...
首页> 外文期刊>British Journal of Dermatology >Network meta-analysis of the outcome 'participant complete clearance' in nonimmunosuppressed participants of eight interventions for actinic keratosis: A follow-up on a Cochrane review
【24h】

Network meta-analysis of the outcome 'participant complete clearance' in nonimmunosuppressed participants of eight interventions for actinic keratosis: A follow-up on a Cochrane review

机译:对八项光化性角化病干预措施的非免疫抑制参与者的结果“参与者完全清除”的网络荟萃分析:Cochrane综述的随访

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The conclusions of pairwise meta-analyses of interventions for actinic keratosis (AK) are limited due to the lack of direct comparison between some interventions. Consequently, we performed a network meta-analysis for eight treatments [5-aminolaevulinic acid (ALA)-photodynamic therapy (PDT), cryotherapy, diclofenac 3% in 2·5% hyaluronic acid (DCF/HA), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 0·5% or 5·0%, imiquimod (IMI) 5%, ingenol mebutate (IMB) 0·015-0·05%, methyl aminolaevulinate (MAL)-PDT and placebo/vehicle (including placebo-PDT)] to determine their relative efficacies. As part of a prior Cochrane systematic review, different databases and grey literature were searched for randomized controlled trials up to April 2012. The inclusion criteria were parallel-group studies with nonimmunosuppressed participants: (i) reporting 'participant complete clearance' and (ii) comparing at least two of the interventions. Thirty-two publications met the criteria and they included the following number of individual or pooled studies (n) and total number of participants (N) for the different interventions: 5-FU 0·5% (n = 4, N = 169), 5-FU 5·0% (n = 2, N = 44), ALA-PDT (n = 6, N = 739), cryotherapy (n = 2, N = 174), DCF/HA (n = 5, N = 299), IMI (n = 14, N = 1411), IMB (n = 3, N = 560), MAL-PDT (n = 7, N = 557) and placebo (n = 32, N = 2520). Network analyses using a random-effects Bayesian model were carried out with the software ADDIS v1.16.1. The interventions were ranked as follows based on calculated probabilities and odd ratios: 5-FU > ALA-PDT ≈ IMI ≈ IMB ≈ MAL-PDT > cryotherapy > DCF/HA > placebo. This efficacy ranking was obtained based on the current available data on 'participant complete clearance' from randomized controlled trials and the analysis model used. However, several other factors should also be considered when prescribing a treatment for AK. What's already known about this topic? Several interventions are effective for the treatment of actinic keratosis (AK). Due to the lack of direct comparisons between these interventions, their relative efficacy is unknown. What does this study add? Using network meta-analysis, the relative efficacy of eight main interventions for AK was determined based on the outcome 'participant complete clearance'. With the exception of ingenol mebutate, the relative efficacy of the interventions was independent of the anatomical location of the lesions.
机译:由于缺乏某些干预措施之间的直接比较,因此光化性角化病(AK)干预的成对荟萃分析的结论有限。因此,我们对八种治疗方法进行了网络荟萃分析[5-氨基戊酸(ALA)-光动力疗法(PDT),冷冻疗法,在2·5%透明质酸(DCF / HA)中的3%双氯芬酸,5-氟尿嘧啶(5 -FU)0·5%或5·0%,咪喹莫特(IMI)5%,甲磺酸丁二醇酯(IMB)0·015-0·05%,氨基戊酸甲酯(MAL)-PDT和安慰剂/载体(包括安慰剂-PDT) )]来确定它们的相对功效。作为先前的Cochrane系统评价的一部分,搜索了截至2012年4月的不同数据库和灰色文献以进行随机对照试验。纳入标准为非免疫抑制参与者的平行组研究:(i)报告“参与者完全清除”,以及(ii)比较至少两种干预措施。共有32篇符合标准的出版物,其中包括以下针对不同干预措施的单独或合并研究的数量(n)和参与者的总数(N):5-FU 0·5%(n = 4,N = 169) ,5-FU 5·0%(n = 2,N = 44),ALA-PDT(n = 6,N = 739),冷冻疗法(n = 2,N = 174),DCF / HA(n = 5, N = 299),IMI(n = 14,N = 1411),IMB(n = 3,N = 560),MAL-PDT(n = 7,N = 557)和安慰剂(n = 32,N = 2520) 。使用软件ADDIS v1.16.1进行了使用随机效应贝叶斯模型的网络分析。根据计算出的概率和奇数比将干预措施排序如下:5-FU> ALA-PDT≈IMI≈IMB≈MAL-PDT>冷冻治疗> DCF / HA>安慰剂。基于随机对照试验和所用分析模型中有关“参与者完全清除”的当前可用数据,获得了该疗效等级。但是,在开创AK疗法时也应考虑其他几个因素。关于此主题的已知信息是什么?有几种干预措施可有效治疗光化性角化病(AK)。由于这些干预措施之间缺乏直接比较,因此其相对功效尚不清楚。这项研究增加了什么?使用网络荟萃分析,基于结果“参与者完全清除”确定了AK的八种主要干预措施的相对疗效。除甲磺酸丁香酚酯外,干预措施的相对疗效与病变的解剖位置无关。

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