Casetta I, Iuliano G, Filippini G
Universita degli Studi di Ferrara, Clinica Neurologica, Corso Giovecca, 203, Ferrara, Italy, 44100.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17;2007(4):CD003982. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003982.pub2.
Azathioprine is the most widely used immunosuppressive treatment in multiple sclerosis (MS). It is an alternative to interferon beta for treating MS also because it is less expensive. Concerns about its safety, mainly a possible increased risk of malignancy, has limited its use. This systematic review aimed to determine the trade off between the benefits and risks of azathioprine in multiple sclerosis.
To compare azathioprine versus placebo. To determine the effect of azathioprine on major clinical outcomes, i.e., disability progression and relapses in patients with multiple sclerosis.
The Multiple Sclerosis Group's Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL- Issue 4, 2006), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR - Issue 4, 2006), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE - searched 28.12.06) MEDLINE (PubMed) (1966 to December 2006), EMBASE (1980 to December 2006). Journals and reference lists were hand searched for relevant articles both to benefit and adverse effects. Regulatory agencies were additional sources of information for adverse effects.
All parallel group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing azathioprine treatment of a least one year duration with placebo for patients with multiple sclerosis. Cohorts, case controls, case series and case reports were also used to assess adverse effects.
Potentially relevant references were evaluated and all data extracted by two independent authors.
The five trials that met our criteria included 698 randomised patients: data from 499 (71.5%) were available for analysis of relapse frequency in patients at one year's, from 488 (70%) at two years' and from 415 (59.5%) at three years' follow-up. Azathioprine reduced the number of patients who had relapses during the first year of treatment (relative risk reduction [RRR] =20%; 95% CI = 5% to 33%), at two years' (RRR =23%; 95% CI = 12% to 33%) and three years' (RRR =18%; 95% CI = 7% to 27%) follow-up. These results were consistent in sensitivity analysis. There was no heterogeneity among the studies. Data from only three small trials with a total of 87 patients were available to calculate the number of patients who progressed during the first two to three years. There was a statistically significant benefit (RRR = 42%; 95% CI = 7% to 64%) of azathioprine therapy at three years' follow-up; this result was robust after sensitivity analyses and there was no heterogeneity among the trials. Gastrointestinal disturbances, bone marrow suppression and hepatic toxicity were greater in the azathioprine group rather than in the placebo group; they were anticipated, and, by monitoring and dosage adjustment, were easily managed. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were few, occurring mostly during the first year of azathioprine treatment and mainly due to gastrointestinal intolerance (5%). Data from the trials and from cohort and case controls studies available in the literature did not show an increase in risk of malignancy from azathioprine. A possible long-term risk of cancer from azathioprine may be related to a treatment duration above ten years and cumulative doses above 600 g.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Azathioprine is an appropriate maintenance treatment for patients with multiple sclerosis who frequently relapse and require steroids. Cumulative doses of 600 g should not be exceeded in relation to a possible increased risk of malignancy. Considering the trade off between the benefits and harms, azathioprine is a fair alternative to interferon beta for treating multiple sclerosis. A logical next step for future trials would seem the direct comparison of azathioprine and interferon beta. In fact the direct comparison between these two widely used treatments in multiple sclerosis has not been made.
硫唑嘌呤是多发性硬化症(MS)中使用最广泛的免疫抑制治疗药物。它也是治疗MS的干扰素β的替代药物,因为其成本较低。对其安全性的担忧,主要是可能增加的恶性肿瘤风险,限制了它的使用。本系统评价旨在确定硫唑嘌呤在多发性硬化症中的利弊权衡。
比较硫唑嘌呤与安慰剂。确定硫唑嘌呤对主要临床结局的影响,即多发性硬化症患者的残疾进展和复发情况。
多发性硬化症组试验注册库、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL - 2006年第4期)、Cochrane系统评价数据库(CDSR - 2006年第4期)、疗效评价文摘数据库(DARE - 2006年12月28日检索)、MEDLINE(PubMed)(1966年至2006年12月)、EMBASE(1980年至2006年12月)。对手工检索期刊和参考文献列表以获取有关益处和不良反应的相关文章。监管机构是不良反应信息的额外来源。
所有平行组随机对照试验(RCT),比较硫唑嘌呤治疗至少一年时间与安慰剂治疗多发性硬化症患者。队列研究、病例对照研究、病例系列研究和病例报告也用于评估不良反应。
对潜在相关参考文献进行评估,所有数据由两名独立作者提取。
符合我们标准的五项试验纳入了698名随机分组患者:499名(71.5%)患者的数据可用于分析一年随访时的复发频率,488名(70%)患者的数据可用于两年随访时的分析,415名(59.5%)患者的数据可用于三年随访时的分析。硫唑嘌呤减少了治疗第一年复发的患者数量(相对危险度降低[RRR]=20%;95%可信区间=5%至33%),两年随访时(RRR =23%;95%可信区间=12%至33%)和三年随访时(RRR =18%;95%可信区间=7%至27%)。这些结果在敏感性分析中是一致的。研究之间没有异质性。仅有三项共87名患者的小型试验的数据可用于计算前两至三年病情进展的患者数量。三年随访时硫唑嘌呤治疗有统计学显著益处(RRR = 42%;95%可信区间=7%至64%);该结果在敏感性分析后仍然可靠,试验之间没有异质性。硫唑嘌呤组的胃肠道紊乱、骨髓抑制和肝毒性比安慰剂组更严重;这些是预期的,并且通过监测和剂量调整很容易控制。因不良反应而退出的情况很少,主要发生在硫唑嘌呤治疗的第一年,主要是由于胃肠道不耐受(5%)。试验数据以及文献中可用的队列研究和病例对照研究数据均未显示硫唑嘌呤会增加恶性肿瘤风险。硫唑嘌呤可能的长期癌症风险可能与治疗持续时间超过十年和累积剂量超过600克有关。
硫唑嘌呤是多发性硬化症频繁复发且需要使用类固醇的患者的合适维持治疗药物。考虑到可能增加的恶性肿瘤风险,累积剂量不应超过600克。考虑到利弊权衡,硫唑嘌呤是治疗多发性硬化症的干扰素β的合理替代药物。未来试验的一个合理下一步似乎是硫唑嘌呤和干扰素β的直接比较。事实上,尚未对这两种在多发性硬化症中广泛使用的治疗方法进行直接比较。