Suppr超能文献

度洛西汀与安慰剂、“活性安慰剂”或不干预对成人重度抑郁症的有益和有害影响:一项随机临床试验的系统评价、荟萃分析和试验序贯分析

Beneficial and harmful effects of duloxetine versus placebo, 'active placebo' or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials.

作者信息

Siddiqui Faiza, Petersen Johanne Juul, Juul Sophie, Kamp Caroline Barkholt, Barbateskovic Marija, Moncrieff Joanna, Horowitz Mark Abie, Maagaard Mathias, Katakam Kiran Kumar, Gluud Christian, Jakobsen Janus C

机构信息

Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, The Capital Region, Copenhagen University Hospital ─ Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, The Capital Region, Copenhagen University Hospital ─ Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2025 Feb 7;15(2):e082853. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082853.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of duloxetine versus 'active placebo', placebo or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised trials.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and other relevant databases up until January 2023. We requested clinical study reports from 36 competent authorities.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

All randomised clinical trials comparing duloxetine versus placebo, 'active placebo' or no intervention, irrespective of publication type, publication status, publication year and language for treatment of major depressive disorder in adults.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Five authors in pairs extracted data using a standardised data extraction sheet. A third review author was consulted for disagreements. Intervention effects were assessed by both random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses, risk of bias assessments were performed by two independent review authors using Cochrane's risk of bias tool V.2 and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

We included 28 trials randomising a total of 7872 participants. All results were at high risk of bias. The trials' assessment time points were between 6 and 16 weeks after randomisation. Meta-analyses showed evidence of a beneficial effect of duloxetine on depressive symptoms (mean difference -1.81, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) points; 95% CI -2.34 to -1.28; heterogeneity I=0.0%; 12 trials) and quality of life (mean difference -3.79 points, 95% CI -5.11 to -2.46; I=0.0%; three trials), but the effect sizes were below our predefined minimal clinically important differences. Trial sequential analysis showed that we did not have enough information to assess the effects of duloxetine on serious adverse events (SAEs) (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.02; I=0.0%; 19 trials) or suicide or suicide attempts (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.16; six trials). Duloxetine increased the risk of non-SAEs (risk ratio 1.27, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.32; I=73.0%; 24 trials). The adverse events with the lowest number needed to harm (NNH) were nausea (NNH 6), dry mouth (NNH 13), somnolence (NNH 17), withdrawal syndrome (NNH 19), sweating (NNH 20), dizziness (NNH 21) and constipation (NNH 21).

CONCLUSIONS

Duloxetine appears to reduce depressive symptom scores and improve quality of life scores in the short term, but the effect sizes are minimal and of questionable patient importance. The short- and long-term effects of duloxetine on risks of SAEs and suicidality are uncertain. Duloxetine increases the risks of several short-term adverse events. Systematic assessments of benefits and harms over longer periods are required.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016053931.

摘要

目的

评估度洛西汀与“活性安慰剂”、安慰剂或不干预相比,对成人重度抑郁症的有益和有害影响。

设计

对随机试验进行系统评价、荟萃分析和试验序贯分析。

数据来源

截至2023年1月的Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO及其他相关数据库。我们向36个主管部门索取了临床研究报告。

选择研究的纳入标准

所有比较度洛西汀与安慰剂、“活性安慰剂”或不干预的随机临床试验,无论其发表类型、发表状态、发表年份和语言,用于治疗成人重度抑郁症。

数据提取与合成

五名作者两两一组,使用标准化数据提取表提取数据。如有分歧,会咨询第三位综述作者。干预效果通过随机效应和固定效应模型荟萃分析进行评估,偏倚风险评估由两名独立综述作者使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具V.2进行,证据确定性使用推荐分级评估、制定和评价进行评估。

结果

我们纳入了28项试验,共随机分配7872名参与者。所有结果都存在高偏倚风险。试验的评估时间点为随机分组后6至16周。荟萃分析显示,有证据表明度洛西汀对抑郁症状有有益影响(平均差值-1.81,汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HDRS-17)评分;95%置信区间-2.34至-1.28;异质性I²=0.0%;12项试验)以及对生活质量有有益影响(平均差值-3.79分,95%置信区间-5.11至-2.46;I²=0.0%;3项试验),但效应大小低于我们预先定义的最小临床重要差异。试验序贯分析表明,我们没有足够信息评估度洛西汀对严重不良事件(SAEs)的影响(比值比0.67,95%置信区间0.44至1.02;I²=0.0%;19项试验)或对自杀或自杀未遂的影响(比值比1.08,95%置信区间0.37至3.16;6项试验)。度洛西汀增加了非严重不良事件的风险(风险比1.27,95%置信区间1.22至1.32;I²=73.0%;24项试验)。伤害所需人数(NNH)最低的不良事件是恶心(NNH 6)、口干(NNH 13)、嗜睡(NNH 17)、戒断综合征(NNH 19)、出汗(NNH 20)、头晕(NNH 21)和便秘(NNH 21)。

结论

度洛西汀似乎在短期内可降低抑郁症状评分并改善生活质量评分,但效应大小极小,对患者的重要性存疑。度洛西汀对严重不良事件风险和自杀倾向的短期及长期影响尚不确定。度洛西汀会增加几种短期不良事件的风险。需要对更长时期的利弊进行系统评估。

试验注册号

PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016053931。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fcca/12056638/63c3eeb92f57/bmjopen-15-2-g001.jpg

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