Dataset Information

Acupuncture for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: Protocol for a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) often suffer from progressive worsening of dyspnea and lung function. Although 2 drugs are now available for IPF treatment, many gaps are still to be filled. Evidences suggest that there may be some beneficial effect of acupuncture on pulmonary diseases. This review aims to systematically determine the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for treating IPF.

Methods

The following 8 databases will be searched from their inception to March 20, 2017: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, and Wanfang Data. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for IPF without restriction of publication status will be included. Two review authors will independently undertake study selection, extraction of data, and assessment of study quality. Meta-analysis will be conducted after screening of studies if possible. Dichotomous data will be analyzed using odds ratio (OR), and continuous data mean difference (MD). Statistical analysis will be conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) software.

Results

This systematic review will provide a detailed summary of the current evidences related to the efficacy and safety of acupuncture in improving breathlessness, exercise limitation, health status impairment of patients with IPF.

Conclusion

This evidence may be useful to clinicians, patients, and health policy-makers with regard to the use of acupuncture in IPF treatment.

Ethics and dissemination

This systematic review will provide up-to-date information on acupuncture for IPF. This review does not require ethical approval and will be disseminated electronically through a peer-reviewed publication or conference presentations.

Trial registration number

PROSPERO 2017:CRD42017059848.

SUBMITTER: Xie Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6392987 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis(IPF) is chronic fibrosing interstitial pneumonia of unknown aetiology. IPF is diagnosed based on the exclusion of known causes such as connective tissue diseases(CTDs). However, some patients fail to meet defined CTD criteria regardless of an implication of immunological involvement and these cases were described in a variety of terms. The classification criteria of this clinical entity consist of a combination of clinical, serological and morphological findings and it is reported to be distinct from IPF. However, the significance of the sole presence of autoantibodies complicated with IPF is still unknown. Therefore, this systematic review aims to clarify the significance of autoantibodies complicated with IPF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:IPF with any autoantibody associated with CTDs is eligible for the review. Primary outcomes are all-cause mortality and pulmonary-cause mortality, while secondary outcomes include a progression of the disease, a deterioration of health-related quality of life and the development of a defined CTD. Primary studies of any type except a case report are included. Two reviewers search four electronic databases such as Medline, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Google Scholar from each inception through 1 February 2018 and extract data independently. A risk of bias in individual studies is assessed by the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Meta-analysis is sought to be conducted if three or more studies report an outcome for a specific autoantibody with the same statistics. If it is inappropriate to combine data due to substantial heterogeneity, the result is reported qualitatively. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses are considered to identify the source of heterogeneity. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation method is applied to evaluate the evidence level of the result. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:There is no concerning ethical issue. The result will be sought for publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017077336.

Project description:BackgroundIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is one of the common types of interstitial lung disease having high prevalence and mortality worldwide. As a result of patient-centred hindering factors of adherence to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), home-based PR is an alternate mode of rehabilitating individuals with IPF. This systematic review will evaluate the effectiveness of unsupervised home-based PR on functional capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in individuals with IPF.MethodsClinically stable, high resolution computed tomography and physician diagnosed IPF participants having modified Medical Research Council score below 5 will be considered for the systematic review. Studies involving home-based PR as an intervention to treat individuals with IPF will be considered. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised studies (with two groups followed up) are eligible to be included. Outcomes of our interest are functional capacity (6-min walk distance, shuttle walk test and incremental shuttle walk test) and secondary outcome measure would include assessment of quality of life and adverse effects of intervention. Electronic databases such as SCOPUS, Medline (PubMed and Web of Science), PEDRo and CINAHL will be searched using database specific terms. Additionally, forward and backward citations of included studies will be searched to identify potential records. Two review authors, independently, will conduct the screening, data extraction using a customised standard tool, and critical appraisal using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool of included studies. If data permits, meta-analysis will be conducted. In case of substantial heterogeneity, we will do a narrative synthesis. Subgroup analysis will be undertaken based on various contextual and interventional factors.DiscussionThis review will provide comprehensive evidence on the effectiveness of unsupervised home-based PR to physiotherapists, policy makers and researchers who are interested in IPF management. Findings from this review may guide the development and evaluation of more robust evidence based home-based PR that aimed to improve functional capacity among people with IPF.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020213883.

Project description:IntroductionIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a form of chronic fibrosing interstitial pneumonia with unknown disease aetiology. Acute exacerbation (AE) of IPF is an accelerated disease progression beyond its expected course. A 30-day mortality of AE of IPF is 40%. While death may occur, there is much variation in the clinical progression of this condition. Previous attempts have been made to investigate various possible prognostic factors for AE of IPF; however, they have yet to be confirmed. The aim of this systematic review is to clarify these prognostic factors.Methods and analysisIn this review, AE of IPF is the condition of interest, which has been defined according to previously established diagnostic criteria. The primary outcomes of interest include short-term all-cause mortality and pulmonary-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes of interest include long-term mortality and hospital separation for the disease. Primary studies investigating prognostic factors for AE of IPF are eligible for inclusion in this review. All study types are permitted except case reports. Two reviewers will search electronic databases, such as Medline and EMBASE, from 2002 to the 1 April 2019 and extract data independently. Risk of bias in individual studies will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Meta-analysis will be conducted for univariate data if at least three studies report the effect of a specific prognostic factor using similar statistical methods. Multivariate results will be reported qualitatively. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be considered with the aim of generalising findings to the clinical settings and drawing more robust conclusions. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method will be applied to evaluate the quality of evidence for each prognostic factor.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be required. Results will be reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42018106172.

Project description:IntroductionInflammatory bowel disease is a relapsing chronic gastrointestinal inflammatory disease. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is a rare but serious extraintestinal pulmonary manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease. However, the relationship between these two conditions is unclear. Therefore, this study aims to elucidate this relationship through a systematic review and meta-analysis, focusing on the risk of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.MethodsThe systematic review will be outlined according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols and its extension statement for reporting systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of healthcare interventions: checklist and explanations. Original articles published in any language will be searched in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Ovid. Observational studies that reveal an association measure between idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and inflammatory bowel disease will be included (cross sectional, cohort, and case-control trials). Two independent reviewers will be assigned to evaluate study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies in meta-analyses. Sensitivity analyses will be conducted based on the quality of included studies. All relevant studies will be assessed based on the study type, sample size, inflammatory bowel disease subtype, odds ratio, confidence interval, treatment strategy, and follow-up. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach will be used to rate the quality of the evidence.DiscussionThe results of this meta-analysis may show that patients with inflammatory bowel disease are at higher risk of developing idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. This study will be the first meta-analysis to focus on the association between inflammatory bowel disease and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Exploring the relationship between the two conditions may further enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and promote the development of related research fields.

Project description:BackgroundThe antifibrotics pirfenidone and nintedanib are both approved for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) by regulatory agencies and are recommended by health technology assessment bodies. Other treatments such as N-acetylcysteine are used in clinical practice but have not received regulatory approval. No head-to-head trials have been conducted to directly compare the efficacy of these therapies in IPF.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of treatments for IPF.MethodsA systematic review was conducted up to April 2015. Phase II/III randomized controlled trials in adults with IPF were eligible. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to compare pirfenidone, nintedanib, and N-acetylcysteine with respect to forced vital capacity (FVC) and mortality.ResultsNine studies were included in the NMA. For change from baseline in FVC, the NMA indicated that pirfenidone and nintedanib were more effective than placebo after 1 year (pirfenidone vs. placebo: difference = 0.12 liter (L), 95% credible interval [CrI] = 0.03-0.21 L; nintedanib vs. placebo: difference = 0.11 L, 95% CrI = 0.00-0.22 L). There was no evidence that N-acetylcysteine had an effect on FVC compared with placebo (N-acetylcysteine vs. placebo: difference = 0.01 L, 95% CrI = -0.15-0.17 L). Patients treated with pirfenidone also had a lower risk of experiencing a decline in percent predicted FVC of ≥ 10% over 1 year (odds ratio [OR]: 0.58, 95% CrI = 0.40-0.88), whereas there was no conclusive evidence of a difference between nintedanib and placebo (OR: 0.65, 95% CrI = 0.42-1.02). The NMA indicated that pirfenidone reduced all-cause mortality relative to placebo over 1 year (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52, 95% CrI = 0.28-0.92). There was no evidence of a difference in all-cause mortality between nintedanib and placebo (HR: 0.70, 95% CrI = 0.32-1.55), or N-acetylcysteine and placebo (HR: 2.00, 95% CrI=0.46-8.62).ConclusionsOur primary analysis of the available evidence indicates that over 1 year, pirfenidone and nintedanib are effective at reducing lung-function decline, and pirfenidone may reduce the odds of experiencing a decline in percent predicted FVC of ≥10% compared with placebo in the first year of treatment. The results of our analysis also suggest that pirfenidone improves survival.DisclosuresFleetwood is an employee of Quantics Consulting. McCool and Glanville are employees of York Health Economics Consortium (YHEC). Quantics and YHEC received funding from F. Hoffmann-La Roche for conducting the systematic review and network meta-analysis reported in this paper. Edwards, Gsteiger, and Daigl are employees of F. Hoffmann-La Roche. Fisher was employed by InterMune UK, a wholly owned Roche subsidiary, until July 2015. He is currently employed by FIECON, which has received funding from F. Hoffmann-La Roche for consulting services. The systematic review and network meta-analysis reported in this paper were conducted by Fleetwood (Quantics Consulting) and McCool and Glanville (YHEC), funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche. The original network analysis was funded by InterMune. Study concept and design were contributed by Edwards, Gsteiger, and Daigl, along with Fleetwood, McCool, and Glanville. Fleetwood, McCool, and Glanville collected the data, with assistance from Edwards, Gsteiger, and Daigl. Data interpretation was performed by Fleetwood and Fisher, with assistance from the other authors. The manuscript was written by Fleetwood, McCool, and Glanville, with assistance from Edwards, Daigl, and Fisher, and revised by all the authors.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a distinct form of interstitial pneumonia with unknown origin and poor prognosis. Current pharmacologic treatments are limited and lung transplantation is a viable option for appropriate patients. The aim of this review was to summarize lung transplantation survival in IPF patients overall, between single (SLT) vs. bilateral lung transplantation (BLT), pre- and post Lung Allocation Score (LAS), and summarize wait-list survival. METHODS: A systematic review of English-language studies published in Medline or Embase between 1990 and 2013 was performed. Eligible studies were those of observational design reporting survival post-lung transplantation or while on the wait list among IPF patients. RESULTS: Median survival post-transplantation among IPF patients is estimated at 4.5 years. From ISHLT and OPTN data, one year survival ranged from 75% - 81%; 3-year: 59% - 64%; and 5-year: 47% - 53%. Post-transplant survival is lower for IPF vs. other underlying pre-transplant diagnoses. The proportion of IPF patients receiving BLT has steadily increased over the last decade and a half. Unadjusted analyses suggest improved long-term survival for BLT vs. SLT; after adjustment for patient characteristics, the differences tend to disappear. IPF patients account for the largest proportion of patients on the wait list and while wait list time has decreased, the number of transplants for IPF patients has increased over time. OPTN data show that wait list mortality is higher for IPF patients vs. other diagnoses. The proportion of IPF patients who died while awaiting transplantation ranged from 14% to 67%. While later transplant year was associated with increased survival, no significant differences were noted pre vs. post LAS implementation; however a high LAS vs low LAS was associated with decreased one-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: IPF accounts for the largest proportion of patients awaiting lung transplants, and IPF is associated with higher wait-list and post-transplant mortality vs. other diagnoses. Improved BLT vs. SLT survival may be the result of selection bias. Survival pre- vs. post LAS appears to be similar except for IPF patients with high LAS, who have lower survival compared to pre-LAS. Data on post-transplant morbidity outcomes are sparse.