Kollar Christine, Schneider Heinz, Waksman Joel, Krusinska Eva
GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA.
Clin Ther. 2007 Jun;29(6):1057-70. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.05.021.
Although nonprescription oral phenylephrine 10 mg has been judged "generally recognized as safe and effective" by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), its efficacy as a nasal decongestant has been questioned.
This study assessed available data on the efficacy of oral phenylephrine 10 mg as a nasal decongestant.
Three sources were used to identify potentially relevant publications--the bibliography of the phenylephrine section of the 1976 FDA monograph on over-the-counter cold, cough, allergy, bronchodilator, and antiasthmatic products; a 2004 Cochrane Review of nasal decongestants for the common cold; and a search of MEDLINE from 1966 through January 2007 using the term phenylephrine nasal. To be included in the analyses, studies had to have a single-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled design; involve an orally administered product in which phenylephrine 10 mg was the sole active ingredient; enroll patients with acute nasal congestion due to the common cold; evaluate nasal airway resistance (NAR) as the efficacy end point; and have sufficient data in the study report to allow reanalysis and/or meta-analysis of phenylephrine 10 mg versus placebo. Reanalysis of individual studies and fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Statistical significance at 30 and 60 minutes after dosing (the primary time points) and a >or=20% reduction in NAR from baseline were considered indicative of a clinically meaningful difference.
Fifteen potentially relevant studies were identified, of which 8 met the inclusion criteria. Data from 7 crossover studies involving a total of 113 subjects were reanalyzed and then pooled for meta-analysis; results from the initial phase of the eighth study, a parallel-group trial involving 50 subjects, were included in the reanalysis of individual studies but not in the meta-analyses. Significant differences in favor of phenylephrine were seen in 4 of the 8 studies (P <or= 0.05). Phenylephrine 10 mg was significantly more effective than placebo at the primary time points and at 90 minutes after dosing in the meta-analyses using both the fixed-effects and random-effects models (P <or= 0.05). At 45, 120, and 180 minutes after dosing, phenylephrine 10 mg was also significantly more effective than placebo in the fixed-effects model (P <or= 0.05). Between 30 and 90 minutes after dosing, percent reductions from baseline in NAR ranged from 6.0 percentage points higher with phenylephrine than with placebo (at 30 and 45 minutes after dosing) to 16.6 percentage points higher (at 60 minutes after dosing). From 60 to 180 minutes after dosing, the percent reductions from baseline were generally >or=20% with phenylephrine.
These meta-analyses of 7 crossover studies and the reanalysis of a parallel-group study support the effectiveness of a single oral dose of phenylephrine 10 mg as a decongestant in adults with acute nasal congestion associated with the common cold.
尽管美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)已判定非处方口服10毫克去氧肾上腺素“一般认为安全有效”,但其作为鼻减充血剂的疗效一直受到质疑。
本研究评估了口服10毫克去氧肾上腺素作为鼻减充血剂疗效的现有数据。
使用三个来源来识别潜在相关出版物——1976年FDA关于非处方感冒、咳嗽、过敏、支气管扩张剂和抗哮喘产品专著中去氧肾上腺素部分的参考文献;2004年Cochrane对普通感冒鼻减充血剂的综述;以及从1966年至2007年1月使用“去氧肾上腺素鼻用”一词对MEDLINE进行的检索。为纳入分析,研究必须具有单剂量、随机、安慰剂对照设计;涉及口服产品,其中10毫克去氧肾上腺素是唯一活性成分;纳入因普通感冒导致急性鼻充血的患者;将鼻气道阻力(NAR)作为疗效终点进行评估;并且研究报告中有足够的数据以允许对10毫克去氧肾上腺素与安慰剂进行重新分析和/或荟萃分析。对个体研究进行了重新分析,并进行了固定效应和随机效应荟萃分析。给药后30分钟和60分钟(主要时间点)的统计学显著性以及NAR较基线降低≥20%被认为表明存在临床意义上的差异。
确定了15项潜在相关研究,其中8项符合纳入标准。对7项交叉研究(共涉及113名受试者)的数据进行了重新分析,然后合并进行荟萃分析;第八项研究(一项涉及50名受试者的平行组试验)初始阶段的结果纳入了个体研究的重新分析,但未纳入荟萃分析。8项研究中有4项显示去氧肾上腺素具有显著优势(P≤0.05)。在使用固定效应和随机效应模型的荟萃分析中,10毫克去氧肾上腺素在主要时间点和给药后90分钟时显著优于安慰剂(P≤0.05)。在给药后45分钟、120分钟和180分钟时,在固定效应模型中10毫克去氧肾上腺素也显著优于安慰剂(P≤0.05)。给药后30至90分钟之间,去氧肾上腺素组NAR较基线降低的百分比比安慰剂组高6.0个百分点(给药后30分钟和45分钟时)至16.6个百分点(给药后60分钟时)。给药后60至180分钟之间,去氧肾上腺素组较基线降低的百分比一般≥20%。
对7项交叉研究的这些荟萃分析以及对一项平行组研究的重新分析支持单剂量口服10毫克去氧肾上腺素对伴有普通感冒的急性鼻充血成人作为减充血剂的有效性。