RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic granulomatous disease (CGD) is a primary immunodeficiency with increased susceptibility to several bacteria, fungi, and mycobacteria, caused by defective or null superoxide production by the NADPH oxidase enzymatic complex. Accepted treatment consists mainly of antimicrobial prophylaxis. The role of human recombinant subcutaneous interferon-gamma (IFNγ) is less clear since the available evidence on its efficacy derives mainly from a single clinical trial that has been challenged. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of IFNγ as an added treatment for CGD when compared to antimicrobial prophylaxis alone. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using MeSH terms "Chronic granulomatous disease" AND ("interferon gamma" OR "interferon-gamma"), as well as antibiotics, placebo, no therapy, clinical trial, and trial, on MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, WHOs, CENTRAL, KOREAMED, The Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and abstracts from meetings, from 1976 to July 2022. We included clinical trials (CT) and prospective follow-up studies and registered the number of serious infections (requiring hospitalization and IV antibiotics) and deaths, adverse events, and autoimmune complications, in patients treated for CGD with antimicrobial prophylaxis plus IFN-γ, versus antimicrobial prophylaxis alone. We assessed the quality of the studies using risk of bias and STROBE. We performed a meta-analysis by calculating both Peto's odds ratio (OR) and risk reduction (RR) through the Mantel-Haenszel method with a fixed-effect model, using Review Manager 5.4, and we reported the number needed to treat (NNT). RESULTS: We identified 54 matches from databases and 4 from other sources. We excluded 12 duplicates, 7 titles, and 9 abstracts for relevance, after which we had 30 eligible studies. Twenty-four were then excluded after reading the full text. Six papers were included: one randomized CT and 5 follow-up studies. In total, 324 patients with Chronic granulomatous disease were followed for 319 months under treatment with antibiotic prophylaxis plus interferon-gamma or placebo (or antibiotic prophylaxis alone), reported between the years 1991 and 2016. Three of the studies included a control group, allowing for the aggregate analysis of efficacy (prevention of serious infections). The aggregate OR was 0.49, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.19 to 1.23. The risk ratio for serious infection was 0.56 (95%CI 0.35-0.90) under IFN-γ. The meta-analysis thus favors interferon-gamma for a risk reduction of serious infection. DISCUSSION: The results from this meta-analysis support the use of IFN-γ in the treatment of patients with CGD. However, we found insufficient clinical evidence and believe more clinical trials are needed to better assess the efficacy and long-term safety of IFN-γ.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Doença Granulomatosa Crônica , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Doença Granulomatosa Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , AntibioticoprofilaxiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The global prevalence of allergic rhinitis is high. International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) Phase III reports a total estimated prevalence of 4.6% in Mexico. There is evidence based on allergic rhinitis Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG), but its promotion, acceptance and application is not optimal or adequate in Mexico. OBJECTIVE: To generate a guideline for the treatment of allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma by adaptating the 2010 ARIA Guideline to Mexican reality, through a transculturation process applying the ADAPTE methodology. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Using the ADAPTE Methodology, the original 2010 ARIA CPG recommendations were evaluated by the guideline development group (GDG) into which multiple medical specialities managing patients with allergic rhinitis were incoorporated. The GDG valorated the quality of 2010 ARIA, checked and translated key clinical questions. Moreover, the GDG adjusted recommendations, patient preferences and included comments in the context of the Mexican reality (safety, costs and cultural issues). To accomplish this, we ran Delphi panels with as many rounds as necessary to reach agreement. One extra question, not included in the original 2010 ARIA, on the use of Nasal Lavages for AR was created sustained by a systematic literature review. RESULTS: A total of 45 questions from the original 2010 ARIA were included and divided into six groups covering prevention, medical treatment, immunotherapy and alternative medicine to treat patients with allergic rhinitis with or without asthma. Most of the questions reached agreement in one or two rounds; one question required three rounds. CONCLUSIONS: An easy-to-use, adaptated, up-to-date and applicable allergic rhinitis guideline for Mexico is now available.
ANTECEDENTES: la prevalencia de rinitis alérgica en todo el mundo es alta. El Estudio Internacional de Asma y Alergias en la Niñez (ISAAC de International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood) Fase III reporta una prevalencia estimada total en México de 4.6%. Existen guías de práctica clínica basadas en evidencia de rinitis alérgica, pero su promoción, aceptación y validez no son óptimas ni adecuadas para México. OBJETIVO: generar una guía de tratamiento de la rinitis alérgica y su repercusión en el asma adaptando la guía ARIA 2010 a la realidad mexicana mediante un proceso de transculturización, por medio de la metodología ADAPTE. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: a través de la metodología ADAPTE un grupo de desarrollo de la guía, integrado por múltiples especialistas que tratan pacientes con rinitis alérgica, valoró la calidad de la guía ARIA 2010, revisó y tradujo las preguntas clínicas clave y ajustó las recomendaciones, preferencias del paciente y comentarios a la realidad mexicana (seguridad, costos y aspectos culturales). Para lograrlo se corrieron páneles Delphi, con tantas rondas como fuera necesario hasta lograr un acuerdo. Por medio de una revisión sistemática de la bibliografía se creó una pregunta especial no incluida en ARIA 2010 de la utilidad de realizar lavados nasales en pacientes con rinitis alérgica. RESULTADOS: se incluyeron 45 preguntas de la guía original ARIA 2010, divididas en seis bloques que abarcan prevención, tratamiento médico, inmunoterapia y terapias alternativas de pacientes con rinitis alérgica con o sin asma. La mayor parte de las preguntas alcanzaron acuerdo en una a dos rondas, sólo una requirió tres para ello. CONCLUSIONES: se cuenta ahora con una guía de rinitis alérgica de usosencillo, adaptada, actualizada y válida para México.