Lansbury Louise, Rodrigo Chamira, Leonardi-Bee Jo, Nguyen-Van-Tam Jonathan, Lim Wei Shen
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, The University of Nottingham, City Hospital Campus, Hucknall Road, Nottingham, UK, NG5 1PB.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Feb 24;2(2):CD010406. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010406.pub3.
Specific treatments for influenza are limited to neuraminidase inhibitors and adamantanes. Corticosteroids show evidence of benefit in sepsis and related conditions, most likely due to their anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties. Although commonly prescribed for severe influenza, there is uncertainty over their potential benefits or harms. This is an update of a review first published in 2016.
To systematically assess the effectiveness and potential adverse effects of corticosteroids as adjunctive therapy in the treatment of influenza, taking into account differences in timing and doses of corticosteroids.
We searched CENTRAL (2018, Issue 9), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1946 to October week 1, 2018), Embase (1980 to 3 October 2018), CINAHL (1981 to 3 October 2018), LILACS (1982 to 3 October 2018), Web of Science (1985 to 3 October 2018), abstracts from the last three years of major infectious disease and microbiology conferences, and references of included articles. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the ISRCTN registry on 3 October 2018.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and observational studies that compared corticosteroid treatment with no corticosteroid treatment for influenza or influenza-like illness. We did not restrict studies by language of publication, influenza subtypes, clinical setting, or age of participants. We selected eligible studies in two stages: sequential examination of title and abstract, followed by full text.
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We pooled estimates of effect using a random-effects model, where appropriate. We assessed heterogeneity using the I statistic and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework.
This updated review includes 30 studies (one RCT with two arms and 29 observational studies) with a total of 99,224 participants. We included 19 studies in the original review (n = 3459), all of which were observational, with 13 studies included in the meta-analysis for mortality. We included 12 new studies in this update (one RCT and 11 observational studies), and excluded one study in the original review as it has been superceded by a more recent analysis. Twenty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis (9536 individuals), of which 15 studied people infected with 2009 influenza A H1N1 virus (H1N1pdm09). Data specific to mortality were of very low quality, based predominantly on observational studies, with inconsistent reporting of variables potentially associated with the outcomes of interest, differences between studies in the way in which they were conducted, and with the likelihood of potential confounding by indication. Reported doses of corticosteroids used were high, and indications for their use were not well reported. On meta-analysis, corticosteroid therapy was associated with increased mortality (odds ratio (OR) 3.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.31 to 6.60; I = 68%; 15 studies). A similar increase in risk of mortality was seen in a stratified analysis of studies reporting adjusted estimates (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.54 to 3.24; I = 0%; 5 studies). An association between corticosteroid therapy and increased mortality was also seen on pooled analysis of six studies which reported adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.02; I = 69%). Increased odds of hospital-acquired infection related to corticosteroid therapy were found on pooled analysis of seven studies (pooled OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.95; I = 90%); all were unadjusted estimates, and we graded the data as of very low certainty.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found one RCT of adjunctive corticosteroid therapy for treating people with community-acquired pneumonia, but the number of people with laboratory-confirmed influenza in the treatment and placebo arms was too small to draw conclusions regarding the effect of corticosteroids in this group, and we did not include it in our meta-analyses of observational studies. The certainty of the available evidence from observational studies was very low, with confounding by indication a major potential concern. Although we found that adjunctive corticosteroid therapy is associated with increased mortality, this result should be interpreted with caution. In the context of clinical trials of adjunctive corticosteroid therapy in sepsis and pneumonia that report improved outcomes, including decreased mortality, more high-quality research is needed (both RCTs and observational studies that adjust for confounding by indication). The currently available evidence is insufficient to determine the effectiveness of corticosteroids for people with influenza.
流感的特效治疗方法仅限于神经氨酸酶抑制剂和金刚烷类药物。皮质类固醇在脓毒症及相关病症中显示出有益效果,这很可能归因于其抗炎和免疫调节特性。尽管皮质类固醇常用于治疗重症流感,但其潜在益处或危害仍存在不确定性。这是对2016年首次发表的一篇综述的更新。
系统评估皮质类固醇作为辅助治疗在流感治疗中的有效性和潜在不良反应,同时考虑皮质类固醇在给药时间和剂量上的差异。
我们检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库(CENTRAL,2018年第9期),其中包括Cochrane急性呼吸道感染组专业注册库、医学索引数据库(MEDLINE,1946年至2018年10月第1周)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(Embase,1980年至2018年10月3日)、护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL,1981年至2018年10月3日)、拉丁美洲及加勒比地区健康科学文献数据库(LILACS,1982年至2018年10月3日)、科学引文索引扩展版(Web of Science,1985年至2018年10月3日)、过去三年主要传染病和微生物学会议的摘要以及纳入文献的参考文献。我们还于2018年10月3日检索了世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台、美国国立医学图书馆临床试验数据库(ClinicalTrials.gov)和国际标准随机对照试验编号注册库(ISRCTN registry)。
我们纳入了将皮质类固醇治疗与未使用皮质类固醇治疗流感或流感样疾病进行比较的随机对照试验(RCT)、半随机对照试验和观察性研究。我们未根据出版物语言、流感亚型、临床环境或参与者年龄对研究进行限制。我们分两个阶段选择符合条件的研究:先依次审查标题和摘要,然后审查全文。
两位综述作者独立提取数据并评估偏倚风险。在适当情况下,我们使用随机效应模型汇总效应估计值。我们使用I²统计量评估异质性,并使用GRADE框架评估证据的确定性。
本次更新的综述纳入了30项研究(1项双臂RCT和29项观察性研究),共99,224名参与者。我们在原综述中纳入了19项研究(n = 3459),所有这些研究均为观察性研究,其中13项研究纳入了死亡率的荟萃分析。本次更新纳入了12项新研究(1项RCT和11项观察性研究),并排除了原综述中的1项研究,因为它已被更新的分析所取代。21项研究纳入了荟萃分析(9536人),其中15项研究针对感染2009甲型H1N1流感病毒(H1N1pdm09)的人群。特定于死亡率的数据质量非常低,主要基于观察性研究,感兴趣结局的潜在相关变量报告不一致,研究实施方式存在差异,且存在指征性潜在混杂的可能性。所报告的皮质类固醇使用剂量较高,且其使用指征报告不佳。荟萃分析显示,皮质类固醇治疗与死亡率增加相关(比值比(OR)3.90,95%置信区间(CI)2.31至6.60;I² = 68%;15项研究)。在报告调整估计值的研究分层分析中,死亡率风险也有类似增加(OR 2.23,9%置信区间CI 1.54至3.24;I² = 0%;5项研究)。在对六项报告调整风险比(HR)的研究进行汇总分析时,也发现皮质类固醇治疗与死亡率增加相关(HR 1.49,95%置信区间CI 1.09至2.02;I² = 69%)。在对七项研究进行汇总分析时,发现与皮质类固醇治疗相关的医院获得性感染几率增加(汇总OR 2.74,95%置信区间CI 1.51至4.95;I² = 90%);所有均为未调整估计值,我们将这些数据的确定性评为极低。
我们发现一项关于辅助皮质类固醇治疗社区获得性肺炎患者的RCT,但治疗组和安慰剂组中实验室确诊流感患者的数量过少,无法就皮质类固醇对该组患者的疗效得出结论,因此我们未将其纳入观察性研究的荟萃分析。观察性研究的现有证据确定性非常低,指征性混杂是一个主要潜在问题。尽管我们发现辅助皮质类固醇治疗与死亡率增加相关,但这一结果应谨慎解读。在脓毒症和肺炎辅助皮质类固醇治疗的临床试验报告结局改善(包括死亡率降低)的背景下,需要更多高质量研究(包括RCT和针对指征性混杂进行调整的观察性研究)。目前可得的证据不足以确定皮质类固醇对流感患者的有效性。