Suppr超能文献

中重度特应性皮炎系统治疗的疗效和安全性:系统评价。

Efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Dermatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Centre for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Institute for Occupational and Social Medicine, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.

出版信息

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014 Feb;133(2):429-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.07.049. Epub 2013 Oct 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Many patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) require systemic immunomodulating treatment to achieve adequate disease control.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (until June 2012). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating systemic immunomodulating treatments for moderate-to-severe AD were included. Selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and generation of treatment recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, symptoms, quality of life, and the course of AD. Safety data were compared by calculating the weekly incidence rates (as percentages) for adverse events.

RESULTS

Thirty-four RCTs with 12 different systemic treatments and totaling 1653 patients were included. Fourteen trials consistently indicate that cyclosporin A efficaciously improves clinical signs of AD. Cyclosporin A is recommended as first-line treatment for short-term use. A second-line treatment option is azathioprine, but efficacy is lower, and evidence is weaker. Methotrexate can be considered a third-line treatment option. Recommendations are impossible for mycophenolate, montelukast, intravenous immunoglobulins, and systemic glucocorticosteroids because of limited evidence. A meta-analysis was not performed because of a lack of standardization in outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

Although 12 different interventions for moderate-to-severe AD have been studied in 34 RCTs, strong recommendations are only possible for the short-term use of cyclosporin A. Methodological limitations in the majority of trials prevent evidence-based conclusions. Large head-to-head trials evaluating long-term treatments are required.

摘要

背景

许多中重度特应性皮炎(AD)患者需要全身免疫调节治疗以实现充分的疾病控制。

目的

我们旨在系统评估中重度 AD 的全身治疗方法的疗效和安全性。

方法

我们对 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CENTRAL(截至 2012 年 6 月)进行了系统文献检索。纳入了评估中重度 AD 的全身免疫调节治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。两名评审员独立进行选择、数据提取、质量评估和使用推荐分级的评估、制定与评价(GRADE)方法生成治疗建议。疗效结局为临床体征、症状、生活质量和 AD 病程。通过计算不良反应的每周发生率(以百分比表示)来比较安全性数据。

结果

纳入了 34 项 RCT 和 12 种不同的全身治疗方法,共 1653 名患者。14 项试验一致表明环孢素 A 能有效改善 AD 的临床体征。环孢素 A 推荐作为短期治疗的一线药物。阿扎胞苷是二线治疗选择,但疗效较低,证据较弱。甲氨蝶呤可作为三线治疗选择。由于证据有限,无法对霉酚酸酯、孟鲁司特、静脉用免疫球蛋白和全身皮质类固醇作出推荐。由于缺乏标准化的结局指标,因此无法进行荟萃分析。

结论

尽管 34 项 RCT 研究了 12 种不同的中重度 AD 干预措施,但只有环孢素 A 的短期使用可以给出强烈的推荐。大多数试验的方法学局限性阻止了基于证据的结论。需要开展评估长期治疗的大型头对头试验。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验