Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of methotrexate in the management of inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: Background:The therapeutic role of methotrexate (MTX) for management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains unclear. Methods:We systematically reviewed randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of MTX for induction and maintenance of remission in IBD until January 2020 in accordance with PROSPERO protocol (#CRD42018115047). Relative risk (RR) of maintenance of remission, induction of remission, endoscopic disease activity, and adverse events were combined in a meta-analysis. Findings:MTX monotherapy was not superior to placebo for induction of clinical remission in Crohn's disease (CD). However, MTX was superior to placebo in maintaining clinical remission of CD. Concomitant therapy with MTX and the TNF inhibitor infliximab (IFX) was not superior to IFX monotherapy in CD. In ulcerative colitis (UC), MTX monotherapy was not superior to placebo neither for induction of clinical remission, nor for maintenance of clinical remission. MTX did not result in superior endoscopic outcomes during induction or maintenance therapy compared with placebo. Regarding adverse events (AEs), our meta-analysis on CD studies showed a significantly higher risk of AEs when comparing MTX versus placebo in studies investigating induction of remission, but not in maintenance of remission. In UC, no such differences in AEs between MTX or placebo were observed. Interpretation:Current data support the efficacy of parenteral MTX monotherapy for maintenance of clinical remission in CD. MTX is not confirmed to be effective for treatment of UC or for induction of remission in CD. No evidence supports concomitant MTX to improve efficacy of IFX (no other biologics investigated).

SUBMITTER: Nielsen OH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7152823 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of methotrexate in the management of inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Nielsen Ole Haagen OH Steenholdt Casper C Juhl Carsten Bogh CB Rogler Gerhard G

EClinicalMedicine 20200204

<h4>Background</h4>The therapeutic role of methotrexate (MTX) for management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains unclear.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of MTX for induction and maintenance of remission in IBD until January 2020 in accordance with PROSPERO protocol (#CRD42018115047). Relative risk (RR) of maintenance of remission, induction of remission, endoscopic disease activity, and adverse events were combined in a meta-analysis.<h4>Fi ...[more]

PMID: 32300735

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectEldecalcitol (ED-71) is a vitamin D analog for the treatment of osteoporosis. However, inconsistent results have been reported in this regard. Hence, this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ED-71 for osteoporosis.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify potential trials from inception until April 2021. The investigated outcomes included bone mineral density and fractures at various sites, and potential adverse events. The pooled effect estimates were calculated using weighted mean difference (WMD) and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model.ResultsEight RCTs involving 2368 patients were selected for the final meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that ED-71 were associated with a higher level of femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD) (WMD: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.24-1.60; P = 0.008), while it had no significant effect on lumbar spine BMD (WMD: 1.09; 95% CI: -0.11 to 2.30; P = 0.076) and hip BMD (WMD: 1.12; 95% CI: -0.16 to 2.40; P = 0.088). Moreover, the use of ED-71 could protect against the risk of all osteoporotic fracture (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.55-0.88; P = 0.003) and vertebral fracture (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.55-0.98; P = 0.038), while it did not affect the risk of nonvertebral fracture (RR: 0.53; 95%CI: 0.23-1.23; P = 0.140). The subgroup analyses found that the effects of ED-71 were superior to those of alfacalcidol on both BMD and fracture results. Moreover, the use of ED-71 plus bisphosphonate was associated with a greater improvement in BMD at various sites compared with bisphosphonate alone. Finally, ED-71 was associated with an increased risk of increased urine calcium level (RR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.33-2.15; P < 0.001).ConclusionThis study found that the use of ED-71 could improve BMD and fractures at various sites, especially compared with alfacalcidol or a combination with bisphosphonate for patients with osteoporosis.Systematic review registration[http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero], identifier [CRD42021270536].

Project description:BackgroundRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined the efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with inconsistent results. We performed a meta-analysis to assess both the short- and long-term efficacy of FMT in IBS.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched through September 2021. RCTs recruiting adult patients with IBS that compared FMT with placebo with dichotomous data of response to therapy were eligible. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of symptom not improving after therapy. RR was also pooled for adverse events (AEs). Continuous data were calculated using a mean difference for IBS-Quality of Life (IBS-QoL). GRADE methodology was used to assess quality of evidence.ResultsThe search strategy generated 658 citations. Seven RCTs comprising 472 patients with IBS were included. FMT was not associated with a significant improvement in global symptom in IBS at 12 weeks in comparison with placebo (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43-1.31) with high heterogeneity between studies (I2 87%). Subgroup analyses showed that FMT was superior to placebo when administered via colonoscopy or gastroscope (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51-0.96; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.99, respectively, while FMT was inferior to placebo when administered via oral capsules (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.06-3.35). FMT induced a significant improvement in IBS-QoL compared to placebo (mean difference 9.39, 95% CI 3.86-14.91) at 12 weeks. No significant difference in the total number of AEs was observed between FMT and placebo (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.59-2.47). FMT did not significantly improve global symptom in IBS at 1-year follow-up compared with placebo (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72-1.12). The GRADE quality evidence to support recommending FMT in IBS was very low.ConclusionIBS patients may benefit from FMT when administered via colonoscopy or gastroscope. FMT may improve the quality of life of IBS. The long-term use of FMT in IBS warrants further investigation. There is very-low-quality evidence to support recommending FMT in IBS.

Project description:AimWe assessed the efficacy and safety of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT3) receptor antagonists in adults with non-constipated irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) or diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D).MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with non-constipated IBS or IBS-D that compared 5-HT3 receptor antagonists with placebo or other conventional treatment. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for improving global IBS symptoms, abdominal pain and abnormal bowel habits, or stool consistency symptoms after therapy, and adverse events, including constipation. Meta- analysis was performed with Mantel Haenszel method using Revman 5.3 software.ResultsWe included 21 RCTs; 16 were high quality (Jadad score ≥ 4). The pooled RR of global IBS symptoms improved by 5-HT3 receptor antagonists versus placebo or mebeverine was 1.56 (95% CI: 1.43-1.71); alosetron, ramosetron, and cilansetron had similar treatment effects. The pooled RR of abdominal pain relieved by 5-HT3 receptor antagonists versus placebo was 1.33 (95% CI: 1.26-1.39). The pooled RR showed that 5-HT3 receptor antagonists improved abnormal bowel habits or stool consistency symptoms (RR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.33, 1.99). The pooled RR of adverse events following 5-HT3 receptor antagonist treatment was 1.15 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.22). Subgroup analysis indicated that alosetron had a high rate of adverse effects (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.25); adverse events following ramosetron treatment were not statistically significantly different. 5-HT3 receptor antagonists were likelier to cause constipation: the pooled RR of constipation developing with 5-HT3 receptor antagonist versus placebo was 3.71 (95% CI: 2.98-4.61). However, constipation was likelier in patients with non-constipated IBS after taking 5-HT3 receptor antagonists than in patients with IBS-D only (non-constipated IBS and IBS-D: RR = 5.28 [95% CI: 3.93, 7.08] vs. IBS-D only 3.24 [2.54, 4.12]).ConclusionsRamosetron, cilansetron, ondansetron, and alosetron are effective for treating non-constipated IBS and IBS-D. Our systematic review found rare serious adverse events.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of methotrexate in the management of inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Publications

Efficacy and safety of methotrexate in the management of inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets