期刊文献+

阿布昔替尼治疗中重度特应性皮炎疗效与安全性的系统评价与meta分析 被引量:3

Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis:a systematic review and meta-analysis
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的系统评价阿布昔替尼治疗中重度特应性皮炎(AD)的疗效与安全性。方法检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Embase、中国知网、维普、万方数据库,检索时间为各数据库建库至2022年6月,筛选阿布昔替尼治疗AD的临床随机对照试验研究,对纳入的研究进行质量评价,使用RevMan 5.4对结局指标进行meta分析。结果共纳入5篇文献,1825例中重度AD患者,其中试验组1387例(阿布昔替尼治疗),对照组438例(给予安慰剂)。meta分析结果显示:第12周时试验组达到研究者整体评分(IGA)=0或1[RR=3.02,95%CI(2.26~4.02),P<0.001]、湿疹面积及严重程度指数缓解75%[RR=2.89,95%CI(2.17~3.85),P<0.001]、峰值瘙痒数值评定量表(PP-NRS)得分较基线改善≥4分[RR=2.32,95%CI(1.88~2.87),P<0.001]的患者百分比均明显高于对照组;试验组治疗期不良事件(TEAE)发生率明显高于对照组[RR=1.16,95%CI(1.07~1.25),P<0.001],而两组间严重不良事件(SAE)发生率无明显差异[RR=0.66,95%CI(0.37~1.17),P=0.160]。所有纳入研究的偏倚风险评估均为低风险。结论阿布昔替尼对中重度AD患者有益,且不良反应可耐受。 Objective To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis(AD).Methods PubMed,Cochrane Library,Web of Science,Embase,China national knowledge infrastructure,VIP,and Wanfang databases were searched from the establishment of each database to June 2022 to screen the clinical randomized controlled trials of abrocitinib for the treatment of AD.The quality of included studies were evaluated,and meta-analysis of outcomes was performed using RevMan5.4 software.Results A total of five articles were included,including 1825 patients with moderate to severe AD.There were 1387 patients in the experimental group(treated with abrocitinib)and 438 patients in the control group(given placebo).Meta-analysis showed that the percentages of patients with an investigator global assessment(IGA)score=0 or 1[RR=3.02,95%CI(2.26-4.02),P<0.001],a at least 75%relief in the eczema area and severity index[RR=2.89,95%CI(2.17-3.85),P<0.001],an improvement of the peak pruritus numerical rating scale(PP-NRS)score≥4 from baseline[RR=2.32,95%CI(1.88-2.87),P<0.001]in the experimental group at 12 weeks were significantly higher than those in the control group.The incidence of treatment emergent adverse events(TEAE)in the experimental group was significantly higher than that in the control group[RR=1.16,95%CI(1.07-1.25),P<0.001],while there was no significant difference in serious adverse events(SAE)between the two groups[RR=0.66,95%CI(0.37-1.17),P=0.160].All included studies were assessed as low risk of bias.Conclusion Abrocitinib is beneficial in patients with moderate to severe AD,and adverse effects are well tolerated.
作者 刘水清 宋雪 陆东亚 刘小奇 费莎妮 韩梅 徐国梅 LIU Shuiqing;SONG Xue;LU Dongya;LIU Xiaoqi;FEI Shani;HAN Mei;XU Guomei(The Third Clinical School,Beijing University of Chinese Medicine,Beijing 100029,China;Department of Dermatology,The Third Affiliated Hospital of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine,Beijing 100029,China;Beijing University of Chinese Medicine,Beijing 100029,China)
出处 《重庆医学》 CAS 2023年第10期1545-1550,共6页 Chongqing medicine
基金 理易揿针治疗皮肤疾病机理探究横向课题(HXGSHT-BZYSY-2021-002)。
关键词 皮炎 特应性 JAK抑制剂 阿布昔替尼 治疗结果 安全性 META分析 dermatitis,atopic JAK inhibitors abrocitinib treatment outcome safety Meta-analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献25

  • 1马琳.润肤剂及居家护理在特应性皮炎治疗中的作用[J].实用皮肤病学杂志,2009,0(1):69-70. 被引量:6
  • 2Moher D,Liberati A,Tetzlaff J. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses:the PRISMA statement[J].Annals of Internal Medicine,2009.264-269.
  • 3Moher D,Cook D J,Eastwood S. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials:the QUOROM statement[J].The Lancet,1999.1896-1900.
  • 4Group M. Meta-Analysis of Observational studies in Epidemiology.A proposal for reporting[J].Journal of the American Medical Association,2000.2008-2012.
  • 5Sacks HS,Berrier J,Reitman D. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials[J].New England Journal of Medicine,1987.450-455.
  • 6Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses[J].European Journal of Epidemiology,2010.603-605.
  • 7Slim K,Nini E,Forestier D. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors):development and validation of a new instrument[J].Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery,2003.712-716.
  • 8Jadad AR,Moore RA,Carroll D. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials:is blinding necessary[J].Controlled Clinical Trials,1996.1-12.
  • 9Higgins J,Green S. Cochrane Collaboration:Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0[updated March 2011][M].John Wiley \& Sons Ltd and The Cochrane Collaboration,Chichester,2011.
  • 10Higgins JP,Altman DG,Gotzsche PC. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials[J].British Medical Journal,2011.d5928.

共引文献678

同被引文献12

引证文献3

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部