Dataset Information

Adverse Effects Associated With Currently Commonly Used Antifungal Agents: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Background: Invasive fungal infections (IFI) is an important contributing factor in morbidity and mortality of immunocompromised and critically ill patients. Although the therapeutic effects of these drugs on IFI have been well documented, the long-term use of antifungal agents has raised concerns about drug tolerability and treatment-related toxicity risks. Methods: We searched articles published before June 30, 2020 in four electronic databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, embase and PubMed. Results: 66 trials were determined to meet our inclusion criteria, providing data on 18,230 participants. We sorted out 23 AEs by system organ classes and six laboratory AEs, 13 of these were used to construct 13 network meta-analyses. Compared with LAmB, anidulafungin, caspofungin, micafungin, fluconazole, and posaconazole had a significantly low incidence of discontinuation of therapy due to AEs (OR = 0.24 (0.09,0.65), 0.24 (0.13,0.43), 0.32 (0.19,0.52), 0.38 (0.23,0.62) and 0.35 (0.17,0.69), respectively). Conclusion: We found that echinocandins are the most tolerated antifungal agents with high safety. The AEs of triazole drugs are mainly concentrated on the increase in liver enzymes, nervous system disorders, especially visual disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, and cardiac diseases. LAmB is the least tolerated and has the most abundant AEs.

SUBMITTER: Yang YL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8585744 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adverse Effects Associated With Currently Commonly Used Antifungal Agents: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Yang Yan-Li YL Xiang Zi-Jian ZJ Yang Jing-Hua JH Wang Wen-Jie WJ Xu Zhi-Chun ZC Xiang Ruo-Lan RL

Frontiers in pharmacology 20211029

<b>Background:</b> Invasive fungal infections (IFI) is an important contributing factor in morbidity and mortality of immunocompromised and critically ill patients. Although the therapeutic effects of these drugs on IFI have been well documented, the long-term use of antifungal agents has raised concerns about drug tolerability and treatment-related toxicity risks. <b>Methods:</b> We searched articles published before June 30, 2020 in four electronic databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ...[more]

PMID: 34776941

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo clarify the effects of smoking on the disposition of two commonly used antipsychotics, olanzapine and clozapine, and to create standards to adjust the doses of these drugs in clinical practice based on the smoking status.DesignA meta-analysis was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library for relevant prospective and retrospective studies.Included studiesWe included the studies that investigated the effects of smoking on the concentration to dose (C/D) ratio of olanzapine or clozapine.Primary outcome measureThe weighted mean difference was calculated using a DerSimonian-Laird random effects model, along with 95% CI.ResultsSeven association studies, comprising 1094 patients (652 smokers and 442 non-smokers) with schizophrenia or other psychiatric disorders, were included in the meta-analysis of olanzapine. The C/D ratio was significantly lower in smokers than in non-smokers (p<0.00001), and the mean difference was -0.75 (ng/mL)/(mg/day) (95% CI -0.89 to -0.61). Therefore, it was estimated that if 10 and 20 mg/day of olanzapine would be administered to smokers, about 7 and 14 mg/day, respectively, should be administered to non-smokers in order to obtain the equivalent olanzapine concentration. Four association studies of clozapine were included in the meta-analysis of clozapine, comprising 196 patients (120 smokers and 76 non-smokers) with schizophrenia or other psychiatric disorders. The C/D ratio was significantly lower in smokers than in non-smokers (p<0.00001), and the mean difference was -1.11 (ng/mL)/(mg/day) (95% CI -1.53 to -0.70). Therefore, it was estimated that if 200 and 400 mg/day of clozapine would be administered to smokers, about 100 and 200 mg/day, respectively, should be administered to non-smokers.ConclusionsWe suggest that the doses of olanzapine and clozapine should be reduced by 30% and 50%, respectively, in non-smokers compared with smokers in order to obtain an equivalent olanzapine or clozapine concentration.

Project description:BackgroundA network meta-analysis can provide estimates of relative efficacy for treatments not directly studied in head-to-head randomized controlled trials. We estimated the relative efficacy and safety of dolutegravir (DTG) versus third agents currently recommended by guidelines, including ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r), ritonavir-boosted darunavir (DRV/r), efavirenz (EFV), cobicistat-boosted elvitegravir (EVG/c), ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r), raltegravir (RAL), and rilpivirine (RPV), in treatment-naive HIV-1-infected patients.MethodsA systematic review of published literature was conducted to identify phase 3/4 randomized controlled clinical trials (up to August 2013) including at least one third agent of interest in combination with a backbone nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) regimen. Bayesian fixed-effect network meta-analysis models adjusting for the type of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor backbone (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine [TDF/FTC] or abacavir/lamivudine [ABC/3TC]) were used to evaluate week 48 efficacy (HIV-RNA suppression to <50 copies/mL and change in CD4+ cells/µL) and safety (lipid changes, adverse events, and discontinuations due to adverse events) of DTG relative to all other treatments. Sensitivity analyses assessing the impact of NRTI treatment adjustment and random-effects models were performed.ResultsThirty-one studies including 17,000 patients were combined in the analysis. Adjusting for the effect of NRTI backbone, treatment with DTG resulted in significantly higher odds of virologic suppression (HIV RNA<50 copies/mL) and increase in CD4+ cells/µL versus ATV/r, DRV/r, EFV, LPV/r, and RPV. Dolutegravir had better or equivalent changes in total cholesterol, LDL, triglycerides, and lower odds of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events compared to all treatments. Random-effects and unadjusted models resulted in similar conclusions.ConclusionThree clinical trials of DTG have demonstrated comparable or superior efficacy and safety to DRV, RAL, and EFV in HIV-1-infected treatment-naive patients. This network meta-analysis suggests DTG is also favorable or comparable to other commonly used third agents (ATV/r, LPV/r, RPV, and EVG/c).

Project description:BackgroundIn contrast to previous network meta-analysis using classical frequentist methods, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of six frequently-used biologics through a Bayesian method.MethodsWeb of Science, Scopus, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease, comparing Infliximab, Adalimumab, Certolizumab pegol, Ustekinumab, Risankizumab, or Vedolizumab, relative to placebo or an active comparator for induction of clinical response (two different definitions) and maintenance of clinical remission. A random-effects model was performed with rankings according to the surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability. Finally, we completed sensitivity and consistency analyses, and evaluated the certainty of evidence through GRADE working group guidance.ResultsWe identified 22 and 20 RCTs for induction and maintenance therapy, respectively. Infliximab combined with azathioprine was most effective for inducing clinical response in TNF (tumor necrosis factor) antagonist-naïve patients. For TNF antagonist-experienced patients, Ustekinumab (SUCRA 86.19) and Risankizumab (SUCRA 62.56) have the largest SUCRA in induction of clinical response. Risankizumab has the lowest risk of adverse events (SUCRA 84.81), serious adverse events (SUCRA 94.23), and serious infections (SUCRA 79.73) in induction therapy. Adalimumab and the 10 mg/kg regimen of Infliximab rank highest for maintaining clinical remission.ConclusionThis analysis suggests that Infliximab in combination with azathioprine may be preferred biologic agents for induction therapy in TNF antagonist-naïve patients. For TNF antagonist-experienced patients, Ustekinumab and Risankizumab may be preferred biologic agents for induction therapy. Risankizumab potentially has the lowest safety risk worth exploring in induction therapy. Adalimumab and the 10 mg/kg regimen of Infliximab have maintenance efficacy benefits for responders to induction therapy.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=458609, Identifier CRD42023458609.

Project description:Background: There is no uniform treatment for pathological scars, including keloids and hypertrophic scars, in clinic currently. Previously, multiple randomized controlled trials have examined the clinical efficacy of different treatments. Nonetheless, the results are inconsistent, and many treatments have not been directly compared. This makes it difficult to conclude which approach is more favorable, in terms of efficacy and safety, for the treatment of pathological scarring. This study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of different injection and topical treatment strategies for hypertrophic scar and keloid. Methods: Relevant literature from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCRCT), and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) were searched, from database inception through November 2020. Randomized clinical trials evaluating different treatment strategies of pathological scars, including triamcinolone acetonide (TAC), verapamil (VER), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), botulinum toxin A (BTA), bleomycin (BLM), and silicone gels were included in the study. Results: The network meta-analysis included a total of 2,009 patients from 29 studies. A network meta-analysis of injection and topical treatment strategies showed that the efficacy of TAC combined with BTA was best in the treatment of pathological scars. Combination therapies of TAC with 5-FU and TAC with BTA significantly improved the clinical efficiency. However, there was no statistically significant difference between other treatment strategies. The order of efficacy predicted by the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve was as follows: TAC+BTA (82.2%) > TAC+5-FU (69.8%) > BTA (67.3%) > 5-FU+silicone (59.4%) > TAC+silicone (58.3%) > 5-FU (49.8%) > BLM (42.0%) > TAC (26.7%) > VER (26.2%) > silicone (18.3%). There was no publication bias revealed based on the funnel diagram. Conclusion: This study recommends intralesional injection of TAC-BTA and TAC-5-FU combined therapies. But for patients who cannot tolerate the side effects, the use of silicone gels in combination with TAC is recommended. However, these conclusions need to be further confirmed by more randomized controlled trials.

Project description:BackgroundBisphosphonate drugs can be used to improve the outcomes of women with breast cancer. Whilst many meta-analyses have quantified their potential benefits for patients, attempts at comprehensive quantification of potential adverse effects have been limited. We undertook a meta-analysis with novel methodology to identify and quantify these adverse effects.MethodsWe systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials in breast cancer where at least one of the treatments was a bisphosphonate (zoledronic acid, ibandronate, pamidronate, alendronate or clodronate). Neoadjuvant, adjuvant and metastatic settings were examined. Primary outcomes were adverse events of any type or severity (excluding death). We carried out pairwise and network meta-analyses to estimate the size of any adverse effects potentially related to bisphosphonates. In order to ascertain whether adverse effects differed by individual factors such as age, or interacted with other common adjuvant breast cancer treatments, we examined individual-level patient data for one large trial, AZURE.FindingsWe identified 56 trials that reported adverse data, which included a total of 29,248 patients (18,301 receiving bisphosphonate drugs versus 10,947 not). 24 out of the 103 different adverse outcomes analysed showed a statistically and practically significant increase in patients receiving a bisphosphonate drug compared with those not (2 additional outcomes that appeared statistically significant came only from small studies with low event counts and no clinical suspicion so are likely artifacts). Most of these 24 are already clinically recognised: 'flu-like symptoms, fever, headache and chills; increased bone pain, arthralgia, myalgia, back pain; cardiac events, thromboembolic events; hypocalcaemia and osteonecrosis of the jaw; as well as possibly stiffness and nausea. Oral clodronate appeared to increase the risk of vomiting and diarrhoea (which may also be increased by other bisphosphonates), and there may be some hepatotoxicity. Four additional potential adverse effects emerged for bisphosphonate drugs in this analysis which have not classically be recognised: fatigue, neurosensory problems, hypertonia/muscle spasms and possibly dysgeusia. Several symptoms previously reported as potential side effects in the literature were not significantly increased in this analysis: constipation, insomnia, respiratory problems, oedema or thirst/dry mouth. Individual patient-level data and subgroup analysis revealed little variation in side effects between women of different ages or menopausal status, those with metastatic versus non-metastatic cancer, or between women receiving different concurrent breast cancer therapies.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis has produced estimates for the absolute frequencies of a range of side effects significantly associated with bisphosphonate drugs when used by breast cancer patients. These results show good agreement with previous literature on the subject but are the first systematic quantification of side effects and their severities. However, the analysis is limited by the availability and quality of data on adverse events, and the potential for bias introduced by a lack of standards for reporting of such events. We therefore present a table of adverse effects for bisphosphonates, identified and quantified to the best of our ability from a large number of trials, which we hope can be used to improve the communication of the potential harms of these drugs to patients and their healthcare providers.

Dataset Information

Adverse Effects Associated With Currently Commonly Used Antifungal Agents: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Publications

Adverse Effects Associated With Currently Commonly Used Antifungal Agents: A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets