Suppr超能文献

霉酚酸酯与硫唑嘌呤治疗视神经脊髓炎及视神经脊髓炎谱系障碍的疗效和耐受性比较。

Comparisons of the efficacy and tolerability of mycophenolate mofetil and azathioprine as treatments for neuromyelitis optica and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder.

作者信息

Chen H, Qiu W, Zhang Q, Wang J, Shi Z, Liu J, Lian Z, Feng H, Miao X, Zhou H

机构信息

Department of Neurology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Department of Neurology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

Eur J Neurol. 2017 Jan;24(1):219-226. doi: 10.1111/ene.13186. Epub 2016 Oct 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To research and compare the efficacy and tolerability of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) in neuromyelitis optica (NMO) and NMO spectrum disorder (NMOSD).

METHODS

In this observational study, we enrolled patients with NMO/NMOSD who received either MMF or AZA for 6 months or more. We compared the efficacy and tolerability of MMF and AZA as preventive treatments in patients with NMO/NMOSD.

RESULTS

Baseline variables between groups were not significantly different. In the MMF-treated (n = 105) and AZA-treated (n = 105) groups, 56.2% and 52.4%, respectively, of patients were relapse-free, and both median annualized relapse rates and Expanded Disability Status Scale scores were lower (P = 0.000). More patients in the AZA than MMF group stopped or switched to another preventive treatment because of adverse effects. The Expanded Disability Status Scale scores at final follow-up were lower in the AZA group than in the MMF group, the duration after treatment was longer in the AZA group than in the MMF group, and more patients in the AZA than MMF group concurrently used prednisone (P < 0.05). Neither the Kaplan-Meier survival estimates (P > 0.05) nor the Cox proportional hazard model (P > 0.05) indicated a significant difference in relapse between MMF- and AZA-treated groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both MMF and AZA were effective in patients with NMO/NMOSD. Fewer and more mild adverse events were attributed to MMF than AZA. The probability of maintaining a relapse-free state was not significantly different between the MMF and AZA groups. However, more effective treatments with more acceptable safety profiles are still needed.

摘要

背景与目的

研究并比较霉酚酸酯(MMF)和硫唑嘌呤(AZA)在视神经脊髓炎(NMO)及视神经脊髓炎谱系障碍(NMOSD)中的疗效及耐受性。

方法

在这项观察性研究中,我们纳入了接受MMF或AZA治疗6个月及以上的NMO/NMOSD患者。比较MMF和AZA作为NMO/NMOSD患者预防性治疗的疗效和耐受性。

结果

两组间的基线变量无显著差异。在MMF治疗组(n = 105)和AZA治疗组(n = 105)中,分别有56.2%和52.4%的患者无复发,且年化复发率中位数和扩展残疾状态量表评分均较低(P = 0.000)。由于不良反应,AZA组比MMF组有更多患者停止或换用其他预防性治疗。最终随访时,AZA组的扩展残疾状态量表评分低于MMF组,AZA组的治疗后持续时间长于MMF组,且AZA组比MMF组有更多患者同时使用泼尼松(P < 0.05)。Kaplan-Meier生存估计(P > 0.05)和Cox比例风险模型(P > 0.05)均未显示MMF治疗组和AZA治疗组在复发方面有显著差异。

结论

MMF和AZA对NMO/NMOSD患者均有效。与AZA相比,MMF所致的不良事件更少且更轻微。MMF组和AZA组维持无复发状态的概率无显著差异。然而,仍需要更有效且安全性更可接受的治疗方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验