Additional considerations are required when preparing a protocol for a systematic review with multiple interventions

The optimal second-line therapy for older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis using individual participant data (IPD)

BACKGROUND

Due to increasing life expectancy, almost half of people with type 2 diabetes are aged 65 years or over worldwide. When metformin alone does not control blood sugar, the choice of which second-line therapy to prescribe next is not clear from currently available evidence. The existence of frailty and comorbidities in older adults further increases the complexity of medical decision-making. As only a relatively small proportion of trials report results separately for older adults, the relative efficacy and safety of second-line therapies in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus are unknown and require further investigation. This individual participant data (IPD) network meta-analysis evaluates the relative efficacy and safety of second-line therapies on their own or in combination in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

All relevant published and unpublished trials will be identified. Studies published prior to 2015 will be identified from two previous comprehensive aggregate data network meta-analyses. Searches will be conducted in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from 1st January 2015 onwards, and in clinicaltrials.gov from inception. Randomised controlled trials with at least 100 estimated older adults (≥ 65 years) receiving at least 24 weeks of intervention that assess the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on mortality, glycemia, vascular and other comorbidities outcomes, and quality of life will be eligible. The screening and data extraction process will be conducted independently by two researchers. The quality of studies will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2. Anonymised IPD of all eligible trials will be requested via clinical trial portals or by contacting the principal investigators or sponsors. Received data will be reanalysed where necessary to standardise outcome metrics. Network meta-analyses will be performed to determine the relative effectiveness of therapies.

DISCUSSION

With the increasing number of older adults with type 2 diabetes worldwide, an IPD network meta-analysis using data from all eligible trials will provide new insights into the optimal choices of second-line antidiabetic drugs to improve patient management and reduce unnecessary adverse events and the subsequent risk of comorbidities in older adults.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021272686.

Non-pharmacological interventions to prevent PICS in critically ill adult patients: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postintensive care syndrome (PICS) is common in critically ill adults who were treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). Although comparative analyses between types of non-pharmacological measures and usual care to prevent PICS have been performed, it remains unclear which of these potential treatments is the most effective for prevention.

METHODS

To obtain the best evidence for non-pharmaceutical interventions in preventing PICS, a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) will be conducted by searching nine electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers will carefully screen the titles, abstracts, and full-text papers to identify and extract relevant data. Furthermore, the research team will meticulously check the bibliographic references of the selected studies and related reviews to discover any articles pertinent to this research. The primary focus of the study is to examine the prevalence and severity of PICS among critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. The additional outcomes encompass patient satisfaction and adverse effects related to the preventive intervention. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias assessment tool will be utilized to evaluate the risk of bias in the included RCTs. To assess the efficacy of various preventative measures, traditional pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian NMA will be used. To gauge the confidence in the evidence supporting the results, we will utilize the Confidence in NMA tool.

DISCUSSION

There are multiple non-pharmacological interventions available for preventing the occurrence and development of PICS. However, most approaches have only been directly compared to standard care, lacking comprehensive evidence and clinical balance. Although the most effective care methods are still unknown, our research will provide valuable evidence for further non-pharmacological interventions and clinical practices aimed at preventing PICS. The research is expected to offer useful data to help healthcare workers and those creating guidelines decide on the most effective path of action for preventing PICS in adult ICU patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023439343.

Comparison of the effectiveness of probiotic supplementation in glucose metabolism, lipid profile, inflammation and oxidative stress in pregnant women

Objective: The optimal probiotic supplementation in pregnant women has not been thoroughly evaluated. By employing a network meta-analysis (NMA) approach, we compared the effectiveness of different probiotic supplementation strategies for pregnant women. Methods: A comprehensive search across multiple databases was performed to identify studies comparing the efficacy of probiotic supplements with each other or the control (placebo) among pregnant women. Results: This NMA, including 32 studies, systematically evaluated 6 probiotic supplement strategies: Lactobacillus, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus and Bifidobacterium (LRB), Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium (LABB), Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lacticaseibacillus casei, and Bifidobacterium bifidum (LLB), multi-combination of four probiotics (MP1), and multi-combination of six or more probiotics (MP2). Among these strategies, LLB, MP1, and MP2 all contain LABB. The NMA findings showed that MP1 was the most effective in reducing fasting blood sugar (FBS) (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA]: 80.5%). In addition, MP2 was the most efficacious in lowering the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) (SUCRA: 89.1%). LABB was ranked as the most effective in decreasing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC) (SUCRA: 95.5%), total cholesterol (TC) (SUCRA: 95.5%), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (SUCRA: 94.8%). Moreover, LLB was ranked as the most effective in raising total antioxidant capacity (TAC) (SUCRA: 98.5%). Conclusion: Multi-combination of probiotic strains, especially those strategies containing LABB, may be more effective than a single probiotic strain in glycolipid metabolism, inflammation, and oxidative stress of pregnant women.

Effects of psychotherapy interventions on anxiety and depression in patients with gastrointestinal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Various psychological interventions have been demonstrated to be effective at preventing anxiety and depression symptoms in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. However, it remains unclear which intervention is the best option. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of various psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in symptomatic patients with GI cancer.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP databases were systematically searched from inception to June 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes were anxiety and depression levels. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data based on prespecified criteria, and evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Stata 14.0 was used to conduct network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two RCTs (2453 patients) involving 9 psychological interventions were included. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT; mean difference [MD] = -4.98, 95% CI (-7.04, -2.93), relaxation therapy (MD = -4.39, 95% CI (-7.90, -0.88), reminiscence therapy (MD = -5.01, 95% CI (-8.20, -1.81)), and narrative nursing (MD = -4.89, 95% CI (-8.54, -1.23)) significantly reduced anxiety levels, and CBT (MD = -2.15, 95% CI (-4.28, -0.02), reminiscence therapy (MD = -7.20, 95% CI (-10.48, -3.91), and narrative nursing (MD = -7.20, 95% CI (-10.48, -3.91)) significantly reduced depression levels in patients with GI cancer compared with conventional nursing care.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this network meta-analysis revealed that CBT, reminiscence therapy and narrative nursing can be actively considered as part of sequential therapy to reduce anxiety and depression levels in patients with GI cancer.

Low awareness of the transitivity assumption in complex networks of interventions: a systematic survey from 721 network meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

The transitivity assumption is the cornerstone of network meta-analysis (NMA). Violating transitivity compromises the credibility of the indirect estimates and, by extent, the estimated treatment effects of the comparisons in the network. The present study offers comprehensive empirical evidence on the completeness of reporting and evaluating transitivity in systematic reviews with multiple interventions.

METHODS

We screened the datasets of two previous empirical studies, resulting in 361 systematic reviews with NMA published between January 2011 and April 2015. We updated our evidence base with an additional 360 systematic reviews with NMA published between 2016 and 2021, employing a pragmatic approach. We devised assessment criteria for reporting and evaluating transitivity using relevant methodological literature and compared their reporting frequency before and after the PRISMA-NMA statement.

RESULTS

Systematic reviews published after PRISMA-NMA were more likely to provide a protocol (odds ratio (OR): 3.94, 95% CI: 2.79-5.64), pre-plan the transitivity evaluation (OR: 3.01, 95% CI: 1.54-6.23), and report the evaluation and results (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.55-2.86) than those before PRISMA-NMA. However, systematic reviews after PRISMA-NMA were less likely to define transitivity (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.42-0.79) and discuss the implications of transitivity (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.27-0.85) than those published before PRISMA-NMA. Most systematic reviews evaluated transitivity statistically than conceptually (40% versus 12% before PRISMA-NMA, and 54% versus 11% after PRISMA-NMA), with consistency evaluation being the most preferred (34% before versus 47% after PRISMA-NMA). One in five reviews inferred the plausibility of the transitivity (22% before versus 18% after PRISMA-NMA), followed by 11% of reviews that found it difficult to judge transitivity due to insufficient data. In justifying their conclusions, reviews considered mostly the comparability of the trials (24% before versus 30% after PRISMA-NMA), followed by the consistency evaluation (23% before versus 16% after PRISMA-NMA).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there has been a slight improvement in reporting and evaluating transitivity since releasing PRISMA-NMA, particularly in items related to the systematic review report. Nevertheless, there has been limited attention to pre-planning the transitivity evaluation and low awareness of the conceptual evaluation methods that align with the nature of the assumption.

Methodological review of NMA bias concepts provides groundwork for the development of a list of concepts for potential inclusion in a new risk of bias tool for network meta-analysis (RoB NMA Tool)

INTRODUCTION

Network meta-analyses (NMAs) have gained popularity and grown in number due to their ability to provide estimates of the comparative effectiveness of multiple treatments for the same condition. The aim of this study is to conduct a methodological review to compile a preliminary list of concepts related to bias in NMAs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We included papers that present items related to bias, reporting or methodological quality, papers assessing the quality of NMAs, or method papers. We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library and unpublished literature (up to July 2020). We extracted items related to bias in NMAs. An item was excluded if it related to general systematic review quality or bias and was included in currently available tools such as ROBIS or AMSTAR 2. We reworded items, typically structured as questions, into concepts (i.e. general notions).

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-one articles were assessed in full text and 58 were included. Of these articles, 12 were tools, checklists or journal standards; 13 were guidance documents for NMAs; 27 were studies related to bias or NMA methods; and 6 were papers assessing the quality of NMAs. These studies yielded 99 items of which the majority related to general systematic review quality and biases and were therefore excluded. The 22 items we included were reworded into concepts specific to bias in NMAs.

CONCLUSIONS

A list of 22 concepts was included. This list is not intended to be used to assess biases in NMAs, but to inform the development of items to be included in our tool.

Can different types of tree nuts and peanuts induce varied effects on specific blood lipid parameters? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Tree nuts and peanuts have shown cardioprotective effects through the modulation of blood lipid levels. Despite the abundance of scientific evidence available, it remains uncertain whether the type of nut consumed influences these changes. The objective of this study was to evaluate and rank the effects of six types of nuts on total cholesterol (total-c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL-c), triglyceride (TG) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL-c) levels through a systematic search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), a frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA), and the estimation of SUCRA values. A total of 76 RCTs were ultimately analyzed. The total c for pistachios, almond, and walnuts; LDL-c for cashews, walnuts, and almond; and TG for hazelnuts and walnuts significantly decreased, while only peanuts exhibited a significant increase in HDL-c levels. According to the rankings, the most effective type of nut for reducing total cholesterol was pistachio, cashew for LDL-c, hazelnut for TG, and peanut for increasing HDL-c levels. It should be noted that every type of nut analyzed exhibited a significant positive impact on some parameters, and specific types demonstrated enhanced advantages for particular blood lipids. These results endorse the use of personalized nutritional strategies to address and prevent dyslipidemia.Registration: PROSPERO database CRD42021270779.

Comparative efficacy of materials used in patients undergoing pulpotomy or direct pulp capping in carious teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Different materials have been used for capping the pulp after exposure during caries removal in permanent teeth. The purpose of this study was to collate and analyze all pertinent evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different materials used in patients undergoing pulpotomy or direct pulp capping in carious teeth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Trials comparing two or more capping agents used for direct pulp capping (DPC) or pulpotomy were considered eligible. An electronic search of four databases and two clinical trial registries was carried out up to February 28, 2021 using a search strategy properly adapted to the PICO framework. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) assessment of primary studies were performed in duplicate and independently. The primary outcome was clinical and radiological success; secondary outcomes included continued root formation, tooth discoloration, and dentin bridge formation.

RESULTS

21 RCTs were included in the study. The RoB assessment indicated a moderate risk among the studies. Due to significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity among the studies, performing network meta-analysis (NMA) was not possible. An ad hoc subgroup analysis revealed strong evidence of a higher success of DPC with Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) compared to calcium hydroxide (CH) (odds ratio [OR] = 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.66-5.79). MTA performed better than CH in pulp capping (both DPC and pulpotomy) of mature compared to immature teeth (OR = 3.34, 95% CI: 1.81-6.17). The GRADE assessment revealed moderate strength of evidence for DPC and mature teeth, and low to very low strength of evidence for the remaining subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity among the trials did not allow NMA. The ad hoc subgroup analysis indicated that the clinical and radiographic success of MTA was higher than that of CH but only in mature teeth and DPC cases where the strength of evidence was moderate. PROSPERO Registration: number CRD42020127239.

Efficacy of mind-body therapies for sleep disturbance in patients with early-stage cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the efficacy of different mind-body therapies (MBTs) for sleep disturbance in patients with early-stage cancer.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials that included patients (aged ≥18 years) with early stage cancer who underwent MBTs (mindfulness, hypnosis, relaxation, yoga, and qigong) were searched in the CINAHL via the EBSCO Host, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Scopus databases, from the date of database inception to October 2022. The outcomes were subjective sleep disturbance and objective sleep efficiency. Network meta-analysis (NMA) and comparative effects ranking were performed using STATA (v14.0; STATACorp, College Station, TX, USA).

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies investigating five MBTs were included in the NMA. For cancer patients receiving active treatment, mindfulness demonstrated the largest effect size in reducing subjective sleep disturbance (standardised mean difference [SMD]: 0.85; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.20-1.50; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment: moderate), and had the highest cumulative probability compared to usual care or waitlist. For cancer patients who had completed active treatment, qigong demonstrated the largest effect size in reducing subjective sleep disturbance (SMD: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.35-1.63; GRADE: low), followed by hypnosis (SMD: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.32-1.42; GRADE: moderate), and mindfulness (SMD: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.24-0.59; GRADE: moderate). Qigong also demonstrated the largest effect size in improving objective sleep efficiency (weighted mean differences: 10.76; 95% CI: 2.01-19.50; GRADE: low); however, the effect of qigong was tested in only one study in this NMA. Among the eight different treatment conditions, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) showed the highest cumulative probability (surface under the cumulative ranking curve: 96.3%) in reducing subjective sleep disturbance and the second highest cumulative probability (SUCRA: 83.3%) in improving objective sleep efficiency.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence supporting the use of MBTs to replace or be comparable to CBT. Mindfulness can be recommended as an optional treatment for reducing sleep disturbance in patients with early-stage cancer. Some support was observed for qigong and hypnosis in reducing sleep disturbances in patients with early-stage cancer who had completed active treatment. More rigorous trials are warranted to confirm whether different forms of MBTs have different effects on sleep in patients with cancer.

Effect of Dietary Approaches on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Dietary patterns play a critical role in diabetes management, while the best dietary pattern for Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients is still unclear. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare the impacts of various dietary approaches on the glycemic control of T2DM patients.

METHODS

Relevant studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and other additional records (1949 to 31 July 2022). Eligible RCTs were those comparing different dietary approaches against each other or a control diet in individuals with T2DM for at least 6 months. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and confidence of estimates with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach for network meta-analyses. In order to determine the pooled effect of each dietary approach relative to each other, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) for interventions for both HbA1c and fasting glucose, which enabled us to estimate the relative intervention effects by combing both direct and indirect trial evidence.

RESULTS

Forty-two RCTs comprising 4809 patients with T2DM were included in the NMA, comparing 10 dietary approaches (low-carbohydrate, moderate-carbohydrate, ketogenic, low-fat, high-protein, Mediterranean, Vegetarian/Vegan, low glycemic index, recommended, and control diets). In total, 83.3% of the studies were at a lower risk of bias or had some concerns. Findings of the NMA revealed that the ketogenic, low-carbohydrate, and low-fat diets were significantly effective in reducing HbA1c (viz., -0.73 (-1.19, -0.28), -0.69 (-1.32, -0.06), and -1.82 (-2.93, -0.71)), while moderate-carbohydrate, low glycemic index, Mediterranean, high-protein, and low-fat diets were significantly effective in reducing fasting glucose (viz., -1.30 (-1.92, -0.67), -1.26 (-2.26, -0.27), -0.95 (-1.51, -0.38), -0.89 (-1.60, -0.18) and -0.75 (-1.24, -0.27)) compared to a control diet. The clustered ranking plot for combined outcomes indicated the ketogenic, Mediterranean, moderate-carbohydrate, and low glycemic index diets had promising effects for controlling HbA1c and fasting glucose. The univariate meta-regressions showed that the mean reductions of HbA1c and fasting glucose were only significantly related to the mean weight change of the subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

For glycemic control in T2DM patients, the ketogenic diet, Mediterranean diet, moderate-carbohydrate diet, and low glycemic index diet were effective options. Although this study found the ketogenic diet superior, further high-quality and long-term studies are needed to strengthen its credibility.

Effects of different exercise modalities and intensities on body composition in overweight and obese children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction: Childhood and adolescent overweight and obesity are global public health issues. Previous studies on exercise and overweight and obese children have produced inconsistent findings and lacked comparisons between different exercise modalities and intensities. Therefore, a network meta-analysis is necessary to provide evidence-based intervention programs. This study aims to identify the effects of different exercise modalities and intensities on changes in body composition in overweight and obese children and adolescents. Methods: A search for randomized controlled trials was conducted on Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase involving exercise interventions aimed at improving body composition (body fat percentage, BMI, fat mass, fat-free mass, body weight) in overweight and obese children and adolescents. A random effects network meta-analysis was performed using STATA 14.0 software within a frequentist framework. The literature quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Results: Thirty-two papers involving 1,452 participants were included. There were six types of intervention involved in the study, including moderate intensity aerobic exercise, high-intensity aerobic exercise, moderate intensity resistance exercise, high-intensity resistance exercise, moderate intensity combined exercise, and high-intensity combined exercise. The network meta-analysis results revealed that high-intensity combined exercise was the best exercise mode for improving BMI [mean difference in kg/m² = -1.65, 95% CI (-3.27, -0.02)] and reducing fat mass [mean difference in kg = -2.87, 95% CI (-4.84, -0.91)]. Moderate intensity combined exercise was the best mode for weight loss [mean difference in kg = -4.58, 95% CI (-5.94, -3.22)] and improvement in body fat percentage [mean difference in% = -2.52, 95% CI (-3.83, -1.20)]. High-intensity resistance exercise had the optimal effect in increasing fat-free mass [mean difference in kg = 1.10, 95% CI (0.22, 1.99)]. Conclusion: In conclusion, the study found that combined exercise, whether moderate or high intensity, was more effective than any other exercise modality in improving body fat percentage and BMI, reducing fat mass and weight. Resistance exercise was the most effective in increasing fat-free mass.

Digital devices for tuberculosis treatment adherence

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To assess the effects of digital devices (feature phone‐based and smartphone‐based technologies, digital pillboxes, ingestible sensors, and other devices) for improving tuberculosis treatment adherence.

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors and H2 receptor antagonists in the initial non‑eradication treatment of duodenal ulcer: A network meta‑analysis

The present network meta-analysis aimed to enhance the corresponding evidence with respect to the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals treatments. Frequentist network meta-analysis was used. Medical literature up to November 2022 was searched for randomized clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of these pharmaceuticals, either compared with each other or compared with placebo. With the exception of ranitidine (300 mg four times daily) and vonoprazan (20 mg once daily) having lower safety than placebo, the efficacy and safety of the remaining treatments were superior to placebo. Cimetidine (400 mg four times daily) and pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) were ranked first in terms of efficacy. The frequentist network meta-analysis shows that for cimetidine (except 400 mg once daily), famotidine, rabeprazole, ilaprazole, lansoprazole (except 7.5 mg once daily) and omeprazole (except 10 mg once daily or 30 mg once daily), the efficacy comparison between the different doses of each of the aforementioned pharmaceuticals did not indicate statistically significant differences. In conclusion, pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) was the best choice for the initial non-eradication treatment of patients with duodenal ulcer, and cimetidine (400 mg twice daily), omeprazole (20 mg once daily), lansoprazole (15 mg once daily), ilaprazole (5 mg once daily) and rabeprazole (10 mg once daily) could be used as the first choice. If the aforementioned pharmaceuticals cannot be prescribed, famotidine (40 mg twice daily) is recommended.

PEG-asparaginase treatment regimens for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Asparaginase has played a crucial role in the improvement of survival in children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL), which is the commonest cancer among children. Survival rates have steadily increased over decades since the introduction of asparaginase to ALL therapy, and overall survival rates reach 90% with the best contemporary protocols. Currently, polyethylene glycolated native Escherichia coli-derived L-asparaginase (PEG-asparaginase) is the preferred first-line asparaginase preparation. Besides its clinical benefits, PEG-asparaginase is well known for severe toxicities. Agreement on the optimal dose, treatment duration, and frequency of administration has never been reached among clinicians.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess the effect of the number of PEG-asparaginase doses on survival and relapse in children and adolescents with ALL. Secondary objectives To assess the association between the number of doses of PEG-asparaginase and asparaginase-associated toxicities (e.g. hypersensitivity, thromboembolism, pancreatitis and osteonecrosis). To undertake a network meta-analysis at dose-level in order to generate rankings of the number of doses of PEG-asparaginase used in the treatment for ALL, according to their benefits (survival and relapse) and harms (toxicity).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science databases and three trials registers in November 2021, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different PEG-asparaginase treatment regimens in children and adolescents (< 18 years of age) with first-line ALL treated with multiagent chemotherapy including PEG-asparaginase.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using a standardised data collection form, two review authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each outcome using a standardised tool (RoB 2.0) and assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes included overall survival, event-free survival and leukaemic relapse. Secondary outcomes included asparaginase-associated toxicities (hypersensitivity, thromboembolism, pancreatitis, sinusoidal obstruction syndrome and osteonecrosis as well as overall asparaginase-associated toxicity). We conducted the review and performed the analyses in accordance with the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three RCTs in the review, and identified an additional four ongoing studies. We judged outcomes of two RCTs to be at low risk of bias in all the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB 2) domains. We rated the remaining study as having some concerns regarding bias. Due to concerns about imprecision, we rated all outcomes as having low- to moderate-certainty evidence.  One study compared intermittent PEG-asparaginase treatment (eight doses of PEG-asparaginase, 1000 IU/m2, intramuscular (IM) administration) versus continuous PEG-asparaginase treatment (15 doses of PEG-asparaginase, 1000 IU/m2, IM) in 625 participants with non-high risk ALL aged 1.0 to 17.9 years. We found that treatment with eight doses probably results in little to no difference in event-free survival compared to treatment with 15 doses (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.06; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to treatment with 15 doses, treatment with eight doses may result in either no difference or a slight reduction in hypersensitivity (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.93; low-certainty evidence), thromboembolism (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.36; low-certainty evidence) or osteonecrosis (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.32; low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found that treatment with eight doses probably reduces pancreatitis (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence) and asparaginase-associated toxicity (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.78; moderate-certainty evidence) compared to treatment with 15 doses. One study compared low-risk standard treatment with additional PEG-asparaginase (six doses, 2500 IU/m2, IM) versus low-risk standard treatment (two doses, 2500 IU/m2, IM) in 1857 participants aged one to nine years old with standard low-risk ALL. We found that, compared to treatment with two doses, treatment with six doses probably results in little to no difference in overall survival (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00; moderate-certainty evidence) and event-free survival (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.04; moderate-certainty evidence), and may result in either no difference or a slight increase in osteonecrosis (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.91 to 3.00; low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found that treatment with six doses probably increases hypersensitivity (RR 12.05, 95% CI 5.27 to 27.58; moderate-certainty evidence), pancreatitis (RR 4.84, 95% CI 2.15 to 10.85; moderate-certainty evidence) and asparaginase-associated toxicity (RR 4.49, 95% CI 3.05 to 6.59; moderate-certainty evidence) compared to treatment with two doses. One trial compared calaspargase (11 doses, 2500 IU/m2, intravenous (IV)) versus PEG-asparaginase (16 doses, 2500 IU/m2, IV) in 239 participants aged one to 21 years with standard- and high-risk ALL and lymphoblastic lymphoma. We found that treatment with 11 doses of calaspargase probably results in little to no difference in event-free survival compared to treatment with 16 doses of PEG-asparaginase (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.16; moderate-certainty evidence). However, treatment with 11 doses of calaspargase probably reduces leukaemic relapse compared to treatment with 16 doses of PEG-asparaginase (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.83; moderate-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found that treatment with 11 doses of calaspargase results in either no difference or a slight reduction in hypersensitivity (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.13; low-certainty evidence), pancreatitis (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.52; low-certainty evidence), thromboembolism (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.42; low-certainty evidence), osteonecrosis (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.56; low-certainty evidence) and asparaginase-associated toxicity (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.40; low-certainty evidence) compared to treatment with 16 doses of PEG-asparaginase.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were not able to conduct a network meta-analysis, and could not draw clear conclusions because it was not possible to rank the interventions. Overall, we found that different numbers of doses of PEG-asparaginase probably result in little to no difference in event-free survival across all studies. In two studies, we found that a higher number of PEG-asparaginase doses probably increases pancreatitis and asparaginase-associated toxicities.

COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF ANTIVIRAL AGENTS FOR PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF HERPES LABIALIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVE

To compare the relative efficacy and safety of antiviral agents used in the prevention and management of herpes labialis through a network meta-analysis of clinical trials.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in Ovid Medline PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus and Clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting a comparison of antiviral agents in the management and prevention of herpes labialis in healthy/immunocompetent adults. The data extracted from the selected RCTs were assessed and a network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed. The interventions were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA).

RESULTS

A total of 52 articles were included for qualitative synthesis and for the quantitative part, 26 articles were analyzed for the primary treatment outcome and 7 studies were analyzed for the primary prevention outcome. The combination therapy of oral valacyclovir and topical clobetasol was the best ranked with a mean reduction in healing time of -3.50 (95% CI -5.22 to -1.78) followed by vidarabine monophosphate of -3.22 (95% CI -4.59 to -1.85). No significant inconsistencies, heterogeneity, and publication bias were reported for TTH outcome analysis. For primary prevention outcomes, only 7 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and none of the interventions was shown to be superior to each other. The absence of adverse events was reported by 16 studies, whereas other studies reported mild side effects only.

CONCLUSION

NMA highlighted that several agents were effective in the management of herpes labialis among which the combination of oral valacyclovir with topical clobetasol therapy was the most effective in reducing the time to heal. However, further studies are required to determine which intervention is the most effective in preventing the recurrence of herpes labialis.

Comparative Effectiveness of Medicinal Interventions for Oral Submucous Fibrosis: A Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

This network meta-analysis presents an exhaustive description and comparison of the available medical interventions for the management of oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted after registration with PROSPERO. (PROSPERO ID CRD42022303441). Databases (PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science, and others) were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) trials from inception till September 2022 for the medical interventions in OSMF. The primary outcome was the improvement in mouth opening. The secondary outcomes were improvement in burning sensation, tongue protrusion, and cheek flexibility. The interventions were ranked according to their efficacy based on the surface under the cumulative ranking.

RESULTS

47 studies including 2393 patients were assessed for quantitative analysis. For mouth opening, the combined treatment with steroid, hyaluronidase, and antioxidant was most effective [MD, 7.05 (95%CI 1.76,12.34)], followed by the combination of oral antioxidants with injectable steroids, [MD, 3.80 (95%CI -0.44,8.03)]. Additionally, the combined treatment with steroid, hyaluronidase, and antioxidant was most effective in reducing the burning sensation [MD, -8.62(-10.95,-6.30)], followed by aloe vera [MD, -8.45(-10.40,-6.49)] and pentoxifylline [MD -7.57(-9.46,-5.68)]. For tongue protrusion, curcumin was most effective followed by antioxidants. Most of the drugs used were reported to cause negligible or mild adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

This network meta-analysis reported the efficacy of medicinal interventions in OSMF patients compared to the placebo in the improvement of mouth opening and burning sensation, and cheek flexibility. The methodological quality of included RCTs was low. Well-designed studies are recommended to obtain strong evidence.

Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes of uric acid-lowering therapy in patients with different kidney functions: study protocol for a systematic review, pairwise and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Hyperuricaemia has been implicated in the development of kidney function in populations with chronic kidney disease; however, the benefits of urate-lowering therapy (ULT) remain uncertain in different clinical studies. The different kidney functions of enrolled populations and distinct pharmacokinetic characteristics of ULT might be of the essence for the contrasting results. In this study, we will synthesise all available data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies, then evaluate the outcomes of ULT in patients stratified by different estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) stratifications. Furthermore, we will attempt to explore a relatively optimal ULT regimen using a Bayesian network meta-analysis in different eGFRs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We searched published and unpublished data from MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials and ClinicalTrials.gov website (before March 2022) for RCTs and cohort studies without language restriction. In the pairwise meta-analysis, all regimens of ULT will be pooled as a whole and compared with controls in different eGFRs. The random-effects model will be applied to generate the summary values using the software Stata V.12.0 (StataCorp). Network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework will be conducted to explore the relative efficacy profiles of different ULTs and to find optimal ULT in different eGFRs. The software of WinBUGS V.1.4.3 and R2WinBUGS package of R V.3.1.1 will be used in the network meta-analysis. Primary outcomes will be the occurrence of major cardiovascular events and kidney failure events. Secondary outcomes will include the rate of change in eGFR per year, all-cause death, changes in serum uric acid level and major adverse events. Two authors will independently review study selection, data extraction and quality assessment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The meta-analysis does not require ethical certification. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and through presentations at academic conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021226163.

Comparative effects of vitamin and mineral supplements in the management of type 2 diabetes in primary care: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Medical nutrition treatment can manage diabetes and slow or prevent its complications. The comparative effects of micronutrient supplements, however, have not yet been well established. We aimed at evaluating the comparative effects of vitamin and mineral supplements on managing glycemic control and lipid metabolism for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to inform clinical practice. Electronic and hand searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were performed until June 1, 2022. We selected RCTs enrolling patients with T2DM who were treated with vitamin supplements, mineral supplements, or placebo/no treatment. Data were pooled via frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses. A total of 170 eligible trials and 14223 participants were included. Low to very low certainty evidence established chromium supplements as the most effective in reducing fasting blood glucose levels and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (SUCRAs: 90.4% and 78.3%, respectively). Vitamin K supplements ranked best in reducing glycated hemoglobin A1c and fasting insulin levels (SUCRAs: 97.0% and 82.3%, respectively), with moderate to very low certainty evidence. Vanadium supplements ranked best in lowering total cholesterol levels with very low evidence certainty (SUCRAs:100%). Niacin supplements ranked best in triglyceride reductions and increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with low to very low evidence certainty (SUCRAs:93.7% and 94.6%, respectively). Vitamin E supplements ranked best in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with very low evidence certainty (SUCRAs:80.0%). Our analyses indicated that micronutrient supplements, especially chromium, vitamin E, vitamin K, vanadium, and niacin supplements, may be more efficacious in managing T2DM than other micronutrients. Considering the clinical importance of these findings, new research is needed to get better insight into this issue.

Comparative efficacy, cognitive effects and acceptability of electroconvulsive therapies for the treatment of depression: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There have been important advances in the use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) to treat major depressive episodes. These include variations to the type of stimulus the brain regions stimulated, and the stimulus parameters (eg, stimulus duration/pulse width). Our aim is to investigate ECT types using a network meta-analysis (NMA) approach and report on comparative treatment efficacy, cognitive side effects and acceptability.

METHOD

We will conduct a systematic review to identify randomised controlled trials that compared two or more ECT protocols to treat depression. This will be done using the following databases: Embase, MEDLINE PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL and will be supplemented by personal contacts with researchers in the field. All authors will be contacted to provide missing information. Primary outcomes will be symptom severity on a validated continuous clinician-rated scale of depression, cognitive functioning measured using anterograde verbal recall, and acceptability calculated using all-cause drop-outs. Secondary outcomes will include response and remission rates, autobiographical memory following a course of ECT, and anterograde visuospatial recall.Bayesian random effects hierarchical models will compare ECT types. Additional meta-regressions may be conducted to determine the impact of effect modifiers and patient-specific prognostic factors if sufficient data are available.

DISCUSSION

This NMA will facilitate clinician decision making and allow more sophisticated selection of ECT type according to the balance of efficacy, cognitive side effects and acceptability.

ETHICS

This systematic review and NMA does not require research ethics approval as it will use published aggregate data and will not collect nor disclose individually identifiable participant data.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022357098.

Topical antibiotics for treating bacterial keratitis: a network meta‐analysis

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (prototype). The objectives are as follows:

To compare the effectiveness and safety of topical antibiotics for treating BK and to rank different interventions through a systematic review and NMA.

Comparative effectiveness of acupuncture and pharmacological interventions in treating diabetic stroke: A protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a close and causative correlation between stroke and diabetes, and the complication of the 2 diseases seriously harms human health and currently becomes a topic of clinical importance. To date, the common methods of treating diabetic stroke include acupuncture and pharmacological interventions. However, there is no high-quality or direct evidence of their comparative effectiveness. This review aims to provide a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of acupuncture and pharmacological interventions in treating diabetic stroke.

METHODS

Databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine Disc will be searched for relevant randomized controlled trials to obtain literatures on the treatment of diabetic stroke, and clinical randomized controlled trials will be screened out from their inception to December 30, 2022. The participant intervention comparator outcomes of this study are as flowing: P, patients with diabetic stroke; I, acupuncture and pharmacological interventions; C, no treatment, pharmacological placebo, or sham acupuncture groups; O, primary outcome will be blood glucose levels, glycosylated hemoglobin levels, and the rate of stroke recurrence; secondary outcomes will include fasting and post-load blood glucose levels, cholesterol, triglycerides, and quality of life scale scores. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool will be used in assessing literature's quality. Review Manager software 5.3 and Stata 15.1 will be used in data analysis.

RESULT

This systematic review and network meta-analysis will provide evidence of the efficacy of different therapeutic methods in treating diabetic stroke, to show which forms of therapy are more commonly used with higher effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

The results will systematically provide suggestions for medical practitioners to choose the effective, time-saving and economical therapeutic strategy for diabetic stroke.

Effective maNagement of depression among patients witH cANCEr (ENHANCE): a protocol for a hybrid systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of interventions for depressive symptoms

BACKGROUND

Depression is common among patients with cancer and is associated with lower treatment participation, lower satisfaction with care, poorer quality of life, greater symptom burden and higher healthcare costs. Various types of interventions (e.g. pharmacological, psychotherapy) are used for the treatment of depression. However, evidence for these among patients with cancer is limited. Furthermore, the relative effectiveness and acceptability of different approaches are unknown because a direct comparison between all available treatments has not been carried out. We will address this by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA) of interventions for depression among people with cancer using a hybrid overview of reviews and systematic review methodology.

METHODS

We will search for and extract data from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of depression interventions for patients with cancer from inception, before performing a supplemental search for more recent RCTs. We will include RCTs comparing pharmacological, psychotherapy, exercise, combination therapy, collaborative care or complementary and alternative medicine interventions with pill placebo, no treatment, waitlist, treatment as usual or minimal treatment control groups, or directly in head-to-head trials, among adults who currently have cancer or have a history of any cancer and elevated depressive symptoms (scores above a cut-off on validated scales or meeting diagnostic criteria). Our primary outcomes will be change in depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference) and intervention acceptability (% who withdrew). Our secondary outcomes will be 6-month change in depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, adverse events and mortality. We will independently screen for eligibility, extract data and assess risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool. We will use frequentist random-effects multivariate NMA in Stata, rankograms and surface under the cumulative ranking curves to synthesise evidence and obtain a ranking of intervention groups. We will explore heterogeneity and inconsistency using local and global measures and evaluate the credibility of results using the Confidence in NEtwork Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework.

DISCUSSION

Our findings will provide the best available evidence for managing depression among patients with cancer. Such information will help to inform clinical guidelines, evidence-based treatment decisions and future research by identifying gaps in the current literature.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Submitted to PROSPERO (record number: 290145), awaiting registration.

Comparative effectiveness of external therapies of traditional Chinese medicine and surgical treatments in pain management of postherpetic neuralgia: A protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the most common long-term complication of herpes zoster (HZ), postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is characterized by chronic, persistent, and debilitating neuropathic pain. PHN seriously harms human health and currently becomes a topic of clinical importance. To date, the common methods of pain management in PHN include external therapies of traditional Chinese medicine and surgical treatments. However, there is no high-quality or direct evidence of their comparative effectiveness. This review aims to provide a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of external therapies of traditional Chinese medicine and surgical treatments in the pain management of PHN.

METHODS

Databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine Disc will be searched for relevant randomized controlled trials to obtain literatures on the treatment of PHN with external therapies of traditional Chinese medicine and surgical treatments, and clinical randomized controlled trials will be screened out from their inception to August 5, 2022. The participant intervention comparator outcomes of this study are as flowing: P, patients with PHN; I, external therapies of traditional Chinese medicine and surgical treatments; C, no treatment, pharmacological placebo, treatment as usual or sham acupuncture groups; O, primary outcome is pain intensity, and secondary outcomes are onset of pain relief time, quality of life, therapeutic effective rate and reverse effects. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool will be used in assessing literature's quality. Network meta-analyses will be conducted to generate estimates of comparative effectiveness of each intervention class and rankings of their effectiveness, in terms of pain management.

RESULT

This systematic review and network meta-analysis will provide evidence of the efficacy of different therapeutic methods for pain management in PHN, to show which forms of therapy are more commonly used with higher effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

The results will systematically provide suggestions for medical practitioners to choose effective, time-saving and economical pain management method for PHN.

Some conservative interventions are more effective than others for people with chronic non-specific neck pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

QUESTION

Which is the most effective conservative intervention for patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNSNP)?

DESIGN

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with CNSNP of at least 3 months duration.

INTERVENTIONS

All available pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcome was adverse events.

RESULTS

Overall, 119 RCTs (12,496 patients; 32 interventions) were included. Risk of bias was low in 50.4% of trials, unclear in 22.7% and high in 26.9%. Compared with inert treatment, a combination of active and/or passive multimodal non-pharmacological inventions (eg, exercise and manual therapy) were effective for pain on a 0-to-10 scale at 1 month (MD range 0.84 to 3.74) and at 3 to 6 months (MD range 1.06 to 1.49), and effective on disability on a 0-to-100 scale at 1 month (MD range 10.26 to 14.09) and 3 to 6 months (MD range 5.60 to 16.46). These effects ranged from possible to definite clinical relevance. Compared with inert treatment, anti-inflammatory drugs alone or in combination with another non-pharmacological treatment did not reduce pain at 1 month or 3 to 6 months. At 12 months, no superiority was found over inert treatment on both outcomes. Most mild adverse events were experienced following acupuncture/dry needling intervention. On average, the evidence varied from low to very low certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

While multimodal non-pharmacological interventions may reduce pain and disability for up to 3 to 6 months of follow-up when compared with inert treatment, the evidence was very uncertain about their effects. Better quality and larger trials are needed to improve the certainty of evidence.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019124501.

Comparative Efficacy of Interventions for the Management of Oral Submucous Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) is a chronic premalignant condition and is characterized by fibroblastic change of lamina propria and stiffness of oral mucosa. Though there are several treatment options available, the best agent is not yet identified. This study assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of medical interventions in the management of OSMF. Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of interventions for OSMF with each other, or placebo. A network meta-analysis was performed, and the interventions were ranked according to their efficacy based on the surface under the cumulative ranking. (PROSPERO Registration no: CRD42021255094). Results: Thirty-two RCTs comprising 2063 patients were eligible for quantitative analysis. In terms of therapeutic efficacy in the improvement of mouth opening Oxitard, a herbal formulation was ranked as the most efficacious agent, [MD, 10.29 (95%CI 6.34–14.25)] followed by combination therapy of Lycopene with corticosteroids and hyaluronidase [MD, 7.07 (95%CI 1.82–12.31)]. For improvement of burning sensation aloe vera was ranked first [MD, 6.14 (95%CI 4.58–7.70)] followed by corticosteroids with antioxidants [MD, 6.13 (95%CI 4.12–8.14)] and corticosteroids in combination with hyaluronidase with antioxidants [MD, 5.95 (95%CI 3.79–8.11)]. In terms of safety, most of the drugs were reported to cause mild adverse effects only. Significant inconsistencies could be identified in the analysis for both the outcomes assessed and were further explored. Conclusions: Our study highlighted the potential efficacy of several agents over placebo in the improvement of mouth opening and burning sensation in OSMF patients. However, the RCTs lacked methodological soundness. Well-designed studies with a larger number of participants with a rigorous randomization process and stringent methodology are recommended to strengthen the results obtained, which may help to construct a clinical guideline for OSMF management.

Anticoagulants for thrombosis prophylaxis in acutely ill patients admitted to hospital: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of different types and doses of anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients who are acutely ill and admitted to hospital.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and national health authority databases. The search was last updated on 16 November 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that evaluated low or intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin, low or intermediate dose unfractionated heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, pentasaccharides, placebo, or no intervention for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill adult patients in hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Random effects, bayesian network meta-analyses used four co-primary outcomes: all cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and serious adverse events at or closest timing to 90 days. Risk of bias was also assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. The quality of evidence was graded using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework.

RESULTS

44 randomised controlled trials that randomly assigned 90 095 participants were included in the main analysis. Evidence of low to moderate quality suggested none of the interventions reduced all cause mortality compared with placebo. Pentasaccharides (odds ratio 0.32, 95% credible interval 0.08 to 1.07), intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin (0.66, 0.46 to 0.93), direct oral anticoagulants (0.68, 0.33 to 1.34), and intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (0.71, 0.43 to 1.19) were most likely to reduce symptomatic venous thromboembolism (very low to low quality evidence). Intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (2.63, 1.00 to 6.21) and direct oral anticoagulants (2.31, 0.82 to 6.47) were most likely to increase major bleeding (low to moderate quality evidence). No conclusive differences were noted between interventions regarding serious adverse events (very low to low quality evidence). When compared with no intervention instead of placebo, all active interventions did more favourably with regard to risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality, and less favourably with regard to risk of major bleeding. The results were robust in prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-molecular-weight heparin in an intermediate dose appears to confer the best balance of benefits and harms for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Unfractionated heparin, in particular the intermediate dose, and direct oral anticoagulants had the least favourable profile. A systematic discrepancy was noted in intervention effects that depended on whether placebo or no intervention was the reference treatment. Main limitations of this study include the quality of the evidence, which was generally low to moderate due to imprecision and within-study bias, and statistical inconsistency, which was addressed post hoc.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020173088.

Comparing the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of interventions for depressive symptoms in people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol

BACKGROUND

Comorbid depression is prevalent in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Depression is commonly untreated or undertreated, thus, there is a need for effective and safe interventions and current guidelines recommend psychological and pharmaceutical interventions for people with MS. However, research suggests that other interventions, such as exercise, could also be effective. The comparative efficacy and safety of intervention modalities have not been quantified.We plan to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety of psychological, pharmaceutical, physical and magnetic stimulation interventions for depression in people with MS.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL and PEDro from inception to 31 December 2021. Search terms will stem from three concepts: MS, depression and randomised controlled trials. Included studies will be randomised controlled trials, where participants are people with MS randomised to receive one of the aforementioned intervention types, and depression or depressive symptoms is the primary outcome, only outcome or secondary outcome with an a priori power calculation. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment (using the Risk of Bias 2 tool) will be conducted independently by two reviewers. If possible, we will synthesise the evidence by fitting a frequentist network meta-analysis model with multivariate random effects, or a pairwise random-effects meta-analysis model. For each model, efficacy will be measured using a standardised mean difference, and safety using an OR. We plan to provide summary measures including forest plots, a geometry of the network, surface under the cumulative ranking curve, and a league table, and perform subgroup analyses. Otherwise, a narrative review will be provided.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics is not required for a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Results will be published in a peer reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020209803.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Comparative Efficacy of Antihypertensive Agents in Flow-Mediated Vasodilation of Patients with Hypertension: Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trial

Hypertension induces both structural and functional changes in blood vessels, thereby increasing endothelial dysfunction, which in turn, contributes to an increase in blood pressure. A popular and widely used noninvasive tool, flow-mediated dilation (FMD), is used to examine peripheral artery endothelium-dependent dilation. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of different classes of antihypertensive agents based on their effects on FMD. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were queried till November 1, 2020. Comparative studies on the efficacies of two or more antihypertensive agents or placebos for hypertensive patients were included. The outcomes were variations in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Two reviewers independently reviewed and filtered the literature and extracted the data; the Cochrane “risk of bias” method was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the randomized controlled trials. A network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 software with a total of 49 studies. Subgroup analysis based on age and duration of treatments was performed. As compared to the placebo group, patients receiving the antihypertensive drugs exhibited significantly enhanced FMD (ARB + CCB: 4.01%, 95% CI, 0.92–7.11%, p < 0.001; ACEI + ARB: 2.81%, 95% CI, 1.19–4.43%, p < 0.001; ACEI: 2.55%, 95% CI, 1.34–3.77%, p < 0.001; ARB: 2.22%, 95% CI, 1.05–3.38%, p < 0.001; β-blocker: 2.23%, 95% CI, 0.93–3.52%, p < 0.001). In the SUCRA curve for network meta-analysis, the combination of CCB and ARB was found to be the most effective in increasing FMD (SUCRA = 89.0%), followed by ACEI monotherapy (SUCRA = 74.2%). ARB combined with CCB was superior in improving the endothelial function measured as the FMD; ACEI monotherapy was the most effective treatment among the antihypertension medications. There were no significant differences between antihypertensive drug-based monotherapies.

The management of anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and history of falls or risk of falls: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation affects an estimated 33 million individuals worldwide and is a major cause of stroke, heart failure, and death. Anticoagulants substantially reduce the risk of stroke but are also associated with an increased risk of bleeding and especially intracranial hemorrhage which is the most concerning complication. Because of this, many patients are not offered anticoagulants, particularly patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls. It is unclear what anticoagulant treatment these patients should be offered. The Liverpool AF-Falls project aims to investigate this area, and this protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis aims to define what is the most appropriate anticoagulant treatment option for the management of atrial fibrillation patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis will include randomized and non-randomized studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of different anticoagulant treatments (vitamin K antagonist and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anti-coagulant). Bibliographic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov , Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science) will be searched according to a pre-specified search strategy. Titles, abstracts, and full texts will be assessed by two independent reviewers and disagreements resolved with a third independent reviewer. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2 (RoB 2) will be used to assess the risk of bias in randomized trials, and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be used for non-randomized studies. A pairwise meta-analysis based on the fixed and random-effects models will be conducted. Publication bias will be evaluated with a funnel plot and Egger's test. Heterogeneity will be assessed with the I² statistic. If conditions for indirect comparison are met and sufficient data are available, a network meta-analysis will be conducted using frequentist and Bayesian methodologies.

DISCUSSION

This review will be the first to summarize direct and indirect evidence on the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatments in atrial fibrillation patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls. The findings will be important to patients, clinicians, and health policy-makers to inform best practices in the use of these treatments.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registry number: CRD42020201086.

Answering complex hierarchy questions in network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Network meta-analysis estimates all relative effects between competing treatments and can produce a treatment hierarchy from the most to the least desirable option according to a health outcome. While about half of the published network meta-analyses present such a hierarchy, it is rarely the case that it is related to a clinically relevant decision question.

METHODS

We first define treatment hierarchy and treatment ranking in a network meta-analysis and suggest a simulation method to estimate the probability of each possible hierarchy to occur. We then propose a stepwise approach to express clinically relevant decision questions as hierarchy questions and quantify the uncertainty of the criteria that constitute them. The steps of the approach are summarized as follows: a) a question of clinical relevance is defined, b) the hierarchies that satisfy the defined question are collected and c) the frequencies of the respective hierarchies are added; the resulted sum expresses the certainty of the defined set of criteria to hold. We then show how the frequencies of all possible hierarchies relate to common ranking metrics.

RESULTS

We exemplify the method and its implementation using two networks. The first is a network of four treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease where the most probable hierarchy has a frequency of 28%. The second is a network of 18 antidepressants, among which Vortioxetine, Bupropion and Escitalopram occupy the first three ranks with frequency 19%.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed method offers a generalised approach of producing treatment hierarchies in network meta-analysis, which moves towards attaching treatment ranking to a clear decision question, relevant to all or a subset of competing treatments.

Surgical interventions for treating intracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a considerable challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising rapidly. The majority of intracapsular hip fractures are treated surgically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects (benefits and harms) of all surgical treatments used in the management of intracapsular hip fractures in older adults, using a network meta-analysis of randomised trials, and to generate a hierarchy of interventions according to their outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and five other databases in July 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, reference lists of retrieved articles and conducted backward-citation searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different treatments for fragility intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included total hip arthroplasties (THAs), hemiarthroplasties (HAs), internal fixation, and non-operative treatments. We excluded studies of people with hip fracture with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis or resulting from high-energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. One review author completed data extraction which was checked by a second review author. We collected data for three outcomes at different time points: mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) - both reported within 4 months, at 12 months, and after 24 months of surgery, and unplanned return to theatre (at end of study follow-up). We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) with Stata software, using frequentist methods, and calculated the differences between treatments using risk ratios (RRs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also performed direct comparisons using the same codes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 119 studies (102 RCTS, 17 quasi-RCTs) with 17,653 participants with 17,669 intracapsular fractures in the review; 83% of fractures were displaced. The mean participant age ranged from 60 to 87 years and 73% were women.  After discussion with clinical experts, we selected 12 nodes that represented the best balance between clinical plausibility and efficiency of the networks: cemented modern unipolar HA, dynamic fixed angle plate, uncemented first-generation bipolar HA, uncemented modern bipolar HA, cemented modern bipolar HA, uncemented first-generation unipolar HA, uncemented modern unipolar HA, THA with single articulation, dual-mobility THA, pins, screws, and non-operative treatment. Seventy-five studies (with 11,855 participants) with data for at least two of these treatments contributed to the NMA. We selected cemented modern unipolar HA as a reference treatment against which other treatments were compared. This was a common treatment in the networks, providing a clinically appropriate comparison. In order to provide a concise summary of the results, we report only network estimates when there was evidence of difference between treatments. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for serious and very serious risks of bias and when estimates included possible transitivity, particularly for internal fixation which included more undisplaced fractures. We also downgraded for incoherence, or inconsistency in indirect estimates, although this affected few estimates. Most estimates included the possibility of benefits and harms, and we downgraded the evidence for these treatments for imprecision.  We found that cemented modern unipolar HA, dynamic fixed angle plate and pins seemed to have the greatest likelihood of reducing mortality at 12 months. Overall, 23.5% of participants who received the reference treatment died within 12 months of surgery. Uncemented modern bipolar HA had higher mortality than the reference treatment (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.85; derived only from indirect evidence; low-certainty evidence), and THA with single articulation also had higher mortality (network estimate RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.32; derived from direct evidence from 2 studies with 225 participants, and indirect evidence; very low-certainty evidence). In the remaining treatments, the certainty of the evidence ranged from low to very low, and we noted no evidence of any differences in mortality at 12 months.  We found that THA (single articulation), cemented modern bipolar HA and uncemented modern bipolar HA seemed to have the greatest likelihood of improving HRQoL at 12 months. This network was comparatively sparse compared to other outcomes and the certainty of the evidence of differences between treatments was very low. We noted no evidence of any differences in HRQoL at 12 months, although estimates were imprecise. We found that arthroplasty treatments seemed to have a greater likelihood of reducing unplanned return to theatre than internal fixation and non-operative treatment. We estimated that 4.3% of participants who received the reference treatment returned to theatre during the study follow-up. Compared to this treatment, we found low-certainty evidence that more participants returned to theatre if they were treated with a dynamic fixed angle plate (network estimate RR 4.63, 95% CI 2.94 to 7.30; from direct evidence from 1 study with 190 participants, and indirect evidence). We found very low-certainty evidence that more participants returned to theatre when treated with pins (RR 4.16, 95% CI 2.53 to 6.84; only from indirect evidence), screws (network estimate RR 5.04, 95% CI 3.25 to 7.82; from direct evidence from 2 studies with 278 participants, and indirect evidence), and non-operative treatment (RR 5.41, 95% CI 1.80 to 16.26; only from indirect evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence of a tendency for an increased risk of unplanned return to theatre for all of the arthroplasty treatments, and in particular for THA, compared with cemented modern unipolar HA, with little evidence to suggest the size of this difference varied strongly between the arthroplasty treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was considerable variability in the ranking of each treatment such that there was no one outstanding, or subset of outstanding, superior treatments. However, cemented modern arthroplasties tended to more often yield better outcomes than alternative treatments and may be a more successful approach than internal fixation. There is no evidence of a difference between THA (single articulation) and cemented modern unipolar HA in the outcomes measured in this review. THA may be an appropriate treatment for a subset of people with intracapsular fracture but we have not explored this further.

Surgical interventions for treating extracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising. The majority of extracapsular hip fractures are treated surgically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects (benefits and harms) of all surgical treatments used in the management of extracapsular hip fractures in older adults, using a network meta-analysis of randomised trials, and to generate a hierarchy of interventions according to their outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and five other databases in July 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different treatments for fragility extracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included internal and external fixation, arthroplasties and non-operative treatment. We excluded studies of hip fractures with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis or resulting from high-energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. One review author completed data extraction which was checked by a second review author. We collected data for three outcomes at different time points: mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) - both reported within 4 months, at 12 months and after 24 months of surgery, and unplanned return to theatre (at end of study follow-up). We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) with Stata software, using frequentist methods, and calculated the differences between treatments using risk ratios (RRs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also performed direct comparisons using the same codes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 184 studies (160 RCTs and 24 quasi-RCTs) with 26,073 participants with 26,086 extracapsular hip fractures in the review. The mean age in most studies ranged from 60 to 93 years, and 69% were women. After discussion with clinical experts, we selected nine nodes that represented the best balance between clinical plausibility and efficiency of the networks: fixed angle plate (dynamic and static), cephalomedullary nail (short and long), condylocephalic nail, external fixation, hemiarthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty (THA) and non-operative treatment. Seventy-three studies (with 11,126 participants) with data for at least two of these treatments contributed to the NMA. We selected the dynamic fixed angle plate as a reference treatment against which other treatments were compared. This was a common treatment in the networks, providing a clinically appropriate comparison.  We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for serious and very serious risks of bias, and because some of the estimates included the possibility of transitivity owing to the proportion of stable and unstable fractures between treatment comparisons. We also downgraded if we noted evidence of inconsistency in direct or indirect estimates from which the network estimate was derived. Most estimates included the possibility of benefits and harms, and we downgraded the evidence for these treatments for imprecision.  Overall, 20.2% of participants who received the reference treatment had died by 12 months after surgery. We noted no evidence of any differences in mortality at this time point between the treatments compared. Effect estimates of all treatments included plausible benefits as well as harms. Short cephalomedullary nails had the narrowest confidence interval (CI), with 7 fewer deaths (26 fewer to 15 more) per 1000 participants, compared to the reference treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07). THA had the widest CI, with 62 fewer deaths (177 fewer to 610 more) per 1000 participants, compared to the reference treatment (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.12 to 4.03). The certainty of the evidence for all treatments was low to very low. Although we ranked the treatments, this ranking should be interpreted cautiously because of the imprecision in all the network estimates for these treatments. Overall, 4.3% of participants who received the reference treatment had unplanned return to theatre. Compared to this treatment, we found very low-certainty evidence that 58 more participants (14 to 137 more) per 1000 participants returned to theatre if they were treated with a static fixed angle plate (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.50), and 91 more participants (37 to 182 more) per 1000 participants returned to theatre if treated with a condylocephalic nail (RR 3.33, 95% CI 1.95 to 5.68). We also found that these treatments were ranked as having the highest probability of unplanned return to theatre. In the remaining treatments, we noted no evidence of any differences in unplanned return to theatre, with effect estimates including benefits as well as harms. The certainty of the evidence for these other treatments ranged from low to very low. We did not use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for early mortality, but our findings were similar to those for 12-month mortality, with no evidence of any differences in treatments when compared to dynamic fixed angle plate. Very few studies reported HRQoL and we were unable to build networks from these studies and perform network meta-analysis.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Across the networks, we found that there was considerable variability in the ranking of each treatment such that there was no one outstanding, or subset of outstanding, superior treatments. However, static implants such as condylocephalic nails and static fixed angle plates did yield a higher risk of unplanned return to theatre. We had insufficient evidence to determine the effects of any treatments on HRQoL, and this review includes data for only two outcomes. More detailed pairwise comparisons of some of the included treatments are reported in other Cochrane Reviews in this series. Short cephalomedullary nails versus dynamic fixed angle plates contributed the most evidence to each network, and our findings indicate that there may be no difference between these treatments. These data included people with both stable and unstable extracapsular fractures. At this time, there are too few studies to draw any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of arthroplasty or external fixation for extracapsular fracture in older adults. Future research could focus on the benefits and harms of arthroplasty interventions compared with internal fixation using a dynamic implant.

Comparative efficacy and safety of the artemisinin derivatives compared to quinine for treating severe malaria in children and adults: A systematic update of literature and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The artemisinin derivatives are the preferred antimalaria drugs for treating severe Plasmodium falciparum malaria. However, their clinical effectiveness compared to each other is unknown. Our objective, therefore, was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the artemisinin derivatives and quinine for treating severe P. falciparum malaria in children and adults using a network meta-analysis.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Review protocol was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020218190. We updated the search strategies of three Cochrane systematic reviews which included published and unpublished randomised control trials (RCTs) that have compared specific artemisinin derivatives to quinine in treating severe malaria. Search included CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, ISI Web of Science and trial registries up to February 2021. We screened studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and quality of evidence in duplicate. Separate network meta-analyses in the frequentist framework, using a random effects model, with quinine as reference, were conducted for adults and children, and rankings were produced using p-scores to assess mortality, parasite clearance, coma recovery, fever clearance, neurological sequela and adverse events. Searches identified 818 citations, 33 RCTs were eligible. We pooled 7795 children and 3182 adults. The networks involved artesunate, artemether, rectal artemisinin, arteether and quinine. Compared to quinine, artesunate reduced mortality in children (risk ratio (RR), 0.76; 95%CI [0.65 to 0.89], moderate quality), adults (RR, 0.55; 95%CI [0.40 to 0.75], moderate quality) and in cerebral malaria (RR, 0.72; 95%CI [0.55 to 0.94], moderate quality). Compared to rectal artemisinin and intramuscular arteether, the efficacy and safety of parenteral artesunate, and intramuscular artemether in treating severe malaria are not clear. Rankings showed that none of the artemisinin drugs were consistently superior in all the outcomes assessed. Indirect evidence produced were of very low ratings due to suspected publication bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

Artesunate reduces mortality compared to quinine for both adults and children in Asia and Africa including cerebral malaria. The artemisinin derivatives remain the best treatment for severe malaria but their comparative clinical effectiveness is yet to be fully explored.

Antiemetics for adults for prevention of nausea and vomiting caused by moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

About 70% to 80% of adults with cancer experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). CINV remains one of the most distressing symptoms associated with cancer therapy and is associated with decreased adherence to chemotherapy. Combining 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists with corticosteroids or additionally with neurokinin-1 (NK₁) receptor antagonists is effective in preventing CINV among adults receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). Various treatment options are available, but direct head-to-head comparisons do not allow comparison of all treatments versus another.  OBJECTIVES: • In adults with solid cancer or haematological malignancy receiving HEC - To compare the effects of antiemetic treatment combinations including NK₁ receptor antagonists, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids on prevention of acute phase (Day 1), delayed phase (Days 2 to 5), and overall (Days 1 to 5) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in network meta-analysis (NMA) - To generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to treatment safety and efficacy • In adults with solid cancer or haematological malignancy receiving MEC - To compare whether antiemetic treatment combinations including NK₁ receptor antagonists, 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids are superior for prevention of acute phase (Day 1), delayed phase (Days 2 to 5), and overall (Days 1 to 5) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting to treatment combinations including 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists and corticosteroids solely, in network meta-analysis - To generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to treatment safety and efficacy SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings, and study registries from 1988 to February 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs including adults with any cancer receiving HEC or MEC (according to the latest definition) and comparing combination therapies of NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors and corticosteroids for prevention of CINV.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We expressed treatment effects as risk ratios (RRs). Prioritised outcomes were complete control of vomiting during delayed and overall phases, complete control of nausea during the overall phase, quality of life, serious adverse events (SAEs), and on-study mortality. We assessed GRADE and developed 12 'Summary of findings' tables. We report results of most crucial outcomes in the abstract, that is, complete control of vomiting during the overall phase and SAEs. For a comprehensive illustration of results, we randomly chose aprepitant plus granisetron as exemplary reference treatment for HEC, and granisetron as exemplary reference treatment for MEC.

MAIN RESULTS

Highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) We included 73 studies reporting on 25,275 participants and comparing 14 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors. All treatment combinations included corticosteroids. Complete control of vomiting during the overall phase We estimated that 704 of 1000 participants achieve complete control of vomiting in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when treated with aprepitant + granisetron. Evidence from NMA (39 RCTs, 21,642 participants; 12 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors) suggests that the following drug combinations are more efficacious than aprepitant + granisetron for completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days): fosnetupitant + palonosetron (810 of 1000; RR 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.37; moderate certainty), aprepitant + palonosetron (753 of 1000; RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.98  to 1.18; low-certainty), aprepitant + ramosetron (753 of 1000; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21; low certainty), and fosaprepitant + palonosetron (746 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.19; low certainty).  Netupitant + palonosetron (704 of 1000; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; high-certainty) and fosaprepitant + granisetron (697 of 1000; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.06; high-certainty) have little to no impact on complete control of vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to aprepitant + granisetron, respectively.  Evidence further suggests that the following drug combinations are less efficacious than aprepitant + granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant + ondansetron (676 of 1000; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.05; low certainty), fosaprepitant + ondansetron (662 of 1000; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.04; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (634 of 1000; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.03; low certainty), rolapitant + granisetron (627 of 1000; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01; moderate certainty), and rolapitant + ondansetron (598 of 1000; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.12; low certainty). We could not include two treatment combinations (ezlopitant + granisetron, aprepitant + tropisetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Serious adverse events We estimated that 35 of 1000 participants experience any SAEs when treated with aprepitant + granisetron. Evidence from NMA (23 RCTs, 16,065 participants; 11 treatment combinations) suggests that fewer participants may experience SAEs when treated with the following drug combinations than with aprepitant + granisetron: fosaprepitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.07; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.39; low certainty), netupitant + palonosetron (9 of 1000; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.58; low certainty), fosaprepitant + granisetron (13 of 1000; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.50; low certainty), and rolapitant + granisetron (20 of 1000; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.70; low certainty). Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of aprepitant + ondansetron (8 of 1000; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.14; very low certainty), aprepitant + ramosetron (11 of 1000; RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.90; very low certainty), fosaprepitant + palonosetron (12 of 1000; RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.95; very low certainty), fosnetupitant + palonosetron (13 of 1000; RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.16; very low certainty), and aprepitant + palonosetron (17 of 1000; RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.05 to 4.78; very low certainty) on the risk of SAEs when compared to aprepitant + granisetron, respectively.  We could not include three treatment combinations (ezlopitant + granisetron, aprepitant + tropisetron, rolapitant + ondansetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) We included 38 studies reporting on 12,038 participants and comparing 15 treatment combinations with NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors, or 5-HT₃ inhibitors solely. All treatment combinations included corticosteroids. Complete control of vomiting during the overall phase We estimated that 555 of 1000 participants achieve complete control of vomiting in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when treated with granisetron. Evidence from NMA (22 RCTs, 7800 participants; 11 treatment combinations) suggests that the following drug combinations are more efficacious than granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days): aprepitant + palonosetron (716 of 1000; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.66; low certainty), netupitant + palonosetron (694 of 1000; RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.70; low certainty), and rolapitant + granisetron (660 of 1000; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.33; high certainty).  Palonosetron (588 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32; low certainty) and aprepitant + granisetron (577 of 1000; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32; low certainty) may or may not increase complete response in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to granisetron, respectively. Azasetron (560 of 1000; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.34; low certainty) may result in little to no difference in complete response in the overall treatment phase (one to five days) when compared to granisetron. Evidence further suggests that the following drug combinations are less efficacious than granisetron in completely controlling vomiting during the overall treatment phase (one to five days) (ordered by decreasing efficacy): fosaprepitant + ondansetron (500 of 100; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.22; low certainty), aprepitant + ondansetron (477 of 1000; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.17; low certainty), casopitant + ondansetron (461 of 1000; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.12; low certainty), and ondansetron (433 of 1000; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty). We could not include five treatment combinations (fosaprepitant + granisetron, azasetron, dolasetron, ramosetron, tropisetron) in NMA for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Serious adverse events We estimated that 153 of 1000 participants experience any SAEs when treated with granisetron. Evidence from pair-wise comparison (1 RCT, 1344 participants) suggests that more participants may experience SAEs when treated with rolapitant + granisetron (176 of 1000; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.50; low certainty). NMA was not feasible for this outcome because of missing direct comparisons.  Certainty of evidence Our main reason for downgrading was serious or very serious imprecision (e.g. due to wide 95% CIs crossing or including unity, few events leading to wide 95% CIs, or small information size). Additional reasons for downgrading some comparisons or whole networks were serious study limitations due to high risk of bias or moderate inconsistency within networks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This field of supportive cancer care is very well researched. However, new drugs or drug combinations are continuously emerging and need to be systematically researched and assessed. For people receiving HEC, synthesised evidence does not suggest one superior treatment for prevention and control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.  For people receiving MEC, synthesised evidence does not suggest superiority for treatments including both NK₁ and 5-HT₃ inhibitors when compared to treatments including 5-HT₃ inhibitors only. Rather, the results of our NMA suggest that the choice of 5-HT₃ inhibitor may have an impact on treatment efficacy in preventing CINV.  When interpreting the results of this systematic review, it is important for the reader to understand that NMAs are no substitute for direct head-to-head comparisons, and that results of our NMA do not necessarily rule out differences that could be clinically relevant for some individuals.

Reporting of Cochrane systematic review protocols with network meta-analyses-A scoping review

Publishing systematic review protocols is a fundamental part of systematic reviews to ensure transparency and reproducibility. In this scoping review, we aimed to evaluate reporting of Cochrane systematic review protocols with network meta-analyses (NMA). We searched all Cochrane NMA protocols published in 2018 and 2019, and assessed the characteristics and reporting of methodologies relevant to NMA. We reported frequencies for each reporting item. Forty-five protocols were assessed, including two for overviews and 43 for intervention reviews. Thirty-three (73%) were labelled as NMA protocols in the title. Forty-two (95%) justified the need of an NMA and 40 (89%) used appropriate search strategies to identify potential eligible studies. About half (24, 53%) considered the transitivity assumption when reporting inclusion criteria and 35 (78%) specified potential effect modifiers. Forty-three (96%) reported statistical software for NMA, 25 (56%) reported NMA model choice, 32 (71%) reported framework choice and 32 (71%) reported assumption about heterogeneity variances. Protocols varied in whether they reported methods for relative ranking (35, 78%), statistical inconsistency (40, 89%), reporting bias (44, 98%) and sources of heterogeneity (39, 87%). In conclusion, Cochrane NMA protocols reported multiple NMA-specific items well, but could be further improved, especially regarding transitivity assumptions. Our recommendations for NMA protocol reporting based on this scoping review could assist authors, reviewers, and editors to improve NMA protocols.

Progress and challenges of network meta-analysis

In the past years, network meta-analysis (NMA) has been widely used among clinicians, guideline makers, and health technology assessment agencies and has played an important role in clinical decision-making and guideline development. To inform further development of NMAs, we conducted a bibliometric analysis to assess the current status of published NMA methodological studies, summarized the methodological progress of seven types of NMAs, and discussed the current challenges of NMAs.

Work-related interventions for preventing back pain-protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Back pain is a widespread health problem that accounts for substantial disability and high costs. The workplace is considered to critically affect the occurrence and persistence of back pain and therefore offers an important opportunity for preventive interventions. Various work-related intervention strategies including both single- and multicomponent interventions have been developed and evaluated so far. To determine their effectiveness, a method of analysis is needed that particularly meets the challenges of the multidimensionality and diversity of these interventions. This planned systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to compare the effects of different work-related interventions for preventing non-specific back pain in people within a formal employment-related context.

METHODS

We will search the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and Academic Search Premier from their inception onwards, as well as additional sources. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs will be considered if they (1) include people within a formal employment-related context, (2) include people without back pain or mixed samples (i.e., people with and without back pain), (3) compare one or more work-related preventive intervention(s) to a control condition, and (4) assess non-specific back pain (incidence or/and pain intensity), ability to work (numbers of participants or/and numbers of days absent from work), intervention-related adverse events or/and self-reported satisfaction with the intervention. Random-effects pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses will be conducted where appropriate. We will calculate summary effect sizes for each comparison of interventions and rank interventions according to their P scores. If feasible, we will conduct additional component network meta-analyses. We plan to conduct subgroup analyses for job exposure, intervention duration, baseline back pain, different localizations of back pain, and gender. Risk of bias will be assessed using RoB 2 and the certainty of the evidence will be rated using the GRADE approach.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review aims to identify work-related intervention strategies as well as components within work-related interventions that are effective for preventing back pain. We expect the results to provide guidance for selecting the most promising interventions and foster the purposeful use of resources. Additionally, they may inform the development and implementation of work-related interventions as well as the design of future research in this field.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021232469.

Network Meta-Analysis Techniques for Synthesizing Prevention Science Evidence

Network meta-analysis is a popular statistical technique for synthesizing evidence from studies comparing multiple interventions. Benefits of network meta-analysis, over more traditional pairwise meta-analysis approaches, include evaluating efficacy/safety of interventions within a single framework, increased precision, comparing pairs of interventions that have never been directly compared in a trial, and providing a hierarchy of interventions in terms of their effectiveness. Network meta-analysis is relatively underutilized in prevention science. This paper therefore presents a primer of network meta-analysis for prevention scientists who wish to apply this method or to critically appraise evidence from publications using the method. We introduce the key concepts and assumptions of network meta-analysis, namely, transitivity and consistency, and demonstrate their applicability to the field of prevention science. We then illustrate the method using a network meta-analysis examining the comparative effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions for preventing hazardous drinking among college students. We provide data and code for all examples. Finally, we discuss considerations that are particularly relevant in network meta-analyses in the field of prevention, such as including non-randomized evidence.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial treatments for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and adolescents: study protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Disruptive behaviour disorders are common among children and adolescents, with negative impacts on the youths, their families and society. Although multiple psychosocial treatments are effective in decreasing the symptoms of disruptive behaviour disorders, comprehensive evidence regarding the comparative efficacy and acceptability between these treatments is still lacking. Therefore, we propose a systematic review and network meta-analysis, integrating both direct and indirect comparisons to obtain a hierarchy of treatment efficacy and acceptability.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The present protocol will be reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. Ten databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, OpenDissertations, The Cochrane Library, Embase and CINAHL, will be searched from inception for randomised controlled trials of psychosocial treatments for children and adolescents with disruptive behaviour disorders, without restrictions on language, publication year and status. The primary outcomes will be efficacy at post-treatment (severity of disruptive behaviour disorders at post-treatment) and acceptability (dropout rate for any reason) of psychosocial treatments. The secondary outcomes will involve efficacy at follow-up, severity of internalising problems and improvement of social functioning. Two authors will independently conduct the study selection and data extraction, assess the risk of bias using the revised Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool and evaluate the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to network meta-analysis. We will perform Bayesian network meta-analyses with a random effects model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to evaluate the robustness of the findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The research does not require ethical approval. Results are planned to be published in journals or presented at conferences. The network meta-analysis will provide information on a hierarchy of treatment efficacy and acceptability and help make a clinical treatment choice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020197448.

Comparative effectiveness of liquid human milk fortifiers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of liquid human milk fortifiers (HMFs) derived from exclusive HM or hydrolyzed protein on growth, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), or late-onset sepsis in North American very low-birth-weight (VLBW) infants compared with powder HMFs (control).

METHODS

Prospective trials published between 2009 and 2020 were systematically reviewed, and meta-analysis was conducted by using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Five studies were identified for up to 591 participants across 39 centers. Study treatments included whey or casein hydrolysate HMF and exclusive HM HMF. Infants fed whey or casein hydrolysate HMF had growth differences compared with the control. No differences were found across treatments in regard to NEC or sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Very low-quality evidence suggests greater linear growth in VLBW infants fed whey hydrolysate liquid HMF, as well as greater weight gain in those fed casein hydrolysate HMF, compared with the control. Additional prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these estimates because of sparsity of evidence. There is insufficient evidence to support HMF decisions regarding NEC or late-onset sepsis prophylaxis.

Hybrid Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Depressive Symptoms in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

OBJECTIVE

Depression is common in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and is associated with poor outcomes. Although different treatments are available, it is unclear which are best or most acceptable to patients, so we conducted a network meta-analysis of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different depression treatments to ascertain relative efficacy.

METHODS

We searched for systematic reviews of RCTs of depression treatments in CAD and updated these with a comprehensive search for recent individual RCTs. RCTs comparing depression treatments (pharmacological, psychotherapeutic, combined pharmacological/psychotherapeutic, exercise, collaborative care) were included. Primary outcomes were acceptability (dropout rate) and change in depressive symptoms 8 week after treatment commencement. Change in 26-week depression and mortality were secondary outcomes. Frequentist, random-effects network meta-analysis was used to synthesize the evidence, and evidence quality was evaluated following Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations recommendations.

RESULTS

Thirty-three RCTs (7240 participants) provided analyzable data. All treatments were equally acceptable. At 8 weeks, combination therapy (1 study), exercise (1 study), and antidepressants (10 studies) yielded the strongest effects versus comparators. At 26 weeks, antidepressants were consistently effective, but psychotherapy was only effective versus usual care. There were no differences in treatment groups for mortality. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations ratings ranged from very low to low.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the evidence was limited and biased. Although all treatments for post-CAD depression were equally acceptable, antidepressants have the most robust evidence base and should be the first-line treatment. Combinations of antidepressants and psychotherapy, along with exercise, could be more effective than antidepressants alone but require further rigorous, multiarm intervention trials.Systematic Review Registration: CRD42018108293 (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews).

Progestogens for preventing miscarriage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their lifetime, and 15% to 20% of pregnancies ending in a miscarriage. Progesterone has an important role in maintaining a pregnancy, and supplementation with different progestogens in early pregnancy has been attempted to rescue a pregnancy in women with early pregnancy bleeding (threatened miscarriage), and to prevent miscarriages in asymptomatic women who have a history of three or more previous miscarriages (recurrent miscarriage).

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the relative effectiveness and safety profiles for the different progestogen treatments for threatened and recurrent miscarriage, and provide rankings of the available treatments according to their effectiveness, safety, and side-effect profile.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 15 December 2020: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE(R), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness or safety of progestogen treatment for the prevention of miscarriage. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved. We excluded quasi- and non-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and indirect comparisons, where possible, to determine the relative effects of all available treatments, but due to the limited number of included studies only direct or indirect comparisons were possible. We estimated the relative effects for the primary outcome of live birth and the secondary outcomes including miscarriage (< 24 weeks of gestation), preterm birth (< 37 weeks of gestation), stillbirth, ectopic pregnancy, congenital abnormalities, and adverse drug events. Relative effects for all outcomes are reported separately by the type of miscarriage (threatened and recurrent miscarriage). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included seven randomised trials involving 5,682 women, and all provided data for meta-analysis. All trials were conducted in hospital settings. Across seven trials (14 treatment arms), the following treatments were used: three arms (21%) used vaginal micronized progesterone; three arms (21%) used dydrogesterone; one arm (7%) used oral micronized progesterone; one arm (7%) used 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone, and six arms (43%) used placebo. Women with threatened miscarriage Based on the relative effects from the pairwise meta-analysis, vaginal micronized progesterone (two trials, 4090 women, risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.07, high-certainty evidence), and dydrogesterone (one trial, 406 women, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.07, moderate-certainty evidence) probably make little or no difference to the live birth rate when compared with placebo for women with threatened miscarriage. No data are available to assess the effectiveness of 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone or oral micronized progesterone for the outcome of live birth in women with threatened miscarriage. The pre-specified subgroup analysis by number of previous miscarriages is only possible for vaginal micronized progesterone in women with threatened miscarriage. In women with no previous miscarriages and early pregnancy bleeding, there is probably little or no improvement in the live birth rate (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.04, high-certainty evidence) when treated with vaginal micronized progesterone compared to placebo. However, for women with one or more previous miscarriages and early pregnancy bleeding, vaginal micronized progesterone increases the live birth rate compared to placebo (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.15, high-certainty evidence). Women with recurrent miscarriage Based on the results from one trial (826 women) vaginal micronized progesterone (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.15, high-certainty evidence) probably makes little or no difference to the live birth rate when compared with placebo for women with recurrent miscarriage. The evidence for dydrogesterone compared with placebo for women with recurrent miscarriage is of very low-certainty evidence, therefore the effects remain unclear. No data are available to assess the effectiveness of 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone or oral micronized progesterone for the outcome of live birth in women with recurrent miscarriage. Additional outcomes All progestogen treatments have a wide range of effects on the other pre-specified outcomes (miscarriage (< 24 weeks of gestation), preterm birth (< 37 weeks of gestation), stillbirth, ectopic pregnancy) in comparison to placebo for both threatened and recurrent miscarriage. Moderate- and low-certainty evidence with a wide range of effects suggests that there is probably no difference in congenital abnormalities and adverse drug events with vaginal micronized progesterone for threatened (congenital abnormalities RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.46, moderate-certainty evidence; adverse drug events RR 1.07 95% CI 0.81 to 1.39, moderate-certainty evidence) or recurrent miscarriage (congenital abnormalities 0.75, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.85, low-certainty evidence; adverse drug events RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.29, moderate-certainty evidence) compared with placebo. There are limited data and very low-certainty evidence on congenital abnormalities and adverse drug events for the other progestogens.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The overall available evidence suggests that progestogens probably make little or no difference to live birth rate for women with threatened or recurrent miscarriage. However, vaginal micronized progesterone may increase the live birth rate for women with a history of one or more previous miscarriages and early pregnancy bleeding, with likely no difference in adverse events. There is still uncertainty over the effectiveness and safety of alternative progestogen treatments for threatened and recurrent miscarriage.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (58%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90. At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non-biological systemic agents. At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non-biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between non-biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Efficacy of Antiangiogenic Drugs in the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema: A Bayesian Network Analysis

Aims: To compare the efficacy of five kinds of antiangiogenic drugs in the treatment of diabetic macular edema Methods: A comprehensive search of seven databases without language restrictions includes PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CBM, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WanFang date. All literature used was published before October 2020. Eligible randomized trials were screened for inclusion in this study, and Bayesian framework was used to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA). Data on the mean change of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) and intraocular pressure (IOP) at 6 months were extracted. Results: 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that covered 2214 eyes, which received treatment of more than 3 months durations were included. In the pooled pair-wise meta-analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between all treatments. The same result was observed in the network meta-analysis with 0-37.82% Global I-squared. For BCVA at 6 months, conbercept and ranibizumab may be favorable than bevacizumab, aflibercept, triamcinolone acetonide and sham injections according to the ranking probabilities. As for CMT at 6 months, ranibizumab may be the most effective compared to bevacizumab, aflibercept and triamcinolone acetonide. In terms of IOP at 6 months, ranibizumab have better effect than bevacizumab, triamcinolone acetonide and sham injections. The results of sensitivity analysis also confirm it. Conclusion: The analysis confirms that ranibizumab may be the most favorable for BCVA improvement and have a stronger efficacy in decreasing CMT and IOP than other drugs when taking all the indicators into consideration. This conclusion may provide clinical evidence to guide treatment decisions. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials will be necessary to further confirm this.

Effectiveness of treatments for acute and subacute mechanical non-specific low back pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for acute and subacute non-specific low back pain (NS-LBP) based on pain and disability outcomes.

Design

A systematic review of the literature with network meta-analysis.

Data sources

Medline, Embase and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception until 17 October 2020.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) involving adults with NS-LBP who experienced pain for less than 6 weeks (acute) or between 6 and 12 weeks (subacute).

Results

Forty-six RCTs (n=8765) were included; risk of bias was low in 9 trials (19.6%), unclear in 20 (43.5%), and high in 17 (36.9%). At immediate-term follow-up, for pain decrease, the most efficacious treatments against an inert therapy were: exercise (standardised mean difference (SMD) −1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) −2.41 to –0.40), heat wrap (SMD −1.38; 95% CI −2.60 to –0.17), opioids (SMD −0.86; 95% CI −1.62 to –0.10), manual therapy (SMD −0.72; 95% CI −1.40 to –0.04) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (SMD −0.53; 95% CI −0.97 to –0.09). Similar findings were confirmed for disability reduction in non-pharmacological and pharmacological networks, including muscle relaxants (SMD -0.24; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.04). Mild or moderate adverse events were reported in the opioids (65.7%), NSAIDs (54.3%) and steroids (46.9%) trial arms.

Conclusion

With uncertainty of evidence, NS-LBP should be managed with non-pharmacological treatments which seem to mitigate pain and disability at immediate-term. Among pharmacological interventions, NSAIDs and muscle relaxants appear to offer the best harm–benefit balance.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of different antihypertensive drug classes for cardiovascular disease prevention: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clinical practice guidelines differ in their recommendations on first-line antihypertensive drug classes. No adequately powered randomised controlled trial have assessed all major drug classes against each other, and previous meta-analyses have mainly relied on pairwise meta-analyses for treatment comparisons.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis will be carried out to assess the efficacy and acceptability of all major antihypertensive drug classes. PubMed and CENTRAL were searched on 21 February 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials with at least 1000 person-years of follow-up, assessing any antihypertensive agent against other agents or placebo. All trials fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be assessed for risk of bias using the second version of Cochrane's risk of bias assessment tool. The study selection process, risk of bias assessment and data extraction are done by two authors in duplicate. Relative risks from individual trials will be combined in pairwise meta-analyses; in the absence of important intransitivity, random-effects network meta-analysis will be performed. The primary outcome for efficacy will be major adverse cardiovascular events, whereas the primary acceptability outcome will be treatment discontinuation for any reason. Additional outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and acute renal failure. The impact of differences within drug classes will be explored through alternative networks, including analysing thiazide-like and thiazide-type diuretics separately.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review will only process aggregated study level data and does not require ethical approval. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020205482.

Intraoperative imaging technology to maximise extent of resection for glioma: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have identified the prognostic relevance of extent of resection in the management of glioma. Different intraoperative technologies have emerged in recent years with unknown comparative efficacy in optimising extent of resection. One previous Cochrane Review provided low- to very low-certainty evidence in single trial analyses and synthesis of results was not possible. The role of intraoperative technology in maximising extent of resection remains uncertain. Due to the multiple complementary technologies available, this research question is amenable to a network meta-analysis methodological approach.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the comparative effectiveness and risk profile of specific intraoperative imaging technologies using a network meta-analysis and to identify cost analyses and economic evaluations as part of a brief economic commentary.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2020, Issue 5), MEDLINE via Ovid to May week 2 2020, and Embase via Ovid to 2020 week 20. We performed backward searching of all identified studies. We handsearched two journals, Neuro-oncology and the Journal of Neuro-oncology from 1990 to 2019 including all conference abstracts. Finally, we contacted recognised experts in neuro-oncology to identify any additional eligible studies and acquire information on ongoing randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs evaluating people of all ages with presumed new or recurrent glial tumours (of any location or histology) from clinical examination and imaging (computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or both). Additional imaging modalities (e.g. positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance spectroscopy) were not mandatory. Interventions included fluorescence-guided surgery, intraoperative ultrasound, neuronavigation (with or without additional image processing, e.g. tractography), and intraoperative MRI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results for relevance, undertook critical appraisal according to known guidelines, and extracted data using a prespecified pro forma.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four RCTs, using different intraoperative imaging technologies: intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) (2 trials, with 58 and 14 participants); fluorescence-guided surgery with 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) (1 trial, 322 participants); and neuronavigation (1 trial, 45 participants). We identified one ongoing trial assessing iMRI with a planned sample size of 304 participants for which results are expected to be published around winter 2020. We identified no published trials for intraoperative ultrasound. Network meta-analyses or traditional meta-analyses were not appropriate due to absence of homogeneous trials across imaging technologies. Of the included trials, there was notable heterogeneity in tumour location and imaging technologies utilised in control arms. There were significant concerns regarding risk of bias in all the included studies. One trial of iMRI found increased extent of resection (risk ratio (RR) for incomplete resection was 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.96; 49 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and one trial of 5-ALA (RR for incomplete resection was 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.71; 270 participants; low-certainty evidence). The other trial assessing iMRI was stopped early after an unplanned interim analysis including 14 participants; therefore, the trial provided very low-quality evidence. The trial of neuronavigation provided insufficient data to evaluate the effects on extent of resection. Reporting of adverse events was incomplete and suggestive of significant reporting bias (very low-certainty evidence). Overall, the proportion of reported events was low in most trials and, therefore, issues with power to detect differences in outcomes that may or may not have been present. Survival outcomes were not adequately reported, although one trial reported no evidence of improvement in overall survival with 5-ALA (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.07; 270 participants; low-certainty evidence). Data for quality of life were only available for one study and there was significant attrition bias (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative imaging technologies, specifically 5-ALA and iMRI, may be of benefit in maximising extent of resection in participants with high-grade glioma. However, this is based on low- to very low-certainty evidence. Therefore, the short- and long-term neurological effects are uncertain. Effects of image-guided surgery on overall survival, progression-free survival, and quality of life are unclear. Network and traditional meta-analyses were not possible due to the identified high risk of bias, heterogeneity, and small trials included in this review. A brief economic commentary found limited economic evidence for the equivocal use of iMRI compared with conventional surgery. In terms of costs, one non-systematic review of economic studies suggested that, compared with standard surgery, use of image-guided surgery has an uncertain effect on costs and that 5-ALA was more costly. Further research, including completion of ongoing trials of ultrasound-guided surgery, is needed.