Comparative Efficacy of Medical Treatments for Chronic Heart Failure: A Network Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Xiang B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8793336 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundOn account of deterioration of chronic heart failure (CHF) and extensive exploration of Chinese herbal injections (CHIs), we performed a network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of CHIs (Huangqi injection, Shenfu injection, Shengmai injection, Shenmai injection, Shenqi Fuzheng injection, Yiqifumai injection) on the basis of western medicine (WM) treatment in CHF.MethodsLiterature search was conducted in Embase, the Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Chinese Biological Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database from inception to June 12nd 2017, and study selection was abided by a prior eligible criteria.ResultsUltimately, a total of 113 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were enrolled. The clinical data of the effective clinical rate, left ventricular ejection fraction, cardiac output and others outcomes was estimated by Stata software and Winbugs software. Risk of bias was assessed by Cochrane Collaboration's tools. Integrating the each outcome's results, a combination of Shengmai injection/Shenmai injection and WM obtain a first rank in most outcomes, particularly primary outcomes.ConclusionsIn conclusion, on the basis of WM, Shengmai injection or Shenmai injection may be a perforable treatment in CHF. In terms of insufficient of this study, more high quality RCTs needed to implement to support our conclusions.
| S-EPMC5793420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:Numerous medical strategies have been proposed for the treatment of thyroid eye disease (TED); however, the best methods for standard treatment are still a matter of controversy. The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to integrate previous evidence to create hierarchies of comparative efficacy of eleven commonly used medical treatments for TED. Methods:A comprehensive search of electronic scientific literature databases was performed and the data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatment outcomes for patients with active TED were selected. Treatment strategies included in this network meta-analysis were intravenous glucocorticoids (IVGC), oral glucocorticoids (OGC), orbital injection of glucocorticoids (OIGC), orbital radiotherapy (OR), intravenous glucocorticoids combined with orbital radiotherapy (IVGC + OR), oral glucocorticoids combined with orbital radiotherapy (OGC + OR), rituximab (RTX), somatostatin analogs, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), teprotumumab, and cyclosporine. The outcomes were response rate, mean difference in proptosis reduction, and reduction in disease activity. A random-effects network meta-analysis using a frequent method was conducted in STATA. Results:Twenty-three studies comprising a total of 1047 patients were included in the analysis. Inconsistency plots showed heterogeneity in the IVGC-Placebo-RTX loop to some extent (RoR = 8.029, P=0.075). Rankings of response rates were as follows: IVGC + OR, teprotumumab, IVGC, OGC + OR, RTX, OIGC, OR, IVIG, OGC, somatostatin, placebo, and cyclosporine. The rank probability analysis of proptosis reduction showed that teprotumumab was the most effective, followed by IVGC, IVGC + OR, OIGC, OGC, OGC + OR, OR, somatostatin, cyclosporine, and placebo. Conclusions:IVGC, alone or combination with OR, and teprotumumab should be preferred as the most effective strategies for active moderate to severe TED. Teprotumumab showed profound effect on proptosis reduction. OIGC, OR, and somatostatin analogs showed some statistical benefit and can be employed as second-line treatment strategies. RTX is a promising biologic agent, but more RCTs are required to define its appropriate role in treating TED.
| S-EPMC6311851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:To provide evidence for medical management of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) in China based on comparisons of all clinical practical interventions using Bayesian network meta-analysis. METHODS:We conducted a systematic literature review by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the Wanfang Database (inception to May 2019) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CIC in Chinese people. Only RCTs that recruited participants aged over 18 and diagnosed with CIC by the Rome II, III or IV criteria were included. We used three outcomes to examine efficacy. The risk ratio (RR) of the responder rate, based on ≥3 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) per week after treatment, was the primary outcome, and the SBM count per week and the Bristol score (BS) were secondary outcomes. In addition, adverse effects (AEs) were also considered a secondary outcome to evaluate safety. We conducted Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effects, and the RR or mean difference with its 95% credible interval was calculated. In addition, we ranked all treatments via their cumulative curves (SUCRA) and assessed the quality of evidence according to the GRADE criteria. RESULTS:We included a total of 42 trials (6820 participants) of 20 grouped interventions that included pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments. For the primary outcome, fourteen interventions were significantly better than placebo, and Probiotics plus Mosapride (PB + MP) appeared superior to others (GRADE quality of evidence: Moderate to Low), followed by Prucalopride (PP) (High to Low) and Electroacupuncture (EA) (High to Low). For SBM, Compound sodium bicarbonate suppository (CSBS) appeared to be best, with an SUCRA value of 90% (High to Low). For BS, Lactulose plus Probiotics (LT + PB) was superior to others (Moderate to Low), followed by Polyethylene glycol (PEG) (High to Moderate). Although all interventions appeared non-significant when compared with placebo in terms of adverse effects, Lactulose plus Mosapride showed greater risk than others on ranking probability. CONCLUSIONS:Given the GRADE assessment, PB + MP, PP and EA may be the priory options with moderate certainty in the quality of evidence for the primary outcome. For SBM, a CSBS may be the best option with moderate certainty in the quality of evidence. For BS, PEG may be the priory option with high certainty in the quality of evidence. However, due to a lack of high certainty in the quality of evidence, caution is needed when recommending the interventions. Because of the limitations, an increased number of trials are required for more accurate results.
| S-EPMC6857160 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent years have witnessed the rapid evolution of therapies in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML). To assess the efficacy and tolerability of all reported front-line treatments for patients with newly diagnosed CML, a multiple-treatments meta-analysis was performed, which accounted for both direct and indirect comparisons among those treatments.MethodsPrimary outcomes were the percentage of patients achieving major molecular response (MMR) and complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) within 12 months. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of progression to accelerated phase (AP), serious adverse effects (AEs), overall discontinuation and discontinuation for drug-related AEs. Direct pairwise meta-analysis and indirect multi-comparison meta-analysis among those treatments in each outcome were both conducted. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated for all treatments in each outcome. Cluster analysis demonstrated the division of treatments into distinct groupings according to efficacy and tolerability profiles.ResultsA total of 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs, including 10,187 patients) comparing 15 different interventions for CP-CML patients were included in this study. SUCRA analysis suggested that all tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are highly effective in newly diagnosed CP-CML when compared to traditional drugs. Newer TKIs and higher-dose imatinib generally resulted in faster cytogenetic and molecular responses when compared with standard-dose imatinib and traditional drugs. Furthermore, traditional drugs, higher-dose imatinib and newer TKIs demonstrated lower acceptability than standard-dose imatinib. One cluster of interventions, which included nilotinib (300/400 mg BID), dasatinib (100 mg QD) and radotinib (300 mg BID), demonstrated higher efficacy and tolerability than other treatments.ConclusionsNilotinib (300/400 mg BID), dasatinib (100 mg QD) and radotinib (300 mg BID) prove to be the most recommended front-line treatments of the greatest efficacy and tolerability for CP-CML patients. High-dose therapies are recommended only for patients in accelerated phase/blast phase or with suboptimal CML-CP response, and management of adverse events should be carried out to avoid compromising the clinical efficacy.
| S-EPMC6714291 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFollowing the availability of new drugs for chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), we sought to provide an updated and comparative synthesis of the evidence on HFrEF pharmacotherapy efficacy.MethodsWe performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis of phase 2 and 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of medical therapy in HFrEF patient cohorts with more than 90% of the participants with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 45% and all-cause mortality reported.ResultsSixty-nine RCTs, accounting for 91,741 subjects, were evaluated. The step-wise introduction of new drugs progressively decreased the risk of all-cause death, up to reaching a random-effects hazard ratio (HR) of 0.43 (95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.27-0.63) with beta blockers (BB), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) versus placebo. The risk was further reduced by adding sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i; HR 0.38, 95% CrI 0.22-0.60), ivabradine (HR 0.39, 95% CrI 0.21-0.64), or vericiguat (HR 0.40, 95% CrI 0.22-0.65) to neurohormonal inhibitors, and by angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), BB, and MRA (HR 0.36, 95% CrI 0.20-0.60). In a sensitivity analysis considering the ARNI and non-ARNI subgroups of SGLT2i RCTs, the combination SGLT2i + ARNI + BB + MRA was associated with the lowest HR (0.28, 95% CrI 0.16-0.45 vs. 0.40, 95% CrI 0.24-0.60 for SGLT2i + BB + ACEi + MRA). Consistent results were obtained in sensitivity analyses and by calculating surface under the cumulative ranking area, as well as for cardiovascular mortality (information available for 56 RCTs), HF hospitalization (45 RCTs), and all-cause hospitalization (26 RCTs).ConclusionsCombination medical therapy including neurohormonal inhibitors and newer drugs, especially ARNI and SGLT2i, confers the maximum benefit with regard to HFrEF prognosis.
| S-EPMC9546056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChinese patent medicines (CPMs) are widely used in China as an adjuvant treatment in dilated cardiomyopathy with heart failure (DCM-HF). However, comprehensive and systematic evidence supporting the beneficial effects of CPMs combined with current complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments against DCM-HF was limited. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess and rank the relative efficacy of eight different CPMs for DCM-HF.MethodsTo retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on the use of CPMs combined with CAM for DCM-HF, the databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science Periodical Database (CSPD), Chinese Citation Database (CCD), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and ClinicalTrials.gov were comprehensively searched from their inception to 29 February 2024. The quality of the included RCTs was examined using the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, version 2.0 (RoB 2). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability values were applied to rank the relative efficacy. Bayesian network meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy of different CPMs.ResultsAfter applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 77 eligible RCTs involving 6980 patients were enrolled. The outcomes assessed included clinical effectiveness rate (CER), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD), 6-min walk test (6MWT), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and cardiac output (CO). The results of the NMA indicated that Qili Qiangxin capsule (QLQX), Wenxin granule (WX), Tongxinluo capsule (TXL), Qishen Yiqi dropping pill (QSYQ), Shexiang Baoxin pill (SXBX), Yangxinshi tablet (YXST), Yixinshu capsule (YXSC), and Getong Tongluo capsule (GTTL) combined with CAM significantly improved performance compared with CAM alone in treating DCM-HF. YXST + CAM (MD = - 9.93, 95% CI - 12.83 to - 7.03) had the highest probability of being the best treatment on account of the enhancement of LVEF. WX + CAM had the highest likelihood of being the best treatment considering the improvement in LVEDD (MD = - 11.7, 95% CI - 15.70 to - 7.79) and 6MWT (MD = - 51.58, 95% CI - 73.40 to - 29.76). QLQX + CAM (MD = - 158.59, 95% CI - 267.70 to - 49.49) had the highest likelihood of being the best intervention for the reduction in BNP. TXL + CAM (MD = - 0.93, 95% CI - 1.46 to - 0.40) might be the optimal choice for increasing CO levels in DCM-HF patients. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed.ConclusionThis NMA suggested that adding CPMs to the current CAM treatment exerted a more positive effect on DCM-HF. Thereinto, QLQX + CAM, TXL + CAM, WX + CAM, and YXST + CAM showed a preferable improvement in patients with DCM-HF when unified considering the clinical effectiveness rate and other outcomes. Furthermore, due to the lack of information on CPMs against DCM-HF and the uneven distribution of included studies among interventions, more high-quality studies are needed to provide more robust evidence to support our findings.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO (CRD42023482669).
| S-EPMC11365150 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure is a public health problem and a great economic burden for patients and healthcare systems. Suppression of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) by angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitors remains the mainstay of treatment for heart failure. However, the abundance of ACE inhibitors makes it difficult for doctors to choose.We performed this network meta-analysis of ACEIs in patients with heart failure in order to address this area of uncertainty.We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Medline.Any randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of captopril, enalapril, lisinopril, ramipril, or trandolapril or combined interventions of 2 or more of these drugs.Two reviewers extracted the data and made the quality assessment. At first, we used Stata software (version 12.0, StataCorp, College Station, TX) to make traditional pairwise meta-analyses for studies that directly compared different interventions. Then, network meta-analysis was performed using WinBUGS (version 1.4.3, MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK).A total of 29 studies were included. Lisinopril was associated with a higher rate of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (odds ratio 65.9, 95% credible interval 1.91 to 239.6) or ramipril (14.65, 1.23 to 49.5). Enalapril significantly reduced systolic blood pressure when compared with placebo (standardized mean differences -0.6, 95% credible interval -1.03 to -0.18). Both captopril (odds ratio 76.2, 95% credible interval 1.56 to 149.3) and enalapril (274.4, 2.4 to 512.9) were associated with a higher incidence of cough compared to placebo.Some important outcomes such as rehospitalization and cardiac death were not included. The sample size and the number of studies were limited, especially for ramipril.Our results suggest that enalapril might be the best option when considering factors such as increased ejection fraction, stroke volume, and decreased mean arterial pressure. However, enalapril was associated with the highest incidence of cough, gastrointestinal discomfort, and greater deterioration in renal function. Trandolapril ranked first in reducing systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Ramipril was associated with the lowest incidence of all-cause mortality. Lisinopril was the least effective in lowering systolic and diastolic blood pressure and was associated with the highest incidence of all-cause mortality.
| S-EPMC4753869 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: A network meta-analysis (NMA) of the current recommended drugs for the treatment of acute heart failure (AHF), was performed to compare the relative efficacy. Methods: We used PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Clinical Trials Register, and Web of Science systems to search studies of randomized controlled trials (RCT) for the treatment of AHF recommended by the guidelines and expert consensus until 1 December 2020. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days. The secondary outcomes included 30-days all-cause rehospitalization, rates of HF-related rehospitalization, rates of adverse events, and rates of serious adverse events. A Bayesian NMA based on random effects model was performed. Results: After screening 14,888 citations, 23 RCTs (17,097 patients) were included, focusing on nesiritide, placebo, serelaxin, rhANP, omecamtiv mecarbil, tezosentan, KW-3902, conivaptan, tolvaptan, TRV027, chlorothiazide, metolazone, ularitide, relaxin, and rolofylline. Omecamtiv mecarbil had significantly lower all-cause mortality rates than the placebo (odds ratio 0.04, 0.01–0.22), rhANP (odds ratio 0.03, 0–0.40), serelaxin (odds ratio 0.05, 0.01–0.38), tezosentan (odds ratio 0.04, 0–0.22), tolvaptan (odds ratio 0.04, 0.01–0.30), and TRV027 (odds ratio 0.03, 0–0.36). No drug was superior to the other drugs for the secondary outcomes and safety outcomes. Conclusion: No drug was superior to the other drugs for the secondary outcomes and safety outcomes. Current drugs for AHF show similar efficacy and safety.
| S-EPMC9537610 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextThere is ongoing uncertainty about the optimal management of patients with localised prostate cancer.ObjectiveTo evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of different treatments for patients with localised prostate cancer.DesignSystematic review with Bayesian network meta-analysis to estimate comparative ORs, and a score (0-100%) that, for a given outcome, reflects average rank order of superiority of each treatment compared against all others, using the Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve (SUCRA) statistic.Data sourcesElectronic searches of MEDLINE without language restriction.Study selectionRandomised trials comparing the efficacy and safety of different primary treatments (48 papers from 21 randomised trials included 7350 men).Data extraction2 reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias.ResultsComparative efficacy and safety evidence was available for prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy (different types and regimens), observational management and cryotherapy, but not high-intensity focused ultrasound. There was no evidence of superiority for any of the compared treatments in respect of all-cause mortality after 5?years. Cryotherapy was associated with less gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity than radiotherapy (SUCRA: 99% and 77% for gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity, respectively).ConclusionsThe limited available evidence suggests that different treatments may be optimal for different efficacy and safety outcomes. These findings highlight the importance of informed patient choice and shared decision-making about treatment modality and acceptable trade-offs between different outcomes. More trial evidence is required to reduce uncertainty. Network meta-analysis may be useful to optimise the power of evidence synthesis studies once data from new randomised controlled studies in this field are published in the future.
| S-EPMC4024605 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, 6-month oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy has been recommended as the preferred adjuvant treatment against high-risk stage 2 and stage 3 colon cancer patients.MethodsRecord retrieval was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meeting libraries from inception to November 2019. Regarding survival and tolerability, randomized controlled trials comparing different adjuvant systemic regimens against high-risk stage 2 and stage 3 colon cancer were eligible. Disease-free survival was primary endpoint. Network calculation was based on a random-effects model, and relative ranking of each node was numerically indicated by p score.ResultsA total of 30 trials were included, corresponding to 54,109 patients. Regarding disease-free survival, none of the analyzed regimens displayed significant superiority against common comparator 6-month capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX), while 12-month [network hazard ratio (HR) 0.81 (0.60-1.10); 0.79 (0.57-1.10)] and 3-month XELOX [0.95 (0.86-1.04); 0.93 (0.83-1.05)] were top-ranking regimens showing non-inferiority among overall and stage 3 patients. Moreover, by pairwise meta-analysis, 3-month XELOX demonstrated significant superiority against 6-month XELOX among low-risk stage 3 patients [pairwise HR 0.78 (0.63-0.97)]. Concerning adverse events, 3-month oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was significantly better than the 6-month counterpart with respect to peripheral sensory neuropathy, thrombocytopenia and fatigue. The 12-month capecitabine monotherapy failed to display non-inferiority among other major adverse events.ConclusionsThe 3-month XELOX treatment could be an alternative option of the 6-month regimen among low-risk stage 3 patients. Among high-risk stage 3 patients, 6-month oxaliplatin-based regimens still seem more competitive. In addition, clinical application of 12-month capecitabine monotherapy should be cautious, despite its top rankings, especially among non-Asian countries.
| S-EPMC7739130 | biostudies-literature