Neurodevelopmental outcomes after prenatal exposure to lamotrigine monotherapy in women with epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lamotrigine has become one of the most commonly prescribed antiseizure medications (ASM) in epileptic women during pregnancy and therefore requires regular updates regarding its safety. The aim of this study was to estimate the association between in utero exposure to lamotrigine monotherapy and the occurrence of neurodevelopmental outcomes. METHODS: All comparative studies assessing the occurrence of neurodevelopmental outcomes after epilepsy-indicated lamotrigine monotherapy exposure during pregnancy were searched. First, references were identified through a snowballing approach, then, through electronic databases (Medline and Embase) from 2015 to June 2022. One investigator evaluated study eligibility and extracted data and a second independent investigator reviewed the meta-analysis (MA). A systematic review and random-effects model approach were performed using a collaborative WEB-based meta-analysis platform (metaPreg.org) with a registered protocol (osf.io/u4gva). RESULTS: Overall, 18 studies were included. For outcomes reported by at least 4 studies, the pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence interval obtained with the number of exposed (N1) and unexposed children (N0) included were: neurodevelopmental disorders as a whole 0.84 [0.66;1.06] (N1 = 5,271; N0 = 22,230); language disorders or delay 1.16 [0.67;2.00] (N1 = 313; N0 = 506); diagnosis or risk of ASD 0.97 [0.61;1.53] (N1 = at least 5,262; N0 = 33,313); diagnosis or risk of ADHD 1.14 [0.75;1.72] (N1 = at least 113; N0 = 11,530) and psychomotor developmental disorders or delay 2.68 [1.29-5.56] (N1 = 163; N0 = 220). The MA of cognitive outcomes included less than 4 studies and retrieved a significant association for infants exposed to lamotrigine younger than 3 years old but not in the older age groups. CONCLUSION: Prenatal exposure to lamotrigine monotherapy is not found to be statistically associated with neurodevelopmental disorders as a whole, language disorders or delay, diagnosis or risk of ASD and diagnosis or risk of ADHD. However, the MA found an increased risk of psychomotor developmental disorders or delay and cognitive developmental delay in less than 3 years old children. Nevertheless, these findings were based exclusively on observational studies presenting biases and on a limited number of included children. More studies should assess neurodevelopmental outcomes in children prenatally exposed to lamotrigine.

Rivaroxaban or Enoxaparin in Nonmajor Orthopedic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs that results in transient reduced mobility places patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban may be noninferior to enoxaparin with regard to the prevention of major venous thromboembolism in these patients. METHODS: In this international, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned adult patients undergoing lower-limb nonmajor orthopedic surgery who were considered to be at risk for venous thromboembolism on the basis of the investigator's judgment to receive either rivaroxaban or enoxaparin. The primary efficacy outcome of major venous thromboembolism was a composite of symptomatic distal or proximal deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or venous thromboembolism-related death during the treatment period or asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis at the end of treatment. A test for superiority was planned if rivaroxaban proved to be noninferior to enoxaparin. For all outcomes, multiple imputation was used to account for missing data. Prespecified safety outcomes included major bleeding (fatal, critical, or clinically overt bleeding or bleeding at the surgical site leading to intervention) and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 3604 patients underwent randomization; 1809 patients were assigned to receive rivaroxaban, and 1795 to receive enoxaparin. Major venous thromboembolism occurred in 4 of 1661 patients (0.2%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 18 of 1640 patients (1.1%) in the enoxaparin group (risk ratio with multiple imputation, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0.75; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.01 for superiority). The incidence of bleeding did not differ significantly between the rivaroxaban group and the enoxaparin group (1.1% and 1.0%, respectively, for major bleeding or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding; 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively, for major bleeding). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban was more effective than enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolic events during a period of immobilization after nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs. (Funded by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne and Bayer; PRONOMOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02401594.).

SGLT2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials balancing their risks and benefits.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have demonstrated the benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). However, serious adverse drug reactions have been reported. The risk/benefit ratio of SGLT2i remains unquantified. We aimed to provide an estimation of their risk/benefit ratio in individuals with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review (MEDLINE, up to 14 September 2021) and meta-analysis. We included randomised CVOTs assessing SGLT2i in individuals with type 2 diabetes with or without other diseases. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' assessment tool. The primary outcomes were overall mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), amputation, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and reported genital infections. For each outcome, we estimated the incidence rate ratio (IRR) with a 95% CI; we then computed the number of events expected spontaneously and with SGLT2i. RESULTS: A total of 46,969 participants from five double-blind, placebo-controlled international trials (weighted mean follow-up 3.5 years) were included. The prevalence of previous CVD ranged from 40.6% to 99.2%. The definition of reported genital infections ranged from 'genital mycotic infection' to 'genital infections that led to discontinuation of the trial regimen or were considered to be serious adverse events'. The number of included studies for each outcomes was five. The use of SGLT2i decreased the risk of all-cause death (IRR 0.86 [95% CI 0.78, 0.95]), MACE (IRR 0.91 [95% CI 0.86, 0.96]), HHF (IRR 0.69 [95% CI 0.62, 0.76]) and ESRD (IRR 0.67 [95% CI 0.53, 0.84]), and increased the risk of DKA (IRR 2.59 [95% CI 1.57, 4.27]) and genital infection (IRR 3.50 [95% CI 3.09, 3.95]) but not of amputation (IRR 1.23 [95% CI 1.00, 1.51]). For 1000 individuals treated over 3.5 years, SGLT2i are expected, on average, to decrease the number of deaths from 70 to 61, to prevent nine MACE, 11 HHF and two cases of ESRD, while inducing two DKA occurrences and 36 genital infections; 778 individuals are expected to avoid all the following outcomes: MACE, HHF, ESRD, amputation, DKA and genital infection. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our study is limited to aggregate data. In a population of individuals with type 2 diabetes and a high CVD risk, the cardiovascular and renal benefits of SGLT2i remain substantial despite the risk of DKA and even the hypothetical risk of amputation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF Registries: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/J3R7Y FUNDING: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Feasibility study and evaluation of expert opinion on the semi-automated meta-analysis and the conventional meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility and acceptance of the semi-automated meta-analysis (SAMA). The objectives are twofold, namely (1) to compare expert opinion on the quality of protocols, methods, and results of one conventional meta-analysis (CMA) and one SAMA and (2) to compare the time to execute the CMA and the SAMA. METHODS: Experts evaluated the protocols and manuscripts/reports of the CMA and SAMA conducted independently on the safety of metronidazole in pregnancy. Expert opinion was collected using AMSTAR 2 checklist. Time spent was recorded using case report forms. RESULTS: The overall scores of the opinion of all experts for protocols, methods, and results for SAMA (6.75) and CMA (6.87) were not statistically different (p = 0.88). The experts' confidence in the results of each MA was 7.89 ± 1.17 and 8.11 ± 0.92, respectively. The time to completion was 14 working days for SAMA and 24.7 for CMA. MA tasks such as calculation of effect estimates, subgroup/sensitivity analysis, and publication bias investigation required no investment in time for SAMA. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our study demonstrated the feasibility of SAMA and suggests acceptance for risk assessment by an expert committee. Our results suggest that SAMA reduces the time required for a MA without altering expert confidence in the methodological and scientific rigor. As our study was limited to one example, the generalization of our results requires confirmation by other studies.

Efficacy and safety of topiramate in binge eating disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate in treating binge eating disorder (BED), using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: The RCTs assessing topiramate vs placebo with or without adjunctive psychotherapy in BED were reviewed using a systematic search in the PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Review, and ClinicalTrials.gov search Websites, from inception to November 2019. Main outcomes were the changes in binge frequency, quality of life, and weight, respectively. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effect models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Three studies were eligible for inclusion, involving 528 BED patients. Topiramate was found to be significantly more efficacious than placebo in reducing: (a) the number of binge episodes per week (MD = -1.31; 95% CI = -2.58 to -0.03; I2 = 94%); (b) the number of binge days per week (MD = -0.98; 95% CI = -1.80 to -0.16; I2 = 94%); and (c) weight (MD = -4.91 kg; 95% CI = -6.42 to -3.41; I2 = 10%). However, participants in the topiramate groups withdrew significantly more frequently for safety reasons, relative to placebo participants (RR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.13-3.18, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings support a possible efficacy of topiramate for the treatment of BED, even if safety concerns could limit the practical use of this treatment in BED subjects.

The benefit-risk balance for biological agents in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the net benefit of biological agents (BA) used in JIA. METHODS: We systematically searched databases up to March 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCT) performed in JIA disease. Separate random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for efficacy (ACR paediatric score 30%, ACRpedi30) and serious adverse events for safety. In order to standardize the baseline risk, we performed a meta-analysis of baseline risk in the control group (for both efficacy and safety meta-analysis). The net benefit was determined as the risk difference of efficacy subtracted by the risk difference of safety. RESULTS: We included 19 trials: 11 parallel RCTs (754 patients) and 8 withdrawal RCTs (704 patients). The net benefit ranged from 2.4% (adalimumab) to 17.6% (etanercept), and from 2.4% (etanercept) to 36.7%, (abatacept) in parallel and withdrawal trials assessing non-systemic JIA, respectively. In the systemic JIA category, the net benefit ranged from 22.8% (rilonacept) to 70.3% (canakinumab), and from 32.3% (canakinumab) to 58.2% (tocilizumab) in parallel and withdrawal trials, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that a greater number of patients experienced therapeutic success without serious adverse events in the systemic onset JIA category compared with the BAs for non-systemic JIA categories. Baseline risk, design of trial and JIA categories impact the measure of net benefit of BAs in JIA patients.

Stereo-electroencephalography-guided radiofrequency thermocoagulation in patients with focal epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the increasing number of studies reporting results of stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG)-guided radiofrequency-thermocoagulation (SEEG-guided RF-TC) in the treatment of patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, the exact efficacy of this approach remains unclear. The seizure-freedom rate varies greatly across studies and the factors associated with efficacy have not been formally investigated. METHODS: All prospective or retrospective studies reporting efficacy and/or safety of SEEG-guided RF-TC in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy were included. The primary outcome was the seizure-free rate 1 year after the procedure. Secondary outcomes were (1) the responder rate 1 year after the procedure and (2) the proportion of patients with permanent neurologic deficit 1 year after the procedure. Each outcome was assessed in all patients and in 4 groups of patients defined by the etiology of epilepsy. Each outcome was pooled using inverse variance weighting, logit transformation of proportion, and a random-effects model. RESULTS: No prospective study was identified and a total of 6 retrospective studies, reporting efficacy and safety data of 296 patients, were included. The pooled rate of permanent neurologic deficit was 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2%-5.3%), without heterogeneity across studies. In contrast, both the seizure-free and responder rates varied greatly across studies, and statistical heterogeneity was high. The pooled seizure-free and responder rates were 23% (95% CI 8%-50%) and 58% (95% CI 36%-77%), respectively. Both for the seizure-free and responder rates, the greatest efficacy was observed in patients with periventricular nodular heterotopia and the lowest in patients with normal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. SIGNIFICANCE: SEEG-guided RF-TC is a safe procedure with low risk of complications. In contrast, the level of evidence regarding its efficacy remains low. Better identification of factors associated with seizure outcome are needed.

Is the perceived placebo effect comparable between adults and children? A meta-regression analysis.

BACKGROUND: A potential larger perceived placebo effect in children compared with adults could influence the detection of the treatment effect and the extrapolation of the treatment benefit from adults to children. This study aims to explore this potential difference, using a meta-epidemiological approach. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was done to identify trials included in meta-analyses evaluating a drug intervention with separate data for adults and children. The standardized mean change and the proportion of responders (binary outcomes) were used to calculate the perceived placebo effect. A meta-regression analysis was conducted to test for the difference between adults and children of the perceived placebo effect. RESULTS: For binary outcomes, the perceived placebo effect was significantly more favorable in children compared with adults (ß = 0.13; P = 0.001). Parallel group trials (ß = -1.83; P < 0.001), subjective outcomes (ß = -0.76; P < 0.001), and the disease type significantly influenced the perceived placebo effect. CONCLUSION: The perceived placebo effect is different between adults and children for binary outcomes. This difference seems to be influenced by the design, the disease, and outcomes. Calibration of new studies for children should consider cautiously the placebo effect in children.

[False positive results or what's the probability that a significant P-value indicates a true effect?] / Les résultats faux positifs ou quelle est la probabilité que le traitement soit efficace quand p < 0,05 ?

The use of statistical test is central in the clinical trial. At the statistical level, obtaining a P<0.05 allows to claim the effectiveness of the new studied treatment. However, given its underlying mathematical logic the concept of "P value" is often misinterpreted. It is often assimilated, mistakenly, to the likelihood that treatment is ineffective. Actually the "P value" gives an indirect information about the plausibility of the existence of treatment effect. With "P<0.05", the probability that the treatment is effective may vary depending on other statistical parameters which are the alpha level of risk, the power of the study and especially the a priori probability of the existence of treatment effect. A "P<0.05" does not always produce the same degree of certainty. Thus there exist situations where the risk of a result "P<0.05" is in reality a false positive is very high. This is the case if the power is low, if there is an inflation of the alpha risk or if the result is exploratory or chance discoveries. This possibility is important to take into consideration when interpreting the results of clinical trials in order to avoid pushing ahead significant results in appearance, but which are likely to be actually false positive results.

Nadroparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in nonsurgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin is widely used in nonsurgical settings. To obtain best estimates of the effects of nadroparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in nonsurgical patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources were Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library supplemented with conference abstracts, without language restrictions. Selection criteria were randomized controlled trials with nadroparin at prophylactic dose in adult nonsurgical patients. Main efficacy outcomes were major VTE (the composite of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic pulmonary embolism, asymptomatic proximal deep vein thrombosis and VTE-related death) and symptomatic VTE. The main safety outcome was major bleeding. We expressed treatment effects as risk ratios. Ten studies (4 vs. placebo or no treatment, 4 vs. UFH, 1 vs. fondaparinux and 1 vs. warfarin) enrolling a total of 7658 patients were included. In comparison with placebo, nadroparin reduced major VTE by about one-half (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.97) with a consistent effect on symptomatic VTE (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.46-1.05) and no increase in major bleeding (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.40-5.79). In comparison with other pharmacological prophylaxis, nadroparin was similarly efficacious for prevention of major VTE (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.63-2.10) and symptomatic VTE (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.51-2.35) and produced similar effects on major bleeding (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.25-1.50). Five studies were open label, and for three of these the adjudication method was not described or not blinded. In nonsurgical populations at risk of VTE, nadroparin reduced VTE by about one half compared with placebo or no treatment and appeared similarly effective and safe as other prophylactic anticoagulants.

Prevention of venous thromboembolic events with low-molecular-weight heparin in the non-major orthopaedic setting: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) venous thromboprophylaxis in patients with transient reduced mobility in the non-major orthopaedic setting. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted using data from all available randomized trials comparing LMWH with placebo or no prophylactic treatment in patients with leg immobilization for fracture or soft-tissue injury of the lower limb or in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major venous thromboembolic events (VTEs), including asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis, symptomatic VTEs, and VTE-related death. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to generate the summary statistics for the overall effect of LMWH. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included (4,726 patients). The weighted rate of major VTEs was estimated to be 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2% to 3.7%) without LMWH prophylaxis. Overall, a significant 68% reduction in the risk of major VTEs was observed with LMWH prophylaxis (relative risk [RR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.51; P < .001). The treatment effect was not modified by the clinical setting, that is, distal lower limb injury (7 studies; 1,711 patients; RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.86) or knee arthroscopy (6 studies; 2,428 patients; RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.49). A nonsignificant 35% increase in the risk of major bleeding was observed in the LMWH prophylaxis group (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.53 to 3.47). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicates potential efficacy of LMWH in preventing thromboembolic events in patients with reduced mobility in the non-major orthopaedic setting compared with placebo or no treatment. However, the decision of whether to implement LMWH prophylaxis in each specific setting should also take into account the risk of VTEs in the absence of prophylaxis, the potential adverse effects of LMWH, and the cost. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, meta-analysis of Level II studies or Level I studies with inconsistent results.

Post-approval studies in France, challenges facing medical devices.

Medical devices are characterized notably by a wide heterogeneity (from tongue depressors to hip prostheses, and from non-implantable to invasive devices), a short life cycle with recurrent incremental innovations (from 18 months to 5 years), and an operator-dependent nature. The objective of the current round table was to develop proposals and recommendations concerning the prerequisites needed in order to meet the French health authorities expectations concerning requests for post-approval studies for medical devices, required in cases where short and long-term consequences are unknown. These studies, which are the responsibility of the manufacturer or the distributor of the medical device, are designed to confirm the role of the medical device in the therapeutic management strategy in a real-life setting. There are currently approximately 150 post-approval studies underway, mainly concerning class III devices, and the majority face difficulties implementing the study or meeting the study objectives. In light of this, the round table endeavored to clearly identify the conditions for implementation of post-approval studies specific to the characteristics of medical devices. Various areas of progress have been envisaged to improve the performance of these studies, and by consequence, the efficiency of reimbursement of medical devices by the national health insurance. These include providing manufacturers with the opportunity to better anticipate post-approval requirements, defining a study-specific primary objective, integrating a phase allowing dialogue between the manufacturer, the health authorities and the scientific committee, and increasing awareness and training of health professionals on the impact of post-approval clinical studies in terms of the reimbursement of medical devices by the national insurance.

French National Authority for Health assessment of metabolic surgery for type 2 diabetes remission-A meta-analysis in patients with class I to III obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the superiority of metabolic surgery (MS) over medical therapy (MT) in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes, leading, to a joint statement in 2016 proposing MS to patients with class I obesity and uncontrolled glycemia. Yet, these RCTs included few patients with class I obesity (body mass index 30-35 kg/m2) and even fewer patients with overweight. Our aim was to provide an updated systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis (MA) of RCTs reporting diabetes remission (DR) after MS in these patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included in the SR with MA only RCTs with at least 24-month follow-up found in Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, and LiSSA between January 2008 and September 2022 comparing DR post-MT versus post-MS. We calculated relative risk (RR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects approach to examine differences in DR between patients allocated to MS versus MT. RESULTS: DR was significantly higher in MS versus MT after 36 months' follow-up in patients with obesity (RR = 6.65 [95 %CI 2.24;19.79]; I² = 27 %; 5 trials, 404 patients), but also specifically in patients with class I obesity (RR = 5.27 [1.31;21.23]; I² = 0 %; 4 trials, 80 patients). Furthermore, and in line with previous results, all additional MAs performed in patients with obesity in this work favor MS (specifically Roux-en-Y gastric bypass) over MT at 24, 36 (only) and 60 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although the data available in patients with class I obesity and type 2 diabetes remains limited, MA shows higher rates of DR after MS compared with MT after 36 months' follow-up in these patients. Consequently, the French National Authority for Health French (HAS) recommends MS for these patients.

Data Monitoring Committees and clinical trials: From scientific justification to organisation.

Clinical trials often last several months or even several years. As the trial progresses, it can be tempting to find out whether the data obtained already answers the question posed at the start of the trial in order to stop inclusions or monitoring earlier. However, knowing and taking into account interim results can sometimes compromise the integrity of the results, which is counterproductive. To minimise this risk and ensure that the treatments are assessed reliably, safety and/or efficacy criteria are monitored during the study by a Data Monitoring Committee. After receiving the results confidentially, the Data Monitoring Committee assesses the benefit/risk ratio of the study treatment and recommends that the trial be continued, modified or terminated. Data Monitoring Committee members issuing these recommendations have an important responsibility: a hasty decision to end the trial may lead to inconclusive results unable to answer the initial question and, inversely, delaying the decision to end the trial may expose the subjects to potentially ineffective or even harmful interventions. The Data Monitoring Committee's task is therefore particularly complex. With this in mind, the round table discussion at the Giens workshops was a chance to review the scientific justification for creating Data Monitoring Committees and to recall the need for their members to receive comprehensive training on the complexities of multiple analyses, confidentiality requirements applying to the results and the need for them to be aware that recommendations to end a trial must be based on data that is robust enough to assess the benefit/risk ratio of the treatment studied.

Are concomitant treatments confounding factors in randomized controlled trials on intensive blood-glucose control in type 2 diabetes? a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Open-label, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are subject to observer bias. If patient management is conducted without blinding, a difference between groups may be explained by other factors than study treatment. One factor may come from taking concomitant treatments with an efficacy on the studied outcomes. In type 2 diabetes, some antihypertensive or lipid-lowering drugs are effective against diabetic complications. We wanted to determine if these concomitant treatments were correctly reported in articles of RCTs on type 2 diabetes and if they might have influenced the outcome. METHODS: We performed a systematic review using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (from January 1950 to July 2010). Open-label RCTs assessing the effectiveness of intensive blood-glucose control in type 2 diabetes were included. We chose five therapeutic classes with proven efficacy against diabetes complications: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor antagonists (AIIRAs), fibrates, statins, and aspirin. Differences between concomitant treatments were considered statistically significant when p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of eight open-label RCTs were included, but only three (37.5%) of them published concomitant treatments. In two studies (ACCORD and ADVANCE), a statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups for aspirin (p = 0.02) and ACEIs (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Few concomitant treatments were published in this sample of open-label RCTs. We cannot completely eliminate an observer bias for these studies. This bias probably influenced the results to an extent that has yet to be determined.

Use of proton pump inhibitors during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of congenital malformations.

Use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are common among pregnant women to relieve gastrointestinal symptoms. The number of exposed pregnancies is therefore considerable, and a recent meta-analysis (MA) from 2020 raised concern about their teratogenicity. The aim of the study was to provide a MA of the risk of major congenital malformations (MCM) after PPI exposure during the first trimester of pregnancy. A systematic review and random-effects model approach were performed using a collaborative WEB-based meta-analysis platform (metaPreg.org) with a registered protocol (osf.io/u4gva). The primary outcome was the incidence of overall MCM. The secondary outcomes of interest were specific MCM reported by at least three studies. All comparative studies assessing these outcomes in PPI exposed pregnancies were searched from inception to April 2022. From the 211 initially identified studies, 11 were included in the MA. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for the primary outcome showed no significant results based on 5 618 exposed pregnancies (OR 1.10, 95% CI [0.95;1.26]; I²=0%). Similarly, no result was significant for the secondary outcomes. The total exposed sample size ranged from 3 161-5 085; OR ranged between 0.60 and 1.92; heterogeneity was between 0% and 23%. Based on the results of the present MA, first trimester PPI exposure was not associated with a significantly increased risk of overall or specific MCM. However, this MA included only observational studies which are prone to bias and there were insufficient data to evaluate PPI at a substance level. Future studies are needed to address this concern.

Replication of systematic reviews: is it to the benefit or detriment of methodological quality?

OBJECTIVES: To perform an overview of the overlap of systematic reviews (SRs) assessing direct oral anticoagulants and characterize these reviews in terms of bias and methodological quality (PROSPERO: CRD42022316273). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A PubMed-indexed search was performed from inception to January 31, 2022 to identify SRs evaluating direct oral anticoagulants in patients treated for an acute venous thromboembolism. The risk of bias of these SRs was assessed according to the Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews tool. Redundancy was defined as overlap in terms of the type of population considered, the interventions compared, and the studies included. RESULTS: A total of 144 SRs were evaluated, of which 26 (18.1%) were classified as original, 87 (60.4%) as conceptual replications, and 31 (21.5%) as excessive replications. The risk of bias was high in 19 (73.1%) of the original SRs, 65 (74.7%) of the conceptual replications, and 21 (67.7%) of the excessive replications. Compared to the original SRs, the overall methodological quality was not improved in either conceptual or excessive replications. CONCLUSION: A large number of SRs was classified as replications; a fifth constituted excessive replications. The replications showed no improvement in overall methodological quality compared to the original SRs.

Risk of drug use during pregnancy: master protocol for living systematic reviews and meta-analyses performed in the metaPreg project.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about the risks of drugs during pregnancy is continuously evolving due to the frequent publication of a large number of epidemiological studies. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses therefore need to be regularly updated to reflect these advances. To improve dissemination of this updated information, we developed an initiative of real-time full-scale living meta-analyses relying on an open online dissemination platform ( www.metapreg.org ). METHOD: All living meta-analyses performed in this project will be conducted in accordance with this master protocol after adaptation of the search strategy. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase will be performed. All analytical studies (e.g., cohort, case-control, randomized studies) reporting original empirical findings on the association between in utero exposure to drugs and adverse pregnancy outcomes will be included. Study screening and data extraction will be performed in a semi-automation way supervised by a biocurator. A risk of bias will be assessed using the ROBINS-I tools. All clinically relevant pregnancy adverse outcomes (malformations, stillbirths, neuro-developmental disorders, pre-eclampsia, etc.) available in the included studies will be pooled through random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity will be evaluated by I2 statistics. DISCUSSION: Our living systematic reviews and subsequent updates will inform the medical, regulatory, and health policy communities as the news results evolve to guide decisions on the proper use of drugs during the pregnancy. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (OSF) registries.

Adverse drug reactions associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: An exploratory nested case-control study in a historical cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Data on adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) used in oncology are mainly derived from clinical trials or cancer-specific reviews. We aim to analyze ADRs that occurred in patients treated with ICIs in real life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational study on a historical cohort of the University Hospitals of Lyon. All patients who initiated an ICI treatment for any cancer in 2017 were included. Patients were followed from the first infusion until 90 days after the last one, death, date of last news or end of the study period (28 February 2019), whichever came first. Two pharmacovigilance specialists assessed the accountability and the severity of each ADR using Naranjo algorithm and common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) classification, respectively. RESULTS: 248 patients were included. They were treated with anti-PD-(L)-1, mainly nivolumab (70.6%) and pembrolizumab (25.8%). Lung cancer (62.1%) and melanoma (20.2%) were the most represented cancers. 139 ADRs occurred in 93 patients (37.5%), on average at the 6th cure (±6.8). ADRs mainly concerned skin (29.5%), endocrine (19.4%) and digestive (10.8%) systems. 17.3% of ADRs were grades III-V and two patients died because of ADRs. By comparing patients with (N=93) or without (N=155) ADRs, all characteristics appeared similar except for age, number of infusions received and death status. The spontaneous notification rate found in this study was 5.8% for all grade ADRs (N = 8) but raised to 23.8% when only grades higher than III were considered (N = 5). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our results are consistent with literature data in frequency and type of serious ADRs. We found a lower frequency of ADRs of any grade, which could be explained by a fairer causality assessment in our study than in clinical trials.