蠕虫疗法(使用蠕虫)诱导炎症性肠病缓解

Helminth therapy (worms) for induction of remission in inflammatory bowel disease.

作者信息

Garg Sushil K, Croft Ashley M, Bager Peter

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware Street SE, Mayo Mail Code 195, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 55455.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan 20;2014(1):CD009400. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009400.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic, globally-occurring gastrointestinal disorder and a major cause of illness and disability. It is conventionally classified into Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Helminths are parasitic worms with complex life cycles involving tissue- or lumen-dwelling stages in their hosts, and causing long-lasting or chronic infections that are frequently asymptomatic. Helminths modulate immune responses of their hosts, and many observational and experimental studies support the hypothesis that helminths suppress immune-mediated chronic inflammation that occurs in asthma, allergy and IBD.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of helminth treatment for induction of remission in IBD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to 13 July 2013: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Inflammatory Bowel Disease Group Specialized Trials Register. We also searched four online trials registries, and abstracts from major meetings. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the intervention was any helminth species or combination of helminth species, administered in any dose and by any route and for any duration of exposure to people with active CD or UC, confirmed through any combination of clinical, endoscopic and histological criteria were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed eligibility using a standardized data collection form. We used the RevMan software for analyses. The primary outcome was induction of remission as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included clinical, histologic, or endoscopic improvement as defined by the authors, endoscopic mucosal healing, change in disease activity index score, change in quality of life score, hospital admissions, requirement for intravenous corticosteroids, surgery, study withdrawal and the incidence of adverse events. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. We assessed the methodological quality of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting each outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs (90 participants) were included. One trial assessed the efficacy and safety of Trichuris suis (T. suis) ova in patients with UC (n = 54). The other RCT was a phase one that assessed the safety and tolerability of T. suis ova in patients with CD (n = 36). The risk of bias in both studies was judged to be low. In the UC study, during the 12-week study period, participants in the active arm received 2-weekly aliquots of 2500 T. suis eggs, added to 0.8 mL of saline; those in the placebo arm received 0.8 mL saline only. There were sparse data available for the outcomes clinical remission and clinical improvement. Ten per cent (3/30) of patients in the T. suis arm entered remission compared to 4% (1/24) of patients in the placebo arm (RR 2.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 21.63). Forty-three per cent (13/30) of patients in the T. suis group achieved clinical improvement compared to 17% (4/24) of placebo patients (RR 2.60, 95% CI 0.97 to 6.95). The mean ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI) score was lower in the T. suis group (6.1 +/- 0.61) compared to the placebo group (7.5 +/- 0.66) after 12 weeks of treatment (MD -1.40, 95% CI -1.75 to -1.05). There was only limited evidence relating to the proportion of patients who experienced an adverse event. Three per cent (1/30) of patients in the T. suis group experienced at least one adverse event compared to 12% (3/24) of placebo patients (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.40). None of the adverse events reported in this study were judged to be related to the study treatment. GRADE analyses rated the overall quality of the evidence for the primary and secondary outcomes (i.e. clinical remission and improvement) as low due to serious imprecision. In the CD study, participants received a single treatment of T. suis ova at a dosage of 500 (n = 9), 2500 (n = 9), or 7500 (n = 9) embryonated eggs or matching placebo (n = 9). The CD study did not assess clinical remission or improvement as outcomes. There were sparse data on adverse events at two weeks. Thirty-seven per cent (10/27) of patients in the T. suis group experienced at least one adverse event compared to 44% (4/9) of placebo patients (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.01). Only one adverse event (dysgeusia) was judged to be possibly related to treatment in this study. Dysgeusia was reported in one patient in the T. suis group and in one patient in the placebo group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to allow any firm conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of helminths used to treat patients with IBD. The evidence for our primary efficacy outcomes in this review comes from one small study and is of low quality due to serious imprecision. We do not have enough evidence to determine whether helminths are safe when used in patients with UC and CD. Further RCTs are required to assess the efficacy and safety of helminth therapy in IBD.

摘要

背景

炎症性肠病(IBD)是一种慢性、全球流行的胃肠道疾病,是疾病和残疾的主要原因。传统上它分为克罗恩病(CD)和溃疡性结肠炎(UC)。蠕虫是具有复杂生命周期的寄生虫,在其宿主中涉及组织或管腔寄生阶段,并导致经常无症状的持久或慢性感染。蠕虫可调节宿主的免疫反应,许多观察性和实验性研究支持蠕虫可抑制哮喘、过敏和IBD中发生的免疫介导的慢性炎症这一假说。

目的

评估蠕虫治疗诱导IBD缓解的疗效和安全性。

检索方法

我们检索了以下数据库自创建至2013年7月13日的数据:医学主题词表(MEDLINE)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库以及Cochrane炎症性肠病组专业试验注册库。我们还检索了四个在线试验注册库以及主要会议的摘要。无语言限制。

选择标准

随机对照试验(RCT),其中干预措施为任何蠕虫种类或蠕虫种类组合,以任何剂量、通过任何途径给药且暴露任何时长,纳入对象为经临床、内镜和组织学标准的任何组合确诊的活动性CD或UC患者,均符合纳入标准。

数据收集与分析

两位作者使用标准化数据收集表独立提取数据并评估纳入资格。我们使用RevMan软件进行分析。主要结局为纳入研究定义的缓解诱导。次要结局包括作者定义的临床、组织学或内镜改善、内镜黏膜愈合、疾病活动指数评分变化、生活质量评分变化、住院、静脉使用皮质类固醇的需求、手术、研究退出以及不良事件发生率。我们计算二分结局的风险比(RR)及相应的95%置信区间(CI)。我们计算连续结局的平均差(MD)及95%CI。我们使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估纳入研究的方法学质量。使用GRADE标准评估支持每个结局的证据的总体质量。

主要结果

纳入两项RCT(90名参与者)。一项试验评估了猪鞭虫(T. suis)卵对UC患者(n = 54)的疗效和安全性。另一项RCT是评估猪鞭虫卵对CD患者(n = 36)安全性和耐受性的一期试验。两项研究的偏倚风险均被判定为低。在UC研究中,在12周的研究期间,治疗组参与者每两周接受一次2500个猪鞭虫卵的等分试样,加入0.8 mL盐水中;安慰剂组参与者仅接受0.8 mL盐水。临床缓解和临床改善结局的数据稀少。猪鞭虫组10%(3/30)的患者进入缓解期,而安慰剂组为4%(1/24)(RR 2.40,95%CI 0.27至21.63)。猪鞭虫组43%(13/30)的患者实现临床改善,而安慰剂组为17%(4/24)(RR 2.60,95%CI 0.97至6.95)。治疗12周后,猪鞭虫组的平均溃疡性结肠炎疾病活动指数(UCDAI)评分(6.1±0.61)低于安慰剂组(7.5±0.66)(MD -1.40,95%CI -1.75至-1.05)。关于经历不良事件的患者比例的证据有限。猪鞭虫组3%(1/30)的患者经历至少一次不良事件,而安慰剂组为12%(3/24)(RR 0.27,95%CI 0.03至2.40)。本研究中报告的不良事件均未被判定与研究治疗相关。GRADE分析将主要和次要结局(即临床缓解和改善)的证据总体质量评为低,原因是严重不精确。在CD研究中,参与者接受一次猪鞭虫卵治疗,剂量为500(n = 9)、2500(n = 9)或7500(n = 9)个受精虫卵或匹配的安慰剂(n = 9)。CD研究未将临床缓解或改善作为结局进行评估。两周时不良事件的数据稀少。猪鞭虫组37%(10/27)的患者经历至少一次不良事件,而安慰剂组为44%(4/9)(RR 0.83,95%CI 0.35至2.01)。本研究中仅一个不良事件(味觉障碍)被判定可能与治疗相关。猪鞭虫组和安慰剂组各有一名患者报告有味觉障碍。

作者结论

目前,没有足够的证据就用于治疗IBD患者的蠕虫的疗效和安全性得出任何确凿结论。本综述中我们主要疗效结局的证据来自一项小型研究,且由于严重不精确而质量较低。我们没有足够的证据确定蠕虫用于UC和CD患者时是否安全。需要进一步的RCT来评估蠕虫疗法在IBD中的疗效和安全性。

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