Background As part of the core outcome set (COS), the core traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome set can improve the consistency of syndrome efficacy evaluation outcomes in TCM clinical research. Previous studies proposed and empirically verified a method of developing core TCM syndrome sets based on complex syndromes under the disease-syndrome combination research model. However, this method is developed on the basis of syndrome types, which has the limitation that the finally included syndrome types are too single to adapt to the complexity of clinical syndromes. Therefore, it is urgent to optimize the existing development method to balance the complexity of clinical syndromes and methodological feasibility. Methods This study adopted qualitative research methods to obtain opinions from TCM clinicians and researchers on developing methods, efficacy evaluation criteria, and construction forms through expert steering committee meetings and semi-structured interviews. The sample size of semi-structured interviews was determined until data saturation was reached, and thematic analysis was used to analyze the transcription results. Results In the expert steering committee meeting, 60% (3/5) of the experts believed that developing in the form of syndrome elements was more operable; in the semi-structured interviews, 77.78% (7/9) of the experts supported developing in the form of syndrome elements, considering it convenient to use. Meanwhile, the research team added an expert semi-structured interview link in the development process, which complemented the cross-sectional survey used in previous studies to jointly improve the original list of TCM syndrome elements. Conclusion The method of developing core TCM syndrome sets based on syndrome elements formed in this study can consider clinical practice while improving the unity of TCM syndrome efficacy evaluation standards, which is helpful to promote the standardized development of TCM clinical research.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of different SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure. Methods The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed and EMbase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure from inception to July 2, 2021. Two researchers independently screened literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 16.0 software. Results A total of 16 randomized controlled trials, including 15 312 patients, involving 5 interventions, namely dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, canagliflozin, sotagliflozin and ertugliflozin were included. Results of network meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the compound outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, all-cause mortality, risk of cardiovascular mortality and serious adverse reactions among patients with heart failure among 5 different SGLT2 inhibitors (P>0.05). Compared with placebo, both selective and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors improved the risk of hospitalization for heart failure, hospitalization for heart failure, or compound cardiovascular mortality (P<0.05), while only selective SGLT2 inhibitors improved the risk of cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and serious adverse events (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between them (P>0.05). The area under the cumulative ordering probability curve of selective and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors ranked first and second, except for the combined outcome of heart failure or cardiovascular death. Conclusion The current evidence indicates that there is no significant difference in the efficacy and safety of the 5 different SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure, and there is no significant difference between selective SGLT2 inhibitors and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask versus endotracheal tubes for laparoscopic surgery.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask versus endotracheal tubes for laparoscopic surgery from inception to April, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 16 RCTs involving 1 593 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: there was no significant difference in the success rate of the first insertion (RR=0.99, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.02, P=0.55). The airway pressure of patients whose position were head higher than foot was significantly lower in the laryngeal mask group than in the tracheal intubation group (MD=–1.20, 95%CI –1.81 to –0.59, P=0.000 1), but there was no significant difference between two groups in reverse position patients (MD=0.48, 95%CI –0.90 to 1.87, P=0.49). The incidence of sore throat (RR=0.58, 95%CI 0.46 to 0.74, P<0.000 01), the incidence of blood stain (RR=0.48, 95%CI 0.30 to 0.77, P=0.002), the incidence of laryngeal spasm/bronchial spasm (OR=0.30, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.80, P=0.02) and the incidence of cough/hiccup (RR=0.10, 95%CI 0.07 to 0.15, P<0.000 01) in the laryngeal mask group were significantly lower than those in the tracheal intubation group.ConclusionThe current evidence shows that compared with tracheal intubation, laryngeal mask can effectively reduce airway pressure of patients whose position are head higher than foot. The risks of various complications are significant higher in tracheal intubation in laparoscopic surgery. Laryngeal mask can maintain patients' normal respiratory functions while reduce damage and do not increase the occurrence of reflux aspiration. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo investigate the predicting effect of PIK3CA mutations for the efficacy and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients received surgical resection. MethodsPCR and DNA sequencing were used to detect the PIK3CA mutation status of 79 HCC tissues, its impact on the short and long term effects of the patients were analyzed. ResultsIn this group of patients, mutation rate of PIK3CA gene exon 9 was 39.24% (31/79), PIK3CA mutation rate correlated with lymph node status and tumor differentiation (P < 0.05). The therapeutic effect of patients with PIK3CA mutation was significantly poor than that of the non-mutated group (P < 0.05). The three-year cumulative survival of patients with PIK3CA mutation (33.33%) was significantly lower than non-mutated group's (60.00%) by Kaplan-Meier (P < 0.05). ConclusionPIK3CA gene mutation in exon 9 could impact the efficiency of surgical resection in patients with HCC and could predict a poor survival prognosis.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoids for severe COVID-19 and to provide references for the treatment strategy of severe COVID-19 patients. Methods PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported glucocorticoid therapy for severe COVID-19 patients from inception to August 26th, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 7 RCTs involving 6 236 patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that compared with usual care, glucocorticoids significantly reduced the all-cause mortality of severe COVID-19 (RR=0.84, 95%CI 0.77 to 0.91, P<0.000 1), whereas no significant difference was found in the progression of complex diseases between the two groups (RR=0.84, 95%CI 0.69 to 1.01, P=0.06). Glucocorticoids did not increase adverse effects in severe COVID-19 compared with usual care (general adverse events: RR=1.15, 95%CI 0.66 to 2.03, P=0.62; serious adverse events: RR=1.13, 95%CI 0.54 to 2.38, P=0.75). Conclusion Current evidence suggests that glucocorticoids are effective in treating severe COVID-19 without significantly increasing adverse events. However, due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the conclusion.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of intravertebral analgesia for external cephalic version. Methods We electronically searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2009), PubMed (1980 to 2009), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 2009), Ovid EBM Database (1991 to 2009), EMbase (1980 to 2009), CBM (1978 to 2009) and CNKI (1979 to 2009) to collect literature about intravertebral analgesia for external cephalic version. We screened randomized controlled trials (RCTs) according to the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and evaluated the quality of the included studies, and then performed meta-analyses by using RevMan 5.0.13 software. Results Seven RCTs involving 620 women met the inclusion criteria. Five trials were of relatively high quality, and 1 of low quality and 2 not clear. The result of meta-analyses showed that intravertebral analgesia was superior in external cephalic version with a RR 1.53 and 95%CI 1.24 to 1.88. Conclusion Intravertebral analgesia can increase the successful rate of external cephalic version in the treatment of breech presentation compared with intravenous medicine for systematic use or no analgesia.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of interferon based antiviral therapy for children with hepatitis B. Methods PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interferon based antiviral therapy for children with hepatitis B from inception to December 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 12 studies involving 723 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: follow-up <12 months, the virological response rate (RR=2.82, 95%CI 1.98 to 4.02, P<0.000 01), serum HBeAg clearance rate (RR=3.02, 95%CI 1.95 to 4.67,P<0.000 01) and ALT normalization rate (RR=1.42, 95%CI 1.19 to 1.70,P=0.000 1) were significantly higher in the interferon group than the control group. Follow-up >12 months, the virological response rate (RR=1.75, 95%CI 1.18 to 2.60, P=0.006) and serum HBeAg clearance rate (RR=2.17, 95%CI 1.28 to 3.65, P=0.004) were also significantly higher in the interferon group. Severe adverse effects were not reported in included studies. Conclusion Current evidence shows that higher virological response is found in HBV infected children with interferon treatment. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer. Methods The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for triple-negative breast cancer from inception to April 1, 2024. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using RevMan 5.4 software. Results A total of 13 RCTs involving 5 416 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the pathologic complete response rate (pCR) (OR=2.09, 95%CI 1.37 to 3.19, P<0.01), progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.75, 95%CI 0.67 to 0.83, P<0.01) and overall survival (OS) (HR=0.87, 95%CI 0.79 to 0.96, P<0.01) were significantly better than those in the control group. The results of subgroup analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences in PFS (P<0.01) and OS (P=0.02) between PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative patients, but there was no statistically significant difference in pCR between PD-L1-positive patients and PD-L1-negative patients (P=0.36). There was a statistically significant difference in pCR between node-positive patients and node-negative patients (P=0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in pCR between patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors and PD-L1 inhibitors (P=0.32); and there was no significant difference in PFS (P=0.19) or OS (P=0.99) between patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors and PD-L1 inhibitors. Compared with those in the control group, the incidences of serious adverse events (RR=1.36, 95%CI 1.09 to 1.70, P<0.01) and immune-related adverse events (RR=2.98, 95%CI 1.66 to 5.35, P<0.01) were higher in the experimental group, and the common immune-related adverse events were hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism.Conclusion The existing evidence shows that immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy are more effective than chemotherapy alone in the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer, and the combination therapy has a higher incidence of adverse reactions. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
Cenobamate is one of the latest antiseizure medications (ASMs) developed for the treatment of focal onset seizures in adult patients. Cenobamate is characterized by a peculiar pharmacology. The mechanisms responsible for its anti-seizure activity include enhancement of the inactivated state of voltage-gated sodium channels with blockade of the persistent sodium current and positive allosteric modulation of GABAa receptors at a non-benzodiazepine binding site. Studies showed that cenobamate appears to be an effective treatment for focal epilepsy, showing reductions in seizure frequency, increased responder rates, and high rates of seizure freedom, and is well tolerated and safe. This article reviews the mechanism, pharmacokinetic characteristics, clinical efficacy, and safety of cenobamate as a novel anti-seizure drug
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of doxazosin for ureterolithiasis.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of comparing doxazosin with conservative treatment or tamsulosin for ureterolithiasis from inception to October, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 15 RCTs involving 1 062 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with conservative treatment, doxazosin significantly facilitated ureteral stone expulsion (RR=1.62, 95%CI 1.45 to 1.81, P<0.000 01). No statistical significant difference was found in stone-free rate (RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.11, P=0.57), stone expulsion time (SMD=−0.17, 95%CI −0.52 to 0.19, P=0.35) or pain episode frequency (SMD=0.21, 95%CI −0.15 to 0.56, P=0.25) between doxazosin and tamsulosin. Treatment-associated serious side effects were rarely reported.ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that doxazosin is an efficient and safe medical expulsion agent for ureterolithiasis management. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.