-
1.
Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine and the risk of acute kidney injury in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Liao, ZM, Zhang, ZM, Liu, Q
Renal failure. 2022;(1):415-425
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine has been widely used as part of the standard treatment for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine increases the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS PubMed and Embase were searched for related publications from inception to Dec 31, 2021, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) comparing the risk of AKI and/or increased creatinine in COVID-19 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine and other controls (active treatment and placebo). We conducted separate meta-analyses for RCTs and NRSIs based on fixed-effect model, with odds ratios (ORs) being considered as effect sizes. RESULTS We included 21 studies in the analysis, with 12 were RCTs. Based on the RCTs, compared to placebo, the OR was 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86, 1.64; p = .30, n = 4, moderate quality) for AKI and 1.00 (95%CI: 0.64, 1.56; p = .99, n = 5, moderate quality) for increased creatinine for patients received hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine treatment; compared to active treatment, the odds was 1.28 (95%CI: 0.65, 2.53; p = .47, n = 2, low quality) for AKI and 0.64 (95%CI: 0.13, 3.20; p = .59, n = 1, low quality) for increased creatine. Evidence from NRSIs showed slightly increased odds of AKI, with low quality. CONCLUSION Based on current available studies which were graded as low to moderate quality, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine use is associated with increased risk of AKI or raised creatinine. Abbreviations: AKI: acute kidney injury; COVID-19: Coronavirus Disease 2019; RCT: randomized controlled trials; NRSI non-randomized studies of interventions; OR: odds ratios; ROBIS-I: Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions.
-
2.
Comparative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib as monotherapy for active rheumatoid arthritis.
Ho Lee, Y, Gyu Song, G
Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics. 2020;(4):674-681
Abstract
WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE Several clinical trials have attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib as monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but their relative efficacy and safety as monotherapy remain unclear due to the lack of data from head-to-head comparison trials. The relative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib as monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were assessed. METHODS We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and examine the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib as monotherapy relative to placebo in patients with RA. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Five RCTs comprising 1547 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib as monotherapy showed a significantly higher American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate. Peficitinib 150 mg monotherapy showed the highest ACR20 response rate (odds ratio, 17.24.39; 95% credible interval, 6.57-51.80). The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve indicated that peficitinib 150 mg had the highest probability of being the best treatment for achieving the ACR20 response rate, followed by peficitinib 100 mg, filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, tofacitinib 5 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, baricitinib 4 mg and placebo. However, the number of patients who experienced serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the JAK inhibitors, except for tofacitinib 5 mg, and placebo. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION All five JAK inhibitors-tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib-were efficacious monotherapy interventions for active RA, and differences were noted in their efficacy and safety in monotherapy.
-
3.
Cytopenias among patients with rheumatic diseases using methotrexate: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.
Vanni, KMM, Lyu, H, Solomon, DH
Rheumatology (Oxford, England). 2020;(4):709-717
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to estimate the incidence of anaemia, leucopoenia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia associated with MTX plus folic acid among patients with rheumatic diseases. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE through August 2016 for all randomized controlled clinical trials with a MTX monotherapy arm. We excluded randomized controlled clinical trials for cancer and included only double-blind studies that reported on haematologic adverse events. Studies were excluded if patients did not receive folic acid or leucovorin supplementation. Full text articles were assessed by two independent reviewers. Incidence estimates were calculated using random-effects models. RESULTS Of 1601 studies identified, 30 (1.87%) were included, representing 3858 patients; all had RA. Seventeen trials reported on anaemia (n = 2032), 17 reported on leucopoenia (n = 2220), 16 reported on neutropenia (n = 2202) and 12 reported on thrombocytopenia (n = 1507). The incidence for any anaemia was 2.55% (95% CI 0.60-5.47%), any leucopoenia 1.17% (95% CI 0.16-2.80%), any neutropenia 1.77% (95% CI 0.33-4.00%), and any thrombocytopenia 0.19% (95% CI 0.00-0.86%). Four cases of severe anaemia were reported, as defined by authors, along with three cases of severe neutropenia. No cases of severe leucopoenia, severe thrombocytopenia or pancytopenia were reported. CONCLUSION Cytopenias are an uncommon side effect of low-dose MTX with folic acid supplementation among RA patients. Further research is needed to reach a more precise estimate.
-
4.
Low-Dose Methotrexate and Mucocutaneous Adverse Events: Results of a Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Lalani, R, Lyu, H, Vanni, K, Solomon, DH
Arthritis care & research. 2020;(8):1140-1146
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Methotrexate (MTX) increases the risk of alopecia and stomatitis, but the prevalence of these adverse events among rheumatic patients taking MTX is poorly defined. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of alopecia and stomatitis with MTX in rheumatic diseases. METHODS We searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases for double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with an MTX monotherapy arm. Alopecia, stomatitis, and oral/mouth ulcers data were extracted. The quality of trials was assessed by 2 authors. We included trials published since 1990 that used at least 10 mg of MTX weekly, coadministered with folic or folinic acid. We estimated the prevalence using random-effects models because heterogeneity was anticipated. Two estimates of prevalence were included; the lower bound estimate included all trials (assuming no alopecia and stomatitis if not mentioned), and the upper bound estimate included only those that specifically described prevalence estimates of alopecia or stomatitis. RESULTS Of 3,954 studies identified, 20 RCTs were included, with a total of 24 MTX monotherapy arms, of which 10 reported the prevalence of alopecia (n = 1,113), and 21 reported stomatitis or mouth/oral ulcers (n = 2,056). The prevalence of alopecia was between 1.0% and 4.9%. The prevalence of stomatitis was between 5.7% and 8.0%. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis gives more precise estimates of mucocutaneous adverse events that occur in rheumatic disease patients taking MTX. These estimates will help inform patient decision-making regarding MTX.
-
5.
Efficacy of Spice Supplementation in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Literature Review.
Letarouilly, JG, Sanchez, P, Nguyen, Y, Sigaux, J, Czernichow, S, Flipo, RM, Sellam, J, Daïen, C
Nutrients. 2020;(12)
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spices, i.e., curcumin, ginger, saffron, and cinnamon, have a thousand-year history of medicinal use in Asia. Modern medicine has begun to explore their therapeutic properties during the last few decades. We aimed to perform a systematic literature review (SLR) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of spice supplementation on symptoms and disease activity in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondylarthritis, or psoriatic arthritis). METHODS An SLR of RCTs, reviews, and meta-analyses was performed, searching for articles in MEDLINE/PubMed. Abstracts from international rheumatology and nutrition congresses (2017-2020) were also scrutinized. The risk of bias of the selected studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and the Jadad scale. RESULTS Altogether, six studies, assessing the use of spice supplementation only in RA patients, were included: one on garlic supplementation, two on curcumin, one on ginger, one on cinnamon, and one on saffron supplementation. Garlic, ginger, cinnamon, or saffron supplementation was associated with a decrease in RA clinical activity. However, several points limit the external validity of these studies. No conclusion on the impact of curcumin supplementation on RA activity could be drawn due to low-quality studies. CONCLUSIONS Garlic, ginger, cinnamon, and saffron supplementation could have a beneficial effect on RA activity, but the risk of bias of these studies is difficult to assess and data are too limited to recommend them in daily practice.
-
6.
Cardiovascular safety of tocilizumab: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Castagné, B, Viprey, M, Martin, J, Schott, AM, Cucherat, M, Soubrier, M
PloS one. 2019;(8):e0220178
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Our objective was to compare the cardiovascular safety of tocilizumab and other biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis using a network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS A systematic literature search through May 2018 identified randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies (cohort only) reporting cardiovascular outcomes of tocilizumab (TCZ) and/or abatacept (ABA) and/or rituximab (RTX) and/or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in rheumatoid arthritis patients. The composite primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (MACE, myocardial infarction (MI), peripheral artery disease (PAD) and cardiac heart failure (CHF)). RESULTS 19 studies were included in the NMA, including 11 RCTs and 8 cohort studies. We found less events with RTX (5.41 [1.70;17.26]. We found no difference between TCZ and other treatments. Concerning MI, we found no difference between TCZ and csDMARD (4.23 [0.22;80.64]), no difference between TCZ and TNFi (2.00 [0.18;21.84]). There was no difference between TCZ and csDMARD (1.51[0.02;103.50] and between TCZ and TNFi (1.00 [0.06;15.85]) for stroke event. With cohorts and RCT NMA, we found no difference between TCZ and other treatments for MACE (0.66 [0.42;1.03] with ABA, 1.04 [0.60;1.81] with RTX, 0.78[0.53;1.16] and 0.91 [0.54;1.51] with csDMARD), but the risk of myocardial infarction was lower with TCZ compared to ABA (0.67 [0.47;0.97]). We lacked data to compare TCZ and other bDMARD for stoke and MI. Not enough data was available to perform a NMA for CHF and PAD. CONCLUSIONS Despite an increase in cholesterol levels, TCZ has safe cardiovascular outcomes compared to other bDMARD.
-
7.
Metabolic and cardiovascular benefits of hydroxychloroquine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Rempenault, C, Combe, B, Barnetche, T, Gaujoux-Viala, C, Lukas, C, Morel, J, Hua, C
Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2018;(1):98-103
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been shown to improve survival rates in other inflammatory diseases. We aimed to assess the available literature on the cardiovascular impact of HCQ in patients with RA. METHODS We systematically searched for studies evaluating the effects of HCQ on cardiovascular outcomes of known risk factors for CVD in patients with RA. Databases searched were MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBase, Cochrane Library and the American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism annual meetings. A meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model, estimating mean differences (MDs), HRs and 95% CIs. Data were extracted by one investigator and independently checked by another. RESULTS The literature search revealed 185 articles and abstracts of interest; further examination resulted in 16 studies fulfilling the criteria. The MDs between HCQ users and non-users in levels of total, low-density and high-density cholesterol and triglycerides were -9.8 (95% CI -14.0 to -5.6), -10.6 (95% CI -14.2 to -7.0), +4.1 (95% CI 2.2 to 6.0) and -19.2 (95% CI -27.2 to -11.1), respectively. Diabetes incidence was lower for HCQ ever users than never users (HR 0.59 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.70)). HCQ seemed to decrease insulin resistance and incidence of CVD, but data were too few for meta-analysis. CONCLUSION Besides its limited efficacy for disease activity and progression, HCQ may benefit the metabolic profile and to a lesser extent cardiovascular events in patients with RA, which suggests its usefulness combined with other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.
-
8.
Systematic review, and meta-analysis of steroid-sparing effect, of biologic agents in randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials for systemic lupus erythematosus.
Oon, S, Huq, M, Godfrey, T, Nikpour, M
Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism. 2018;(2):221-239
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To systematically review, and conduct a meta-analysis of steroid-sparing effect in, phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trials of biologic therapies for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS Studies were identified by searching Medline (via Pubmed), EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS databases, the Cochrane library, and clinicaltrials.gov. Adult human studies published in English in the last ten years (until 18/04/2017) were included. A random-effects meta-analysis comparing a common corticosteroid-reduction endpoint in the trials of rituximab, belimumab, tabalumab and epratuzumab in SLE, was conducted. RESULTS Twenty-eight studies were identified; nine were conducted in SLE, five in lupus nephritis and the remaining 14 were post hoc analyses of phase 3 trials in SLE. All therapies trialed targeted B-cells (rituximab (anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb)), belimumab (anti-BAFF mAb), tabalumab (anti-BAFF mAb), epratuzumab (anti-CD22 mAb), atacicept (TACI-Ig), ocrelizumab (anti-CD20 mAb)), except for abetimus sodium and abatacept (CTLA4-Ig). Only the three trials of belimumab met their primary endpoints, although benefit in secondary endpoints and reduction in serological activity was often seen in the other studies. Meta-analysis showed that most therapies (belimumab, tabalumab, and epratuzumab) had a steroid-sparing effect, compared to placebo (pooled RR 1.36 (1.19, 1.56), I2 = 0, p < 0.67). Therapies were generally well tolerated; however, three studies were terminated prematurely due to serious side effects. CONCLUSIONS With the exception of belimumab, none of the phase 3 trials of biologic therapy in SLE have met their primary endpoint. However, the significant steroid-sparing effect of these agents suggests that future trials may need to include steroid dose in a composite primary endpoint.
-
9.
A systemic review and meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy and safety of total glucosides of peony combined with methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis.
Feng, ZT, Xu, J, He, GC, Cai, SJ, Li, J, Mei, ZG
Clinical rheumatology. 2018;(1):35-42
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
To assess the efficacy and safety of the combination of total glucoside of peony (TGP) and methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on the traditional Chinese active component TGP combined with MTX vs. MTX alone for the treatment of RA was collected by searching the Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP Journals database, and Wanfang database up to February 2017. Study selection, data extraction, data synthesis, and data analyses were performed according to the Cochrane standards. A total of eight RCTs involving 522 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with MTX alone, the use of TGP combined with MTX exhibited better therapeutic effects for the treatment of RA (P = 0.004). In addition, TGP combined with MTX caused a more significant decrease in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (P < 0.0001) and swollen joint count (SJC) (P < 0.00001). However, no significant differences were found in C-reactive protein (CRP) (P = 0.19), duration of morning stiffness (DMS) (P = 0.32), or tender joint count (TJC) (P = 0.23) between the two groups. In addition, adverse events were more frequently reported in the MTX monotherapy group than in the TGP and MTX combination group (P = 0.0007). Our study demonstrates that TGP combined with MTX is more effective than MTX alone for the treatment of RA. Nevertheless, the adverse effects of the combination of TGP and MTX need to be further assessed. Due to the poor methodological quality of included trials, well-designed, multi-center, and large-scale RCTs are necessary to draw a more definitive conclusion.
-
10.
Impact of biological therapy on work outcomes in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register (BSRBR-AS) and meta-analysis.
Shim, J, Jones, GT, Pathan, EMI, Macfarlane, GJ
Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2018;(11):1578-1584
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To quantify, among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), the benefit on work outcomes associated with commencing biologic therapy. METHODS The British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register in Axial Spondyloarthritis (BSRBRAS) recruited patients meeting Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria for axSpA naïve to biological therapy across 83 centres in Great Britain. Work outcomes (measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Index) were compared between those starting biological therapy at the time of recruitment and those not. Differences between treatment groups were adjusted using propensity score matching. Results from BSRBR-AS were combined with other studies in a meta-analysis to calculate pooled estimates. RESULTS Of the 577 participants in this analysis who were in employment, 27.9% were starting biological therapy at the time of recruitment. After propensity score adjustment, patients undergoing biological therapy, at 12-month follow-up, experienced significantly greater improvements (relative to non-biological therapy) in presenteeism (-9.4%, 95% CI -15.3% to -3.5%), overall work impairment (-13.9%, 95% CI -21.1% to -6.7%) and overall activity impairment (-19.2%, 95% CI -26.3% to -12.2%). There was no difference in absenteeism (-1.5%, 95% CI -8.0 to 4.9). Despite these improvements, impact on work was still greater in the biological treated cohort at follow-up. In the meta-analysis including 1109 subjects across observational studies and trials, treatment with biological therapy was associated with significantly greater improvements in presenteeism, work impairment and activity impairment, but there was no difference in absenteeism. CONCLUSIONS There is consistent evidence that treatment with biological therapy significantly improves work productivity and activity impairment in people with axSpA. However, there remain substantial unmet needs in relation to work.