Topical bromfenac in VEGF-driven maculopathies: topical review and meta-analysis
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kulikov A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11344392 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Intraocular surgery is associated with increased ocular inflammation. If maintained for a prolonged period after surgery, this inflammation can cause various complications, including subconjunctival fibrosis and bleb scarring. This clinical trial was a prospective, randomised, single-blind, interventional study comparing the efficacy and safety of 0.1% bromfenac sodium ophthalmic solution and 0.02% fluorometholone ophthalmic suspension in the inhibition of multiple inflammatory cytokines in the aqueous humour of 26 patients with pseudophakic eyes who had undergone phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation. The patients were randomly assigned to one of the trial drugs, and aqueous humour samples were collected before and after drug administration. Platelet-derived growth factor-AA levels significantly decreased in both drug groups, but they were significantly higher in the fluorometholone group than in the bromfenac group (P = 0.034). Bromfenac also significantly decreased vascular endothelial growth factor level (P = 0.0077), as well as monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 level (P = 0.013), which was elevated for a prolonged period after phacoemulsification. These data suggest that bromfenac is useful to alleviate prolonged microenvironmental alterations in the aqueous humour of pseudophakic eyes.
| S-EPMC7966778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Inflammation is a key pathogenic factor in age-related macular degeneration (AMD). However, the clinical importance of combining anti-VEGF agents and topical NSAIDs to reduce inflammation remains unclear. In this study, we systematically reviewed clinical trials comparing combined treatment versus anti-VEGF alone in AMD patients. We quantified treatment effects via meta-analysis. The pooled weighted mean difference (WMD, -0.91, 95%CI: -1.39 to -0.42, P = 0.0003) demonstrates that combined treatment may reduce required anti-VEGF injection number, probably by means of decreasing central retina thickness (CRT) (WMD = -22.9, 95% CI: -41.20 to -4.59, P = 0.01). The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) did not change significantly between these two groups (WMD = - 0.01, 95%CI: -0.23 to 0.20, P = 0.90). Topical NSAIDs slightly increased the incidence of foreign body sensation (Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.63, 95%Cl: 1.06 to 6.52, P = 0.76). Combining topical NSAIDs and anti-VEGF agents may provide a new strategy for AMD treatment.
| S-EPMC5630133 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Unlabelled: A previous systematic review reported that topical NSAIDs were effective in relieving pain in chronic conditions like osteoarthritis and tendinitis. More trials, a better understanding of trial quality and bias, and a reclassification of certain drugs necessitate a new review.MethodsStudies were identified by searching electronic databases, and writing to manufacturers. We identified randomised, double blind trials comparing topical NSAID with either placebo or another active treatment, in adults with chronic pain. The primary outcome was a reduction in pain of approximately 50% at two weeks, and secondary outcomes were local and systemic adverse events and adverse event-related withdrawals. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat (NNT), and relative harm and number-needed-to-harm (NNH) were calculated, and the effects of trial quality, validity and size, outcome reported, and condition treated, were examined by sensitivity analyses.ResultsTwelve new trials were added to 13 trials from a previous review. Fourteen double blind placebo-controlled trials had information from almost 1,500 patients. Topical NSAID was significantly better than placebo with relative benefit 1.9 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.2), NNT 4.6 (95% confidence interval 3.8 to 5.9). Results were not affected by trial quality, validity or size, outcome reported, or condition treated. Three trials with 764 patients comparing a topical with an oral NSAID found no difference in efficacy. Local adverse events (6%), systemic adverse events (3%), or the numbers withdrawing due to an adverse event were the same for topical NSAID and placebo.ConclusionsTopical NSAIDs were effective and safe in treating chronic musculoskeletal conditions for two weeks. Larger and longer trials are necessary to fully elucidate the place of topical NSAIDs in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC516039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Ocular surface squamous neoplasia (OSSN) has different treatment modalities. Although surgical excision has been the gold standard therapeutic option, topical pharmacotherapy agents such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), interferon alfa-2b (IFN) and mitomycin-C (MMC) are also commonly used. The protocol was registered (CRD42021224961). Comprehensive literature research was carried out to compare topical pharmacotherapy (5-FU or IFN or MMC) to surgical excision regarding clinical success (tumor resolution), recurrence and complications in patients undergoing treatment for OSSN. From 7859 records, 7 articles were included in the qualitative and 4 in the quantitative synthesis. The outcomes of surgical excision and topical pharmacotherapy were comparable in the included articles. There were no significant differences between surgical excision and topical pharmacotherapy regarding the clinical success [odds ratio (OR): 0.785; confidence interval (CI): 0.130-4.736, P = 0.792)] and tumor recurrence (OR: 0.746; CI: 0.213-2.609; P = 0.646). The most common side effect of the different therapeutic options was dry eye. The highest rate of dry eye symptoms was reported after surgical excision (in 59%). Topical pharmacotherapy with all the 3 agents is as effective and well-tolerable as surgical excision in terms of tumor resolution, recurrence rate and side effects in all OSSN patients suggesting similar long-term clinical benefits.
| S-EPMC9392743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary outcome(s): Colorectal cancer incidence, Colorectal tumor incidence
| 79216 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:Background: The incidence and mortality of sepsis are increasing year by year, and there is still a lack of specific biomarkers to predict its prognosis. Prognostic value of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in predicting the severity and mortality of sepsis has been gradually discovered. Methods: Literature was searched through Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI) and Cochrane Library databases in March 2022. Observational studies, evaluating the impact of VEGF in sepsis outcomes (mortality and severity) are included in this meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were also assessed. Meta-regression analysis were performed to identify the potential sources of heterogeneity. Result: A total of 1,574 articles were retrieved from the systematic literature search. We included 20 studies for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Deceased and critically ill patients had higher baseline VEGF levels than survivors and non-severe patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for VEGF predicts sepsis mortality were 0.79and 0.76, respectively. the area under the SROC curve was 0.83. Conclusion: High VEGF are associated with poor clinical outcomes for patients diagnosed with sepsis. This study was recorded on PROSPERO, under the registration ID: CRD42022323079.
| S-EPMC9355294 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: Topical Chinese herbal medicine (TCHM) is widely used to prevent radiodermatitis in patients who receive radiation therapy in China. However, evidence regarding its efficacy remains limited. The purpose of the review is to evaluate the effects of TCHM in preventing radiodermatitis. Methods: The protocol of this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020220620). Relevant clinical trials were identified (from January 1, 2010, to April 24, 2022) through 11 electronic databases, including PubMed, SpringerLink, Proquest, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, the ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure Databases, Wangfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and the Chongqing VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database. The quality of the included trials was assessed through a risk of bias assessment using Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2.0). We included RCTs that compared TCHM single used or as adjunctive treatment with routine drugs, conventional therapy, or placebo for cancer patients who are about to start radiation therapy and do not possess any type of dermatitis or skin lesions at that time. Primary outcomes of interest were the incidence of radiodermatitis and the grade of radiodermatitis according to the RTOG (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group). Secondary outcomes included the recovery time of skin and mucosa, the occurrence time of radiodermatitis, the radiation dose, quality of life, and adverse events. Data were summarized using risk ratio (RR) calculations and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes or mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Certainty of the evidence was assessed according to the GRADE criteria. Results: In this review, 38 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Risk of bias assessment through RoB 2.0 showed that two studies were rated as low risk, two studies were rated as high risk, and the rest were rated as having some concerns. Compared with routine drugs, TCHM may have an advantage in reducing RTOG grading (RR = 0.46, 95%CI 0.35-0.60), decreasing the recovery time of radiodermatitis (MD = -2.35, 95%CI 3.58 to -1.12 days), delaying the occurrence of radiodermatitis (MD = 2.36, 95%CI 1.74-2.98), and improving the quality of life of patients (RR = 1.46, 95%CI 1.03-2.06). Compared with conventional therapy, TCHM may also have an advantage in decreasing the grade of RTOG (RR = 0.28, 95%CI 0.21-0.38). Conclusion: Current low evidence revealed that TCHM may have better efficacy in the prevention of radiodermatitis; however, more high-quality RCTs are still warranted to testify this conclusion. Systematic Review Registration: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020220620), identifier (PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020220620).
| S-EPMC9257048 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ProblemTo determine the safety and efficacy of topical corticosteroid versus vehicle/moisturizer in children under 2 years old (<2 y).Eligibility criteriaA systematic review and meta-analysis searching PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE, NHS Economic Evaluation, CINAHL, GREAT, and Clinicaltrials.gov. We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing topical corticosteroids to vehicle/moisturizer and included children <2 y. Two authors extracted data.SampleOnly one study limited analyses to children <2 y, so our review included participants older than 2 years. Twelve RCTs were included with 2224 participants. Ten studies were industry-sponsored.ResultsThe proportion of responders to topical corticosteroid across studies was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.54-0.74), as compared to vehicle/moisturizer 0.32 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.20-0.48). The proportion of adverse events were similar between groups (topical steroids 0.17 (95% CI, 0.08-0.33) vs. vehicle/moisturizer 0.12 (CI 0.02-0.42)). High heterogeneity in treatment response occurred across studies that could not be explained by potential moderators. Mild adrenal suppression occurred in 4 of 157 measured participants (3%) receiving topical corticosteroids. Limitations include the few RCTs on this topic, the inclusion of participants >2 y and outcome measures and reporting methods rarely met CONSORT guidelines.ConclusionsTopical corticosteroids trended to being more effective and equally safe to vehicle/moisturizers, but generalizability is limited given the dearth of well-designed studies focused on children <2 y. Adverse events from vehicle/moisturizer may be greater than topical corticosteroid due to under treatment.ImplicationsFurther work is needed in this age group.
| S-EPMC7444023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEvidence for the effectiveness of topical treatments, in providing symptomatic relief from ocular allergy, remains uncertain.AimsTo assess the effectiveness and relative efficacy of topical treatments for the management of seasonal allergic conjunctivitis.Design of studyA systematic review and meta-analysis.SettingA literature search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, and EMBASE bibliographic databases.MethodDouble-masked randomised controlled trials were identified, that compared the use of topical mast cell stabilisers (sodium cromoglycate, nedocromil, lodoxamide) with placebo, topical antihistamines with placebo, and topical mast cell stabilisers with topical antihistamines.ResultsA meta-analysis of six trials showed that patients using sodium cromoglycate were 17 times (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4 to 78) more likely to perceive benefit compared with those using a placebo, although this estimate may be partially influenced by publication bias. Five trials indicated that those patients using nedocromil were 1.8 times (95% CI = 1.3 to 2.6) more likely to perceive their allergy to be moderately or totally controlled than those using a placebo. Four trials showed that those using antihistamines were 1.3 times (95% CI = 0.8 to 2.2) more likely to perceive a 'good' treatment effect than those using mast cell stabilisers, although this beneficial effect was not statistically significant. Limited evidence suggests that antihistamines might have a faster therapeutic effect compared to mast cell stabilisers.ConclusionOverall, these findings confirm the benefit of topical mast cell stabilisers and antihistamines over placebo for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis. There is, however, insufficient evidence to recommend the use of one type of medication over another. Treatment preferences should therefore be based on convenience of use (with reduced frequency of instillation for some preparations), patient preference, and costs, especially as important side effects were not reported with any medication.
| S-EPMC1266207 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA previous systematic review reported that topical NSAIDs were effective in relieving pain in acute conditions like sprains and strains, with differences between individual drugs for efficacy. More trials, a better understanding of trial quality and bias, and a reclassification of certain drugs necessitate a new review.MethodsStudies were identified by searching electronic databases and writing to manufacturers. We selected randomised double blind trials comparing topical NSAID with either placebo or another active treatment in adults with acute pain, and extracted dichotomous information approximating to a 50% reduction in pain at one week, together with details of adverse events and withdrawals. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat (NNT), and relative risk and number-needed-to-harm (NNH) were calculated, with sensitivity analyses where appropriate to investigate differences between individual drugs and aspects of trial design.ResultsTwenty-six double blind placebo controlled trials had information from 2,853 patients for evaluation of efficacy. Topical NSAID was significantly better than placebo in 19 of the 26 trials, with a pooled relative benefit of 1.6 (95% confidence interval 1.4 to 1.7), and NNT of 3.8 (95% confidence interval 3.4 to 4.4) compared with placebo for the outcome of half pain relief at seven days. Results were not affected by outcome reported, or condition treated, but smaller trials yielded a larger estimate of efficacy. Indirect comparisons of individual topical NSAIDs showed that ketoprofen was significantly better than all other topical NSAIDs, while indomethacin was barely distinguished from placebo. Three trials, with 433 patients, compared topical with oral NSAID (two trials compared the same drug, one compared different drugs) and found no difference in efficacy. Local adverse events, systemic adverse events, or withdrawals due to an adverse event were rare, and no different between topical NSAID and placebo.ConclusionsTopical NSAIDs were effective and safe in treating acute painful conditions for one week.
| S-EPMC420463 | biostudies-literature