Safety and efficacy of sequential treatments for postmenopausal osteoporosis: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Background: The sequential anti-osteoporotic treatment for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) is important, but the order in which different types of drugs are used is confusing and controversial. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of available sequential treatments to explore the most efficacious strategy for long-term management of osteoporosis. Methods: In this network meta-analysis, we searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to September 19, 2023 to identify randomised controlled trials comparing sequential treatments for women with PMO. The identified trials were screened by reading the title and abstract, and only randomised clinical trials involving sequential anti-osteoporotic treatments and reported relevant outcomes for PMO were included. The main outcomes included vertebral fracture risk, the percentage change in bone mineral density (BMD) in different body parts, and all safety indicators in the stage after switching treatment. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using the multivariate random effects method and evaluated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Confidence in the Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework. This study is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42022360236. Findings: A total of 19 trials comprising 18,416 participants were included in the study. Five different sequential treatments were investigated as the main interventions and compared to the corresponding control groups. The intervention groups in this study comprised the following treatment switch protocols: switching from an anabolic agent (AB) to an anti-resorptive agent (AR) (ABtAR), transitioning from one AR to another AR (ARtAAR), shifting from an AR to an AB (ARtAB), switching from an AB to a combined treatment of AB and AR (ABtC), and transitioning from an AR to a combined treatment (ARtC). A significant reduction in the incidence of vertebral fractures was observed in ARtC, ABtAR and ARtAB in the second stage, and ARtC had the lowest incidence with 81.5% SUCRA. ARtAAR and ABtAR were two effective strategies for preventing fractures and improving BMD in other body parts. Especially, ARtAAR could improve total hip BMD with the highest 96.1% SUCRA, and ABtAR could decrease the risk of total fractures with the highest 94.3% SUCRA. Almost no difference was observed in safety outcomes in other comparisons. Interpretation: Our findings suggested that the ARtAAR and ABtAR strategy are the effective and safe sequential treatment for preventing fracture and improving BMD for PMO. ARtC is more effective in preventing vertebral fractures. Funding: The National Natural Science Foundation of China (82170900, 81970762), the Hunan Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Hunan Province High-level Health Talents "225" Project.

New insights into muscularis macrophages in the gut: from their origin to therapeutic targeting.

Muscularis macrophages, as the most abundant immune cells in the intestinal muscularis externa, exhibit tissue protective phenotype in the steady state. Owing to tremendous advances in technology, we now know the fact that muscularis macrophages are a heterogeneous population of cells which could be divided into different functional subsets depending on their anatomic niches. There is emerging evidence showing that these subsets, through molecular interactions with their neighbours, take part in a wide range of physiological and pathophysiological processes in the gut. In this review, we summarize recent progress (particularly over the past 4 years) on distribution, morphology, origin and functions of muscularis macrophages and, where possible, the characteristics of specific subsets in response to the microenvironment they occupy, with particular emphasis on their role in muscular inflammation. Furthermore, we also integrate their role in inflammation-related gastrointestinal disorders, such as post-operative ileus and diabetic gastroparesis, in order to propose future therapeutic strategies.

Metformin versus insulin for gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Metformin is increasingly used in clinical practice for the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus. However, its safety and long-term effects on fetuses exposed to metformin in uterus remain controversial. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database (last search was updated on 1 May 2019) for randomized controlled trials comparing metformin with insulin. Two reviewers extracted the data and calculated pooled estimates by use of a random-effects model. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included. Among these, seventeen RCTs (N = 2828 participants) were included for quantitative analyses and seven studies were included only for qualitative synthesis. Metformin lowered the risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension (p = .03; risk ratio (RR) = 0.64; confidence interval (95%CI) [0.44, 0.95]), large for gestational age babies (p = .04; RR = 0.82; 95% CI [0.68, 0.99]), macrosomia (p = .01; RR = 0.63; 95%CI [0.45, 0.90]), neonatal hypoglycemia (p = .001; RR = 0.72; 95%CI [0.59, 0.88]), and neonatal intensive care unit admission (p = .01; RR = 0.74; 95%CI [0.58, 0.94]). Metformin did not increase premature delivery (p = .11; RR = 1.28; 95%CI [0.95, 1.73]), preeclampsia (p = .45; RR = 0.89; 95%CI [0.65, 1.21]), caesarean delivery (p = .20; RR = 0.94; 95%CI [0.85, 1.04]), small for gestational age babies (p = .95; RR = 0.99; 95%CI [0.69, 1.42]). The long-term results seemed to have no adverse effect, but the information was still limited. CONCLUSIONS: According to our review, metformin may have potential benefits for pregnant women and newborns with no obvious adverse effects. However, even more studies are needed to provide evidence for the future use of metformin.