The efficacy and safety of drug treatments for chronic insomnia in adults: a meta-analysis of RCTs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Buscemi N
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2219774 | biostudies-other | 2007 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:It is impossible to conduct head-to-head trials of all the therapies to determine optimal treatment in the rapidly advancing era of therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). In this network meta-analysis,we aimed to compare efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for mRCC. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and unpublished studies were also sought through "clinicaltrials.gov" from their inception through January 31, 2016. A database search identified 1253 articles, with 11 studies meeting the eligibility criteria. A total of 7597 patients in twelve different treatment arms were assessed. Network meta-analysis showed sunitinib had a significantly longer PFS than IFN-α (SMD=-5.68; 95%CI: -10.76,-0.86; P<0.001) and placebo (SMD=-6.71; 95%CI: -12.65,-0.79; P<0.001), meanwhile, pazopanib had a significantly longer PFS compared with placebo (SMD=5.13; 95%CI: 0.43, 10.09; P<0.001). The cumulative ranking probability curve indicated that sunitinib had the highest probability of being the best treatment modality in terms of PFS and it also had the highest probability of being the safest drugs as the first-line treatment when it came to SAE. Thus, sunitinib might be the best choice of first-line treatment for patients with mRCC because it has the most favorable balance between efficacy and safety.
| S-EPMC4941278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCumulative exposure to one or more anticholinergic medications ("anticholinergic burden") is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes, particularly among older individuals. Mirabegron, an oral selective β3-adrenergic receptor agonist, has demonstrated efficacy in managing the symptoms of overactive bladder without contributing to anticholinergic burden. However, it is not known whether the favorable safety profile of mirabegron relative to antimuscarinics varies with increasing age among a patient population who may have a high anticholinergic burden.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to indirectly compare the safety and efficacy profile of mirabegron relative to antimuscarinics in older adults with overactive bladder.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that reported safety and efficacy endpoints among patients aged ≥ 65 years. Identified randomized controlled trials were subsequently synthesized via a network meta-analysis. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines in designing, performing, and reporting the literature review were followed. In line with current best practices, the network meta-analysis was conducted using a Bayesian approach and according to the overall general guidance for evidence synthesis developed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence decision support unit. Estimates of relative safety were assessed via the odds ratio and estimates of relative efficacy were assessed via means and credible intervals.ResultsA total of 3078 abstracts, 300 of which underwent full-text screening, were identified using the search criteria. Twenty articles reporting on 21 randomized controlled trials were eligible for data extraction and synthesis. Following review, five safety and five efficacy endpoints were considered for inclusion in the network meta-analysis. Regarding findings typical of anticholinergic exposure in older adults, mirabegron was not associated with an increased odds of dry mouth (odds ratio 95% credible interval 0.76 [0.26-2.37]) or constipation (1.08 [0.39-3.02]) relative to placebo, whereas antimuscarinics were strongly associated with these events (odds ratio range 3.78-7.85 and 2.12-4.66, respectively). In this older population, mirabegron was associated with a similar odds of experiencing adverse event-related treatment discontinuations relative to placebo (0.99 [0.57-1.70]), while the odds of experiencing an adverse event-related treatment discontinuation for antimuscarinics had a range of 1.14-3.03 (in most cases, the association was mild). No increased odds of experiencing overall treatment-emergent adverse events was observed for mirabegron or antimuscarinics (odds ratio range 1.25-1.55), apart from fesoterodine (2.23 [1.37-3.37]). Finally, a similar treatment effect was observed across all efficacy endpoints between mirabegron and antimuscarinics in this older population.ConclusionsThis study indicates that the safety and efficacy profile of mirabegron remains favorable compared with antimuscarinics among older adults. This includes safety outcomes typically associated with anticholinergic burden, which were less frequently observed in patients treated with mirabegron.
| S-EPMC7595992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Secukinumab is a novel IL-17A inhibitor that has been confirmed to be effective for treating PsA and RA. Several studies have demonstrated that secukinumab also provides benefits for AS patients. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of secukinumab for the management of AS. The PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for RCTs published prior to March 2020 on the treatment of AS with secukinumab. The primary outcome was the ASAS20 response, and the secondary outcomes included the ASAS40 response, ASAS5/6 response, SF-36 PCS score, ASQoL score, and AEs. Dichotomous data were expressed as pooled RRs with 95% CIs, while continuous data were expressed as pooled MDs with 95% CIs. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on whether the AS patients previously underwent treatment with TNFi. A total of 4 RCTs with 1166 patients were included in our meta-analysis. At week 16, secukinumab 150?mg yielded significant improvements in the clinical response and patient-reported outcomes for AS patients. There was no increased risk of AEs. Consistent results were detected in the meta-analysis of secukinumab 75?mg versus a placebo. Furthermore, no significant difference was detected between the secukinumab 75?mg group and secukinumab 150?mg group. We concluded that secukinumab is effective for treating AS and generally well tolerated by AS patients in the short term, regardless of whether they previously underwent TNFi treatment. The superiority of secukinumab 150?mg over secukinumab 75?mg seems to be limited, since no significant difference in any endpoint was detected between the two groups.
| S-EPMC7641709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe purpose of this systematic review is to provide supporting evidence for a clinical practice guideline on the use of behavioral and psychological treatments for chronic insomnia disorder in adult populations.MethodsThe American Academy of Sleep Medicine commissioned a task force of 9 experts in sleep medicine and sleep psychology. A systematic review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that addressed behavioral and psychological interventions for the treatment of chronic insomnia disorder in adults. Statistical analyses were performed to determine if the treatments produced clinically significant improvements in a range of critical and important outcomes. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation process was used to evaluate the evidence for making specific treatment recommendations.ResultsThe literature search identified 1,244 studies; 124 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 89 studies provided data suitable for statistical analyses. Evidence for the following interventions is presented in this review: cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia, brief therapies for insomnia, stimulus control, sleep restriction therapy, relaxation training, sleep hygiene, biofeedback, paradoxical intention, intensive sleep retraining, and mindfulness. This review provides a detailed summary of the evidence along with the quality of evidence, the balance of benefits vs harms, patient values and preferences, and resource use considerations.
| S-EPMC7853211 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC5934901 | biostudies-other
Project description:In the realm of acute respiratory infections, coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), poses a global public health challenge. The application of corticosteroids (CSs) in COVID-19 remains a contentious topic among researchers. Accordingly, our team performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to meticulously evaluate the safety and efficacy of CSs in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. To explore efficacy of CSs in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, we meticulously screened RCTs across key databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as China's CNKI and Wanfang Data. We focused on assessing the 28 days mortality rates. We evaluated the data heterogeneity using the Chi-square test and I2 values, setting significance at 0.1 and 50%. Data from 21 RCTs involving 5721 participants were analyzed. The analysis did not demonstrate a significant association between CSs intervention and the 28 days mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (relative risk [RR] = 0.93; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.84-1.03; P = 0.15). However, subgroup analysis revealed a significant reduction in 28 days mortality among patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 (RR at 0.85; 95% CI: 0.76-0.95; P = 0.004). Specifically, short-term CS administration (≤ 3 days) was associated with a substantial improvement in clinical outcomes (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.09-0.63; P = 0.004), as was longer-term use (≥ 8 days) (RR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.77-0.99; P = 0.04). Additionally, in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, the administration of dexamethasone increased the number of 28 days ventilator-free days (Mean Difference = 1.92; 95% CI: 0.44-3.40; P = 0.01). Methylprednisolone also demonstrated significant benefits in improving clinical outcomes (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.09-0.63; P = 0.004). Our meta-analysis demonstrated that although there is no significant difference in 28 days mortality rates among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the use of CSs may be beneficial in improving clinical outcomes in moderate or severe COVID-19 patients. There was no significant increase in the occurrence of adverse events associated with the use of CSs. Our meta-analysis provides evidence that while CSs may not be suitable for all COVID-19 patients, they could be effective and safe in severely ill COVID-19 patients. Consequently, it is recommended to administer CSs for personalized treatments in COVID-19 cases to improve the clinical outcomes while minimizing adverse events.
| S-EPMC11246314 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChronic insomnia is a common health problem with substantial consequences in older adults. Cognitive behavioral treatments are efficacious but not widely available. The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of brief behavioral treatment for insomnia (BBTI) vs an information control (IC) condition.MethodsA total of 79 older adults (mean age, 71.7 years; 54 women [70%]) with chronic insomnia and common comorbidities were recruited from the community and 1 primary care clinic. Participants were randomly assigned to either BBTI, consisting of individualized behavioral instructions delivered in 2 intervention sessions and 2 telephone calls, or IC, consisting of printed educational material. Both interventions were delivered by a nurse clinician. The primary outcome was categorically defined treatment response at 4 weeks, based on sleep questionnaires and diaries. Secondary outcomes included self-report symptom and health measures, sleep diaries, actigraphy, and polysomnography.ResultsCategorically defined response (67% [n = 26] vs 25% [n = 10]; χ(2) = 13.8) (P < .001) and the proportion of participants without insomnia (55% [n = 21] vs 13% [n = 5]; χ(2) = 15.5) (P < .001) were significantly higher for BBTI than for IC. The number needed to treat was 2.4 for each outcome. No differential effects were found for subgroups according to hypnotic or antidepressant use, sleep apnea, or recruitment source. The BBTI produced significantly better outcomes in self-reported sleep and health (group × time interaction, F(5,73) = 5.99, P < .001), sleep diary (F(8,70) = 4.32, P < .001), and actigraphy (F(4,74) = 17.72, P < .001), but not polysomnography. Improvements were maintained at 6 months.ConclusionWe found that BBTI is a simple, efficacious, and durable intervention for chronic insomnia in older adults that has potential for dissemination across medical settings.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00177203.
| S-EPMC3101289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The medical treatments of chronic heart failure have made remarkable progress in recent years. It is crucial to determine the optimal drug combination based on current evidence. Methods: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted for studies on angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and ivabradine (IVA) between 1987 and 2021. The network meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of drug therapies in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Results: Forty-eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which overall included 68,074 patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40%, were identified and included in the network meta-analysis. The efficacies of 13 intervention classes, including monotherapies or combinations of ACEI, ARB, ARNI, BB, MRA, SGLT2i, IVA, and placebo, on hospitalization for HF, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality were compared. Among the 13 included interventions, ARNI+BB+MRA, SGLT2i+ACEI+BB+MRA, and IVA+ACEI+BB+MRA were found to be best in terms of all three outcomes. Compared with placebo, these three drug combinations were associated with significant reductions in the risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization for HF. Conclusions: ARNI+BB+MRA, SGLT2i+ACEI+BB+MRA, and IVA+ACEI+BB+MRA were the top three therapies for patients with HFrEF. The increasing use of combinations of conventional and novel drugs contributed to progressive reductions in hospitalization and mortality in patients with HFrEF.
| S-EPMC8793336 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of multi-drug therapy based on eszopiclone in the treatment of insomnia after stroke using a network meta-analysis method and to provide evidence for clinical practice.MethodComputer searches of PubMed, Excerpt Medica Database (Embase), Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, APA PsycInfo, CNKI, WanFang, Sinomed and other databases were performed to search for clinical randomized controlled studies (RCTs) on multi-drug therapy based on eszopiclone in the treatment of insomnia patients after stroke. The search time was from the establishment of each database until July 2023. The bias risk assessment tool recommended by Cochrane was used to evaluate the quality of the included RCTs. Stata 14.0 was applied to perform network meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.3 software for traditional meta-analysis.ResultEighteen RCTs and 1646 patients were ultimately included, involving 11 treatment options. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the ranking of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) decline was eszopiclone combined with sweet dream oral liquid (ESZ+SDOL)>eszopiclone combined with a shugan jieyu capsule (ESZ+SGJYC)>eszopiclone combined with agomelatine (ESZ+AGO)>eszopiclone combined with flupentixol and melitracen tablets (ESZ+FMT)>eszopiclone combined with yangxue qingnao granules (ESZ+YXQNG)>eszopiclone combined with mirtazapine (ESZ+MIR)>ESZ>FMT; the modified Edinburgh Scandinavia Stroke Scale (MESSS) decline ranking was ESZ+SDOL>ESZ+AGO>ESZ; and the clinical total effective rate ranking was eszopiclone combined with a xuefu zhuyu capsule (ESZ+XFZYC)>ESZ+MIR>ESZ+SGJYC>ESZ+SDOL> ESZ+FMT>ESZ+YXQNG>ESZ>FMT. In terms of clinical adverse reactions, in addition to ESZ therapy, ESZ+ESC had the highest number of adverse reactions, with abdominal pain being the most common. ESZ+YXQNG had the most types of adverse reactions, with 8 types.ConclusionMulti-drug therapy based on eszopiclone can effectively improve the sleep quality of patients with insomnia after stroke, and ESZ+SDOL has significant efficacy and safety. However, due to the limitations of this study, efficacy ranking cannot fully explain the superiority or inferiority of clinical efficacy. In the future, more multicentre, large sample, double-blind randomized controlled trials are needed to supplement and demonstrate the results of this study.
| S-EPMC10843102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We conducted meta-analyses of findings from randomized, placebo-controlled, short-term trials for acute mania in manic or mixed states of DSM (III-IV) bipolar I disorder in 56 drug-placebo comparisons of 17 agents from 38 studies involving 10,800 patients. Of drugs tested, 13 (76%) were more effective than placebo: aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperdone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone. Their pooled effect size for mania improvement (Hedges' g in 48 trials) was 0.42 (confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.48); pooled responder risk ratio (46 trials) was 1.52 (CI: 1.42-1.62); responder rate difference (RD) was 17% (drug: 48%, placebo: 31%), yielding an estimated number-needed-to-treat of 6 (all p<0.0001). In several direct comparisons, responses to various antipsychotics were somewhat greater or more rapid than lithium, valproate, or carbamazepine; lithium did not differ from valproate, nor did second generation antipsychotics differ from haloperidol. Meta-regression associated higher study site counts, as well as subject number with greater placebo (not drug) response; and higher baseline mania score with greater drug (not placebo) response. Most effective agents had moderate effect-sizes (Hedges' g=0.26-0.46); limited data indicated large effect sizes (Hedges' g=0.51-2.32) for: carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, risperidone, and tamoxifen. The findings support the efficacy of most clinically used antimanic treatments, but encourage more head-to-head studies and development of agents with even greater efficacy.
| S-EPMC3055677 | biostudies-other