 1.11, 95 % CI: 0.79, 1.55, p = 0.56) and 0-2 (OR 0.90, 95 % CI: 0.61, 1.31, p = 0.57), as well as combined mRS scores (OR 1.05, 95 % CI: 0.82, 1.34, p = 0.72). Similarly, there were no significant disparities between the two treatment groups in NIHSS score change from baseline (MD 0.32, 95 % CI: -0.35, 0.98, p = 0.35) and in mortality rates (OR 0.87, 95 % CI: 0.26, 2.93, p = 0.83). Notably, in comparison to the IV t-PA group, the DAPT group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of bleeding (OR 0.31, 95 % CI: 0.14, 0.69, p = 0.004) and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) (OR 0.10, 95 % CI: 0.04, 0.26, p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis found no significant differences in efficacy between DAPT and IV t-PA. However, DAPT demonstrated a significantly lower risk of sICH and bleeding compared with IV t-PA.