Krob Alexander H, Fleischer Alan B, D'Agostino Ralph, Feldman Steven R
Westwood-Squibb Center for Dermatology Research, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157-1071, USA.
J Cutan Med Surg. 2003 Jul-Aug;7(4):306-11. doi: 10.1007/s10227-002-0139-9.
Toenail onychomycosis is a challenge for clinicians to treat, and this challenge is compounded by conflicting information in the medical literature concerning the efficacy of the two principal agents used in its treatment: terbinafine and itraconazole.
The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of terbinafinewith that of itraconazole in the treatment of toenail onychomycosis caused by dermatophytes.
A Medline search was performed for all English language publications from 1966 to June 1999 on the use of terbinafine and itraconazole in the treatment of toenail onychomycosis. Included were randomized studies in which subjects received no less than 3 months (or cycles) and no more than 4 months (or cycles) of either terbinafine or itraconazole. Data were abstracted and statistical analyses (random effects model, fixed effects model, and Peto's method) were applied.
Thirteen studies were included from the original literature review of 1636 total referenced reports; four studies did not fulfill our inclusion or exclusion criteria. The primary analysis of six studies directly comparing terbinafine to itraconazole resulted in an odds ratio ranging from 1.8 (95% CI = 1.8, 2.8) to 2.9 (1.9, 4.1). The secondary analysis of three studies comparing either itraconazole or terbinafine to placebo estimated an odds ratio of 1.1-1.7. The former shows that terbinafine is 80%-190% more likely to result in mycologic cure than is itraconazole; the latter demonstrates a 10%-70% greater likelihood. The difference between the relative efficacies of terbinafine and itraconazole was highly statistically significant (p < 0.0001).
Meta-analysis of the published worldwide literature finds that terbinafine is significantly more effective than itraconazole at achieving mycologic cure of toenail onychomycosis.
趾甲甲真菌病的治疗对临床医生而言是一项挑战,而医学文献中关于其治疗的两种主要药物——特比萘芬和伊曲康唑疗效的信息相互矛盾,这使得挑战更加复杂。
本荟萃分析的目的是比较特比萘芬和伊曲康唑治疗皮肤癣菌引起的趾甲甲真菌病的疗效。
对1966年至1999年6月间所有关于使用特比萘芬和伊曲康唑治疗趾甲甲真菌病的英文出版物进行了Medline检索。纳入的是随机研究,其中受试者接受不少于3个月(或疗程)且不超过4个月(或疗程)的特比萘芬或伊曲康唑治疗。提取数据并应用统计分析(随机效应模型、固定效应模型和Peto方法)。
在对1636篇参考文献报告进行的原始文献综述中,纳入了13项研究;4项研究不符合我们的纳入或排除标准。对6项直接比较特比萘芬和伊曲康唑的研究进行的主要分析得出的优势比范围为1.8(95%可信区间 = 1.8, 2.8)至2.9(1.9, 4.1)。对3项将伊曲康唑或特比萘芬与安慰剂进行比较的研究进行的次要分析估计优势比为1.1 - 1.7。前者表明特比萘芬实现真菌学治愈的可能性比伊曲康唑高80% - 190%;后者表明可能性高10% - 70%。特比萘芬和伊曲康唑相对疗效的差异具有高度统计学意义(p < 0.0001)。
对全球已发表文献的荟萃分析发现,在实现趾甲甲真菌病的真菌学治愈方面,特比萘芬比伊曲康唑显著更有效。