Short-acting insulin analogues versus regular human insulin on postprandial glucose and hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Strict glucose control using multiple doses of insulin is the standard treatment for type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), but increased risk of hypoglycemia is a frequent drawback. Regular insulin in multiple doses is important for achieving strict glycemic control for T1DM, but short-acting insulin analogues may be better in reducing hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose levels. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effects of short-acting insulin analogues vs regular human insulin on hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose in patients with T1DM. METHODS: Searches were run on the electronic databases MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, LILACS, and DARE for RCTs published until August 2017. To be included in the study, the RCTs had to cover a minimum period of 4 weeks and had to assess the effects of short-acting insulin analogues vs regular human insulin on hypoglycemia and postprandial glucose levels in patients with T1DM. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the quality of the selected studies. The primary outcomes analyzed were hypoglycemia (total episodes, nocturnal hypoglycemia, and severe hypoglycemia) and postprandial glucose (at all times, after breakfast, after lunch, and after dinner). Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and quality of life were considered secondary outcomes. The risk of bias of each RCT was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias table, while the quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the GRADEpro software. The pooled mean difference in the number of hypoglycemic episodes and postprandial glucose between short-acting insulin analogues vs. regular human insulin was calculated using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Of the 2897 articles retrieved, 22 (6235 patients) were included. Short-acting insulin analogues were associated with a decrease in total hypoglycemic episodes (risk rate 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99; 6235 patients; I2 = 81%), nocturnal hypoglycemia (risk rate 0.55, 95% CI 0.40-0.76, 1995 patients, I2 = 84%), and severe hypoglycemia (risk rate 0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.77; 5945 patients, I2 = 0%); and with lower postprandial glucose levels (mean difference/MD - 19.44 mg/dL; 95% CI - 21.49 to - 17.39; 5031 patients, I2 = 69%) and lower HbA1c (MD - 0,13%; IC 95% - 0.16 to - 0.10; 5204 patients; I2 = 73%) levels. CONCLUSIONS: Short-acting insulin analogues are superior to regular human insulin in T1DM patients for the following outcomes: total hypoglycemic episodes, nocturnal hypoglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, postprandial glucose, and HbA1c.

Physical Activity Interventions in Faith-Based Organizations: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To review and assess the effectiveness of physical activity interventions delivered in faith-based organizations. DATA SOURCE: We searched the Cochrane Library, DoPHER, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, WHO ICTRP, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases until January 2016, without restriction of language or publication date. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials investigating physical activity interventions for adults delivered in faith-based organizations. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed study methodological quality. DATA SYNTHESIS: We used relative risk and mean difference with 95% confidence interval to estimate the effect of the interventions on measures of physical activity, physical fitness, and health. RESULTS: The review included 18 studies. Study participants were predominantly female, and the majority of trials were conducted in the United States. Study heterogeneity did not allow us to conduct meta-analyses. Although interventions delivered in faith-based organizations increased physical activity and positively influenced measures of health and fitness in participants, the quality of the evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: Faith-based organizations are promising settings to promote physical activity, consequently addressing health disparities. However, high-quality randomized clinical trials are needed to adequately assess the effectiveness of interventions delivered in faith-based organizations.

RETRACTED: Ivabradine as adjuvant treatment for chronic heart failure.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted at the request of editors as it is contains multiple serious errors in the data of its primary end-point that make its conclusions unreliable. For example, in Figure 4, the cardiovascular death rates cited from Fox 2008 and Swedberg 2010 are incorrect. K. Fox, et al. Lancet, 372 (2008), pp. 807­816; K. Swedberg et al. Lancet, 376 (2010), pp. 875­885.

Polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation for drug-resistant epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 1% to 3% of all individuals will receive a diagnosis of epilepsy during their lives, which corresponds to approximately 50 million affected people worldwide. The real prevalence is possibly higher because epilepsy is underreported in developing countries. Although most will achieve adequate control of their disease though the use of medication, approximately 25% to 30% of all those with epilepsy are refractory to pharmacological treatment and will continue to have seizures despite the use of two or more agents in adequate dosages. Over the last decade, researchers have tested the use of polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplements for the treatment of refractory epilepsy, with inconsistent results. There have also been some concerns about the use of omega-3 PUFA compounds because they reduce platelet aggregation and could, in theory, cause bleeding. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic acid-EPA and docosahexanoic acid-DHA) in the control of seizures in people with refractory epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register (from inception up to November 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, issue 11), MEDLINE (1948 to November 2015), EMBASE (1980 to November 2015), SCOPUS (1823 to November 2015); LILACS (Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe de Informação em Ciências da Saúde) (1982 to November 2015); ClinicalTrials.gov; World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (November 2015). No language restrictions were imposed. We contacted study authors for additional and unpublished information and screened the reference lists of retrieved citations for potentially eligible studies not identified through the electronic search. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised studies using PUFAs for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors were involved in study selection, data extraction and quality assessment of the included trials. The following outcomes were assessed: seizure freedom, seizure reduction, improvement in quality of life, potential adverse effects, gastrointestinal effects, drop-out rates and changes in plasma lipid profile. Primary analyses were by intention to treat. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies were identified as potentially relevant; three fulfilled the selection criteria and were included in the review. Two placebo-controlled, double blind trials involving adult participants were conducted in developed countries, while one placebo-controlled, single blind trial involving children was conducted in a developing country (Egypt). Bromfield 2008 randomised 27 American adults to receive 2.2 g/day of omega-3 PUFAs (EPA:DHA in a 3:2 ratio) or placebo. Yuen 2005 randomised 58 people in the UK to approximately 1.7 g/day omega-3 PUFAs (1g EPA and 0.7g DHA) or placebo. Reda 2015 randomised 70 Egyptian children to receive 3 ml/day of 1200 mg fish oil (providing 0.24 g DHA and 0.36 g EPA) or placebo. The three studies recruited a total of 155 subjects (85 adults and 70 children); 78 of them (43 adults and 35 children) were randomised to PUFAs and 77 (42 adults and 35 children) to placebo. All participants were followed for up to 12 weeks. Seizure freedom was reported by only one study, with a high risk of bias, involving exclusively children. The risk estimate for this outcome was significantly higher in the children receiving PUFA compared to the control group (risk ratio (RR) 20.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.84 to 140.99, 1 study, 70 children). Similarly, PUFA supplementation was associated with a significant difference in the proportion of children with at least 50% reduction in seizure frequency (RR 33.00 95% CI 4.77 to 228.15, 1 study with a high risk of bias, 70 children). However, this effect was not observed when the data from two studies including adult participants were pooled (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.75, I² 0%, 2 studies, 78 participants, low-quality evidence). One of our three primary outcomes (adverse effects related to bleeding) was not assessed in any of the studies included in this review. There were no significant differences between the PUFA and control groups in relation to gastrointestinal effects (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.89, 2 studies, 85 participants, low-quality evidence).Supplementation with PUFA did not produce significant differences in mean frequency of seizures, quality of life or other side effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the limited number of studies and small sample sizes, there is not enough evidence to support the use of PUFA supplementation in people with refractory epilepsy. More trials are needed to assess the benefits of PUFA supplementation in the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy.

Alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune, T-cell-dependent, inflammatory, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, with an unpredictable course. Current MS therapies focus on treating exacerbations, preventing new exacerbations and avoiding the progression of disability. However, at present there is no effective treatment that is capable of safely and effectively reaching these objectives. This has led to the development and investigation of new drugs. Recent clinical trials suggest that alemtuzumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody against cell surface CD52, could be a promising option for MS. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and effectiveness of alemtuzumab used alone or associated with other treatments to decrease disease activity in patients with any form of MS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Trials Register of the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group (30 April 2015), which contains trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS and the trial registry databases ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. There was no restriction on the source, publication date or language. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised clinical trials (RCTs) involving adults diagnosed with any form of MS according to the McDonald criteria, comparing alemtuzumab alone or associated with other medications, at any dose and for any duration, versus placebo or any other active drug therapy or alemtuzumab in other dose, regimen or duration. The co-primary outcomes were relapse-free survival, sustained disease progression and number of participants with at least one of any adverse events, including serious adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors performed study selection, data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment. A third review author checked the process for accuracy. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess the risk of bias of the studies included in the review. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of the body of evidence. To measure the treatment effect on dichotomous outcomes we used the risk ratio (RR); for the treatment effect on continuous outcomes, we used the mean difference (MD) and for time-to-event outcomes we used hazard ratio (HR). We calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI) for these measures. When there was no heterogeneity, we used a fixed-effect model to pool data. MAIN RESULTS: Three RCTs (1713 participants) fulfilled the selection criteria and we included them in the review. All three trials compared alemtuzumab versus subcutaneous interferon beta-1a for patients with relapsing-remitting MS. Patients were treatment-naive in the CARE-MS and CAMMS223 studies. The CARE-MS II study included patients with at least one relapse while being treated with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate. Alemtuzumab was given for 12 or 24 months; for some outcomes, the follow-up period reached 36 months. The regimens were (a) 12 mg or 24 mg per day administered intravenously, once a day for five consecutive days at month 0 and 12 or (b) 24 mg per day, intravenously, once a day for three consecutive days at month 12 and 24. The patients in the other arm of the trials received interferon beta-1a 44 µg subcutaneously three times weekly after dose titration.At 24 months, alemtuzumab 12 mg was associated with: (a) higher relapse-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.60; 1248 participants, two studies, moderate quality evidence); (b) higher sustained disease progression-free survival (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.87; 1191 participants; two studies; moderate quality evidence); (c) a slightly higher number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06; 1248 participants; two studies; moderate quality evidence); (d) a lower number of participants with new or enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.91; 1238 participants; two studies; I(2) = 80%); and (e) a lower number of dropouts (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.41; 1248 participants; two studies, I(2) = 29%; low quality evidence).At 36 months, alemtuzumab 24 mg was associated with: (a) higher relapse-free survival (45 versus 17; HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.40; one study; 221 participants); (b) a higher sustained disease progression-free survival (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.69; one study; 221 participants); and (c) no statistical difference in the rate of participants with at least one adverse event. We did not find any study that reported any of the following outcomes: rate of participants free of clinical disease activity, quality of life, fatigue or change in the numbers of MRI T2- and T1-weighted lesions after treatment. It was not possible to perform subgroup analyses according to disease type and disability at baseline due to lack of data. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In patients with relapsing-remitting MS, alemtuzumab 12 mg was better than subcutaneous interferon beta-1a for the following outcomes assessed at 24 months: relapse-free survival, sustained disease progression-free survival, number of participants with at least one adverse event and number of participants with new or enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions on MRI. The quality of the evidence for these results was low to moderate. Alemtuzumab 24 mg seemed to be better than subcutaneous interferon beta-1a for relapse-free survival and sustained disease progression-free survival, at 36 months.More randomised clinical trials are needed to evaluate the effects of alemtuzumab on other forms of MS and compared with other therapeutic options. These new studies should assess additional relevant outcomes such as the rate of participants free of clinical disease activity, quality of life, fatigue and adverse events (individual rates, serious adverse events and long-term adverse events). Moreover, these new studies should evaluate other doses and durations of alemtuzumab course.

Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation for prevention of complications after pulmonary resection in lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary complications are often observed during the postoperative period of lung resection for patients with lung cancer. Some conditions such as intubation, a long stay in the intensive care unit, the high cost of antibiotics and mortality may be avoided with the prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is widely accepted and often used in hospitals, and may reduce the number of pulmonary complications and mortality after this type of surgery. Therefore, a systematic review is required to map and critically assess the benefits and harms of NIPPV for patients undergoing lung resection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of NIPPV for preventing complications in patients who underwent pulmonary resection for lung cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and PEDro, to identify potentially eligible trials. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches. The databases were last searched on 17 March 2015. We searched the reference lists of relevant papers and contacted experts in the field for information about additional published and unpublished studies. We also searched the Register of Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com) and ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) to identify ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials that compared NIPPV in the immediate postoperative period after pulmonary resection with no intervention or conventional respiratory therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors collected data and assessed trial risk of bias. Where possible, we pooled data from the individual studies using a fixed-effect model (quantitative synthesis), but where this was not possible we tabulated or presented the data in the main text (qualitative synthesis). Where substantial heterogeneity existed, we applied a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 155 references retrieved from searches, 6 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and 1 quasi-randomised trial fulfilled the eligibility criteria for this review, including a total of 436 patients. Five studies described quantitative measures of pulmonary complications, with pooled data showing no difference between NIPPV compared with no intervention (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.47). Three studies reported intubation rates and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.25 to 1.20). Five studies reported measures of mortality on completion of the intervention period. There was no statistical difference between the groups for this outcome (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.53). Similar results were observed in the subgroup analysis considering ventilatory mode (bi-level versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). No study evaluated the postoperative consumption of antibiotics. Two studies reported the length of intensive care unit stay and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (MD -0.75; 95% CI -3.93 to 2.43). Four studies reported the length of hospital stay and there was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups (MD -0.12; 95% CI -6.15 to 5.90). None of the studies described any complications related to NIPPV. Of the seven included studies, four studies were considered as 'low risk of bias' in all domains, two studies were considered 'high risk of bias' for the allocation concealment domain, and one of these was also considered 'high risk of bias' for random sequence generation. One other study was considered 'high risk of bias' for including participants with more severe disease. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated that there was no additional benefit of using NIPPV in postoperative pulmonary resection for all outcomes analysed (pulmonary complications, rate of intubation, mortality, rate of non-pulmonary complications, postoperative consumption of antibiotics, length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospital stay and adverse effects related to NIPPV). However, the quality of evidence is 'very low', 'low' and 'moderate' since there were few studies, with small sample size and low frequency of outcomes. New well-designed and well-conducted randomised trials are needed to answer the questions of this review with greater certainty.