RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to critically re-appraise the published trials assessing propranolol for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We report methods and results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials of pharmacologic treatments for migraine prophylaxis. We included randomized trials that compared propranolol with placebo for migraine prophylaxis in adults. The outcomes of interest were informed by the Core outcome set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) and include the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, the reduction of monthly migraine days, and the number of adverse events leading to discontinuation. We assessed risk of bias by using a modified Cochrane RoB (risk of bias) 2.0 tool and the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our search yielded twenty trials (n = 1291 patients) eligible for data synthesis and analysis. The analysis revealed a moderate certainty evidence that propranolol leads to a reduction in monthly migraine days versus placebo (-1.27; 95% CI: -2.25 to -0.3). We found moderate certainty evidence that propranolol increases the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo with a relative risk of 1.65 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.93); absolute risk difference: 179 more per 1,000 (95% CI 113 to 256). We found high certainty evidence that propranolol increases the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo with a risk difference of 0.02 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.03); absolute risk difference: 20 more per 1,000 (95% CI 0 to 30). CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis shows that propranolol has a prophylactic role in migraine, with an overall acceptable tolerability profile. Combining these results with its long-standing use and its global availability at a low cost confirms its role as a first line agent in the prophylaxis of migraine.
Asunto(s)
Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta , Trastornos Migrañosos , Propranolol , Propranolol/uso terapéutico , Propranolol/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Trastornos Migrañosos/prevención & control , Trastornos Migrañosos/tratamiento farmacológico , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/administración & dosificación , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The fragility index (FI) of a meta-analysis evaluates the extent that the statistical significance can be changed by modifying the event status of individuals from included trials. Understanding the FI improves the interpretation of the results of meta-analyses and can help to inform changes to clinical practice. This review determined the fragility of ophthalmology-related meta-analyses. METHODS: Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with binary outcomes published in a journal classified as 'Ophthalmology' according to the Journal Citation Report or an Ophthalmology-related Cochrane Review were included. An iterative process determined the FI of each meta-analysis. Multivariable linear regression modeling evaluated the relationship between the FI and potential predictive factors in statistically significant and non-significant meta-analyses. RESULTS: 175 meta-analyses were included. The median FI was 6 (Q1-Q3: 3-12). This meant that moving 6 outcomes from one group to another would reverse the study's findings. The FI was 1 for 18 (10.2%) of the included meta-analyses and was ≤5 for 75 (42.4%) of the included meta-analyses. The number of events (p < 0.001) and the p-value (p < 0.001) were the best predictors of the FI in both significant and non-significant meta-analyses. CONCLUSION: The statistical significance of meta-analyses in ophthalmology often hinges on the outcome of a few patients. The number of events and the p-value are the most important factors in determining the fragility of the evidence. The FI is an easily interpretable measure that can supplement the reader's understanding of the strength of the evidence being presented. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022377589.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Internationally accepted standards for trustworthy guidelines include the necessity to ground recommendations in values and preferences. Considering values and preferences respects the rights of citizens to participate in health decision-making and ensures that guidelines align with the needs and priorities of the communities they are intended to serve. Early anecdotal reports suggest that COVID-19 public health guidelines did not consider values and preferences. OBJECTIVE: To capture and characterize whether and how COVID-19 public health guidelines considered values and preferences. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of COVID-19 public health guidelines. We searched the eCOVID-19 RecMap platform-a comprehensive international catalog of COVID-19 guidelines-up to July 2023 and the Guidelines International Network (GIN) Library-an international library of guidelines published or endorsed by GIN member organizations-up to May 2024. We included guidelines that made recommendations addressing vaccination, masking, isolation, lockdowns, travel restrictions, contact tracing, infection surveillance, and school closures. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to review guidelines for consideration of values and preferences. RESULTS: Our search yielded 130 eligible guidelines, of which 41 (31.5%) were published by national organizations, 70 (53.8%) by international organizations, and 19 (14.6%) by professional societies and associations. Twenty-eight (21.5%) guidelines considered values and preferences. Among guidelines that considered values and preferences, most did so to assess the acceptability of recommendations (23; 82.1%) and by referencing published research (25; 89.3%). Guidelines only occasionally engaged laypersons as part of the guideline development group (8; 28.6%). None of the guidelines performed systematic reviews of the literature addressing values and preferences. CONCLUSION: Most COVID-19 public health guidelines did not consider values and preferences. When they were considered, it was often suboptimal. Disregard for values and preferences might have partly contributed to divisive and unpopular COVID-19 policies. Given the possibility of future health emergencies, we recommend guideline developers identify efficient and effective methods for considering values and preferences in crisis situations.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In 2020, the Lancet Commission identified 12 risk factors as priorities for prevention of dementia, and other studies identified APOE e4/e4 genotype and family history of Alzheimer's disease strongly associated with dementia outcomes; however, it is unclear how robust these relationships are across dementia subtypes and analytic scenarios. Specification curve analysis (SCA) is a new tool to probe how plausible analytical scenarios influence outcomes. METHODS: We evaluated the heterogeneity of odds ratios for 12 risk factors reported from the Lancet 2020 report and two additional strong associated non-modifiable factors (APOE e4/e4 genotype and family history of Alzheimer's disease) with dementia outcomes across 450,707 UK Biobank participants using SCA with 5357 specifications across dementia subtypes (outcomes) and analytic models (e.g., standard demographic covariates such as age or sex and/or 14 correlated risk factors). RESULTS: SCA revealed variable dementia risks by subtype and age, with associations for TBI and APOE e4/e4 robust to model specification; in contrast, diabetes showed fluctuating links with dementia subtypes. We found that unattributed dementia participants had similar risk factor profiles to participants with defined subtypes. CONCLUSIONS: We observed heterogeneity in the risk of dementia, and estimates of risk were influenced by the inclusion of a combination of other modifiable risk factors; non-modifiable demographic factors had a minimal role in analytic heterogeneity. Future studies should report multiple plausible analytic scenarios to test the robustness of their association. Considering these combinations of risk factors could be advantageous for the clinical development and evaluation of novel screening models for different types of dementia.
Asunto(s)
Bancos de Muestras Biológicas , Demencia , Humanos , Demencia/epidemiología , Factores de Riesgo , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Femenino , Masculino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Biobanco del Reino UnidoRESUMEN
Background: There are no direct comparisons of sotatercept to add-on therapies approved for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of add-on sotatercept versus other add-on therapies using a network meta-analysis. Data Sources: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and clinicaltrials.gov until April 15, 2023, for randomized trials involving patients with PAH who were treated with add-on sotatercept or other add-on PAH therapies. Data Extraction: Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessments were performed independently and in duplicate using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis using the restricted maximum-likelihood estimator and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (grading of recommendations assessment development, and evaluation) approach. Synthesis: Our search found 18 trials (5,777 patients) eligible for analysis. Sotatercept reduces clinical worsening as compared with placebo (relative risk [RR], 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.11-0.41; with high certainty). Sotatercept probably reduces clinical worsening more, compared with add-on endothelin receptor antagonists (RR, 0.28; 95% CI = 0.14-0.55), inhaled prostanoid (RR, 40.21; 95% CI = 0.07-0.67), and prostanoid taken orally (RR, 0.32; 95% CI = 0.16-0.67; all with moderate certainty). Sotatercept probably improves 6-minute-walk distance compared with placebo (mean difference [MD], 36.89 m; 95% CI = 25.26-48.51). Although sotatercept probably improves 6-minute-walk distance more than add-on endothelin receptor antagonists (MD, 18.38 m; 95% CI = 5.92-30.84) and prostanoid taken orally (MD, 25.66 m; 95% CI = 13.71-37.61), it did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference of 33 m (both with moderate certainty). Conclusions: Sotatercept is an effective add-on therapy for PAH, likely superior to many approved add-on PAH therapies in reducing clinical worsening.
Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos , Metaanálisis en Red , Humanos , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/uso terapéutico , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/administración & dosificación , Hipertensión Arterial Pulmonar/tratamiento farmacológico , Antagonistas de los Receptores de Endotelina/uso terapéutico , Antagonistas de los Receptores de Endotelina/administración & dosificación , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and improve "Making Alternative Treatment Choices Intuitive and Trustworthy" (MATCH-IT)-a digital, interactive decision support tool displaying structured evidence summaries for multiple comparisons-to help physicians interpret and apply evidence from network meta-analysis (NMA) for their clinical decision-making. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a qualitative user testing study, applying principles from user-centered design in an iterative development process. We recruited a convenience sample of practicing physicians in Norway, Belgium, and Canada, and asked them to interpret structured evidence summaries for multiple comparisons-linked to clinical guideline recommendations-displayed in MATCH-IT. User testing included (a) introduction of a clinical scenario, (b) a think-aloud session with participant-tool interaction, and (c) a semistructured interview. We video recorded, transcribed, and analyzed user tests using directed content analysis. The results informed new updates in MATCH-IT. RESULTS: Distributed across 5 development cycles we tested MATCH-IT with 26 physicians. Of these, 24 (94%) reported either no or sparse prior experience with interpretation of NMA. Physicians perceived MATCH-IT as easy to interpret and navigate, and appreciated its ability to provide an overview of the evidence. Visualization of effects in pictograms and inclusion of information on burden of treatment ("practical issues") were highlighted as potentially useful features in interacting with patients. We also identified problems, including undiscovered functionalities (drag and drop), suboptimal tutorial, and cumbersome navigation of the tool. In addition, physicians wanted definition/explanation of key terms (eg, outcomes and "certainty"), and there were concerns that overwhelming evidence from a large NMA would complicate applicability to clinical practice. This led to several updates with development of a new start page, tutorial, updated user interface for more efficient maneuvering, solutions to display definition of key terms and a "frequently asked questions" section. To facilitate interpretation of large networks, we improved categorization of results using color coding and added filtering functionality. These modifications allowed physicians to focus on interventions of interest and reduce information overload. CONCLUSION: This study provides proof of concept that physicians can use MATCH-IT to understand NMA evidence. Key features of MATCH-IT in a clinical context include providing an overview of the evidence, visualization of effects, and the display of information on burden of treatments. However, unfamiliarity with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation concepts, time constraints, and accessibility at the point of care may be challenges for use. To what extent our results are transferable to real-world clinical contexts remains to be explored.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Home noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may improve chronic hypercarbia in COPD and patient-important outcomes. The efficacy of home high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) as an alternative is unclear. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials of subjects from inception to March 31, 2023, and updated the search on July 14, 2023. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We analyzed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NIV, HFNC, or standard care in adult subjects with COPD with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure. Outcomes included mortality, COPD exacerbations, hospitalizations, and quality of life (St George Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]). RESULTS: We analyzed 24 RCTs (1,850 subjects). We found that NIV may reduce the risk of death compared to standard care (relative risk 0.82 [95% CI 0.66-1.00]) and probably reduces exacerbations (relative risk 0.71 [95% CI 0.58-0.87]). HFNC probably reduces exacerbations compared to standard care (relative risk 0.77 [0.68-0.88]), but its effect on mortality is uncertain (relative risk 1.20 [95% CI 0.63-2.28]). HFNC probably improves SGRQ scores (mean difference -7.01 [95% CI -12.27 to -1.77]) and may reduce hospitalizations (relative risk 0.87 [0.69-1.09]) compared to standard care. No significant difference was observed between HFNC and NIV in reducing exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: Both NIV and HFNC reduce exacerbation risks in subjects with COPD compared to standard care. HFNC may offer advantages in improving quality of life.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Inulin-type fructans (ITF) are the leading prebiotics in the market. Available evidence provides conflicting results regarding the beneficial effects of ITF on cardiovascular disease risk factors. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of ITF supplementation on cardiovascular disease risk factors in adults. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Emcare, AMED, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception through May 15, 2022. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) administered ITF or placebo (for example, control, foods, diets) to adults for ≥2 weeks and reported one or more of the following: low, very-low, or high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C, VLDL-C, HDL-C); total cholesterol; apolipoprotein A1 or B; triglycerides; fasting blood glucose; body mass index; body weight; waist circumference; waist-to-hip ratio; systolic or diastolic blood pressure; or hemoglobin A1c. Two reviewers independently and in duplicate screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We pooled data using random-effects model, and assessed the certainty of evidence (CoE) using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: We identified 1767 studies and included 55 RCTs with 2518 participants in meta-analyses. The pooled estimate showed that ITF supplementation reduced LDL-C [mean difference (MD) -0.14 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval (95% CI: -0.24, -0.05), 38 RCTs, 1879 participants, very low CoE], triglycerides (MD -0.06 mmol/L, 95% CI: -0.12, -0.01, 40 RCTs, 1732 participants, low CoE), and body weight (MD -0.97 kg, 95% CI: -1.28, -0.66, 36 RCTs, 1672 participants, low CoE) but little to no significant effect on other cardiovascular disease risk factors. The effects were larger when study duration was ≥6 weeks and in pre-obese and obese participants. CONCLUSION: ITF may reduce low-density lipoprotein, triglycerides, and body weight. However, due to low to very low CoE, further well-designed and executed trials are needed to confirm these effects. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019136745.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Inulina , Adulto , Humanos , Inulina/farmacología , Inulina/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/prevención & control , Fructanos/farmacología , Fructanos/uso terapéutico , LDL-Colesterol , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Peso Corporal , Obesidad , TriglicéridosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To present an application of specification curve analysis-a novel analytic method that involves defining and implementing all plausible and valid analytic approaches for addressing a research question-to nutritional epidemiology. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We reviewed all observational studies addressing the effect of red meat on all-cause mortality, sourced from a published systematic review, and documented variations in analytic methods (eg, choice of model, covariates, etc.). We enumerated all defensible combinations of analytic choices to produce a comprehensive list of all the ways in which the data may reasonably be analyzed. We applied specification curve analysis to data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007 to 2014 to investigate the effect of unprocessed red meat on all-cause mortality. The specification curve analysis used a random sample of all reasonable analytic specifications we sourced from primary studies. RESULTS: Among 15 publications reporting on 24 cohorts included in the systematic review on red meat and all-cause mortality, we identified 70 unique analytic methods, each including different analytic models, covariates, and operationalizations of red meat (eg, continuous vs quantiles). We applied specification curve analysis to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, including 10,661 participants. Our specification curve analysis included 1208 unique analytic specifications, of which 435 (36.0%) yielded a hazard ratio equal to or more than 1 for the effect of red meat on all-cause mortality and 773 (64.0%) less than 1. The specification curve analysis yielded a median hazard ratio of 0.94 (interquartile range: 0.83-1.05). Forty-eight specifications (3.97%) were statistically significant, 40 of which indicated unprocessed red meat to reduce all-cause mortality and eight of which indicated red meat to increase mortality. CONCLUSION: We show that the application of specification curve analysis to nutritional epidemiology is feasible and presents an innovative solution to analytic flexibility.
Asunto(s)
Encuestas Nutricionales , Carne Roja , Humanos , Carne Roja/efectos adversos , Mortalidad , Causas de Muerte , Estudios Observacionales como Asunto , Interpretación Estadística de Datos , Masculino , FemeninoRESUMEN
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), also called chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), is characterised by persistent fatigue, postexertional malaise, and cognitive dysfunction. It is a complex, long-term, and debilitating illness without widely effective treatments. This study describes the treatment choices and experiences of ME/CFS patients who have experienced variable levels of recovery. METHOD: Interpretive description study consisting of semi-structured qualitative interviews with 33 people who met the US Centers for Disease Control (2015) diagnostic criteria for ME/CFS and report recovery or symptom improvement. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants endorsed partial recovery, and seven reported full recovery from ME/CFS. Participants reported expending significant time and energy to identify, implement, and adapt therapeutic interventions, often without the guidance of a medical practitioner. They formulated individualised treatment plans reflecting their understanding of their illness and personal resources. Most fully recovered participants attributed their success to mind-body approaches. CONCLUSION: Patients with ME/CFS describe independently constructing and managing treatment plans, due to a lack of health system support. Stigmatised and dismissive responses from clinicians precipitated disengagement from the medical system and prompted use of other forms of treatment.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome de Fatiga Crónica , Humanos , Síndrome de Fatiga Crónica/terapia , Síndrome de Fatiga Crónica/diagnóstico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of potential risk of bias elements on effect estimates in randomized trials. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a systematic survey of meta-epidemiological studies examining the influence of potential risk of bias elements on effect estimates in randomized trials. We included only meta-epidemiological studies that either preserved the clustering of trials within meta-analyses (compared effect estimates between trials with and without the potential risk of bias element within each meta-analysis, then combined across meta-analyses; between-trial comparisons), or preserved the clustering of substudies within trials (compared effect estimates between substudies with and without the element, then combined across trials; within-trial comparisons). Separately for studies based on between- and within-trial comparisons, we extracted ratios of odds ratios (RORs) from each study and combined them using a random-effects model. We made overall inferences and assessed certainty of evidence based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, development, and Evaluation and Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses. RESULTS: Forty-one meta-epidemiological studies (34 of between-, 7 of within-trial comparisons) proved eligible. Inadequate random sequence generation (ROR 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.97) and allocation concealment (ROR 0.92, 95% CI 0.88-0.97) probably lead to effect overestimation (moderate certainty). Lack of patients blinding probably overestimates effects for patient-reported outcomes (ROR 0.36, 95% CI 0.28-0.48; moderate certainty). Lack of blinding of outcome assessors results in effect overestimation for subjective outcomes (ROR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.93; high certainty). The impact of patients or outcome assessors blinding on other outcomes, and the impact of blinding of health-care providers, data collectors, or data analysts, remain uncertain. Trials stopped early for benefit probably overestimate effects (moderate certainty). Trials with imbalanced cointerventions may overestimate effects, while trials with missing outcome data may underestimate effects (low certainty). Influence of baseline imbalance, compliance, selective reporting, and intention-to-treat analysis remain uncertain. CONCLUSION: Failure to ensure random sequence generation or adequate allocation concealment probably results in modest overestimates of effects. Lack of patients blinding probably leads to substantial overestimates of effects for patient-reported outcomes. Lack of blinding of outcome assessors results in substantial effect overestimation for subjective outcomes. For other elements, though evidence for consistent systematic overestimate of effect remains limited, failure to implement these safeguards may still introduce important bias.
Asunto(s)
Distribución Aleatoria , Humanos , Sesgo , Estudios Epidemiológicos , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
TOPIC: To compare the efficacy and safety of subthreshold macular laser to conventional focal laser photocoagulation for the treatment of vision loss secondary to diabetic macular edema (DME). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Macular laser remains an important and cost effective treatment option for vision loss secondary to DME. Although anti-VEGF therapy is often first-line, macular laser is of utility in low-resource or remote settings, for patients at risk of loss to follow-up, and for DME not meeting country-specific reimbursement criteria for anti-VEGF therapy. Subthreshold laser is a modality that does not produce clinical or histologic evidence of thermal damage, thereby potentially limiting the common complications of conventional laser. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to September 28, 2022. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects modeling. Data were collected at 12 and 24 months for best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central retinal thickness, diabetic retinopathy severity scale, rate of adverse events, rate of enrolled patients not completing treatment, rate of patients receiving retreatment, and quality-of-life measures. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias version 2 and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) frameworks, respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed between subthreshold laser modalities and evaluated with Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses tool. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs comprising 514 eyes receiving conventional laser and 574 eyes receiving subthreshold laser were included. Subthreshold laser likely results in no difference to BCVA (moderate GRADE certainty) compared with conventional laser. Conventional laser demonstrated a small, statistically significant improvement in central retinal thickness (low GRADE certainty); however, the magnitude of this improvement is unlikely to be clinically important. There may not be a difference in the rate of adverse events (low GRADE certainty) at 12 months when comparing subthreshold laser to conventional laser for DME. CONCLUSION: Randomized controlled trial literature to date suggests subthreshold laser to be as effective as conventional laser in the treatment of DME. Increased follow-up duration is needed to observe any long-term safety benefit from reduced retinal damage. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Retinopatía Diabética , Edema Macular , Humanos , Edema Macular/diagnóstico , Edema Macular/etiología , Edema Macular/cirugía , Retinopatía Diabética/complicaciones , Retinopatía Diabética/diagnóstico , Retinopatía Diabética/cirugía , Ranibizumab , Bevacizumab , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Coagulación con Láser/métodos , Retina , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Retinal non-perfusion (RNP) is fundamental to disease onset and progression in diabetic retinopathy (DR). Whether anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy can modify RNP progression is unclear. This investigation quantified the impact of anti-VEGF therapy on RNP progression compared with laser or sham at 12 months. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were performed; Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 4th March 2022. The change in any continuous measure of RNP at 12 months and 24 months was the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Outcomes were reported utilising standardised mean differences (SMD). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version-2 and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines informed risk of bias and certainty of evidence assessments. RESULTS: Six RCTs (1296 eyes) and three RCTs (1131 eyes) were included at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Meta-analysis demonstrated that RNP progression may be slowed with anti-VEGF therapy compared with laser/sham at 12 months (SMD: -0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.29, -0.06; p = 0.003; I2 = 0; GRADE rating: LOW) and 24-months (SMD: -0.21; 95% CI: -0.37, -0.05; p = 0.009; I2 = 28%; GRADE rating: LOW). The certainty of evidence was downgraded due to indirectness and due to imprecision. CONCLUSION: Anti-VEGF treatment may slightly impact the pathophysiologic process of progressive RNP in DR. The dosing regimen and the absence of diabetic macular edema may impact this potential effect. Future trials are needed to increase the precision of the effect and inform the association between RNP progression and clinically important events. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022314418.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Retinopatía Diabética , Humanos , Retinopatía Diabética/diagnóstico , Retinopatía Diabética/tratamiento farmacológico , Retinopatía Diabética/complicaciones , Ranibizumab , Bevacizumab , Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , RetinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF) increases mortality risk, but which factors increase mortality is unknown. We aimed to perform a prognostic review of factors associated with mortality in patients with IPF. STUDY DESIGN: and methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for studies that reported on the association between any prognostic factor and AE-IPF. We assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS tool. We conduced pairwise meta-analyses using REML heterogeneity estimator, and GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 35 studies in our analysis. We found that long-term supplemental oxygen at baseline (aHR 2.52 [95 % CI 1.68 to 3.80]; moderate certainty) and a diagnosis of IPF compared to non-IPF ILD (aHR 2.19 [95 % CI 1.22 to 3.92]; moderate certainty) is associated with a higher risk of death in patients with AE-IPF. A diffuse pattern on high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) compared to a non-diffuse pattern (aHR 2.61 [95 % CI 1.32 to 2.90]; moderate certainty) is associated with a higher risk of death in patients with AE-IPF. We found that using corticosteroids prior to hospital admission (aHR 2.19 [95 % CI 1.26 to 3.82]; moderate certainty) and those with increased neutrophils (by % increase) in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) during the exacerbation is associated with a higher risk of death (aHR 1.02 [1.01 to 1.04]; moderate certainty). INTERPRETATION: Our results have implications for healthcare providers in making treatment decisions and prognosticating the clinical trajectory of patients, for researchers to design future interventions to improve patient trajectory, and for guideline developers in making decisions about resource allocation.
Asunto(s)
Neumonías Intersticiales Idiopáticas , Fibrosis Pulmonar Idiopática , Humanos , Pronóstico , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Lavado BroncoalveolarRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the available evidence for corticosteroids in fibrotic interstitial lung disease (fILD) to inform the randomised embedded multifactorial adaptive platform ILD. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched Embase, Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL and Web of Science databases from inception to April 17 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included studies that compared corticosteroids with standard care, placebo or no treatment in adult patients with fILD. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We report on the change in forced vital capacity (FVC) and mortality. We used random-effects meta-analysis to estimate relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and standardised MDs for continuous outcomes, with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of the 13 229 unique citations identified, we included 10 observational studies comprising 1639 patients. Corticosteroids had an uncertain effect on mortality compared with no treatment (RR 1.03 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.25); very low certainty evidence). The effect of corticosteroids on the rate of decline in FVC (% predicted) was uncertain when compared with no treatment (MD 4.29% (95% CI -8.26% to 16.83%); very low certainty evidence). However, corticosteroids might reduce the rate of decline in FVC in patients with non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) fILD (MD 10.89% (95% CI 5.25% to 16.53%); low certainty evidence), while an uncertain effect was observed in patients with IPF (MD -3.80% (95% CI -8.94% to 1.34%); very low certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence on the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in fILD is limited and of low certainty. Randomised trials are needed to address this significant research gap.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides , Enfermedades Pulmonares Intersticiales , Adulto , Humanos , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Enfermedades Pulmonares Intersticiales/tratamiento farmacológico , Capacidad VitalRESUMEN
With the introduction of therapies to treat geographic atrophy (GA), GA management in clinical practice is now possible. A living systematic review can provide access to timely and robust evidence synthesis. This review found that complement factor 3 and 5 (C3 and C5) inhibition compared to sham likely reduces change in square root GA area at 12 months and untransformed GA area at 24 months. There is likely little to no difference in the rate of systemic treatment-emergent adverse events compared to sham. C3 and C5 inhibition, however, likely does not improve best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 12 months, and the evidence is uncertain regarding change in BCVA at 24 months. Higher rates of ocular treatment emergent adverse effects with complement inhibition occur at 12 months and likely at 24 months. Complement inhibition likely results in new onset neovascular age-related macular degeneration at 12 months. This living meta-analysis will continuously incorporate new evidence.
RESUMEN
Importance: Modulation of intestinal microbiome by administering probiotics, prebiotics, or both may prevent morbidity and mortality in premature infants. Objective: To assess the comparative effectiveness of alternative prophylactic strategies through a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar from inception until May 10, 2023. Study Selection: Eligible trials tested probiotics, prebiotics, lactoferrin, and combination products for prevention of morbidity or mortality in preterm infants. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A frequentist random-effects model was used for the NMA, and the certainty of evidence and inferences regarding relative effectiveness were assessed using the GRADE approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality, severe necrotizing enterocolitis, culture-proven sepsis, feeding intolerance, time to reach full enteral feeding, and duration of hospitalization. Results: A total of 106 trials involving 25â¯840 preterm infants were included. Only multiple-strain probiotics were associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared with placebo (risk ratio [RR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.86; risk difference [RD], -1.7%; 95% CI, -2.4% to -0.8%). Multiple-strain probiotics alone (vs placebo: RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.50; RD, -3.7%; 95% CI, -4.1% to -2.9%) or in combination with oligosaccharides (vs placebo: RR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.37; RD, -5.1%; 95% CI, -5.6% to -3.7%) were among the most effective interventions reducing severe necrotizing enterocolitis. Single-strain probiotics in combination with lactoferrin (vs placebo RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.78; RD, -10.7%; 95% CI, -13.7% to -3.5%) were the most effective intervention for reducing sepsis. Multiple-strain probiotics alone (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.80; RD, -10.0%; 95% CI, -13.9% to -5.1%) or in combination with oligosaccharides (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.67; RD, -14.1%; 95% CI, -18.3% to -8.5%) and single-strain probiotics (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; RD, -10.0%; 95% CI, -12.6% to -7.2%) proved of best effectiveness in reduction of feeding intolerance vs placebo. Single-strain probiotics (MD, -1.94 days; 95% CI, -2.96 to -0.92) and multistrain probiotics (MD, -2.03 days; 95% CI, -3.04 to -1.02) proved the most effective in reducing the time to reach full enteral feeding compared with placebo. Only single-strain and multistrain probiotics were associated with greater effectiveness compared with placebo in reducing duration of hospitalization (MD, -3.31 days; 95% CI, -5.05 to -1.58; and MD, -2.20 days; 95% CI, -4.08 to -0.31, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and NMA, moderate- to high-certainty evidence demonstrated an association between multistrain probiotics and reduction in all-cause mortality; these interventions were also associated with the best effectiveness for other key outcomes. Combination products, including single- and multiple-strain probiotics combined with prebiotics or lactoferrin, were associated with the largest reduction in morbidity and mortality.
Asunto(s)
Enterocolitis Necrotizante , Probióticos , Sepsis , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Lactoferrina/uso terapéutico , Prebióticos , Enterocolitis Necrotizante/prevención & control , Metaanálisis en Red , Probióticos/uso terapéutico , Sepsis/prevención & control , Morbilidad , OligosacáridosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) with chronic hypercapnia is usually treated with non-invasive ventilation (NIV). High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may be an appropriate alternative. However, the efficacy of HFNC in COPD patients with chronic hypercapnia is yet to be optimally summarized. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using random effects with inverse variance methods. Randomized controlled trials involving adult COPD patients initiated on HFNC for at least one month were included. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, acute exacerbations, hospitalizations, and change in St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). We assessed the risk of bias using ROB 2.0 and assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: We included four randomized trials involving 440 patients. HFNC probably reduces acute exacerbations compared to standard care (RR 0.77 [95 % CI 0.66 to 0.89]; moderate certainty), suggesting 69 fewer acute exacerbations per 1000 patients. HFNC may reduce hospital admissions (RR 0.87 [95 % CI 0.69 to 1.09]; low certainty) and may lower the SGRQ score (MD 8.12 units lower [95 % CI 13.30 to 2.95 lower]; low certainty). However, HFNC may have no effect on mortality (RR 1.22 [95 % CI 0.64 to 2.35]; low certainty). CONCLUSION: HFNC probably reduces acute exacerbations and might reduce hospital admissions in COPD patients with chronic hypercapnia. However, its effect on mortality is uncertain. Future larger RCTs with longer follow-up periods are recommended to provide more robust evidence on the efficacy of HFNC in patients with COPD.