Predictive distributions for between-study heterogeneity and simple methods for their application in Bayesian meta-analysis

Bayesian Meta-Analysis of Health State Utility Values: A Tutorial with a Practical Application in Heart Failure

Researchers incorporate health state utility values as inputs to inform economic models. However, for a particular health state or condition, multiple utility values derived from different studies typically exist and a single study is often insufficient to represent the best available source of utility needed to inform policy decisions. The purpose of this paper is to provide an introductory guidance for conducting Bayesian meta-analysis of health state utility values to generate a single parameter input for economic evaluation, using R. The tutorial is illustrated using data from a systematic review of health state utilities of patients with heart failure, with 21 studies that reported utilities measured using the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). Explanations, key considerations and suggested readings are provided for each step of the tutorial, adhering to a clear workflow for conducting Bayesian meta-analysis: (1) setting-up the data; (2) employing methods to impute missing standard deviations; (3) defining the priors; (4) fitting the model; (5) diagnosing model convergence; (6) interpreting the results; and (7) performing sensitivity analyses. The posterior distributions for the pooled effect size (i.e. mean health state utility) and between-study heterogeneity are discussed and interpreted in light of the data, priors and models used. We hope that this tutorial will foster interest in Bayesian methods and their applications in the meta-analysis of utilities.

Association of active mobilisation variables with adverse events and mortality in patients requiring mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mobilisation during critical illness is now included in multiple clinical practice guidelines. However, a large, randomised trial and systematic review have recently identified an increased probability of adverse events and mortality in patients who received early active mobilisation in the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to determine the effects of mobilisation compared with usual care on adverse events and mortality in an acute ICU setting. In subgroup analyses, we specifically aimed to investigate possible sources of harm, including the timing and duration of mobilisation achieved, ventilation status, and admission diagnosis.

METHODS

In this systematic review with frequentist and Bayesian analyses, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and PEDro electronic databases, as well as clinical trial registries (ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov), from inception to March 16, 2023, without language restrictions. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials that examined active mobilisation compared with either no mobilisation or mobilisation commencing later, or at a lower frequency or intensity, in adults who were critically ill during or after a period of mechanical ventilation in an acute ICU setting. Two authors independently screened reports, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (version 1). The primary outcome was the number of adverse events that occurred during the implementation of mobilisation, with the effect of mobilisation on mortality being the secondary outcome. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated in R (version 4.0.3) using random-effects modelling, with Bayesian analysis completed to calculate the probability of treatment harm (ie, RR >1). Subgroup analyses were completed to investigate the association of various factors of mobilisation on adverse events and mortality: duration of mobilisation (longer [≥20 min per day] vs shorter [<20 min per day]), timing of commencement (early [≤72 h from ICU admission] vs late [>72 h from ICU admission]), ventilation status at commencement (all patients mechanically ventilated vs all patients extubated), and ICU admission diagnosis (surgical vs medical). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022369272.

FINDINGS

After title and abstract screening of 14 440 studies and review of 466 full texts, 67 trials with 7004 participants met inclusion criteria, with 59 trials contributing to the meta-analysis. Of the 67 included studies, 15 (22%) did not mention adverse events and 13 (19%) reported no adverse events occurring across the trial period. Overall, we found no effect of mobilisation compared with usual care on the occurrence of adverse events (RR 1·09 [95% CI 0·69-1·74], p=0·71; I2 91%; 32 731 events, 20 studies; very low certainty), with a 2·96% occurrence rate (693 events in 23 395 intervention sessions; 25 studies). Mobilisation did not have any effect on mortality (RR 0·98 [95% CI 0·87-1·12], p=0·81; I2 0%; n=6218, 58 studies; moderate certainty). Subgroup analysis was hindered by the large amount of data that could not be allocated and analysed, making the results hypothesis generating only.

INTERPRETATION

Implementation of mobilisation in the ICU was associated with a less than 3% chance of an adverse event occurring and was not found to increase adverse events or mortality overall, providing reassurance for clinicians about the safety of performing this intervention. Subgroup analyses did not clearly identify any specific variable of mobilisation implementation that increased harm.

FUNDING

None.

Sharing information across patient subgroups to draw conclusions from sparse treatment networks

Network meta-analysis (NMA) usually provides estimates of the relative effects with the highest possible precision. However, sparse networks with few available studies and limited direct evidence can arise, threatening the robustness and reliability of NMA estimates. In these cases, the limited amount of available information can hamper the formal evaluation of the underlying NMA assumptions of transitivity and consistency. In addition, NMA estimates from sparse networks are expected to be imprecise and possibly biased as they rely on large-sample approximations that are invalid in the absence of sufficient data. We propose a Bayesian framework that allows sharing of information between two networks that pertain to different population subgroups. Specifically, we use the results from a subgroup with a lot of direct evidence (a dense network) to construct informative priors for the relative effects in the target subgroup (a sparse network). This is a two-stage approach where at the first stage, we extrapolate the results of the dense network to those expected from the sparse network. This takes place by using a modified hierarchical NMA model where we add a location parameter that shifts the distribution of the relative effects to make them applicable to the target population. At the second stage, these extrapolated results are used as prior information for the sparse network. We illustrate our approach through a motivating example of psychiatric patients. Our approach results in more precise and robust estimates of the relative effects and can adequately inform clinical practice in presence of sparse networks.

Comparing interventions for early psychosis: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis

Background

'Early Intervention in Psychosis' (EIP) services have been associated with improved outcomes for early psychosis. However, these services are heterogeneous and many provide different components of treatment. The impact of this variation on the sustained treatment effects is unknown.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and component network meta-analysis (cNMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared specialised intervention services for early psychosis. We searched CENTRAL (published and unpublished), EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science from inception to February 2023. Primary outcomes were negative and positive psychotic symptoms at 3-month and 1-year follow-up and treatment dropouts. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms and social functioning at 1-year follow-up. We registered a protocol for our study in PROSPERO (CRD42017057420).

Findings

We identified 37 RCTs including 4599 participants. Participants' mean age was 25.8 years (SD 6.0) and 64.0% were men. We found evidence that psychological interventions (this component grouped all psychological treatment intended to treat, or ameliorate the consequences of, psychotic symptoms) are beneficial for reducing negative symptoms (iSMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.05, p = 0.014) at 3-month follow-up and may be associated with clinically relevant benefits in improving social functioning scores at 1-year follow-up (iSMD -0.52, 95% CI -1.05 to 0.01, p = 0.052). The addition of case management has a beneficial effect on reducing negative symptoms (iSMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.11, p = 0.030) and positive symptoms (iSMD -1.05, 95% CI -2.02 to -0.08, p = 0.033) at 1-year follow-up. Pharmacotherapy was present in all trial arms, meaning it was not possible to examine the specific effects of this component.

Interpretation

Our findings suggest psychological interventions and case management in addition to pharmacotherapy as the core components of services for early psychosis to achieve sustained clinical benefits. Our conclusions are limited by the small number of studies and sparsely connected networks.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis with empirical heterogeneity priors for application in health technology assessment with very few studies

In Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis, the use of weakly informative prior distributions is of particular benefit in cases where only a few studies are included, a situation often encountered in health technology assessment (HTA). Suggestions for empirical prior distributions are available in the literature but it is unknown whether these are adequate in the context of HTA. Therefore, a database of all relevant meta-analyses conducted by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG, Germany) was constructed to derive empirical prior distributions for the heterogeneity parameter suitable for HTA. Previously, an extension to the normal-normal hierarchical model had been suggested for this purpose. For different effect measures, this extended model was applied on the database to conservatively derive a prior distribution for the heterogeneity parameter. Comparison of a Bayesian approach using the derived priors with IQWiG's current standard approach for evidence synthesis shows favorable properties. Therefore, these prior distributions are recommended for future meta-analyses in HTA settings and could be embedded into the IQWiG evidence synthesis approach in the case of very few studies.

Network meta analysis to predict the efficacy of an approved treatment in a new indication

Drug repurposing refers to the process of discovering new therapeutic uses for existing medicines. Compared to traditional drug discovery, drug repurposing is attractive for its speed, cost, and reduced risk of failure. However, existing approaches for drug repurposing involve complex, computationally-intensive analytical methods that are not widely used in practice. Instead, repurposing decisions are often based on subjective judgments from limited empirical evidence. In this article, we develop a novel Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) framework that can predict the efficacy of an approved treatment in a new indication and thereby identify candidate treatments for repurposing. We obtain predictions using two main steps: first, we use standard NMA modeling to estimate average relative effects from a network comprised of treatments studied in both indications in addition to one treatment studied in only one indication. Then, we model the correlation between relative effects using various strategies that differ in how they model treatments across indications and within the same drug class. We evaluate the predictive performance of each model using a simulation study and find that the model minimizing root mean squared error of the posterior median for the candidate treatment depends on the amount of available data, the level of correlation between indications, and whether treatment effects differ, on average, by drug class. We conclude by discussing an illustrative example in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis and find that the candidate treatment has a high probability of success in a future trial.

Risk of infectious adverse events of venetoclax therapy for hematologic malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs

ABSTRACT

Venetoclax is a small molecule inhibitor of BCL-2 used in the treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Recent postmarketing studies of ibrutinib, another small molecule inhibitor, suggested that these agents may predispose to opportunistic infections. We sought to systematically review the randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence of venetoclax to assess whether it predisposes patients to infectious adverse events (IAEs) and neutropenia. We systematically reviewed RCTs comparing venetoclax therapy with active or placebo controls for patients with hematologic malignancies. Data on IAEs and neutropenia were pooled by Bayesian meta-analysis, and we computed the probability of any increased risk (P[risk ratio (RR) > 1]) of IAEs or neutropenic complications. Seven RCTs were included, comprising 2067 patients. In CLL (n = 1032), there was a low probability of increased risk of high-grade (P[RR > 1] = 71.2%) and fatal IAEs (P[RR > 1] = 64.5%) and high-grade neutropenia (P[RR > 1] = 63.4%). There were insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis of IAEs in AML; however, 1 trial suggested an increased risk of IAEs with venetoclax. Furthermore, in AML (n = 642), venetoclax was associated with a high probability of increased risk of high-grade neutropenia (P[RR > 1] = 94.6%) and febrile neutropenia (P[RR > 1] = 90.6%). Our results suggest that venetoclax has a low probability of increased risk of IAEs or neutropenia in CLL. By contrast, there is likely increased risk of high-grade neutropenia and febrile neutropenia in AML. Importantly, our analyses did not identify any specific IAEs that would benefit from routine antimicrobial prophylaxis or pre-emptive testing.

Lipid-Lowering Therapy and Risk of Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

There is debate over whether statins increase risk of hemorrhagic stroke, so we assessed current evidence, including data from new statin trials and trials of nonstatin low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C)- and triglyceride-lowering therapies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a systematic review of large randomized clinical trials (≥1000 patients with ≥2 years follow-up) of LDL-C-lowering therapy (statin, ezetimibe, and PCSK-9 [proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9] inhibitor) and triglyceride-lowering therapy (omega-3 supplements and fibrate) that reported hemorrhagic stroke as an outcome. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to July 2, 2021 and updated a meta-analysis of cardiovascular statin trials published in 2012. Among our several subgroup analyses, we looked at difference depending on stroke status and also depending on age. We identified 37 trials for LDL-C lowering (284 301 participants) and 11 for triglyceride lowering (120 984 participants). Overall, we found a higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke for LDL-C lowering, risk ratio (RR) 1.16 (95% CI, 1.01-1.32, P=0.03). For statins (33 trials, 216 258 participants), RR=1.17 (95% CI, 1.01-1.36); for PCSK-9 inhibitors (2 trials, 46 488 participants), RR=0.86 (95% CI, 0.43-1.74); and for ezetimibe (2 trials, 21 555 participants), RR=1.14 (95% CI, 0.64-2.03). In statin trials of patients with previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, RR was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.05-2.04), and in trials with mean age ≥65 years old, RR=1.34 (95% CI, 1.04-1.73) (Pint=0.14 and Pint=0.23 respectively); for triglyceride lowering (11 trials, 120 984 participants), RR=1.05 (95% CI, 0.86-1.30).

CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence for a small increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke events with LDL-C-lowering therapies but no clear evidence for triglyceride-lowering therapies.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42021275363.

Ketamine versus etomidate as an induction agent for tracheal intubation in critically ill adults: a Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tracheal intubation is a high-risk intervention commonly performed in critically ill patients. Due to its favorable cardiovascular profile, ketamine is considered less likely to compromise clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether ketamine, compared with other agents, reduces mortality in critically ill patients undergoing intubation.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception until April 27, 2023, for randomized controlled trials and matched observational studies comparing ketamine with any control in critically ill patients as an induction agent. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available, and the secondary outcomes included Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, ventilator-free days at day 28, vasopressor-free days at day 28, post-induction mean arterial pressure, and successful intubation on the first attempt. For the primary outcome, we used a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis on the risk ratio (RR) scale with a weakly informative neutral prior corresponding to a mean estimate of no difference with 95% probability; the estimated effect size will fall between a relative risk of 0.25 and 4. The RR and 95% credible interval (CrI) were used to estimate the probability of mortality reduction (RR < 1). The secondary outcomes were assessed with a frequentist random-effects model. We registered this study in Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/2vf79/ ).

RESULTS

We included seven randomized trials and one propensity-matched study totaling 2978 patients. Etomidate was the comparator in all the identified studies. The probability that ketamine reduced mortality was 83.2% (376/1475 [25%] vs. 411/1503 [27%]; RR, 0.93; 95% CrI, 0.79-1.08), which was confirmed by a subgroup analysis excluding studies with a high risk of bias. No significant difference was observed in any secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

All of the included studies evaluated ketamine versus etomidate among critically ill adults requiring tracheal intubation. This meta-analysis showed a moderate probability that induction with ketamine is associated with a reduced risk of mortality.

Comparative effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions on sleep in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review with network meta-analysis

This network meta-analysis aimed to estimate the comparative effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions on sleep in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Seven databases were systematically searched up to February 2023. A random-effects network meta-analysis in a frequentist framework was performed to synthesize continuous data as standardized mean differences (SMD) along with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). A total of 15,641 records were identified, and 107 randomized controlled trials involving 8,121 participants were included. Of 14 identified interventions, eight were significantly more effective than passive control in improving sleep quality at immediate post-intervention (SMDs = 0.67-0.74), with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) being the most effective treatment (SMD = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.45-1.03). Only CBT demonstrated sustained effects at short-term (SMD = 1.56; 95% CI: 0.62-2.49) and mid-term (SMD = 1.23; 95% CI: 0.44-2.03) follow-ups. Furthermore, CBT significantly improved subjective (SMD = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.25-1.03) and objective (SMD = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.01-0.59) sleep efficiency compared with passive control at immediate post-intervention. Our findings support CBT as the first-line treatment for improving sleep in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain, given its superior effectiveness across multiple sleep outcomes and its sustainable effects until mid-term follow-up. However, the certainty of evidence for these interventions in improving sleep quality was very low to low.

Comparing binary efficacy outcomes for systemic immunomodulatory treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) are evaluated primarily in placebo-controlled trials with binary efficacy outcomes. In a living systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we previously analysed continuous efficacy measures.

OBJECTIVES

To compare binary efficacy outcomes of systemic treatments for AD.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information (LILACS) database, Global Resource for Eczema Trials (GREAT) database and trial registries up to 1 March 2023. We included randomized trials examining ≥ 8 weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate-to-severe AD. We screened titles, abstracts and full texts and abstracted data independently, in duplicate. Outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving at least 50%, 75% and 90% improvements in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 50, EASI 75 and EASI 90, respectively) and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) success. We performed random-effects Bayesian NMAs to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) between each intervention for each outcome.

RESULTS

Eighty-three trials with 22 122 participants were included in the systematic review. In analyses limited to trials of 8-16 weeks' duration with predominantly adult populations, abrocitinib 200 mg daily (OR 1.5, 95% CrI 1.1-2.2) and upadacitinib 15 mg daily (OR 1.7, 95% CrI 0.9-3.3) and 30 mg daily (OR 2.5, 95% CrI 1.3-5.0) were associated with higher odds of achieving EASI 50 vs. dupilumab. Abrocitinib 100 mg daily (OR 0.7, 95% CrI 0.5-1.0), baricitinib 2 mg daily (OR 0.4, 95% CrI 0.3-0.5) and 4 mg daily (OR 0.5, 95% CrI 0.3-0.7), and tralokinumab (OR 0.4, 95% CrI 0.3-0.6) were associated with lower odds of achieving EASI 50 vs. dupilumab. Results were similar for EASI 75, EASI 90 and IGA success.

CONCLUSIONS

Supporting results for continuous outcome measures, upadacitinib 30 mg daily and abrocitinib 200 mg daily are the most efficacious with regard to binary efficacy endpoints up to 16 weeks in adults with moderate-to-severe AD, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg daily, dupilumab and abrocitinib 100 mg daily. Dupilumab and both doses of upadacitinib and abrocitinib are more efficacious than baricitinib 4 and 2 mg daily and tralokinumab.

Twenty years of network meta-analysis: Continuing controversies and recent developments

Network meta-analysis (NMA) is an extension of pairwise meta-analysis (PMA) which combines evidence from trials on multiple treatments in connected networks. NMA delivers internally consistent estimates of relative treatment efficacy, needed for rational decision making. Over its first 20 years NMA's use has grown exponentially, with applications in both health technology assessment (HTA), primarily re-imbursement decisions and clinical guideline development, and clinical research publications. This has been a period of transition in meta-analysis, first from its roots in educational and social psychology, where large heterogeneous datasets could be explored to find effect modifiers, to smaller pairwise meta-analyses in clinical medicine on average with less than six studies. This has been followed by narrowly-focused estimation of the effects of specific treatments at specific doses in specific populations in sparse networks, where direct comparisons are unavailable or informed by only one or two studies. NMA is a powerful and well-established technique but, in spite of the exponential increase in applications, doubts about the reliability and validity of NMA persist. Here we outline the continuing controversies, and review some recent developments. We suggest that heterogeneity should be minimized, as it poses a threat to the reliability of NMA which has not been fully appreciated, perhaps because it has not been seen as a problem in PMA. More research is needed on the extent of heterogeneity and inconsistency in datasets used for decision making, on formal methods for making recommendations based on NMA, and on the further development of multi-level network meta-regression.

A review and comparison of arm-based versus contrast-based network meta-analysis for binary outcomes-Understanding their differences and limitations

Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a statistical procedure to simultaneously compare multiple interventions. Despite the added complexity of performing an NMA compared with the traditional pairwise meta-analysis, under proper assumptions the NMA can lead to more efficient estimates on the comparisons of interventions by combining and contrasting the direct and indirect evidence into a form of evidence that can be used to underpin treatment guidelines. Two broad classes of NMA methods are commonly used in practice: the contrast-based (CB-NMA) and the arm-based (AB-NMA) models. While CB-NMA only focuses on the relative effects by assuming fixed intercepts, the AB-NMA offers greater flexibility on the estimands, including both the absolute and relative effects by assuming random intercepts. A major criticism of the AB-NMA, on which we aim to elaborate in this paper, is that it does not retain randomization within trials, which may introduce bias in the estimated relative effects in some scenarios. This criticism was drawn under the implicit assumption that a given relative effect is transportable, in which case the data generating mechanism favors the inference based on CB-NMA, which models the relative effect. In this article, we aim to review, summarize, and elaborate on the underlying assumptions, similarities and differences, and also the advantages and disadvantages, between CB-NMA and AB-NMA methods. As indirect treatment comparison is susceptible to risk of bias no matter which approach is taken, it is important to consider both approaches in practice as complementary sensitivity analyses and to provide the totality of evidence from the data.

Abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis

Background

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin condition. One of the most common skin disorders in children, atopic dermatitis typically manifests before the age of 5 years, but it can develop at any age. Atopic dermatitis is characterised by dry, inflamed skin accompanied by intense itchiness (pruritus).

Objectives

To appraise the clinical and cost effectiveness of abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib within their marketing authorisations as alternative therapies for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis compared to systemic immunosuppressants (first-line ciclosporin A or second-line dupilumab and baricitinib).

Data sources

Studies were identified from an existing systematic review (search date 2019) and update searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) to November 2021, from bibliographies of retrieved studies, clinical trial registers and evidence provided by the sponsoring companies of the treatments under review.

Methods

A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness literature was carried out and a network meta-analysis undertaken for adults and adolescents at different steps of the treatment pathway. The primary outcome of interest was a combined response of Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4; where this was consistently unavailable for a step in the pathway, an analysis of Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 was conducted. A de novo economic model was developed to assess cost effectiveness from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. The model structure was informed through systematic review of the economic literature and by consulting clinical experts. Effectiveness data were obtained from the network meta-analysis. Costs and utilities were obtained from the evidence provided by sponsoring companies and standard UK sources.

Results

Network meta-analyses indicate that abrocitinib 200 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg may be more effective, and tralokinumab may be less effective than dupilumab and baricitinib as second-line systemic therapies. Abrocitinib 100 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg have a more similar effectiveness to dupilumab. Upadacitinib 30 and 15 mg are likely to be more effective than ciclosporin A as a first-line therapy. Upadacitinib 15 mg, abrocitinib 200 and 100 mg may be more effective than dupilumab in adolescents. The cost effectiveness of abrocitinib and upadacitinib for both doses is dependent on the subgroup of interest. Tralokinumab can be considered cost-effective as a second-line systemic therapy owing to greater cost savings per quality-adjusted life-year lost.

Conclusions

The primary strength of the analysis of the three new drugs compared with current practice for each of the subpopulations is the consistent approach to the assessment of clinical and cost effectiveness. However, the conclusions are limited by the high uncertainty around the clinical effectiveness and lack of data for the primary outcome for comparisons with baricitinib and for the adolescent and adult first-line populations.

Future work and limitations

The most significant limitation that Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4 could not be obtained for the adolescent and adult first-line systemic treatment populations is due to a paucity of data for dupilumab and ciclosporin A. A comparison of the new drugs against one another in addition to current practice would be beneficial to provide a robust view on which treatments are the most cost-effective.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021266219.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: 135138) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 4. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Expedited transport versus continued on-scene resuscitation for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The benefit of rapid transport from the scene to definitive in-hospital care versus extended on-scene resuscitation in out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) is uncertain.

Aim

To assess the use of expedited transport from the scene of OHCA compared with more extended on-scene resuscitation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in adults.

Methods

A systematic search of the literature was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS. Randomised control trials (RCTs) and observational studies were included. Studies reporting transport timing for OHCA patients with outcome data on survival were identified and reviewed. Two investigators assessed studies identified by screening for relevance and assessed bias using the ROBINS-I tool. Studies with non-dichotomous timing data or an absence of comparator group(s) were excluded. Outcomes of interest included survival and favourable neurological outcome. Survival to discharge and favourable neurological outcome were meta-analysed using a random-effects model.

Results

Nine studies (eight cohort studies, one RCT) met eligibility criteria and were considered suitable for meta-analysis. On pooled analysis, expedited (or earlier) transfer was not predictive of survival to discharge (odds ratio [OR] 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53 to 2.53, I2 = 99%, p = 0. 65) or favorable neurological outcome (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.37, I2 = 99%, p = 0.85). The certainty of evidence across studies was assessed as very low with a moderate risk of bias. Region of publication was noted to be a major contributor to the significant heterogeneity observed amongst included studies.

Conclusions

There is inconclusive evidence to support or refute the use of expedited transport of refractory OHCA.

Topical treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s).

RESULTS

The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna).

RESULTS

The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

Atezolizumab in Combination with Bevacizumab for the Management of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the First-Line Setting: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

In 2020, atezolizumab-bevacizumab became the new standard of care (SOC) for first-line unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, following a decade where sorafenib was the preferred first-line treatment. In the last few years, a number of novel systemic treatments with non-inferiority and superiority to sorafenib have been approved as first-line treatments.

Objectives

The objective of this systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare randomised controlled trial evidence for atezolizumab-bevacizumab with globally relevant pharmacological comparators for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable HCC.

Methods

Randomised controlled trials investigating first-line treatment of HCC in adults with no prior systemic treatment were eligible for inclusion into the SLR and were retrieved from Embase, MEDLINE, and Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews. Interventions of interest for the NMA included atezolizumab-bevacizumab, sorafenib, lenvatinib, durvalumab (including in combination with tremelimumab), cabozantinib (including in combination with atezolizumab), camrelizumab (including in combination with rivoceranib), pembrolizumab (including in combination with lenvatinib), and tislelizumab. Random effects NMA was conducted for survival endpoints within a Bayesian framework with an informative prior distribution for between-study heterogeneity. The hazard ratios for relative treatment effect were estimated with 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

Results

The SLR identified 49 studies, of which eight formed a connected evidence network permitting the indirect treatment comparison of atezolizumab-bevacizumab with comparators of interest. The indirect comparisons suggested an improved overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab-bevacizumab versus most comparators. All indirect treatment comparison results for atezolizumab-bevacizumab included the null value within the 95% CrI (n = 1) for OS and progression-free survival (PFS).

Conclusions

The results of the NMA indicate atezolizumab-bevacizumab is associated with superior or comparable OS and PFS together with a manageable safety profile compared with globally relevant comparators in the unresected HCC indication. The findings support that atezolizumab-bevacizumab remains SOC for the management of first-line unresectable HCC patients.

A systematic review with meta-analysis on prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy versus standard dressing for obese women after caesarean section

AIMS

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in obese women undergoing caesarean section.

DESIGN

An updated review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to March 2022 without restriction in language. We chose surgical site infection as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

NPWT resulted in a lower surgical site infection rate compared with conventional dressing (risk ratio [RR] = 0.76). The infection rate after low transverse incision was lower comparing the NPWT group with the control group ([RR] = 0.76). No statistically significant difference was detected in blistering([RR] = 2.91). The trial sequential analysis did not support the 20% relative decrease in surgical site infection in the NPWT group. (type II error of 20%).

Addition of long-acting beta2 agonists or long-acting muscarinic antagonists versus doubling the dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma with medium dose ICS: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay treatment for persistent asthma. Escalating treatment is required when asthma is not controlled with ICS therapy alone, which would include, but is not limited to, adding a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or doubling the dose of ICS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of adding a LABA or LAMA to ICS therapy versus doubling the dose of ICS in adolescents and adults whose asthma is not well controlled on medium-dose (MD)-ICS using a network meta-analysis (NMA), and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization ICTRP for pre-registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from January 2008 to 19 December 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for studies including adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma who had been treated with or were eligible for MD-ICS, comparing it to high-dose (HD)-ICS, ICS/LAMA, or ICS/LABA. We excluded cluster- and cross-over RCTs. Studies were of at least 12 weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis according to a previously published protocol. We used Cochrane's Screen4ME workflow to assess search results. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. The primary outcome is asthma exacerbations (moderate and severe).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38,276 participants from 35 studies (median duration 24 weeks (range 12 to 78); mean age 44.1; 38% male; 69% white; mean forced expiratory volume in one second 2.1 litres and 68% of predicted). MD- and HD-ICS/LABA likely reduce and MD-ICS/LAMA possibly reduces moderate to severe asthma exacerbations compared to MD-ICS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.59 to 0.82; moderate certainty; HR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.46 to 0.76; moderate certainty; and HR 0.56, 95% CrI 0.38 to 0.82; low certainty, respectively), whereas HD-ICS probably does not (HR 0.94, 95% CrI 0.70 to 1.24; moderate certainty). There is no clear evidence to suggest that any combination therapy or HD-ICS reduces severe asthma exacerbations compared to MD-ICS (low to moderate certainty). This study suggests no clinically meaningful differences in the symptom or quality of life score between dual combinations and monotherapy (low to high certainty). MD- and HD-ICS/LABA increase or likely increase the odds of Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) responders at 6 and 12 months compared to MD-ICS (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% CrI 1.23 to 1.76; high certainty; and OR 1.59, 95% CrI 1.31 to 1.94; high certainty at 6 months; and OR 1.61, 95% CrI 1.22 to 2.13; moderate certainty and OR 1.55, 95% CrI 1.20 to 2.00; high certainty at 12 months, respectively). MD-ICS/LAMA probably increases the odds of ACQ responders at 6 months (OR 1.32, 95% CrI 1.11 to 1.57; moderate certainty). No data were available at 12 months. There is no clear evidence to suggest that HD-ICS increases the odds of ACQ responders or improves the symptom or qualify of life score compared to MD-ICS (very low to high certainty). There is no evidence to suggest that ICS/LABA or ICS/LAMA reduces asthma-related or all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to MD-ICS (very low to high certainty). HD-ICS results in or likely results in little or no difference in the included safety outcomes compared to MD-ICS as well as HD-ICS/LABA compared to MD-ICS/LABA. The pairwise meta-analysis shows that MD-ICS/LAMA likely reduces all-cause adverse events (AEs) and results in a slight reduction in treatment discontinuation due to AEs compared to MD-ICS (risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.96; 4 studies, 2238 participants; moderate certainty; and RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.99; 4 studies, 2239 participants; absolute risk reduction 10 fewer per 1000 participants; moderate certainty, respectively). The NMA evidence is in agreement with the pairwise evidence on treatment discontinuation due to AEs, but very uncertain on all-cause AEs, due to imprecision and heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review findings suggest that MD- or HD-ICS/LABA and MD-ICS/LAMA reduce moderate to severe asthma exacerbations and increase the odds of ACQ responders compared to MD-ICS whereas HD-ICS probably does not. The evidence is generally stronger for MD- and HD-ICS/LABA than for MD-ICS/LAMA primarily due to a larger evidence base. There is no evidence to suggest that ICS/LABA, ICS/LAMA, or HD-ICS/LABA reduces severe asthma exacerbations or SAEs compared to MD-ICS. MD-ICS/LAMA likely reduces all-cause AEs and results in a slight reduction in treatment discontinuation due to AEs compared to MD-ICS. The above findings may assist in deciding on a treatment option during the stepwise approach of asthma management. Longer-term safety of higher than medium-dose ICS needs to be addressed in phase 4 or observational studies given that the median duration of included studies was six months.

Bayesian estimation and prediction for network meta-analysis with contrast-based approach

Network meta-analysis is gaining prominence in clinical epidemiology and health technology assessments that enable comprehensive assessment of comparative effectiveness for multiple available treatments. In network meta-analysis, Bayesian methods have been one of the standard approaches for the arm-based approach and are widely applied in practical data analyses. Also, for most cases in these applications, proper noninformative priors are adopted, which does not incorporate subjective prior knowledge into the analyses, and reference Bayesian analyses are major choices. In this article, we provide generic Bayesian analysis methods for the contrast-based approach of network meta-analysis, where the generic Bayesian methods can treat proper and improper prior distributions. The proposed methods enable direct sampling from the posterior and posterior predictive distributions without formal iterative computations such as Markov chain Monte Carlo, and technical convergence checks are not required. In addition, representative noninformative priors that can be treated in the proposed framework involving the Jeffreys prior are provided. We also provide an easy-to-handle R statistical package, BANMA, to implement these Bayesian analyses via simple commands. The proposed Bayesian methods are illustrated using various noninformative priors through applications to two real network meta-analyses.

Comparative efficacy of therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Aim: To assess the relative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) including newer therapies (ozanimod, ponesimod, ublituximab) using network meta-analysis (NMA). Materials & methods: Bayesian NMAs for annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to 3-month and 6-month confirmed disability progression (3mCDP and 6mCDP) were conducted. Results: For each outcome, the three most efficacious treatments versus placebo were monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies: alemtuzumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab for ARR; alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab for 3mCDP; and alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and either ocrelizumab or ofatumumab (depending on the CDP definition used for included ofatumumab trials) for 6mCDP. Conclusion: The most efficacious DMTs for RMS were mAb therapies. Of the newer therapies, only ublituximab ranked among the three most efficacious treatments (for ARR).

Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis

BACKGROUND

Bayesian methods have potential for efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Furthermore, value of information (VOI) methods estimate the value of reducing decision uncertainty, aiding transparent research prioritization. These methods require a prior distribution describing current uncertainty in key parameters, such as relative treatment effect (RTE). However, at the time of designing and commissioning research, there may be no data to base the prior on. The aim of this article is to present methods to construct priors for RTEs based on a collection of previous RCTs.

METHODS

We developed 2 Bayesian hierarchical models that captured variability in RTE between studies within disease area accounting for study characteristics. We illustrate the methods using a data set of 743 published RCTs across 9 disease areas to obtain predictive distributions for RTEs for a range of disease areas. We illustrate how the priors from such an analysis can be used in a VOI analysis for an RCT in bladder cancer and compare the results with those using an uninformative prior.

RESULTS

For most disease areas, the predicted RTE favored new interventions over comparators. The predicted effects and uncertainty differed across the 9 disease areas. VOI analysis showed that the expected value of research is much lower with our empirically derived prior compared with an uninformative prior.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a novel approach to generating informative priors that can be used to aid research prioritization and trial design. The methods can also be used to combine RCT evidence with expert opinion. Further work is needed to create a rich database of RCT evidence that can be used to form off-the-shelf priors.

HIGHLIGHTS

Bayesian methods have potential to aid the efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Value-of-information (VOI) methods can be used to aid research prioritization by calculating the value of current decision uncertainty.These methods require a distribution describing current uncertainty in key parameters, that is, "prior distributions."This article demonstrates a methodology to estimate prior distributions for relative treatment effects (odds and hazard ratios) estimated from a collection of previous RCTs.These results may be combined with expert elicitation to facilitate 1) value-of-information methods to prioritize research or 2) Bayesian methods for research design.

Summarizing empirical information on between-study heterogeneity for Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis

In Bayesian meta-analysis, the specification of prior probabilities for the between-study heterogeneity is commonly required, and is of particular benefit in situations where only few studies are included. Among the considerations in the set-up of such prior distributions, the consultation of available empirical data on a set of relevant past analyses sometimes plays a role. How exactly to summarize historical data sensibly is not immediately obvious; in particular, the investigation of an empirical collection of heterogeneity estimates will not target the actual problem and will usually only be of limited use. The commonly used normal-normal hierarchical model for random-effects meta-analysis is extended to infer a heterogeneity prior. Using an example data set, we demonstrate how to fit a distribution to empirically observed heterogeneity data from a set of meta-analyses. Considerations also include the choice of a parametric distribution family. Here, we focus on simple and readily applicable approaches to then translate these into (prior) probability distributions.

Prognostic Value of Neurotrophic Tyrosine Receptor Kinase Gene Fusions in Solid Tumors for Overall Survival: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Evidence suggests that neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions in solid tumors are predictive biomarkers for targeted inhibition across a number of adult and pediatric tumor types. However, despite robust clinical response to tyrosine receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors, the natural history and prognostic implications of NTRK fusions in solid tumors are poorly understood. It is important to evaluate their prognostic significance on survival to provide some context to the clinical effectiveness observed in clinical trials of TRK-targeted therapies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed to identify studies comparing the overall survival (OS) of patients with NTRK fusion-positive (NTRK+) versus NTRK fusion-negative (NTRK-) tumors. Five retrospective matched case-control studies published before 11 August 2022 were assessed for inclusion, and three were selected for the meta-analysis (sample size: 69 NTRK+, 444 NTRK-). Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Studies tool. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) was estimated using a Bayesian random-effects model.

RESULTS

In the meta-analysis, the median follow-up ranged from 2 to 14 years and the median OS was between 10.1 and 12.7 months (where reported). Comparing patients with tumors NTRK+ and NTRK-, the pooled HR estimate for OS was 1.51 (95% credible interval, 1.01 to 2.29). The patients analyzed had no previous or current exposure to TRK inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

In patients not treated with TRK inhibitor therapies, those with NTRK+ solid tumors have a 50% increased risk of mortality within 10 years from diagnosis or the start of standard therapy compared with those with NTRK- status. Although this is the most robust estimate of the comparative survival rate to date, further studies are required to reduce uncertainty.

Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) could effectively prevent the occurrence of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAVTE), which incidence rate was estimated to be 4-20%. But the efficacy and safety remain controversial between DOACs and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were systematically searched from inception to March 15, 2022. A random-effects model was used to report the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for both direct and network meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included totaling 3242 patients. A lower rate of recurrence VTE was noted in the DOACs compared with LMWH (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47-0.82, I²=0.0%). The aspect of major bleeding (MB) was similar (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.77-2.18, I²=34.9%). When assessing clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.17-2.22, I²=20.7%) and clinically relevant bleeding (CRB) (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.11-1.74, I²=0.0%), a higher risk of events was observed in DOACs. In subgroup analyses, the MB of gastrointestinal and genitourinary malignancies had a higher rate in the DOACs. For ranking, apixaban ranked the first in prevention of VTE and reducing MB events. Edoxaban had the highest risk drug in MB. In terms of CRNMB and CRB, LMWH showed the lowest risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with LMWH, DOACs seemed to have a decreased risk of recurrence VTE while increasing CRNMB and CRB. DOACs and LMWH were equivalent to the aspect of MB, but DOACs had a higher MB risk in patients with gastrointestinal and genitourinary malignancies. Apixaban may be the lowest risk compared to the other DOACs in precaution of VTE and reducing bleeding events.

Vitamin D status and risk of rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D is important for immunomodulation and may play a role in autoimmune diseases. Studies have reported a high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, and vitamin D status, assessed by circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration, is inversely associated with RA disease activity. However, it is unclear whether vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of later developing RA. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of pre-diagnostic 25(OH)D concentrations and risk of RA.

METHODS

Medline and Embase databases were searched in December 2021 using various keywords for 'vitamin D', 'rheumatoid arthritis', and 'prospective study'. Publications identified from the search were screened for eligibility, studies were excluded if vitamin D status was measured at or after RA diagnosis, and data were extracted from relevant articles. Bayesian meta-analysis was used to estimate the summary relative risk (RR) and 95% credible interval (CrI) for risk of RA in relation to circulating 25(OH)D concentrations, as well as the between-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 908 records, of which 4 publications reporting on 7 studies, involving a total of 15,604 participants and 1049 incident RA cases, were included in the meta-analysis. There was no suggestion of an association between 25(OH)D concentration and subsequent risk of RA. The pooled RR per 25 nmol/L increment in 25(OH)D was 0.96 (95% CrI 0.82-1.13; I² = 52%). No associations were evident in men (RR = 1.02, 95% CrI 0.65-1.61; I² = 77%, 2 studies) or women (RR = 0.94, 95% CrI 0.73-1.22; I² = 71%, 4 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis did not identify evidence of an association between 25(OH)D and RA risk, but there was notable between-study heterogeneity and a lack of precision. Investigations in large-scale prospective studies with long follow-up or suitably designed Mendelian randomisation studies with consideration of potential non-linear relationships are needed to determine whether vitamin D is involved in RA aetiology.

Sintilimab plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: network meta-analysis

Aim: This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum versus US FDA-approved/National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapies for untreated advanced/metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK aberrations. Methods: Bayesian network meta-analysis was the base-case analysis and included assessment of fixed and random effects, and independent and simultaneous models, adjusting for baseline risk (placebo response). Chemotherapy was the common comparator. Results: Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than atezolizumab + platinum + nab-paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.40-0.82) and nivolumab + ipilimumab + pemetrexed + platinum (HR: 0.66; 95% CrI: 0.48-0.92). Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed comparable progression-free survival (HR: 0.96; 95% CrI: 0.71-1.30). There was no significant difference in overall survival (HR range: 0.61-0.81) or overall response rates (odds ratio [OR] range: 0.29-0.75) between sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and the other ICI combinations. The incidence of high-grade adverse events was higher with sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum than with nivolumab + ipilimumab (OR: 0.46; 95% CrI: 0.33-0.64) or without chemotherapy (OR: 0.25; 95% CrI: 0.19-0.34), with no significant difference between sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and the other ICI combinations. Conclusion: Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum showed comparable efficacy and safety versus US standard-of-care first-line ICI combinations for advanced/metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Metabolic side effects in persons with schizophrenia during mid- to long-term treatment with antipsychotics: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Metabolic side effects of antipsychotic drugs can have serious health consequences and may increase mortality. Although persons with schizophrenia often take these drugs for a long time, their mid- to long-term metabolic effects have been studied little so far. This study aimed to evaluate the mid- to long-term metabolic side effects of 31 antipsychotics in persons with schizophrenia by applying a random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (up to April 27, 2020) and PubMed (up to June 14, 2021). We included published and unpublished, open and blinded randomized controlled trials with a study duration >13 weeks which compared any antipsychotic in any form of administration with another antipsychotic or with placebo in participants diagnosed with schizophrenia. The primary outcome was weight gain measured in kilograms. Secondary outcomes included "number of participants with weight gain", fasting glucose, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. We identified 137 eligible trials (with 35,007 participants) on 31 antipsychotics, with a median follow-up of 45 weeks. Chlorpromazine produced the most weight gain (mean difference to placebo: 5.13 kg, 95% credible interval, CrI: 1.98 to 8.30), followed by clozapine (4.21 kg, 95% CrI: 3.03 to 5.42), olanzapine (3.82 kg, 95% CrI: 3.15 to 4.50), and zotepine (3.87 kg, 95% CrI: 2.14 to 5.58). The findings did not substantially change in sensitivity and network meta-regression analyses, although enriched design, drug company sponsorship, and the use of observed case instead of intention-to-treat data modified the mean difference in weight gain to some extent. Antipsychotics with more weight gain were often also among the drugs with worse outcome in fasting glucose and lipid parameters. The confidence in the evidence ranged from low to moderate. In conclusion, antipsychotic drugs differ in their propensity to induce metabolic side effects in mid- to long-term treatment. Given that schizophrenia is often a chronic disorder, these findings should be given more consideration than short-term data in drug choice.

Observational versus randomized controlled trials to inform antibiotic treatment durations: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing shorter and longer antibiotic treatment durations are increasingly common. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are an ideal methodological approach to study antibiotic treatment durations; however, these trials can be logistically and financially challenging to conduct.

OBJECTIVES

In this narrative review, we sought to compare the strengths and limitations of observational study data with those of RCT data in evaluating antibiotic treatment durations. We used uncomplicated Gram-negative bacteraemia as an illustrative case example because several published RCTs and observational studies have been conducted in similar patient populations.

SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE for articles comparing treatment durations for gram-negative bacteremia from inception to June 9th, 2022. We included studies reporting on all-cause mortality and/or relapse at day 28-30. Data comparing short- versus long-course therapy were pooled by Bayesian random effects meta-analyses to assess the odds ratios (OR) of all-cause mortality and relapse at 30 days, stratified by study design. Parameters were summarized with median and 95% highest-density credible intervals (CrI). Posterior probabilities of OR > 1.0 were estimated. Observational studies were further examined to determine if and how they addressed potential sources of bias.

CONTENT

We identified 1671 unique records and included 10 studies (seven observational and three RCTs). With respect to 30-day mortality, the Bayesian posterior probability that a longer course of therapy was better (i.e. OR >1.0) was 42% in RCTs (OR, 0.94; 95% CrI, 0.51-1.68) and 91% in observational studies (OR, 1.25; 95% CrI, 0.88-1.73). No observational study fully addressed all potential sources of bias.

IMPLICATIONS

On the basis of our findings, we discuss future directions for antibiotic treatment duration trials, including approaches to limit sources of bias in observation data and novel trial designs.

The Effect of Mobilization at 6 Months after Critical Illness - Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy and safety of early active mobilization compared with usual care regarding long-term outcomes for adult critically ill survivors remain uncertain. METHODS: We systematically reviewed randomized clinical trials comparing early active mobilization versus usual care in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was days alive and out of hospital to day 180 after pooling data using random effects modeling. We also performed a Bayesian meta-analysis to describe the treatment effect in probability terms. Secondary outcomes were mortality, physical function, strength, health-related quality of life at 6 months, and adverse events. RESULTS: Fifteen trials from 11 countries were included with data from 2703 participants. From six trials (1121 participants) reporting the primary outcome, the pooled mean difference was an increase of 4.28 days alive and out of hospital to day 180 in those patients who received early active mobilization (95% confidence interval, −4.46 to 13.03; I2=41%). Using Bayesian analyses with vague priors, the probability that the intervention increased days alive and out of hospital was 75.1%. In survivors, there was a 95.1% probability that the intervention improved physical function measured through a patient-reported outcome measure at 6 months (standardized mean difference, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0.32; I2=0%). Although no treatment effect was identified on any other secondary outcome, there was a 66.4% possibility of increased adverse events with the implementation of early active mobilization and a 72.2% chance it increased 6-month mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Use of early active mobilization for critically ill adults did not significantly affect days alive and out of hospital to day 180. Early active mobilization was associated with improved physical function in survivors at 6 months; however, the possibility that it might increase mortality and adverse events needs to be considered when interpreting this finding. (PROSPERO number, CRD42022309650.)

Short-term efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions for global population with elevated blood pressure: A network meta-analysis

Background

This study aims to compare the potential short-term effects of non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) on prehypertensive people, and provide evidence for intervention models with potential in future community-based management.

Methods

In this Bayesian network meta-analysis, Pubmed, Embase, and Web of science were screened up to 16 October 2021. Prehypertensive patients (systolic blood pressure, SBP 120-139 mmHg/diastolic blood pressure, DBP 80-89 mmHg) with a follow-up period longer than 4 weeks were targeted. Sixteen NPIs were identified during the scope review and categorized into five groups. Reduction in SBP and DBP was selected as outcome variables and the effect sizes were compared using consistency models among interventions and intervention groups. Grade approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

Results

Thirty-nine studies with 8,279 participants were included. For SBP, strengthen exercises were the most advantageous intervention group when compared with usual care (mean difference = -6.02 mmHg, 95% CI -8.16 to -3.87), and combination exercise, isometric exercise, and aerobic exercise were the three most effective specific interventions. For DBP, relaxation was the most advantageous intervention group when compared with usual care (mean difference = -4.99 mmHg, 95% CI -7.03 to -2.96), and acupuncture, meditation, and combination exercise were the three most effective specific interventions. No inconsistency was found between indirect and direct evidence. However, heterogeneity was detected in some studies.

Conclusion

NPIs can bring short-term BP reduction benefits for prehypertensive patients, especially exercise and relaxation. NPIs could potentially be included in community-based disease management for prehypertensive population once long-term real-world effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are proven.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=151518, identifier: CRD42020151518.

Cancer risk with topical calcineurin inhibitors, pimecrolimus and tacrolimus, for atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis is a prevalent condition in children and can be effectively managed with medications such as topical calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus or tacrolimus). A key unresolved safety concern is whether use of topical calcineurin inhibitors is associated with cancer. We systematically reviewed the risk of cancer in patients with atopic dermatitis exposed to topical calcineurin inhibitors.

METHODS

As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters atopic dermatitis guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, the Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências da Saúde database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the US Food and Drug Administration database, the European Medicines Agency database, company registers, and relevant citations from inception to June 6, 2022. We included randomised controlled trials and comparative and non-comparative non-randomised studies in any language addressing cancer risk in patients with atopic dermatitis using topical calcineurin inhibitors. We excluded split-body studies and studies with less than 3 weeks of follow-up. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We used Bayesian models to estimate the probability for cancer due to topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure and the GRADE approach to determine the certainty of the evidence. Patients, advocacy groups, and care providers set a priori thresholds of important effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/v4bfc.

FINDINGS

We identified and analysed 110 unique studies (52 randomised controlled trials and 69 non-randomised studies [11 were non-randomised study extensions of randomised controlled trials]) including 3·4 million patients followed up for a mean of 11 months (range 0·7-120). The absolute risk of any cancer with topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure was not different from controls (absolute risk 4·70 per 1000 with topical calcineurin inhibitors vs 4·56 per 1000 without; odds ratio 1·03 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·11]; moderate certainty). For all age groups and using data from observational studies and randomised controlled trials, the use of pimecrolimus (OR 1·05 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·15]) or tacrolimus (0·99 [0·89-1·09]) is likely to have had little to no association with cancer compared with no topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure. For pimecrolimus versus tacrolimus, the finding was similar (0·95 [95% credible interval 0·83-1·07]). Findings were similar in infants, children, and adults, and robust to trial sequential, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses.

INTERPRETATION

Among individuals with atopic dermatitis, moderate-certainty evidence shows that topical calcineurin inhibitors do not increase the risk of cancer. These findings support the safe use of topical calcineurin inhibitors in the optimal treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis.

FUNDING

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology via the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters.

Allergen immunotherapy for atopic dermatitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD, eczema) is driven by a combination of skin barrier defects, immune dysregulation, and extrinsic stimuli such as allergens, irritants, and microbes. The role of environmental allergens (aeroallergens) in triggering AD remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We systematically synthesized evidence regarding the benefits and harms of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for AD.

METHODS

As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD Guideline update, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Resource for Eczema Trials, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized controlled trials comparing subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT), and/or no AIT (placebo or standard care) for guideline panel-defined patient-important outcomes: AD severity, itch, AD-related quality of life (QoL), flares, and adverse events. Raters independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We synthesized intervention effects using frequentist and Bayesian random-effects models. The GRADE approach determined the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-three randomized controlled trials including 1957 adult and pediatric patients sensitized primarily to house dust mite showed that add-on SCIT and SLIT have similar relative and absolute effects and likely result in important improvements in AD severity, defined as a 50% reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.53 [1.31-1.78]; 26% vs 40%, absolute difference 14%) and QoL, defined as an improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index by 4 points or more (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.44 [1.03-2.01]; 39% vs 56%, absolute difference 17%; both outcomes moderate certainty). Both routes of AIT increased adverse events (risk ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.44-1.79]; 66% with SCIT vs 41% with placebo; 13% with SLIT vs 8% with placebo; high certainty). AIT's effect on sleep disturbance and eczema flares was very uncertain. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main findings.

CONCLUSIONS

SCIT and SLIT to aeroallergens, particularly house dust mite, can similarly and importantly improve AD severity and QoL. SCIT increases adverse effects more than SLIT. These findings support a multidisciplinary and shared decision-making approach to optimally managing AD.

A Network Meta-analysis of Dexamethasone for Preventing Postextubation Upper Airway Obstruction in Children

Rationale: Periextubation corticosteroids are commonly used in children to prevent upper airway obstruction (UAO). However, the best timing and dose combination of corticosteroids is unknown. Objectives: To compare effectiveness of different corticosteroid regimens in preventing UAO and reintubation. Methods: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase search identified randomized trials in children using corticosteroids to prevent UAO. All studies used dexamethasone. The studies were categorized based on timing of initiation of dexamethasone (early use: >12 h before extubation) and the dose (high dose: ⩾0.5 mg/kg/dose). We performed Bayesian network meta-analysis with studies grouped into four regimens: high dose, early use (HE); low dose, early use (LE); high dose, late use (HL); and low dose, late use. Results: Eight trials (n = 903) were included in the analysis. For preventing UAO (odds ratio; 95% credible interval), HE (0.13; 0.04-0.36), HL (0.39; 0.19-0.74), and LE (0.15; 0.04-0.58) regimens appear to be more effective than no dexamethasone (low certainty). HE and LE had the highest probability of being the top-ranked regimens for preventing UAO (surface under the cumulative ranking curve 0.901 and 0.808, respectively). For preventing reintubation, the effect estimate was imprecise for all four dexamethasone regimens compared with no dexamethasone (very low certainty). HE and LE were the top-ranked regimens (surface under the cumulative ranking curve 0.803 and 0.720, respectively) for preventing reintubation. Sensitivity analysis showed that regimens that started >12 hours before extubation were likely more effective than regimens started >6 hours before extubation. Conclusions: Periextubation dexamethasone can prevent postextubation UAO in children, but effectiveness is highly dependent on timing and dosing regimen. Early initiation (ideally >12 h before extubation) appears to be more important than the dose of dexamethasone. Ultimately, the specific steroid strategy should be personalized, considering the potential for adverse events associated with dexamethasone and the individual risk of UAO and reintubation.

Effect of tocilizumab, sarilumab, and baricitinib on mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 treated with corticosteroids: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) established the mortality reduction by tocilizumab (Actemra), baricitinib (Olumiant), and sarilumab (Kevzara) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, uncertainty remains about which treatment performs best in patients receiving corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate probabilities of noninferiority between baricitinib and sarilumab compared to tocilizumab in patients treated with corticosteroids.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and MedRxiv.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Eligible RCTs assigning hospitalized adults with COVID-19 treated with corticosteroids to tocilizumab or baricitinib or sarilumab versus standard of care or placebo (control).

METHODS

Reviewers independently abstracted published data and assessed study quality with the Risk of Bias 2 tool. Unpublished data, if required, were requested from authors of included studies. The outcome of interest was all-cause mortality at 28 days.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-seven RCTs with 13 549 patients were included. Overall, the risk of bias was low. Bayesian pairwise meta-analyses were used to aggregate results of each treatment versus control. The average odds ratio for mortality was 0.78 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.65, 0.94) for tocilizumab; 0.78 (95% CrI: 0.56, 1.03) for baricitinib; and 0.91 (95% CrI: 0.60, 1.40) for sarilumab. The certainty of evidence (GRADE) ranged from moderate to low. Bayesian meta-regressions with multiple priors were used to estimate probabilities of noninferiority (margin of 13% greater effect by tocilizumab). Compared to tocilizumab, there were ≤94% and 90% probabilities of noninferiority with baricitinib and sarilumab, respectively.

RESULTS

All but two studies included data with only indirect evidence for the comparison of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospitalized COVID-19 treated with corticosteroids, there are high probabilities that both baricitinib and sarilumab are associated with similar mortality reductions in comparison to tocilizumab.

Predictive factors for pre-intervention rebleeding in aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rebleeding before intervention is a devastating complication of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH). It often occurs early and is associated with poor outcomes. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify potential predictors of rebleeding in aSAH. A database search identified studies detailing the occurrence of pre-intervention rebleeding in aSAH, and 809 studies were screened. The association between rebleeding and a variety of demographic, clinical, and radiological factors was examined using random effects meta-analyses. Fifty-six studies totalling 33,268 patients were included. Rebleeding occurred in 3,223/33,268 patients (11.1%, 95%CI 9.4-13), with risk decreasing by approximately 0.2% per year since 1981. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) during admission was higher in patients who rebled compared with those who did not (MD 7.4 mmHg, 95%CI 2.2 - 12.7), with increased risk in cohorts with SBP > 160 mmHg (RR 2.12, 95%CI 1.35-3.34), but not SBP > 140 mmHg. WFNS Grades IV-V (RR 2.05, 95%CI 1.13-3.74) and Hunt-Hess grades III-V (RR 2.12, 95%CI 1.38-3.28) were strongly associated with rebleeding. Fisher grades IV (RR 2.24, 95%CI 1.45-3.49) and III-IV (RR 2.05, 95%CI 1.17-3.6) were also associated with an increased risk. Awareness of potential risk factors for rebleeding is important when assessing patients with aSAH to ensure timely management in high-risk cases. Increased SBP during admission, especially > 160 mmHg, poorer clinical grades, and higher radiological grades are associated with an increased risk. These results may also aid in designing future studies assessing interventions aimed at reducing the risk of rebleeding.

Efficacy of awake prone positioning in patients with covid-19 related hypoxemic respiratory failure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of awake prone positioning versus usual care in non-intubated adults with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to covid-19.

DESIGN

Systematic review with frequentist and bayesian meta-analyses.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY

Randomized trials comparing awake prone positioning versus usual care in adults with covid-19 related hypoxemic respiratory failure. Information sources were Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 4 March 2022.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were performed for the primary and secondary outcomes. Bayesian meta-analyses were performed for endotracheal intubation and mortality outcomes. GRADE certainty of evidence was assessed for outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes were mortality, ventilator-free days, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, escalation of oxygen modality, change in oxygenation and respiratory rate, and adverse events.

RESULTS

17 trials (2931 patients) met the eligibility criteria. 12 trials were at low risk of bias, three had some concerns, and two were at high risk. Awake prone positioning reduced the risk of endotracheal intubation compared with usual care (crude average 24.2% v 29.8%, relative risk 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.94; high certainty). This translates to 55 fewer intubations per 1000 patients (95% confidence interval 87 to 19 fewer intubations). Awake prone positioning did not significantly affect secondary outcomes, including mortality (15.6% v 17.2%, relative risk 0.90, 0.76 to 1.07; high certainty), ventilator-free days (mean difference 0.97 days, 95% confidence interval -0.5 to 3.4; low certainty), ICU length of stay (-2.1 days, -4.5 to 0.4; low certainty), hospital length of stay (-0.09 days, -0.69 to 0.51; moderate certainty), and escalation of oxygen modality (21.4% v 23.0%, relative risk 1.04, 0.74 to 1.44; low certainty). Adverse events related to awake prone positioning were uncommon. Bayesian meta-analysis showed a high probability of benefit with awake prone positioning for endotracheal intubation (non-informative prior, mean relative risk 0.83, 95% credible interval 0.70 to 0.97; posterior probability for relative risk <0.95=96%) but lower probability for mortality (0.90, 0.73 to 1.13; <0.95=68%).

CONCLUSIONS

Awake prone positioning compared with usual care reduces the risk of endotracheal intubation in adults with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to covid-19 but probably has little to no effect on mortality or other outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022314856.

Effectiveness and tolerability of dual and triple combination inhaler therapies compared with each other and varying doses of inhaled corticosteroids in adolescents and adults with asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend a higher-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or adding a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) when asthma is not controlled with medium-dose (MD) ICS/long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) combination therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of dual (ICS/LABA) and triple therapies (ICS/LABA/LAMA) compared with each other and with varying doses of ICS in adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched multiple databases for pre-registered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 12 weeks of study duration from 2008 to 18 February 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched studies, including adolescents and adults with uncontrolled asthma who had been treated with, or were eligible for, MD-ICS/LABA, comparing dual and triple therapies. We excluded cluster- and cross-over RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis according to the previously published protocol. We used Cochrane's Screen4ME workflow to assess search results and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. The primary outcome was steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations and asthma-related hospitalisations (moderate to severe and severe exacerbations).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17,161 patients with uncontrolled asthma from 17 studies (median duration 26 weeks; mean age 49.1 years; male 40%; white 81%; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (MEF 1)1.9 litres and 61% predicted). The quality of included studies was generally good except for some outcomes in a few studies due to high attrition rates. Medium-dose (MD) and high-dose (HD) triple therapies reduce steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.71 to 0.99] and 0.69 [0.58 to 0.82], respectively) (high-certainty evidence), but not asthma-related hospitalisations, compared to MD-ICS/LABA. High-dose triple therapy likely reduces steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations compared to MD triple therapy (HR 0.83 [95% CrI 0.69 to 0.996], [moderate certainty]). Subgroup analyses suggest the reduction in steroid-requiring exacerbations associated with triple therapies may be only for those with a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year but not for those without. High-dose triple therapy, but not MD triple, results in a reduction in all-cause adverse events (AEs) and likely reduces dropouts due to AEs compared to MD-ICS/LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.79 [95% CrI 0.69 to 0.90], [high certainty] and 0.50 [95% CrI 0.30 to 0.84], [moderate certainty], respectively). Triple therapy results in little to no difference in all-cause or asthma-related serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to dual therapy (high certainty). The evidence suggests triple therapy results in little or no clinically important difference in symptoms or quality of life compared to dual therapy considering the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and HD-ICS/LABA is unlikely to result in any significant benefit or harm compared to MD-ICS/LABA.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medium-dose and HD triple therapies reduce steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations, but not asthma-related hospitalisations, compared to MD-ICS/LABA especially in those with a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year. High-dose triple therapy is likely superior to MD triple therapy in reducing steroid-requiring asthma exacerbations. Triple therapy is unlikely to result in clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms or quality of life compared to dual therapy considering the MCIDs. High-dose triple therapy, but not MD triple, results in a reduction in all-cause AEs and likely reduces dropouts due to AEs compared to MD-ICS/LABA. Triple therapy results in little to no difference in all-cause or asthma-related SAEs compared to dual therapy. HD-ICS/LABA is unlikely to result in any significant benefit or harm compared to MD-ICS/LABA, although long-term safety of higher rather than MD- ICS remains to be demonstrated given the median duration of included studies was six months. The above findings may assist deciding on a treatment option when asthma is not controlled with MD-ICS/LABA.

Management of Chronic Subdural Hematoma: A Systematic Review and Component Network Meta-analysis of 455 Studies With 103 645 Cases

BACKGROUND

Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is a common neurosurgical condition with a high risk of recurrence after treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare the risk of recurrence, morbidity, and mortality across various treatments for CSDH.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were searched from January 01, 2000, to July 07, 2021. The primary outcome was recurrence, and secondary outcomes were morbidity and mortality. Component network meta-analyses (CNMAs) were performed for surgical and medical treatments, assessing recurrence and morbidity. Incremental risk ratios (iRRs) with 95% CIs were estimated for each component.

RESULTS

In total, 12 526 citations were identified, and 455 studies with 103 645 cases were included. Recurrence occurred in 11 491/93 525 (10.8%, 95% CI 10.2-11.5, 418 studies) cases after surgery. The use of a postoperative drain (iRR 0.53, 95% CI 0.44-0.63) and middle meningeal artery embolization (iRR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05-0.83) reduced recurrence in the surgical CNMA. In the pharmacological CNMA, corticosteroids (iRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36-0.61) and surgical intervention (iRR 0.11, 95% CI 0.07-0.15) were associated with lower risk. Corticosteroids were associated with increased morbidity (iRR 1.34, 95% CI 1.05-1.70). The risk of morbidity was equivalent across surgical treatments.

CONCLUSION

Recurrence after evacuation occurs in approximately 10% of cSDHs, and the various surgical interventions are approximately equivalent. Corticosteroids are associated with reduced recurrence but also increased morbidity. Drains reduce the risk of recurrence, but the position of drain (subdural vs subgaleal) did not influence recurrence. Middle meningeal artery embolization is a promising treatment warranting further evaluation in randomized trials.

Location-scale models for meta-analysis

Heterogeneity is commonplace in meta-analysis. When heterogeneity is found, researchers often aim to identify predictors that account for at least part of such heterogeneity by using mixed-effects meta-regression models. Another potentially relevant goal is to focus on the amount of heterogeneity as a function of one or more predictors, but this cannot be examined with standard random- and mixed-effects models, which assume a constant (i.e., homoscedastic) value for the heterogeneity variance component across studies. In this paper, we describe a location-scale model for meta-analysis as an extension of the standard random- and mixed-effects models that not only allows an examination of whether predictors are related to the size of the outcomes (i.e., their location), but also the amount of heterogeneity (i.e., their scale). We present estimation methods for such a location-scale model through maximum and restricted maximum likelihood approaches, as well as methods for inference and suggestions for visualization. We also provide an implementation via the metafor package for R that makes this model readily available to researchers. Location-scale models can provide a useful tool to researchers interested in heterogeneity in meta-analysis, with the potential to enhance the scope of research questions in the field of evidence synthesis.

Effects of physical exercise on blood pressure during pregnancy

Objective

Effect of physical exercise on pregnant women currently has become a hot topic in prenatal health care. In this study, A meta-analysis was conducted on account of Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). It focused on evaluating the effect of physical exercise intervention on blood pressure so that could provide certain evidence for health care during pregnancy.

Methods

Results of relevant studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, and all of these included studies were evaluated according to the Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias. Stata 15.1 was used for meta-analysis, and mean difference (MD) was used as statistic for pooled analysis. The effect values were combined by conventional meta-analysis and Bayesian meta-analysis respectively, and the consistency of pooled results was considered as well.

Results

A total of 18 RCT studies were included in the quantitative analysis. The conventional meta-analysis showed differences in blood pressure between intervention group and control group (P < 0.05). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures of intervention group were 3.19 mmHg (95% CI: -5.13, -1.25) and 2.14 mmHg (95% CI: -4.26, -0.03) lower than that of control group, respectively. Bayesian meta-analysis showed that both systolic and diastolic pressure among intervention group decreased by 3.34 mmHg (95% CrI: -5.15, -1.56) and 2.14 mmHg (95% CrI: -3.79, − 0.50), respectively. Subgroup analysis supported that as long as healthy pregnant women participated in exercises, their blood pressure could be slightly regulated, while hypertension susceptible pregnant women significantly lowered blood pressure.

Conclusion

Exercise intervention during pregnancy is beneficial to lower or normalize blood pressure, and this research provides clues for follow-up studies.

Personalized Prediction of Alzheimer’s Disease and Its Treatment Effects by Donepezil: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis of Eight Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Patient characteristics may predict the progression of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and may moderate the effects of donepezil. Objective: To build a personalized prediction model for patients with AD and to estimate patient-specific treatment effects of donepezil, using individual patient characteristics. Methods: We systematically searched for all double-masked randomized controlled trials comparing oral donepezil and pill placebo in the treatment of AD and requested individual participant data through its developer, Eisai. The primary outcome was cognitive function at 24 weeks, measured with the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive component (ADAS-cog). We built a Bayesian meta-analytical prediction model for patients receiving placebo and we performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to estimate patient-level treatment effects. Results: Eight studies with 3,156 participants were included. The Bayesian prediction model suggested that more severe cognitive and global function at baseline and younger age were associated with worse cognitive function at 24 weeks. The individual participant data meta-analysis showed that, on average, donepezil was superior to placebo in cognitive function (ADAS-cog scores, –3.2; 95% Credible Interval (CrI) –4.2 to –2.1). In addition, our results suggested that antipsychotic drug use at baseline might be associated with a lower effect of donepezil in ADAS-cog (2.0; 95% CrI, –0.02 to 4.3). Conclusion: Although our results suggested that donepezil is somewhat efficacious for cognitive function for most patients with AD, use of antipsychotic drugs may be associated with lower efficacy of the drug. Future research with larger sample sizes, more patient covariates, and longer treatment duration is needed.

Probiotic Supplementation Prevents the Development of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia for Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the common critical complications of nosocomial infection (NI) in invasive mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The efficacy of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), enteral nutrition and/or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) supplemented with or without probiotic, prebiotic, and synbiotic therapies in preventing VAP among these patients has been questioned. We aimed to systematically and comprehensively summarize all available studies to generate the best evidence of VAP prevention for invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the administration of TPN, EPN, probiotics-supplemented EPN, prebiotics-supplemented EPN, and synbiotics-supplemented EPN for VAP prevention in invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients were systematically retrieved from four electronic databases. The incidence of VAP was the primary outcome and was determined by the random-effects model of a Bayesian framework. The secondary outcomes were NI, ICU and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, and mechanical ventilation duration. The registration number of Prospero is CRD42020195773.

Results

A total of 8339 patients from 31 RCTs were finally included in network meta-analysis. The primary outcome showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN had a higher correlation with the alleviation of VAP than EPN in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.58–0.95). Subgroup analyses showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN prevented VAP in trauma patients (OR 0.30; 95% CrI 0.13–0.83), mixed probiotic strain therapy was more effective in preventing VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.55; 95% CrI 0.31–0.97), and low-dose probiotic therapy (less than 10¹⁰ CFU per day) was more associated with lowered incidence of VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.16; 95% CrI 0.04–0.64). Secondary outcomes indicated that synbiotic-supplemented EPN therapy was more significantly related to decreased incidence of NI than EPN therapy (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85). Prebiotic-supplemented EPN administration was the most effective in preventing diarrhea (OR 0.05; 95% CrI 0.00–0.71).

Conclusion

Probiotic supplementation shows promise in reducing the incidence of VAP in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients. Currently, low quality of evidence reduces strong clinical recommendations. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to conclusively prove these findings.

Systamatic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020195773], identifier [CRD42020195773].

Relative efficacy of lasmiditan versus rimegepant and ubrogepant as acute treatments for migraine: network meta-analysis findings

Background

In the absence of head-to-head trials, comprehensive evidence comparing onset of efficacy of novel agents for acute treatment of migraine is lacking. This study aimed to explore the relative efficacy of lasmiditan (serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine] 1F receptor agonist) versus rimegepant and ubrogepant (calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists) for the acute oral treatment of migraine through network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

Data included in the NMA were identified through a systematic literature search (conducted April 2018, updated May/December 2020) of phase II–IV, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic/episodic migraine with/without aura. Treatments included: lasmiditan 50, 100, 200 mg; rimegepant 75 mg; ubrogepant 25, 50, 100 mg. Pairwise treatment comparisons from Bayesian fixed-effect/random-effects NMA, adjusted by baseline risk where appropriate, were conducted. Comparisons were reported as odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. Early-onset efficacy endpoints included: pain freedom at 2 hours and pain relief at 1 and 2 hours. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) profiles were summarised. Heterogeneity and inconsistency in the network were explored; sensitivity analyses investigated robustness of findings.

Results

Across 12 RCTs included in the base case, females represented >80% of included patients (mean age 37.9–45.7 years). Odds of achieving both pain freedom and pain relief at 2 hours were higher with lasmiditan 100 and 200 mg versus rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 25 and 50 mg. Results for pain relief at 1 hour were consistent with those at 2 hours, but fewer comparisons were available. There were no statistically significant differences between lasmiditan 50 mg and ubrogepant or rimegepant for any outcome. Sensitivity analyses were in the same direction as base case analyses. Most commonly reported ADRs (incidence ≥2%) were: dizziness, fatigue, paraesthesia, sedation, nausea/vomiting and muscle weakness with lasmiditan; nausea with rimegepant; and nausea, somnolence and dry mouth with ubrogepant.

Conclusions

The efficacy findings of this indirect comparison indicate that lasmiditan 100 mg or 200 mg might be an appropriate acute treatment option for patients with migraine seeking a fast onset of action. Differently from rimegepant and ubrogepant, lasmiditan use is associated with mainly neurological events, which are mostly mild or moderate in severity and self-limiting.

350/350 words

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01440-w.

Network meta-analysis of immune-oncology monotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in patients with PD-L1 expression ⩾50

Background:

For patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and high (⩾50%) programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, effective first-line immune-oncology monotherapies with significant survival benefits are approved, cemiplimab being the most recent. In a phase III trial, cemiplimab demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and PD-L1 ⩾50%. A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to identify/compare the efficacy/safety of cemiplimab versus pembrolizumab or other immune-oncology monotherapies from randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) published in November 2010–2020.

Methods:

Relevant RCTs were identified by searching databases and conference proceedings as per ISPOR, NICE, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. NMA with time-varying hazard ratios (HRs) was performed for OS and PFS. Analyses were conducted for objective response rate (ORR) and safety/tolerability. Fixed-effect models were used due to limited evidence. Various sensitivity analyses were conducted to validate the base case analyses.

Results:

The feasibility assessment determined that EMPOWER-Lung 1, KEYNOTE-024, and KEYNOTE-042 trials were eligible. IMpower110 was excluded because an incompatible PD-L1 assay (SP142) was used for patient selection. For first-line advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ⩾50%, cemiplimab was associated with statistically significant improvements in PFS [HR (95% credible interval [CrI]): 0.65 (0.50–0.86), 1–12 months] and ORR [odds ratio (OR) (95% CrI): 1.64 (1.04–2.62)], and comparable OS [HR (95% CrI): 0.77 (0.54–1.10), 1–12 months] versus pembrolizumab. There was no evidence of differences between cemiplimab and pembrolizumab for Grade 3–5 adverse events (AEs) [OR (95% CrI): 1.47 (0.83–2.60)], immune-mediated AEs [1.75 (0.33–7.49)], and all-cause discontinuation due to AEs [1.21 (0.58–2.61)].

Conclusions:

Considering the limitations of indirect treatment comparisons, in patients with advanced NSCLC and PD-L1 ⩾50%, cemiplimab monotherapy demonstrated significant improvements in PFS and ORR, comparable OS, and no evidence of differences in safety/tolerability versus pembrolizumab.

Comparative efficacy and safety of antihyperglycemic drug classes for patients with type 2 diabetes following failure with metformin monotherapy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of antihyperglycemic agents, taken in combination with metformin, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A previous 2016 comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane CENTRAL was updated to October 2018, and a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with T2DM taking an antihyperglycemic agent in combination with metformin were included. Bayesian NMA was performed to assess the relative efficacy and safety of the antihyperglycemic classes.

RESULTS

In total, 204 RCTs were included, which assessed the efficacy and safety of eight antihyperglycemic drug classes (i.e., sulfonylureas, meglitinides, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, basal and biphasic insulin, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransport-2 inhibitors). All drug classes significantly reduced haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) compared to metformin monotherapy (mean reduction from 0.50 to 0.92). The drug classes varied in their relative effects on hypoglycemia, body weight, body mass index, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high and low density lipoprotein cholesterol, and the classes had differing safety profiles on total adverse events, urogenital adverse events, heart failure, serious adverse events, and withdraw due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

All eight antihyperglycemic drug classes, taken in combination with metformin, reduced HbA1c levels; however, the effects of the agents on other outcomes varied among the classes.