A clinical systematic literature review of treatments among patients with advanced and/or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive breast cancer.

Aim: This systematic literature review aims to summarize the efficacy/effectiveness of treatments, including eribulin (ERI)-based and anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) treatments in advanced/metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. Methods: Three databases from 2016 to September 2021 were searched for clinical trials and observational studies in patients receiving first-line (1L) standard of care (SOC), second-line (2L) SOC or third-line or subsequent lines (3L+). Results: 2692 citations were screened, and 38 studies were included. Eleven studies were randomized-controlled trials (RCTs; 5 in 1L, 6 in 3L+), 6 were single-arm trials (5 in 1L, 1 in 3L+) and 21 were observational studies (13 in 1L, 6 in 2L, 4 in 3L+ [note that studies with subgroups for 1L, 2L, 3L+ are double-counted]). Longer overall survival (OS) was associated with 1L and 2L treatment, and for 3L+ studies that included ERI, ERI or trastuzumab (Tmab) + ERI led to longer OS than treatments of physician's choice (median OS of 11, 10 and 8.9 months, respectively). Progression-free survival was 9 months in Tmab + pertuzumab (Pmab) + ERI, 4 months in Tmab + ERI and 3.3 months in ERI. Conclusion: Available treatments provide a wide range of efficacy. However, later lines lack standardization and conclusions on comparative effectiveness are limited by differing trial designs. Thus, the chance of prolonged survival with new agents warrants further research.

Burden of Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Systematic Literature Review of Patient Reported Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has a profound negative impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Here we summarize the evidence on HRQoL and Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in patients with HS in real-world settings by conducting a systematic literature review (SLR) of observational studies. METHODS: Data sources included MEDLINE, Embase & PsycINFO between January 1, 2010 and August 29, 2021, and conference proceedings between 2019 and 2021. Identified abstracts were reviewed and screened independently by two reviewers. Eligibility criteria included patients with HS of any severity, sample size ≥ 100, reporting PROs including HRQoL measures. Included studies were critically appraised. RESULTS: Fifty-eight observational studies matched inclusion criteria. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was the most commonly utilized instrument: 57% of included studies reported mean baseline DLQI scores, ranging between 8.4 and 16.9, indicating a very large impact on the patients' HRQoL. Higher scores were reported with increasing disease severity and among female patients. Pain was assessed mostly by an 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale (NRS) with a mean baseline score ranging from 3.6 to 7.7 indicating moderate to high pain levels. There was a negative impact of HS on patients' psychological well-being, based on PRO scores related to depression and anxiety. A high proportion of sexual dysfunction was reported, with a larger impact on women than men. Work productivity and leisure activity were consistently found to be impaired in patients with HS. CONCLUSIONS: All included studies reported a negative impact of HS on patients' lives. A diverse set of disease- and non-disease-specific PRO instruments were utilized highlighting the need for more consistent use of HS-specific validated PRO instruments to assess the impact of HS on the different aspects of patients' HRQoL to allow for data to be more meaningfully interpreted and compared in real-world settings. Patients with HS need better disease management approaches that address the observed low quality of life.

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a skin disease, which mainly involves the hair follicles, and may greatly affect the health of those with the illness. HS often causes painful or itchy bumps or swelling of the skin, especially in the intimate areas. These occasionally drain and have an odor. When they heal, sometimes they leave dark spots or scars. People with HS can feel depressed, anxious, or embarrassed, among other things. In this study, we looked at how existing studies measured the impact of HS on the physical, mental, and social quality of people's lives. When searching the Internet, we found 58 publications on studies around this topic. Across all of the studies, HS had a large negative effect on patients' quality of life. We found that the groups of people which were impacted more by HS had worse cases of the disease. Patients with more severe HS felt higher levels of pain. Women were also affected more than men. Many studies showed that patients with HS often felt depressed and anxious. Three studies showed that HS greatly affected women's sexual health. Many patients said that HS made it hard to work and do things for fun. More and better treatments are needed since HS can have such a big impact on people's lives.

A network meta-analysis of immunotherapy-based treatments for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Introduction: In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing immunotherapies for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NsqNSCLC), a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the relative efficacy of these treatments. Materials & methods: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials evaluating first-line-to-progression and second-line treatments for advanced NsqNSCLC informed Bayesian NMAs for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) end points. Results: Among first-line-to-progression treatments, pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the greatest OS benefit versus other regimens and a PFS benefit versus all but three regimens. Among second-line treatments, an OS benefit was seen for atezolizumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab versus docetaxel. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the maximum OS benefit in the first-line setting. In the second-line setting, anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapies were better than docetaxel.

Comparative Efficacy of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Versus Other Bronchodilators for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual maintenance therapies for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus other dual and mono-bronchodilator therapies in symptomatic patients with COPD. METHODS: A systematic literature review (October 2015-November 2020) was performed to identify RCTs ≥ 8 weeks long in adult patients with COPD that compared LAMA/LABA combinations against any long-acting bronchodilator-containing dual therapy or monotherapy. Data extracted on changes from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score, Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score, rescue medication use and moderate/severe exacerbation rate were analysed using an NMA in a frequentist framework. The primary comparison was at 24 weeks. Fixed effects model results are presented. RESULTS: The NMA included 69 full-length publications (including 10 GSK clinical study reports) reporting 49 studies. At 24 weeks, UMEC/VI provided statistically significant greater improvements in FEV1 versus all dual therapy and monotherapy comparators. UMEC/VI provided similar improvements in SGRQ total score compared with all other LAMA/LABAs, and significantly greater improvements versus UMEC 125 µg, glycopyrronium 50 µg, glycopyrronium 18 µg, tiotropium 18 µg and salmeterol 50 µg. UMEC/VI also provided significantly better outcomes versus some comparators for TDI focal score, rescue medication use, annualised moderate/severe exacerbation rate, and time to first moderate/severe exacerbation. CONCLUSION: UMEC/VI provided generally better outcomes compared with LAMA or LABA monotherapies, and consistent improvements in lung function (measured by change from baseline in trough FEV1 at 24 weeks) versus dual therapies. Treatment with UMEC/VI may improve outcomes for symptomatic patients with COPD compared with alternative maintenance treatments.

Bronchodilators are medicines that open the airways, allowing patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to breathe more easily. There are two different types of bronchodilators, namely long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting ß₂-agonists (LABAs), which can be used on their own or combined (LAMA/LABAs). Only a few clinical trials have compared different LAMA/LABA combinations with each other, so it is unclear which LAMA/LABA combination provides the greatest benefits for patients.In this study, we used network meta-analysis to compare a LAMA/LABA combination medicine called umeclidinium and vilanterol (UMEC/VI) with other LAMAs and LABAs used alone or in combination to treat patients with COPD. Network meta-analysis is a way of comparing two or more medicines by analysing data from many studies. We systematically searched for evidence from clinical trials in adult patients with COPD that were at least 8 weeks long and that compared LAMA/LABA combinations with a LAMA, a LABA, or another LAMA/LABA combination. We analysed data from 49 clinical trials that met these criteria.We found that patients treated with UMEC/VI had better lung function than patients treated with alternative LAMA/LABA combinations or bronchodilators used on their own. Patients treated with UMEC/VI had better quality of life than those receiving some other treatments, but not all. All the medicines we compared had similar side effects.Our results suggest that treating patients with COPD with UMEC/VI might improve their lung function and quality of life more than alternative bronchodilators.

Prognostic Factors in Hormone Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative (HR+/HER2-) Advanced Breast Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review.

PURPOSE: Advanced breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with several well-defined subtypes, among which, hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) is most prevalent. Determination of HR and HER2 status influences prognosis and, thus, disease management. Although literature on these prognostic factors exist, especially in the early breast cancer setting, it remains unclear to what extent these factors can guide clinical decision-making in the advanced disease setting. Therefore, we sought to identify the strength and consistency of evidence for prognostic factors in patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) of the major electronic databases was conducted in November 2018 for primary research studies published since 2010. Endpoints of interest were tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). RESULTS: Seventy-nine studies were included wherein all patients were diagnosed with advanced breast cancer and ≥50% of the population were HR+/HER2-. OS was the most commonly assessed endpoint (n=67) followed by PFS (n=33), BCSS (n=5) and tumor response (n=3). The prognostic factors with strongest evidence of association with worse OS were negative progesterone receptor status, higher tumor grade, higher circulating tumor cell (CTC) count and higher Ki67 level, number of metastatic sites (eg multiple vs single) and sites of metastases (eg presence of liver metastases vs absence), shorter time to recurrence or progression to advanced breast cancer, poor performance status, prior therapy attributes in the early or metastatic setting (type of therapy, treatment line, response of prior therapy), and race (black vs white). The prognostic factors that had strongest evidence of association with PFS included CTC count, number and sites of metastases, and absence of prior therapy or higher lines of therapy in the early or metastatic setting. The directionality of association was consistent for all prognostic factors except between lymph node and OS, and de novo metastatic breast cancer and PFS. CONCLUSION: Multiple disease, treatment, and patient-related prognostic factors impact survival, particularly OS, in patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. Treatment outcomes can vary considerably due to these factors. Understanding poorer prognostic factors for patients can result in improved clinical decision-making.

Medication adherence and persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: Proper adherence and persistence to medications are crucial for better quality of life and improved outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis (PsO), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We systematically describe current adherence and persistence patterns for RA, PsO, and PsA, with a focus on biologics and identifying factors associated with adherence and persistence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using various databases, a systematic literature review of US-based studies published from 2000 to 2015 on medication adherence and persistence to biologics and associated factors was conducted among patients with RA, PsO, and PsA. RESULTS: Using the medication possession ratio or the percentage of days covered >80%, RA and PsO adherence rates for etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab ranged from 16% to 73%, 21% to 70%, and 38% to 81%, respectively. Using the criteria of a ≥45-day gap, RA persistence rates for etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab ranged from 46% to 89%, 42% to 94%, and 41% to 76%, respectively. In PsO, persistence rates for etanercept and adalimumab ranged from 34% to 50% and 50% to 62%, respectively. Similar persistence rates were observed in PsA. Experienced biologics users showed better adherence and persistence. Younger age, female gender, higher out-of-pocket costs, greater disease severity, and more comorbidities were associated with lower adherence and persistence rates. Qualitative surveys revealed that nonpersistence was partly due to perceived ineffectiveness and safety/tolerability concerns. CONCLUSION: Biologic adherence and persistence rates in RA, PsO, and PsA in the United States were low, with significant opportunity for improvement. Various factors - including decrease in disease severity; reduction of comorbidities; lower out-of-pocket costs; refilling at specialty pharmacies; and awareness of drug effectiveness, safety, and tolerability - can inform targeted approaches to improve these rates.

Efficacy and metabolic effects of lurasidone versus brexpiprazole in schizophrenia: a network meta-analysis.

Aim: To assess the relative efficacy and metabolic effects of lurasidone and brexpiprazole in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. Methods: Five lurasidone and three brexpiprazole trials were identified. In the absence of head-to-head trials, a Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing lurasidone and brexpiprazole was performed. Results: Nonstatistically significant differences in efficacy measures were observed between lurasidone and brexpiprazole. Significant differences favoring lurasidone for weight change (-0.69 kg; 95% CrI: -1.22 to -0.15), total cholesterol (-7.60 mg/dl; 95% CrI: -13.94 to -1.22), and low-density lipoprotein (-6.58 mg/dl; 95% CrI: -12.11 to -1.04) were observed, with a trend indicating half the risk of experiencing ≥7% weight gain. Conclusion: This network meta-analysis suggested that lurasidone had similar efficacy and fewer metabolic effects than brexpiprazole in patients with acute schizophrenia.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor-methotrexate combination therapy versus triple therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials have not consistently demonstrated differences between tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) plus methotrexate and triple therapy (methotrexate plus hydroxychloroquine plus sulfasalazine) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The study objective was to estimate the efficacy, radiographic benefits, safety and patient-reported outcomes of TNFi-methotrexate versus triple therapy in patients with RA. METHODS: A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials of TNFi-methotrexate or triple therapy as one of the treatment arms in patients with an inadequate response to or who were naive to methotrexate was conducted. American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria (ACR70) at 6 months was the prespecified primary endpoint to evaluate depth of response. Data from direct and indirect comparisons between TNFi-methotrexate and triple therapy were pooled and quantitatively analysed using fixed-effects and random-effects Bayesian models. RESULTS: We analysed 33 studies in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate and 19 in patients naive to methotrexate. In inadequate responders, triple therapy was associated with lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi-methotrexate (OR 0.35, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.19 to 0.64). Most secondary endpoints tended to favour TNFi-methotrexate in terms of OR direction; however, no clear increased likelihood of achieving these endpoints was observed for either therapy. The odds of infection were lower with triple therapy than with TNFi-methotrexate (OR 0.08, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.57). There were no differences observed between the two regimens in patients naive to methotrexate. CONCLUSIONS: In this NMA, triple therapy was associated with 65% lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi-methotrexate in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate. Although secondary endpoints numerically favoured TNFi-methotrexate, no clear differences were observed. The odds of infection were greater with TNFi-methotrexate. No differences were observed for patients naive to methotrexate. These results may help inform care of patients who fail methotrexate first-line therapy.

The efficacy and tolerability of perampanel and other recently approved anti-epileptic drugs for the treatment of refractory partial onset seizure: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This paper compares the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) relative to other recently approved anti-epileptic drug (AEDs) - lacosamide (LCS), retigabine (RTG), and eslicarbazepine (ESL) for the adjunctive treatment of partial onset seizures with or without secondary generalization and specifically in the secondary generalization subgroup. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review of all RCTs of PER and selected AEDs in EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane Central from 1998 to January 2011 with an update in PubMed in March 2013 was performed. A network meta-analysis was conducted for 50% responder rate for overall seizures; withdrawal due to adverse events; seizure freedom; and 50% responder rate for secondary generalized seizures. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs (three PER, three LCS, three RTG and three ESL) were included. PER performed significantly better than placebo for 'responder rate' (OR 2.151, 95% CrI 1.348-3.472) and 'seizure freedom' (OR 2.507, 95% CrI 1.067-7.429). When compared to other agents, PER was found to be equally effective. For 'withdrawal due to adverse events', PER had the lowest odds ratio vs. placebo compared with other AEDs. In the analysis for the subgroup of patients with secondary generalization, only four RCTs (three PER and one LCS) met the inclusion criteria for one outcome (responder rate) for LCS. In this subgroup, PER was statistically significantly better than placebo (OR 2.448, 95% CrI 1.088-5.828). CONCLUSION: PER was statistically significantly superior to placebo in responder rate, seizure freedom, and responder rate in the secondary generalization population. Though PER had statistically significant greater withdrawal compared to placebo, it had the lowest ORs vs. placebo, suggesting a superior safety profile among the comparators included in this analysis. In patients with partial onset seizure with secondary generalization, PER had a statistically significant effect on responder rate compared to placebo.

Comparative effectiveness of combined pharmacologic and mechanical thromboprophylaxis versus either method alone in major orthopedic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of combination pharmacologic and mechanical venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis versus either method alone in major orthopedic surgery. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing total hip replacement, total knee replacement, or hip fracture surgery who received VTE prophylaxis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We conducted a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus databases (January 1980-July 2011) to identify trials that directly compared pharmacologic plus mechanical VTE prophylaxis to either strategy alone, evaluated United States Food and Drug Administration-approved agents, and reported rates of mortality, VTE, bleeding, and other adverse effects. Six trials were included, none of which were conducted in patients who had hip fracture surgery. The quality of each trial was evaluated, and the strength of evidence for each outcome was rated. No significant difference was found in the rate of pulmonary embolism or nonfatal pulmonary embolism when the combination of pharmacologic and mechanical prophylaxis was compared to pharmacologic prophylaxis alone, with low strength of evidence. The risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was significantly decreased in the combination group (relative risk [RR] 0.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.72]), with moderate strength of evidence, with benefits of combination therapy persisting in the total knee replacement subgroup (RR 0.41 [95% CI 0.25-0.68]). There was insufficient evidence to evaluate other final or intermediate outcomes or harms. In the comparison of combined pharmacologic and mechanical prophylaxis to mechanical prophylaxis alone, there was insufficient evidence to evaluate any final health outcomes or harms. There was no significant difference in the risk of proximal DVT when comparing combination prophylaxis to mechanical prophylaxis alone (RR 0.78 [95% CI 0.35-1.74]) based on low strength of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of DVT was decreased with the use of combination prophylaxis versus pharmacologic prophylaxis alone in patients undergoing total hip replacement or total knee replacement. However, due to primarily insufficient evidence for most outcomes evaluated, the balance of benefits to harms of combined pharmacologic and mechanical prophylaxis versus either strategy alone cannot be determined in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery.

Clinical, safety, and economic evidence in radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Thyroid cancer is the most common endocrine malignancy, with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) comprising ~93% of all thyroid cancers. While most cases of DTC are curable with the use of surgery and radioactive iodine (RAI) ablation of the remaining thyroid remnant, prognosis is dire and treatment options limited when DTC becomes RAI-refractory (RAI-R). Standard cytotoxic chemotherapy has limited efficacy, making enrollment in clinical trials of novel targeted therapies the preferred treatment approach. Thus, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review of the clinical trial scientific literature with a focus on efficacy, safety, and economics to identify all potential treatment options that have been or are currently being evaluated for the treatment of RAI-R DTC. METHODS: Embase.com (including Medline), Medline In-Process and other nonindexed citations, the Cochrane Libraries, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant recent conference proceedings were searched using predefined search criteria. Important inclusion criteria included English language, randomized controlled studies or interventional single-arm studies only, and studies of drug therapies only. Search results were screened utilizing the discretion of multiple researchers, and key data were abstracted. RESULTS: Forty-five unique trials (16 full-text, 4 conference abstracts, and 25 ClinicalTrials.gov entries) were included in the clinical review. No studies that met criteria for inclusion in the economic review were identified. Among 20 trials with results available, all were Phase II and only one was randomized. The most commonly studied drugs were tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs); other drugs included celecoxib, doxorubicin with interferon alpha-2b, rosiglitazone, selumetinib (AZD6244), thalidomide, VEGF trap, and vorinostat. Overall, efficacy and safety profiles were specific to treatment regimen, with objective response rates (ORR) ranging from 0% on gefitinib, rosiglitazone, VEGF trap, and vorinostat to 50% on lenvatinib, a TKI. CONCLUSIONS: Limited clinical research and no economic research has been conducted in RAI-R DTC. Certain treatments, notably TKIs, have shown promise in Phase II trials, and two Phase III randomized placebo-controlled trials are ongoing. New research on the economic and humanistic burden of RAI-R DTC must be paired with the clinical evidence currently in development to examine the existing burden and future promise in treating patients with RAI-R DTC.

Comparative effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparins versus other anticoagulants in major orthopedic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) versus other anticoagulants as venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of 37 randomized controlled trials. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing total hip replacement, total knee replacement, or hip fracture surgery who received prophylaxis with a LMWH or another anticoagulant. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We conducted a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus databases (1980-July 2011) to identify randomized controlled trials. Trials were included if they directly compared LMWH prophylaxis with another anticoagulant class and reported outcomes of interest. Compared with patients who received unfractionated heparin (UFH), patients who received LMWHs had fewer pulmonary embolism, total deep vein thrombosis (DVT), major bleeding, and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia events. Compared with patients who received vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), patients who received LMWHs had fewer total DVT and distal DVT events but reported increased major bleeding, minor bleeding, and surgical site bleeding events. Major efficacy end points such as symptomatic venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, and nonfatal pulmonary embolism showed similar benefits of therapy with LMWHs and VKAs. Compared with patients receiving factor Xa inhibitors, patients who received LMWHs had more major venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, total DVT, asymptomatic DVT, proximal DVT, and distal DVT events but fewer major bleeding events. Compared with patients receiving direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs), patients who received LMWHs had more major venous thromboembolism, total DVT, and proximal DVT events without significantly negatively affecting bleeding. However, patients who received LMWHs had fewer distal DVT events versus those who received DTIs. Subgroup analyses indicated differences based on the surgical procedure and individual drug within certain pharmacologic classes. CONCLUSION: According to moderate-to-high strength of evidence, LMWH prophylaxis provides additional benefits with less harm compared with UFH. With predominantly moderate strength of evidence, the balance of benefits to harms for factor Xa inhibitors or DTIs compared with LMWHs seems favorable. With predominantly low-to-moderate strength of evidence, the known benefits in total DVT and distal DVT with LMWHs versus VKAs may not be sufficient to counteract the increased risk of bleeding.

Oral antidiabetic drugs and regression from prediabetes to normoglycemia: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Impaired glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose, and elevated hemoglobin A(1c) are intermediate stages, considered prediabetes, a precursor to overt type 2 diabetes mellitus. Prediabetes is associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease, independent of diabetes development. Data have shown that various oral antidiabetic drugs can help people regress from prediabetes to normoglycemia. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of oral antidiabetic drugs in promoting regression from prediabetes to normoglycemia. METHODS: MEDLINE (1950-November 2011), EMBASE (1990-November 2011), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (indexed September 2011) were systematically searched. A manual search of references from reports of clinical trials and review articles was performed to identify additional relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials 12 weeks or more in duration evaluating any of the oral antidiabetic drugs and studying regression from prediabetes to normoglycemia were included. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (N = 11,600 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Use of oral antidiabetic drugs in prediabetic patients was shown to double the odds of achieving normoglycemia compared to controls (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.67). When individual classes of oral antidiabetic drugs were evaluated, use of thiazolidinediones (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.93 to 2.81) and α-glucosidase inhibitors (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.24) was associated with significantly increased odds. However, biguanides (OR 2.04) and sulfonylureas (OR 1.84) failed to reach statistical significance (p = 0.06 and p = 0.39, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with prediabetes, oral antidiabetic drugs were associated with increased odds of regression to normoglycemia versus placebo/control. Only thiazolidinediones and α-glucosidase inhibitors provided a statistically significant increase in odds of regressing to normoglycemia.

Prolonged versus standard-duration venous thromboprophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery is unclear. PURPOSE: To compare the benefits and harms of prolonged versus standard-duration thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery in adults. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus from 1980 to July 2011 and MEDLINE from 1980 through November 2011, without language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials reporting thromboembolic or bleeding outcomes that compared prolonged (≥21 days) with standard-duration (7 to 10 days) thromboprophylaxis. DATA ABSTRACTION: Two independent reviewers abstracted data and rated study quality and strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eight randomized, controlled trials (3 good-quality and 5 fair-quality) met the inclusion criteria. High-strength evidence showed that compared with standard-duration therapy, prolonged prophylaxis resulted in fewer cases of pulmonary embolism (PE) (5 trials; odds ratio [OR], 0.14 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.47]; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 0.8%), asymptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (4 trials; relative risk [RR], 0.48 [CI, 0.31 to 0.75]; ARR, 5.8%), symptomatic DVT (4 trials; OR, 0.36 [CI, 0.16 to 0.81]; ARR, 1.5%), and proximal DVT (6 trials; RR, 0.29 [CI, 0.16 to 0.52]; ARR, 7.1%). Moderate-strength evidence showed fewer symptomatic objectively confirmed episodes of venous thromboembolism (4 trials; RR, 0.38 [CI, 0.19 to 0.77]; ARR, 5.7%), nonfatal PE (4 trials; OR, 0.13 [CI, 0.03 to 0.54]; ARR, 0.7%), and DVT (7 trials; RR, 0.37 [CI, 0.21 to 0.64]; ARR, 12.1%) with prolonged prophylaxis. High-strength evidence showed more minor bleeding events with prolonged prophylaxis (OR, 2.44 [CI, 1.41 to 4.20]; absolute risk increase, 6.3%), and insufficient evidence from 1 trial on hip fracture surgery suggested more surgical-site bleeding events (OR, 7.55 [CI, 1.51 to 37.64]) with prolonged prophylaxis. LIMITATIONS: Data relevant to knee replacement or hip fracture surgery were scant and insufficient. Most trials had few events; the strength of evidence ratings that were used may not adequately capture uncertainty in such situations. CONCLUSION: Prolonged prophylaxis decreases the risk for venous thromboembolism, PE, and DVT while increasing the risk for minor bleeding in patients undergoing total hip replacement.

Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of adjunctive devices in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention of native vessels.

BACKGROUND: During percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dislodgement of atherothrombotic material from coronary lesions can result in distal embolization, and may lead to increased major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality. We sought to systematically review the comparative effectiveness of adjunctive devices to remove thrombi or protect against distal embolization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing PCI of native vessels. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search of Medline, the Cochrane Database, and Web of Science (January 1996-March 2011), http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, abstracts from major cardiology meetings, TCTMD, and CardioSource Plus. Two investigators independently screened citations and extracted data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of adjunctive devices plus PCI to PCI alone, evaluated patients with STEMI, enrolled a population with 95% of target lesion(s) in native vessels, and reported data on at least one pre-specified outcome. Quality was graded as good, fair or poor and the strength of evidence was rated as high, moderate, low or insufficient. Disagreement was resolved through consensus. RESULTS: 37 trials met inclusion criteria. At the maximal duration of follow-up, catheter aspiration devices plus PCI significantly decreased the risk of MACE by 27% compared to PCI alone. Catheter aspiration devices also significantly increased the achievement of ST-segment resolution by 49%, myocardial blush grade of 3 (MBG-3) by 39%, and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3 flow by 8%, while reducing the risk of distal embolization by 44%, no reflow by 48% and coronary dissection by 70% versus standard PCI alone. In a majority of trials, the use of catheter aspiration devices increased procedural time upon qualitative assessment.Distal filter embolic protection devices significantly increased the risk of target revascularization by 39% although the use of mechanical thrombectomy or embolic protection devices did not significantly impact other final health outcomes. Distal balloon or any embolic protection device increased the achievement of MBG-3 by 61% and 20% and TIMI3 flow by 11% and 6% but did not significantly impact other intermediate outcomes versus control. Upon qualitative analysis, all device categories, with exception of catheter aspiration devices, appear to significantly prolong procedure time compared to PCI alone while none appear to significantly impact ejection fraction. Many of the final health outcome and adverse event evaluations were underpowered and the safety of devices overall is unclear due to insufficient amounts of data. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI, for most devices, few RCTs evaluated final health outcomes over a long period of follow-up. Due to insufficient data, the safety of these devices is unclear.

Association between CHADS2risk factors and anticoagulation-related bleeding: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the strength of evidence supporting an accentuated bleeding risk when patients with CHADS(2) risk factors (chronic heart failure, hypertension, advanced age, diabetes, and prior stroke/transient ischemic attack) receive warfarin. METHODS: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE (January 1, 1950, through December 22, 2009) and Cochrane CENTRAL (through December 22, 2009) was conducted to identify studies that reported multivariate results on the association between CHADS(2) covariates and risk of bleeding in patients receiving warfarin. Each covariate was evaluated for its association with a specific type of bleeding. Individual evaluations were rated as good, fair, or poor using methods consistent with those recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The strength of the associations between each CHADS(2) covariate and a specific type of bleeding was determined using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria as insufficient, very low, low, moderate, or high for the entire body of evidence. RESULTS: Forty-one studies were identified, reporting 127 multivariate evaluations of the association between a CHADS(2) covariate and bleeding risk. No CHADS(2) covariate had a high strength of evidence for association with any bleeding type. For the vast majority of evaluations, the strength of evidence between covariates and bleeding was low. Advanced age was the only covariate that had a moderate strength of evidence for association; this was the strongest independent positive predictor for major bleeding. Similar findings were observed regardless of whether all included studies, or only those evaluating patients with atrial fibrillation, were assessed. CONCLUSION: The associations between CHADS(2) covariates and increased bleeding risk were weak, with the exception of age. Given the known association of the CHADS(2) score and stroke risk, the decision to prescribe warfarin should be driven more by patients' risk of stroke than by the risk of bleeding.

Neurothrombectomy devices for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke: state of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: Acute ischemic strokes are associated with poor outcomes and high health care burden. Evidence exists evaluating the use of neurothrombectomy devices in patients receiving currently recommended treatments that may have limited efficacy. PURPOSE: To describe the state of the evidence supporting use of neurothrombectomy devices in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science were searched, without language restrictions, from their inception through May 2010. The MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials searches were updated through November 2010. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent investigators screened citations for human studies of any design or case series or case reports of patients with an acute ischemic stroke that evaluated a neurothrombectomy device and reported at least 1 clinical effectiveness outcome or harm. DATA EXTRACTION: Using standardized protocols, 2 independent investigators extracted information about study characteristics and outcomes, and a third reviewer resolved disagreement. DATA SYNTHESIS: 87 articles met eligibility criteria, including 18 prospective single-group studies, 7 noncomparative retrospective studies, and 62 case series or case reports. Two U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared devices, the MERCI Retriever (Concentric Medical, Mountain View, California) (40%) and the Penumbra System (Penumbra, Alameda, California) (9%), represented a large portion of the available data. All prospective and retrospective studies provided data on successful recanalization with widely varying rates (43% to 78% with the MERCI Retriever and 83% to 100% with the Penumbra System). Rates of harms, including symptomatic (16 studies; 0% to 10% with the MERCI Retriever and 0% to 11% with the Penumbra System) or asymptomatic (13 studies; 28% to 43% and 1% to 30%, respectively) intracranial hemorrhage and vessel perforation or dissection (11 studies; 0% to 7% and 0% to 5%, respectively), also varied by device. Predictors of harm included older age, history of stroke, and higher baseline stroke severity scores, whereas successful recanalization was the sole predictor of good outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Most available data are from single-group, noncomparative studies. In addition, the patient population most likely to benefit from these devices is undetermined. CONCLUSION: Currently available neurothrombectomy devices offer intriguing treatment options in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Future trials should use a randomized design, with adequate power to show equivalency or noninferiority between competing strategies or devices, and strive to identify populations that are most likely to benefit from use of neurothrombectomy devices. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.