Suppr超能文献

[姑息治疗中的大麻素:疗效、耐受性和安全性的系统评价与荟萃分析]

[Cannabinoids in palliative care: Systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety].

作者信息

Mücke M, Carter C, Cuhls H, Prüß M, Radbruch L, Häuser W

机构信息

Klinik für Palliativmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53127, Bonn, Deutschland.

Institut für Hausarztmedizin, Medizinische Fakultät, Universität Bonn, Bonn, Deutschland.

出版信息

Schmerz. 2016 Feb;30(1):25-36. doi: 10.1007/s00482-015-0085-2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cannabinoids have multiple medical indications in palliative care, such as relief of pain or nausea or increase of appetite and weight stabilisation. The value of cannabinoids for these indications is not resolved sufficiently for palliative patients. A systematic review with meta-analysis of the efficacy, tolerability and safety on the basis of randomised controlled studies (RCT) or randomised open label or crossover studies has not yet been conducted.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An extensive search for RCTs, randomised open label or crossover studies dealing with the underlying question was performed in the databases of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus and Clinicaltrials.gov up to April 2015. Studies with a duration of ≥ 2 weeks and ≥ 10 participants per treatment group were included into analysis. Using a random effects model, pooled estimates of event rates for categorical data and standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables and risk differences (RD) for dichotomous variables were calculated.

RESULTS

Out of initially 108 studies 9, with a total of 1561 participants suffering from advanced or end stage diseases, were included. The median study duration of the cancer research was 8 weeks (16 days-11 weeks), of the HIV research 6 weeks (3-12 weeks) and of the study concentrating on Alzheimer's 2 × 6 weeks. The outcome results for cannabis/cannabinoids vs. placebo in patients with cancer were not significant for the 30 % decrease in pain (RD: 0.07; 95 % confidence interval (CI): - 0.01 to 0.16; p = 0.07), caloric intake (SMD: 0.2; 95 % CI: - 0.66 to 1.06; p = 0.65) or sleep problems (SMD: - 0.09; 95 % CI: - 0.62 to 0.43; p = 0.72). In the treatment of HIV cannabinoids were superior to placebo for the outcome of weight change (SMD: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.22-0.92; p = 0.001). Change in appetite was significant for the treatment of HIV (SMD: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.11-1.03; p = 0.02), but not for treatment of cancer (SMD: 0.81; 95 % CI: - 1.14 to 2.75; p = 0.42). Nausea/vomiting (SMD: 0.20; 95 % CI: - 0.03 to 0.44; p = 0.09) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL; SMD: 0.00; 95 % CI: - 0.19 to 0.18; p = 0.98) did not show significant differences in the therapy of the two diseases. For the outcomes of tolerability the results were not significant for occurrence of dizziness (RD: 0.03; 95 % CI: - 0.02 to 0.08; p = 0.23) or psychiatric diseases, such as hallucinations or psychosis (RD: - 0.01; 95 % CI: - 0.04 to 0.03; p = 0.69) in the therapy of cancer. The outcome of psychiatric diseases in the treatment of HIV was significant (RD: 0.05; 95 % CI: 0.00-0.11; p = 0.05). The number of withdrawals due to adverse events, as a marker for tolerability, and the reports of serious adverse events as a measure of safety was not significantly different (RD: 1.20; 95 % CI: 0.85-1.71; p = 0.30 and RD: 1.15; 95 % CI: 0.88-1.49; p = 0.30, respectively). Dronabinol vs. megestrol acetate showed a superiority of megestrol in the therapy of cancer-associated anorexia for the endpoints change of appetite (49 vs. 75 %; p = 0.0001), weight gain (3 vs. 11 %; p = 0.02), HRQoL (p = 0.003) and tolerability (p = 0.03). There was no difference in the safety of the therapies (p = 0.12). In the treatment of HIV-associated wasting syndrome megestrol acetate was better than dronabinol for the endpoint of weight gain (p = 0.0001), whereas tolerability and safety did not differ. In the therapy of Alzheimer's dronabinol was better than placebo in the endpoint of weight gain according to one study (n = 15). A difference between herbal cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids, analysed by one study (n = 62) could not be found.

CONCLUSION

Cannabinoids can lead to an increase in appetite in patients with HIV wasting syndrome but the therapy with megestrol acetate is superior to treatment with cannabinoids. The included studies were not of sufficient duration to answer questions concerning the long-term efficacy, tolerability and safety of therapy with cannabis or cannabinoids. Due to the sparse amount of data it is not possible to recommend a favoured use of cannabis or cannabinoids at this point.

摘要

背景

大麻素在姑息治疗中有多种医学适应症,如缓解疼痛或恶心、增加食欲以及稳定体重。对于姑息治疗患者而言,大麻素在这些适应症方面的价值尚未得到充分明确。尚未基于随机对照研究(RCT)、随机开放标签或交叉研究对其疗效、耐受性和安全性进行系统评价及荟萃分析。

材料与方法

截至2015年4月,在Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、PsycINFO、PubMed、Scopus和Clinicaltrials.gov数据库中,广泛检索涉及该基本问题的RCT、随机开放标签或交叉研究。纳入分析的研究要求持续时间≥2周且每个治疗组≥10名参与者。采用随机效应模型,计算分类数据的事件率合并估计值、连续变量的标准化均值差(SMD)以及二分变量的风险差(RD)。

结果

最初检索到的108项研究中,有9项被纳入,共1561名患有晚期或终末期疾病的参与者。癌症研究的中位研究持续时间为8周(16天 - 11周),HIV研究为6周(3 - 12周),专注于阿尔茨海默病的研究为2×6周。在癌症患者中,大麻/大麻素与安慰剂相比,疼痛减轻30%(RD:0.07;95%置信区间(CI): - 0.01至0.16;p = 0.07)、热量摄入(SMD:0.2;95%CI: - 0.66至1.06;p = 0.65)或睡眠问题(SMD: - 0.09;95%CI: - 0.62至0.43;p = 0.72)的结果均无统计学意义。在HIV治疗中,大麻素在体重变化结果方面优于安慰剂(SMD:0.57;95%CI:0.22 - 0.92;p = 0.001)。食欲变化在HIV治疗中具有统计学意义(SMD:0.57;95%CI:0.11 - 1.03;p = 0.02),但在癌症治疗中无统计学意义(SMD:0.81;95%CI: - 1.14至2.75;p = 0.42)。恶心/呕吐(SMD:0.20;95%CI: - 0.03至0.44;p = 0.09)和健康相关生活质量(HRQoL;SMD:0.00;95%CI: - 0.19至0.18;p = 0.98)在两种疾病的治疗中均未显示出显著差异。对于耐受性结果,在癌症治疗中,头晕发生率(RD:0.03;95%CI: - 0.02至0.08;p = 0.23)或精神疾病如幻觉或精神病(RD: - 0.01;95%CI: - 0.04至0.03;p = 0.69)均无统计学意义。HIV治疗中精神疾病的结果具有统计学意义(RD:0.05;95%CI:0.00 - 0.11;p = 0.05)。作为耐受性指标的因不良事件导致的撤药次数以及作为安全性衡量指标的严重不良事件报告,差异均无统计学意义(RD分别为:1.20;95%CI:0.85 - 1.71;p = 0.30和RD:1.15;95%CI:0.88 - 1.49;p = 0.30)。在癌症相关性厌食症治疗中,对于食欲变化(49%对75%;p = 0.0001)、体重增加(3%对11%;p = 0.02)、HRQoL(p = 0.003)和耐受性(p = 0.03)等终点指标,屈大麻酚与甲地孕酮相比,甲地孕酮更具优势。两种治疗方法的安全性无差异(p = 0.12)。在HIV相关性消瘦综合征治疗中,对于体重增加这一终点指标,甲地孕酮优于屈大麻酚(p = 0.0001),而耐受性和安全性无差异。在一项针对阿尔茨海默病的研究(n = 15)中,屈大麻酚在体重增加终点指标上优于安慰剂。一项研究(n = 62)未发现草药大麻与合成大麻素之间存在差异。

结论

大麻素可使HIV消瘦综合征患者的食欲增加,但甲地孕酮治疗优于大麻素治疗。纳入的研究持续时间不足以回答关于大麻或大麻素治疗的长期疗效、耐受性和安全性问题。由于数据量稀少,目前无法推荐优先使用大麻或大麻素。

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验