Dataset Information

The Efficacy and Safety of Topical β-Blockers in Treating Infantile Hemangiomas: A Meta-Analysis Including 11 Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical β-blockers in the treatment of superficial infantile hemangiomas (SIH) and mixed infantile hemangiomas (MIH), respectively, and compare the efficacy and safety of topical β-blockers with other interventions.

Methods

The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. We searched for randomized controlled trials in databases from 2010 to 2018 comparing topical β-blockers with other interventions for infantile hemangiomas. The outcomes evaluated were efficacy and adverse effects. Data analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3. Publication bias was assessed to account for bias in patient selection.

Results

Eleven studies, involving 1,235 patients, were subjected to this meta-analysis. Six studies compared topical β-blockers with other interventions (propranolol, placebo, corticosteroids or pulsed dye laser) in treating SIH, and 5 studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of a topical β-blocker when it was combined with another intervention in treating MIH. A topical β-blocker was discovered to be as effective as oral propranolol in treating SIH (risk ratio, RR, 0.96, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.91-1.02, p = 0.20, I2 = 0%), and topical β-blockers were more beneficial than placebo, corticosteroids or pulsed dye laser in treating SIH (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.66-3.05, p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Topical β-blockers combined with another intervention gave rise to a better clinical response in the treatment of MIH than intervention alone (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.10-3.60, p = 0.02, I2 = 55%) (standard mean difference 0.80, 95% CI 0.28-1.31, p = 0.002, I2 = 0%). Compared with oral propranolol, topical β-blockers were associated with fewer incidences of adverse effects (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.39, p = 0.004, I2 = 0%). No significant difference in adverse effects was found when a topical β-blocker was combined with another intervention in treating MIH (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.58-1.74, p = 0.98, I2 = 0%).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis provided evidence that topical β-blockers may replace oral propranolol as first-line therapy for SIH and that they are of additive value in treating MIH.

SUBMITTER: Wang X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8117385 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInfantile Hemangiomas (IHs) are common benign vascular tumors of infancy that may have serious consequences. The research on diagnostic markers for IHs is scarce.MethodsThe "limma" R package was applied to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in developing IHs. Plugin ClueGO in Cytoscape software performed functional enrichment of DEGs. The Search Tool for Retrieving Interacting Genes (STRING) database was utilized to construct the PPI network. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model and support vector machine recursive feature elimination (SVM-RFE) analysis were used to identify diagnostic genes for IHs. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve evaluated diagnostic genes' discriminatory ability. Single-gene based on Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) was conducted by Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA). The chemicals related to the diagnostic genes were excavated by the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD). Finally, the online website Network Analyst was used to predict the transcription factors targeting the diagnostic genes.ResultsA total of 205 DEGs were singled out from IHs samples of 6-, 12-, and 24-month-old infants. These genes principally participated in vasculogenesis and development-related, endothelial cell-related biological processes. Then we mined 127 interacting proteins and created a network with 127 nodes and 251 edges. Furthermore, LASSO and SVM-RRF algorithms identified five diagnostic genes, namely, TMEM2, GUCY1A2, ISL1, WARS, and STEAP4. ROC curve analysis results indicated that the diagnostic genes had a powerful ability to distinguish IHs samples from normal samples. Next, the results of GSEA for a single gene illustrated that all five diagnostic genes inhibited the "valine, leucine, and isoleucine degradation" pathway in the development of IHs. WARS, TMEM2, and STEAP4 activated the "blood vessel development" and "vasculature development" in IHs. Subsequently, inhibitors targeting TMEM2, GUCY1A2, ISL1, and STEAP4 were mined. Finally, 14 transcription factors regulating GUCY1A2, 14 transcription factors regulating STEAP4, and 26 transcription factors regulating ISL1 were predicted.ConclusionThis study identified five diagnostic markers for IHs and further explored the mechanisms and targeting drugs, providing a basis for diagnosing and treating IHs.

Project description:Lower ureteric stones and lower urinary tract symptoms are common in urology.Drug treatment is one of standard therapy,but the efficacy was controversial.Thus we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of monotherapy or combination therapy of adrenoceptor1 blockers and phosphodiesterase5 inhibitors for treatment.Randomized controlled trials up to November 2016 were retrieved from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase. A total of 17 studies were included. We analyzed data through random or fixed effect models. The heterogeneity between studies was assessed by the I2 test statistic.As for lower ureter stones, our analysis demonstrated tadalafil had a significantly lower incidence of abnormal ejaculation than adrenoceptor1 blockers (2.31 95%CI 0.22to0.84, P?=?0.01),while combination therapy had a higher expulsion rate (2.49 95%CI 1.44to4.29, P?=?0.001) and shorter expulsion time (-?1.98 95%CI -3.08to0.88, P?=?0.0004) than tamsulosin. As for lower urinary tract symptoms, our analysis indicated adrenoceptor1 blockers was more effective than phosphodiesterase5 inhibitors on decreasing International Prostate Symptom Score (1.96 95%CI 0.03to3.89, P?=?0.05) and Post-Void Residual (9.41 95%CI 1.40to14.41, P?=?0.02) and phosphodiesterase5 inhibitors showed a greater effect than adrenoceptor1 blockers on improving Erectile Dysfunction (2.23 95%CI 1.24to3.22, P<0.0001).Combination therapy had a significantly better effect on International Prostate Symptom Score (1.47 95%CI 1.25to1.69, P<0.0001), Maximum flow rate (0.87 95%CI 0.71to1.04, P<0.0001), Post-Void Residual (10.74 95%CI 3.53to17.96,P?=?0.004) and Quality of life (0.59 95%CI 0.22to0.97, P?=?0.002) but was associated with higher incidences of adverse events (3.40 95%CI 1.82to6.36, P?=?0.0001) than adrenoceptor1 blockers. Combination therapy had a significantly better effect on International Prostate Symptom Score (4.19 95%CI 3.34to5.04, P<0.0001), Maximum flow rate (1.86 95%CI 1.32to2.39, P<0.0001), Post-Void Residual (22.58 95%CI 9.13to36.04, P?=?0.001) and Quality of life (0.68 95%CI 0.37to1.00, P<0.0001) without higher incidences of adverse events than PDE5-Is.In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggested combination therapy had a best efficacy of therapy for lower ureteric stones or lower urinary tract symptoms correlated with benign prostatic hyperplasia than monotherapy. Adrenoceptor1 blockers was more effective than phosphodiesterase5 inhibitors on International Prostate Symptom Score and Post-Void Residual. Both monotherapy and combination therapy were safe.

Project description:ImportanceOral β-blockers used for the prevention of migraine headache are not effective for the treatment of acute pain. Small case series have suggested that topically applied β-blockers may be useful in the management of acute migraine pain, warranting evaluation with randomized clinical trials.ObjectiveTo evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of topically applied timolol maleate ophthalmic solution, 0.5%, compared with topically applied placebo eyedrops in the treatment of acute migraine attacks.Design, setting, and participantsIn this randomized, masked placebo-controlled crossover trial conducted from May 27, 2015, to August 28, 2017, 50 patients with migraine were randomized to receive either timolol eyedrops, 0.5%, or a placebo eyedrop (carboxymethyl cellulose, 0.5%). After a 3-month treatment period, patients completed a 1-month washout period and were crossed over to receive the opposite treatment for a final 3 months. Analysis was performed on a modified intent-to-treat basis.InterventionAfter random assignment, patients were instructed to use 1 drop of the assigned medication in each eye at the earliest onset of migraine.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome measure was reduction in pain score with treatment. The primary end point was reduction of pain score by 4 points, or to zero, 20 minutes after instillation of the eyedrop.ResultsOf the 50 patients, 42 (84%) were females and the mean (SD) age was 27.3 (11.3) years. Of a total of 619 migraine attacks, 284 (46%) were treated with timolol, 271 (44%) were treated with the placebo, and 64 (10%) occurred during the washout period when no study medications were used. Seven patients (14%) withdrew after randomization. A total of 233 of the timolol-treated migraine attacks (82%) were associated with a reduction in pain score by 4 points, or to zero, at 20 minutes compared with 38 of the placebo-treated attacks (14%), with a difference of 68 percentage points (95% CI, 62-74 percentage points). A generalized estimating equation analysis revealed that pain score reduction at 20 minutes was greater in the timolol group compared with the placebo group by a mean (SE) of 4.63 points (0.34) (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized crossover trial supports consideration of timolol eyedrops in the acute treatment of migraine. Further research is warranted to determine if the improvements observed are sustained for a longer follow-up and with larger groups.Trial registrationCTRI/2015/05/005829, UTN: U1111-1167-6439.

Project description:ImportanceTreatment of infantile hemangioma (IH) with topical timolol in the first 2 months of life (early proliferative phase) may prevent further growth and the need for treatment with oral propranolol. To our knowledge, no studies have determined whether beginning early treatment with timolol for IH is better than in other proliferative stages.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of timolol maleate solution, 0.5%, for the early treatment of IH in infants younger than 60 days.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a pilot clinical trial included patients aged 10 to 60 days with focal or segmental hemangiomas (superficial, deep, mixed, or minimal/arrested growth). Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with topical timolol maleate solution, 0.5%, or placebo twice daily for 24 weeks. Changes in lesion size (volume, thickness) and color were evaluated from photographs taken at 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 36 weeks. Vital signs and adverse effects were recorded at each visit. The study was carried out from November 2015 to January 2017, and data analyses were completed in September 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome of complete or nearly complete IH resolution and the secondary outcomes of changes in lesion thickness, volume, and color were evaluated by a blinded investigator.ResultsOf the 69 patients recruited, the mean (SD) age was 48.4 (10.6) days; 55 (80%) were female; and 51 (74%), 11 (16%), 6 (9%), and 1 (1%) had superficial, mixed, abortive, or deep IHs, respectively. The IHs were localized, segmental, or indeterminate in 60 (87%), 7 (10%), and 2 (3%) patients, respectively. The IHs were located on the head and/or neck (n = 23 [33%]) or other body sites (n = 46 [67%]). The study was completed by 26 of 33 (79%) patients receiving timolol and 31 of 36 (86%) receiving placebo. There were no significant differences between timolol and placebo for complete or nearly complete IH resolution at 24 weeks (n = 11 [42%] vs n = 11 [36%]; P = .37). The odds ratio of complete or almost complete response vs no response at week 24 was 1.33 (95% CI, 0.45-3.89). There were no between-group differences in IH size (volume, thickness). An improvement in color was observed at week 4 in the timolol group, and timolol was well tolerated with no systemic adverse effects.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, results demonstrated that topical timolol is well tolerated for the treatment of early proliferative IH but provides limited benefit in lesion resolution when given during the early proliferative stage.Trial registrationEudraCT Identifier: 2013-005199-17.