Le Cleach Laurence, Trinquart Ludovic, Do Giao, Maruani Annabel, Lebrun-Vignes Benedicte, Ravaud Philippe, Chosidow Olivier
Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, 51 avenue du Général de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, France, 94010.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Aug 3;2014(8):CD009036. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009036.pub2.
Genital herpes is caused by herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) or 2 (HSV-2). Some infected people experience outbreaks of genital herpes, typically, characterized by vesicular and erosive localized painful genital lesions.
To compare the effectiveness and safety of three oral antiviral drugs (acyclovir, famciclovir and valacyclovir) prescribed to suppress genital herpes outbreaks in non-pregnant patients.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the search portal of the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and pharmaceutical company databases up to February 2014. We also searched US Food and Drug Administration databases and proceedings of seven congresses to a maximum of 10 years. We contacted trial authors and pharmaceutical companies.
We selected parallel-group and cross-over randomized controlled trials including patients with recurrent genital herpes caused by HSV, whatever the type (HSV-1, HSV-2, or undetermined), with at least four recurrences per year (trials concerning human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients or pregnant women were not eligible) and comparing suppressive oral antiviral treatment with oral acyclovir, famciclovir, and valacyclovir versus placebo or another suppressive oral antiviral treatment.
Two review authors independently selected eligible trials and extracted data. The Risk of bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Treatment effect was measured by the risk ratio (RR) of having at least one genital herpes recurrence. Pooled RRs were derived by conventional pairwise meta-analyses. A network meta-analysis allowed for estimation of all possible two-by-two comparisons between antiviral drugs.
A total of 26 trials (among which six had a cross-over design) were included. Among the 6950 randomly assigned participants, 54% (range 0 to 100%) were female, mean age was 35 years (range 26 to 45.1), and the mean number of recurrences per year was 11 (range 6.3 to 17.8). Duration of treatment was two to 12 months. Risk of bias was considered high for half of the studies and unclear for the other half. A total of 14 trials compared acyclovir versus placebo, four trials compared valacyclovir versus placebo and 2 trials compared valacyclovir versus no treatment. Three trials compared famciclovir versus placebo. Two trials compared valacyclovir versus famciclovir and one trial compared acyclovir versus valacyclovir versus placebo.We analyzed data from 22 trials for the outcome: risk of having at least one clinical recurrence. We could not obtain the outcome data for four trials. In placebo-controlled trials, there was a low quality evidence that the risk of having at least one clinical recurrence was reduced with acyclovir (nine parallel-group trials, n = 2049; pooled RR 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.58), valacyclovir (four trials, n = 1788; pooled RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.69), or famciclovir (two trials, n = 732; pooled RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.64). The six cross-over trials showed larger treatment effects on average than the parallel-group trials. We found evidence of a small-study effect for acyclovir placebo-controlled trials (adjusted pooled RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.75). In analyzing parallel-group trials by daily dose, no clear evidence was found of a dose-response relationship for any drug. In head-to-head trials, the risk of having at least one recurrence was increased with valacyclovir rather than acyclovir (one trial, n = 1345; RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.34) and was not significantly different from that seen with famciclovir as compared with valacyclovir (one trial, n = 320; RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.63).We included 16 parallel-arm trials in a network meta-analysis and we were unable to determine which of the drugs was most effective in reducing the risk of at least one clinical recurrence (after adjustment for small-study effects, pooled RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.11 for valacyclovir vs acyclovir; pooled RR 1.04, 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.49 for famciclovir vs acyclovir; and pooled RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.75 for famciclovir vs valacyclovir). Safety data were sought but were reported as total numbers of adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Owing to risk of bias and inconsistency, there is low quality evidence that suppressive antiviral therapy with acyclovir, valacyclovir or famciclovir in pacients experiencing at least four recurrences of genital herpes per year decreases the number of pacients with at least one recurrence as compared with placebo. Network meta-analysis of the few direct comparisons and the indirect comparisons did not show superiority of one drug over another.
生殖器疱疹是由单纯疱疹病毒1型(HSV - 1)或2型(HSV - 2)引起的。一些感染者会出现生殖器疱疹发作,典型表现为水疱性和糜烂性局部疼痛性生殖器病变。
比较三种口服抗病毒药物(阿昔洛韦、泛昔洛韦和伐昔洛韦)用于抑制非妊娠患者生殖器疱疹发作的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了截至2014年2月的Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台的检索入口以及制药公司数据库。我们还检索了美国食品药品监督管理局数据库以及七次大会的会议记录,最长追溯到10年。我们联系了试验作者和制药公司。
我们选择了平行组和交叉随机对照试验,纳入由HSV引起的复发性生殖器疱疹患者,无论其类型(HSV - 1、HSV - 2或未确定),每年至少复发四次(涉及人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)阳性患者或孕妇的试验不符合条件),并比较口服抗病毒抑制治疗与口服阿昔洛韦、泛昔洛韦和伐昔洛韦相对于安慰剂或另一种口服抗病毒抑制治疗的效果。
两位综述作者独立选择符合条件的试验并提取数据。使用偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。治疗效果通过至少有一次生殖器疱疹复发的风险比(RR)来衡量。合并RR通过传统的成对荟萃分析得出。网络荟萃分析允许估计抗病毒药物之间所有可能的两两比较。
共纳入26项试验(其中六项为交叉设计)。在6950名随机分配的参与者中,54%(范围为0至100%)为女性,平均年龄为35岁(范围为26至45.1岁),每年平均复发次数为11次(范围为6.3至17.8次)。治疗持续时间为2至12个月。一半的研究偏倚风险被认为较高,另一半则不明确。共有14项试验比较了阿昔洛韦与安慰剂,四项试验比较了伐昔洛韦与安慰剂,两项试验比较了伐昔洛韦与不治疗。三项试验比较了泛昔洛韦与安慰剂。两项试验比较了伐昔洛韦与泛昔洛韦,一项试验比较了阿昔洛韦与伐昔洛韦与安慰剂。我们分析了22项试验的数据以获得以下结果:至少有一次临床复发的风险。我们无法获得四项试验的结果数据。在安慰剂对照试验中,有低质量证据表明,阿昔洛韦(九项平行组试验,n = 2049;合并RR 0.48,95%置信区间(CI)0.39至0.58)、伐昔洛韦(四项试验,n = 1788;合并RR 0.41,95% CI 0.