首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease >Comparative efficacy of inhaled medications (ICS/LABA, LAMA, LAMA/LABA and SAMA) for COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparative efficacy of inhaled medications (ICS/LABA, LAMA, LAMA/LABA and SAMA) for COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

机译:吸入性药物(ICS / LABA,LAMA,LAMA / LABA和SAMA)对COPD的比较疗效:系统评价和网络荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose: To assess the comparative efficacy of short-acting muscarinic antagonists (SAMAs), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), LAMA in combination with long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs; LAMA/LABAs) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in combination with LABA (ICS/LABAs) for the maintenance treatment of COPD. Materials and methods: We systematically reviewed 74 randomized controlled trials (74,832 participants) published up to 15 November 2017, which compared any of the interventions (SAMA [ipratropium], LAMA [aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium, umeclidinium], LAMA/LABA [aclidinium/formoterol, indacaterol/glycopyrronium, tiotropium/olodaterol, umeclidinium/vilanterol] and ICS/LABA [fluticasone/vilanterol, budesonide/formoterol, salmeterol/fluticasone]) with each other or with placebo. A random-effects network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect evidence was conducted to examine the change from baseline in trough FEV1, transition dyspnea index, St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire and frequency of adverse events at weeks 12 and 24. Results: Inconsistency models were not statistically significant for all outcomes. LAMAs, LAMA/LABAs and ICS/LABAs led to a significantly greater improvement in trough FEV1 compared with placebo and SAMA monotherapy at weeks 12 and 24. All LAMA/LABAs, except aclidinium/formoterol, were statistically significantly better than LAMA monotherapy and ICS/LABAs in improving trough FEV1. Among the LAMAs, umeclidinium showed statistically significant improvement in trough FEV1 at week 12 compared to tiotropium and glycopyrronium, but the results were not clinically significant. LAMA/LABAs had the highest probabilities of being ranked the best agents in FEV1 improvement. Similar trends were observed for the transition dyspnea index and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire outcomes. There were no significant differences in the incidences of adverse events among all treatment options. Conclusion: LAMA/LABA showed the greatest improvement in trough FEV1 at weeks 12 and 24 compared with the other inhaled drug classes, while SAMA showed the least improvement. There were no significant differences among the LAMAs and LAMA/LABAs within their respective classes.
机译:目的:评估短效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(SAMAs),长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMAs),LAMA与长效β-激动剂(LABAs; LAMA / LABAs)和吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)的比较疗效与LABA(ICS / LABAs)联合用于COPD的维持治疗。材料和方法:我们系统回顾了截至2017年11月15日发表的74项随机对照试验(74,832名参与者),比较了任何干预措施(SAMA [ipratropium],LAMA [[啶],格隆溴铵,噻托铵,umeclidinium],LAMA / LABA [aclidinium / formoterol,茚达特罗/糖吡咯烷,噻托溴铵/奥洛他特罗,umeclidinium /维兰特罗]和ICS / LABA [氟替卡松/维兰特罗,布地奈德/福莫特罗,沙美特罗/氟替卡松]彼此或与安慰剂。进行了直接和间接证据相结合的随机效应网络荟萃分析,以检查低谷FEV1,基线呼吸困难指数,圣乔治呼吸问卷的基线变化以及第12和24周不良事件发生的频率。结果:不一致的模型不是所有结果在统计上均具有重要意义。与安慰剂和SAMA单一疗法相比,LAMA,LAMA / LABA和ICS / LABA在第12和24周时导致谷值FEV1的改善更大。除阿地那定/福莫特罗外,所有LAMA / LABA均明显优于LAMA单一疗法和ICS / LABAs改善谷底FEV1。在LAMA中,与噻托溴铵和格隆溴铵相比,乌米地铵在第12周的谷值FEV1有统计学显着改善,但临床意义不大。 LAMA / LABA在FEV1改善中被评为最佳代理商的可能性最高。过渡呼吸困难指数和圣乔治呼吸问卷调查结果也观察到类似趋势。在所有治疗方案中,不良事件的发生率均无显着差异。结论:与其他吸入药物类别相比,LAMA / LABA在第12周和第24周显示谷内FEV1的改善最大,而SAMA则显示最小的改善。 LAMA和LAMA / LABA在各自的类别之间没有显着差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号