Comparative effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for patients with COVID-19: Protocol for a systematic review and individual-patient data network meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Cao Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7652299 | biostudies-literature | 2020
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Comparative effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for patients with COVID-19: Protocol for a systematic review and individual-patient data network meta-analysis.
Cao Yulong Y Shan Jiao J Gong Zhizhong Z Kuang Jiqiu J Gao Yan Y
PloS one 20201109 11
<h4>Background</h4>A recent cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China, has been caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We propose the protocol described below to perform an individual-patient data (IPD) network meta-analysis (NMA) in order to evaluate the efficacies of different antiviral drugs to treat patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We will search the Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI and VIP datab ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:All possible direct-acting antiviral agent (DAA) regimens for treatment-naive hepatitis C genotype 1 were evaluated by many randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, the optimum regimen remains inconclusive. We aim to compare interventions in terms of sustained virological response at 12 (SVR12) and 24 (SVR24) weeks after the end of treatment and adverse effects (AEs) (fatigue, headache, nausea, insomnia). PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs until July 31, 2015. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) between treatments on clinical outcomes. Twenty-two eligible RCTs were included. Compared with peginterferon-ribavirin (PR), daclatasvir plus PR (OR 8.90, P < 0.001), faldaprevir plus PR (OR 3.72, P < 0.001), simeprevir plus PR (OR 3.59, P < 0.001), sofosbuvir plus PR (OR 4.69, P < 0.001) yield a significant effect in improving SVR12. Consistently, simeprevir plus PR (OR 3.49, P < 0.001), sofosbuvir plus PR (OR 4.51, P < 0.001), daclatasvir plus PR (OR 4.77, P < 0.001) also improved the rates of SVR24 significantly compared with PR. With respect to AEs, compared with PR, ledipasvir plus sofosbuvir plus PR (OR 2.13, P < 0.001) confer a significant AE in nausea, whereas daclatasvir plus PR (OR 0.20, P < 0.001 and OR 0.18, P < 0.001, respectively) lowered the incidence of fatigue and nausea significantly when compared with ledipasvir plus sofosbuvir plus PR. Daclatasvir plus PR was the most effective in SVR12 and SVR24, but caused an increased AEs profile (headache and insomnia). Combined ledipasvir with sofosbuvir or combination of PR was associated with higher incidence of fatigue and nausea.
| S-EPMC4782908 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThrombolytic agents and anticoagulants are the two classes of medication used in the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). There is continuous renewal and iteration of thrombolytic agents, and the efficacy and adverse effects of different agents have different effects on PE due to their different mechanisms of action.ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different thrombolytic agents in the treatment of all types of acute PE: hemodynamically unstable PE (massive PE) and hemodynamically stable PE (submassive PE and low-risk PE), using a network meta-analysis.MethodsA search was conducted of the following databases: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thrombolytic agents with heparin or other thrombolytic agents in patients with acute PE; the clinical outcomes included patient mortality, recurrent PE, pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) after treatment, and major and minor bleeding. The measurement duration of outcome indicators was the longest follow-up period. Thereafter, a network meta-analysis was performed using a Bayesian network framework.ResultsA total of 29 RCTs (3,067 patients) were included, of which 6 studies (304 patients) were massive PE, 14 studies (2,173 patients) were submassive PE, 1 study (83 patients) included massive and submassive PE, and 8 studies (507 patients) were PE of unknown type. The treatment regimens included thrombolytic therapy (alteplase, reteplase, tenecteplase, streptokinase, and urokinase) and anticoagulant therapy alone. The results showed that the mortality using thrombolytic agents (except tenecteplase) was significantly lower compared with heparin. The recurrence of PE with alteplase was significantly lower compared with heparin (RR = 0.23, 95% CI, 0.04, 0.65). The PASP after using alteplase was significantly lower compared with heparin (mean difference = -11.36, 95% CI, -21.45, -1.56). Compared with heparin, the incidence of minor bleeding associated with tenecteplase was higher (RR = 3.27, 95% CI, 1.36, 7.39); compared with streptokinase, the incidence of minor bleeding associated with tenecteplase was higher (RR = 3.22, 95% CI, 1.01, 11.10).ConclusionFor patients with acute PE, four thrombolytic agents (alteplase, reteplase, streptokinase, and urokinase) appeared to be superior in efficacy compared with anticoagulants alone due to a reduction in mortality and no increase in bleeding risk. Alteplase may be a better choice because it not only reduced mortality but also reduced PE recurrence rate and treated PASP. Tenecteplase did not reduce mortality compared with anticoagulants alone and may not be a good choice of thrombolytic agent due to an increase in minor bleeding compared with streptokinase and anticoagulants alone. Thrombolytic drugs should be rationally selected to optimize the thrombolytic regimen and achieve as good a balance as possible between thrombolysis and bleeding.
| S-EPMC10015747 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 outbreak presents a new, life-threatening disease. Our aim was to assess the potential effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for COVID-19 in children.MethodsElectronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang Data) from their inception to March 31, 2020 were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), clinical controlled trials and cohort studies of interventions with antiviral agents for children (less than 18 years of age) with COVID-19.ResultsA total of 23 studies with 6,008 patients were included. There was no direct evidence and all of evidence were indirect. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate to high in general. The effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19 is uncertain: For adults with COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir had no effect on mortality [risk ratio (RR) =0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45 to 1.30]. Arbidol and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) had no benefit on probability of negative PCR test (RR =1.27; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.73; RR =0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.18) respectively. For adults with SARS, interferon was associated with reduced corticosteroid dose [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.14 g; 95% CI, -0.21 to -0.07] but had no effect on mortality (RR =0.72; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.88); ribavirin did not reduce mortality (RR =0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.06) and was associated with high risk of severe adverse reactions; and oseltamivir had no effect on mortality (RR =0.87; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.38). Ribavirin combined with interferon was also not effective in adults with MERS and associated with adverse reactions.ConclusionsThere is no evidence showing the effectiveness of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19, and the clinical efficacy of existing antiviral agents is still uncertain. We do not suggest clinical routine use of antivirals for COVID-19 in children, with the exception of clinical trials.
| S-EPMC7290634 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe US Food and Drug Administration has withdrawn the bowel cleansing kit HalfLytely (PEG 3500) with 10 mg bisacodyl tablets due to an increased risk of ischaemic colitis compared with the same kit with only 5 mg bisacodyl. This is of interest in Canada given that the bowel cleansing kit Bi-Peglyte (PEG 3500) with 15 mg bisacodyl is currently approved for use. The objective is to assess the comparative safety of various bowel cleansers with or without bisacodyl, with a primary interest inpolyethylene glycol (PEG)-based and sodium-picosulfate-based products.Methods and analysisGiven the existing volume of the literature, the review will be conducted in two stages. Stage 1 will consist of a scoping exercise by searching MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library (up to 21 November 2017) to identify randomised controlled trials, quasirandomised studies and non-randomised studies in which any bowel cleanser regimens were compared among persons undergoing colonoscopy. The outcomes will be mapped to establish a listing of the studies and their comparisons and outcomes currently available in the literature. From this, a data synthesis plan will be determined. In stage 2, a systematic review with meta-analyses will be pursued, focused on the bowel cleanser comparisons and outcomes of interest identified in stage 1. Two reviewers will screen, extract and quality assess the articles. Outcomes of interest include ischaemic colitis, electrolyte imbalances and their consequences, seizures, bowel perforation and patient tolerability. If sufficient data exist and studies are of sufficient homogeneity, network meta-analyses (NMAs) will be performed.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was not necessary due to study design. Updating the safety profile of bowel cleansers among the generally healthy population undergoing colonoscopy is pertinent given recent approval changes. This will be the first NMA within this population. Policy considerations may be reconsidered to minimise risk during bowel cleanser use.Prospero registration numberCRD42018084720.
| S-EPMC6020982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMetronomic chemotherapy (MC) strategy has been used in breast cancer for more than a decade since it was first proposed. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate its efficacy and safety for breast cancer patients at various stages, as well as to clarify the most effective medication strategy when applying MC and discover its most sensitive subpopulation in breast cancer patients.MethodWe will systematically retrieve random controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of MC in breast cancer on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and web of science to perform this network meta-analysis. Markov chain Monte Carlo method based on Bayesian Theory will be used to conduct network meta-analysis and the efficacy and safety will be ranked by combining direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. We will assess the quality of literatures with the Cochrane Risk Bias Assessment Tool and assess the strength of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. Data analysis will be completed with the WinBUGS, R, Stata and RevMan softwares.Results and conclusionThrough the analysis, we can obtain the ranking of efficacy and safety in different MC strategy, and reveal the specific breast cancer groups that are more sensitive to MC. We access the effectiveness by disease free survival, progress free survival, time to progress, objective response rate, and overall survival, and measure the toxicity by dose-limiting toxicity. The result of our study could provide evidence for clinicians to make a better choice when they consider MC.Inplasy registration numberINPLASY202140142.
| S-EPMC8202618 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe comparative efficacy and safety of PCSK9 inhibitors, statins, and ezetimibe to lower lipid levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia remain unknown. We aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of the lipid-lowering agents in these patients.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2000 to June 1, 2018 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Frequentist network meta-analysis was used to pool all estimates. Ranking probabilities were used to rank the comparative effects of all drugs against placebo.ResultsEighty-four RCTs enrolled 246,706 patients were included. Most of the included were assessed as low risk of bias. The probabilities of PCSK9 inhibitors that ranked first in improving lipid outcomes were all 100%. The probability of statins that ranked first in reducing the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events was 60.6%, and the probability of PCSK9 inhibitor was 37.1%, while no significant difference of efficacy in reducing CV events was observed between the 2 agents (odds ratios [OR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.87-1.11). Statin ranked first in reducing all-cause and CV death. Compared with placebo, statins were associated with reduced risks of all-cause (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96) and CV death (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.91) while PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe were not. No agents caused adverse events (including neurocognitive events), except that statins therapy significantly increases the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.42-2.51) and creatine kinase (CK) (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.09-1.93) and the incidence of diabetes (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26).ConclusionsPCSK9 inhibitors were the most effective lipid-lowering agents in improving lipid levels. Furthermore, PCSK9 inhibitors achieved similar CV benefits like statins, while PCSK9 inhibitors were not associated with any increased risk of statin-related side-effects. Thus, PCSK9 inhibitors may also be recommended as promisingly first-line lipid-lowering treatment for patients with hypercholesterolemia, especially for these with statins intolerance or resistance.
| S-EPMC6380691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo date, no studies have described randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness and safety of various biological agents used in induction therapy for lupus nephritis.ObjectivesWe designed this study to assess the relative efficacy and safety of some of these biological agents in patients with lupus nephritis.MethodWe collected data from RCTs that examined the efficacy and safety of any biological agents for lupus nephritis and then used these data to complete a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine the direct and indirect evidence from these studies.ResultsWe identified nine RCTs evaluating rituximab, abatacept, belimumab, anifrolumab, obinutuzumab, ocrelizumab, and low-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) across 1,480 patients. Low-dose IL-2, obinutuzumab, rituximab, and belimumab achieved complete remission in a significant proportion of respondents when compared with that in the control. Ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that low-dose IL-2 had the highest probability of achieving complete remission, followed by obinutuzumab, rituximab, belimumab, anifrolumab, abatacept, ocrelizumab, and the control. The risk of serious adverse events (SAE) tended to be lower for low-dose IL-2, rituximab, belimumab, and obinutuzumab than for the control. SUCRA-based ranking indicated that IL-2 had the highest probability of being safe, followed by rituximab, belimumab, obinutuzumab, control, anifrolumab, abatacept, and ocrelizumab.ConclusionsLow-dose IL-2 was the most effective induction treatment for patients with lupus nephritis and had the lowest potential for SAE. Higher complete remission rates and a more favorable safety profile suggest that low-dose IL-2, obinutuzumab, rituximab, and belimumab may be superior to the current control as treatments for lupus nephritis.
| S-EPMC9843543 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAcute renal colic is one of the most common urological emergencies. While previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pairwise meta-analyses only looked at the efficacy of 1 or 2 analgesics. It is not fully understood that the comprehensive ranking of the effectiveness and safeness of analgesics from these published articles. Therefore, this network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify RCTs of different analgesics for acute renal colic. RCTs assessing active analgesics intervention against active comparator or placebo controls for acute renal colic will be included. We will also screen the reference lists of included studies, previous reviews and meta-analyses to identify other relevant trials. The primary outcomes will be pain variance at 30 minutes, need rescue medicine, complete pain relief or at least 50% pain relief at 30 minutes, and pain relapse within 24 hours. We will also assess secondary outcomes for safeness (side effects: dizziness, vomit, allergic, hypotension, cardiac toxicity, and drug dependence). The risk of bias of included RCTs will be assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and the quality of evidence will be assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) instrument. We will perform pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian NMA to compare the effectiveness and safeness of different analgesic interventions.ResultsThis NMA will compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.ConclusionThis is the first systematic review to use the NMA to comprehensively compare and rank analgesics for relieving pain of acute renal colic in adults based on most important factors deciding the choice of initial analgesia, and the results can provide implications for clinical practice and further research.
| S-EPMC6417635 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPatent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is the most common cardiovascular problem that develops in preterm infants and evidence regarding the best treatment approach is lacking. Currently available medical options to treat a PDA include indomethacin, ibuprofen or acetaminophen. Wide variation exists in PDA treatment practices across Canada. In view of this large practice variation across Canadian neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), we plan to conduct a comparative effectiveness study of the different pharmacotherapeutic agents used to treat the PDA in preterm infants.Methods and analysisA multicentre prospective observational comparative-effectiveness research study of extremely preterm infants born <29 weeks gestational age with an echocardiography confirmed PDA will be conducted. All participating sites will self-select and adhere to one of the following primary pharmacotherapy protocols for all preterm babies who are deemed to require treatment.Standard dose ibuprofen (10 mg/kg followed by two doses of 5 mg/kg at 24 hours intervals) irrespective of postnatal age (oral/intravenous).Adjustable dose ibuprofen (oral/intravenous) (10 mg/kg followed by two doses of 5 mg/kg at 24 hours intervals if treated within the first 7 days after birth. Higher doses of ibuprofen up to 20 mg/kg followed by two doses of 10 mg/kg at 24 hours intervals if treated after the postnatal age cut-off for lower dose as per the local centre policy).Acetaminophen (oral/intravenous) (15 mg/kg every 6 hours) for 3-7 days.Intravenous indomethacin (0.1-0.3 mg/kg intravenous every 12-24 hours for a total of three doses).OutcomesThe primary outcome is failure of primary pharmacotherapy (defined as need for further medical and/or surgical/interventional treatment following an initial course of pharmacotherapy). The secondary outcomes include components of the primary outcome as well as clinical outcomes related to response to treatment or adverse effects of treatment.Sites and sample sizeThe study will be conducted in 22 NICUs across Canada with an anticipated enrollment of 1350 extremely preterm infants over 3 years.AnalysisTo examine the relative effectiveness of the four treatment strategies, the primary outcome will be compared pairwise between the treatment groups using χ2 test. Secondary outcomes will be compared pairwise between the treatment groups using χ2 test, Student's t-test or Wilcoxon rank sum test as appropriate. To further examine differences in the primary and secondary outcomes between the four groups, multiple logistic or linear regression models will be applied for each outcome on the treatment groups, adjusted for potential confounders using generalised estimating equations to account for within-unit-clustering. As a sensitivity analysis, the difference in the primary and secondary outcomes between the treatment groups will also be examined using propensity score method with inverse probability weighting approach.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the IWK Research Ethics Board (#1025627) as well as the respective institutional review boards of the participating centres.Trial registration numberNCT04347720.
| S-EPMC8103361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConcurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the preferred treatment strategy for inoperable esophageal cancer (EC). However, the effect of CRT needs to be improved.MethodsThis study comprehensively analyzed targeted agents combined with CRT for the treatment of EC by a network meta-analysis. The search was performed in public databases from incipient to 5 August 2021. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of targeted agents combined with CRT and CRT alone on EC patients were included.ResultsTen studies were included. For progression-free survival (PFS), nivolumab (67.4%) and erlotinib (64.6%) had advantages based on Cox analysis. Regarding the frequency of PFS, cetuximab (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.91; p=0.042) and nivolumab (OR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.34, 2.44; p<0.01) were significantly superior to the control. For overall survival (OS), nivolumab (71.6%) in Cox analysis and nimotuzumab (69.7%) in frequency analysis were found to have relative advantages. Nimotuzumab combined with CRT was significantly better than the control with regard to endoscopic and the pathologic complete response (epCR; OR: 2.81; 95% CI: 1.28, 6.14; p=0.011) and objective response rate (ORR; 4.71; 95% CI: 1.45, 15.29; p=0.008). The targeted drugs were not associated with significant SEA risk.ConclusionIn conclusion, compared to CRT alone, cetuximab and nivolumab combined with CRT were found to significantly improve the PFS rate only based on the frequency results. However, there was no benefit in terms of OS. For epCR and ORR, nimotuzumab was better than the blank control. Considering the limitations in this study, more well-designed RCTs are needed in the future to validate the results.
| S-EPMC8666421 | biostudies-literature