Suppr超能文献

大麻素在姑息治疗中的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Systematic review and meta-analysis of cannabinoids in palliative medicine.

机构信息

Department of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

Center for Rare Diseases Bonn (ZSEB), University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

出版信息

J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2018 Apr;9(2):220-234. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12273. Epub 2018 Feb 5.

Abstract

We provide a systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cannabinoids in palliative medicine. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and http://clinicaltrials.gov, and a selection of cancer journals were searched up until 15th of March 2017. Of the 108 screened studies, nine studies with a total of 1561 participants were included. Overall, the nine studies were at moderate risk of bias. The quality of evidence comparing cannabinoids with placebo was rated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation as low or very low because of indirectness, imprecision, and potential reporting bias. In cancer patients, there were no significant differences between cannabinoids and placebo for improving caloric intake (standardized mean differences [SMD]: 0.2 95% confidence interval [CI]: [-0.66, 1.06] P = 0.65), appetite (SMD: 0.81 95% CI: [-1.14, 2.75]; P = 0.42), nausea/vomiting (SMD: 0.21 [-0.10, 0.52] P = 0.19), >30% decrease in pain (risk differences [RD]: 0.07 95% CI: [-0.01, 0.16]; P = 0.07), or sleep problems (SMD: -0.09 95% CI: [-0.62, 0.43] P = 0.72). In human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients, cannabinoids were superior to placebo for weight gain (SMD: 0.57 [0.22; 0.92]; P = 0.001) and appetite (SMD: 0.57 [0.11; 1.03]; P = 0.02) but not for nausea/vomiting (SMD: 0.20 [-0.15, 0.54]; P = 0.26). Regarding side effects in cancer patients, there were no differences between cannabinoids and placebo in symptoms of dizziness (RD: 0.03 [-0.02; 0.08]; P = 0.23) or poor mental health (RD: -0.01 [-0.04; 0.03]; P = 0.69), whereas in HIV patients, there was a significant increase in mental health symptoms (RD: 0.05 [0.00; 0.11]; P = 0.05). Tolerability (measured by the number of withdrawals because of adverse events) did not differ significantly in cancer (RD: 1.15 [0.80; 1.66]; P = 0.46) and HIV patients (RD: 1.87 [0.60; 5.84]; P = 0.28). Safety did not differ in cancer (RD: 1.12 [0.86; 1.46]; P = 0.39) or HIV patients (4.51 [0.54; 37.45]; P = 0.32) although there was large uncertainty about the latter reflected in the width of the CI. In one moderate quality study of 469 cancer patients with cancer-associated anorexia, megestrol was superior to cannabinoids in improving appetite, producing >10% weight gain and tolerability. In another study comparing megestrol to dronabinol in HIV patients, megestrol treatment led to higher weight gain without any differences in tolerability and safety. We found no convincing, unbiased, high quality evidence suggesting that cannabinoids are of value for anorexia or cachexia in cancer or HIV patients.

摘要

我们对姑息治疗中使用大麻素的疗效、耐受性和安全性进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。检索了 Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、PsycINFO、PubMed、Scopus 和 http://clinicaltrials.gov,以及一些癌症期刊,截止日期为 2017 年 3 月 15 日。在筛选出的 108 项研究中,有 9 项研究共纳入 1561 名参与者。总体而言,这 9 项研究存在中度偏倚风险。根据 Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation 标准,将比较大麻素与安慰剂的证据质量评为低或极低,因为存在间接性、不精确性和潜在的报告偏倚。在癌症患者中,大麻素与安慰剂相比,在改善热量摄入方面没有显著差异(标准化均数差 [SMD]:0.2,95%置信区间 [CI]:[-0.66, 1.06];P=0.65),食欲(SMD:0.81,95% CI:[-1.14, 2.75];P=0.42),恶心/呕吐(SMD:0.21,95% CI:[-0.10, 0.52];P=0.19),疼痛缓解超过 30%(风险差异 [RD]:0.07,95% CI:[-0.01, 0.16];P=0.07),或睡眠问题(SMD:-0.09,95% CI:[-0.62, 0.43];P=0.72)。在人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)患者中,大麻素在体重增加(SMD:0.57,95% CI:0.22;0.92];P=0.001)和食欲(SMD:0.57,95% CI:0.11;1.03];P=0.02)方面优于安慰剂,但在恶心/呕吐方面无差异(SMD:0.20,95% CI:[-0.15, 0.54];P=0.26)。关于癌症患者的副作用,大麻素与安慰剂在头晕(RD:0.03,95% CI:[-0.02;0.08];P=0.23)或心理健康不佳(RD:-0.01,95% CI:[-0.04;0.03];P=0.69)方面无差异,但在 HIV 患者中,心理健康症状显著增加(RD:0.05,95% CI:[0.00;0.11];P=0.05)。在癌症(RD:1.15,95% CI:0.80;1.66];P=0.46)和 HIV 患者(RD:1.87,95% CI:0.60;5.84];P=0.28)中,耐受性(通过因不良事件而退出的人数来衡量)无显著差异。在癌症(RD:1.12,95% CI:0.86;1.46];P=0.39)或 HIV 患者(RD:4.51,95% CI:0.54;37.45];P=0.32)中,安全性也没有差异,尽管后者的置信区间较宽,表明存在很大的不确定性。在一项针对 469 名癌症相关性厌食症癌症患者的中等质量研究中,美金刚优于大麻素,可改善食欲,使体重增加超过 10%,且耐受性良好。在另一项将美金刚与 dronabinol 比较的 HIV 患者研究中,美金刚治疗导致体重增加,但耐受性和安全性无差异。我们没有发现令人信服的、无偏倚的、高质量的证据表明大麻素对癌症或 HIV 患者的厌食或恶病质有价值。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/61ed/5879974/6d79e75f95fc/JCSM-9-220-g001.jpg

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