三联吸入器疗法与中重度哮喘的哮喘结局:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Triple vs Dual Inhaler Therapy and Asthma Outcomes in Moderate to Severe Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA. 2021 Jun 22;325(24):2466-2479. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.7872.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

The benefits and harms of adding long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) for moderate to severe asthma remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically synthesize the outcomes and adverse events associated with triple therapy (ICS, LABA, and LAMA) vs dual therapy (ICS plus LABA) in children and adults with persistent uncontrolled asthma.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, ICTRP, FDA, and EMA databases from November 2017, to December 8, 2020, without language restriction.

STUDY SELECTION

Two investigators independently selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing triple vs dual therapy in patients with moderate to severe asthma.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses, including individual patient-level exacerbation data, were used. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess certainty (quality) of the evidence.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Severe exacerbations, asthma control (measured using the Asthma Control Questionnaire [ACQ-7], a 7-item list with each item ranging from 0 [totally controlled] to 6 [severely uncontrolled]; minimal important difference, 0.5), quality of life (measured using the Asthma-related Quality of Life [AQLQ] tool; score range, 1 [severely impaired] to 7 [no impairment]; minimal important difference, 0.5), mortality, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs using 3 LAMA types that enrolled 11 894 children and adults (mean age, 52 years [range, 9-71 years]; 57.7% female) were included. High-certainty evidence showed that triple therapy vs dual therapy was significantly associated with a reduction in severe exacerbation risk (9 trials [9932 patients]; 22.7% vs 27.4%; risk ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.77 to 0.90]) and an improvement in asthma control (14 trials [11 230 patients]; standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.06 [95% CI, -0.10 to -0.02]; mean difference in ACQ-7 scale, -0.04 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01]). There were no significant differences in asthma-related quality of life (7 trials [5247 patients]; SMD, 0.05 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.13]; mean difference in AQLQ score, 0.05 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.13]; moderate-certainty evidence) or mortality (17 trials [11 595 patients]; 0.12% vs 0.12%; risk ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.33 to 2.75]; high-certainty evidence) between dual and triple therapy. Triple therapy was significantly associated with increased dry mouth and dysphonia (10 trials [7395 patients]; 3.0% vs 1.8%; risk ratio, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.38]; high-certainty evidence), but treatment-related and serious adverse events were not significantly different between groups (moderate-certainty evidence).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among children (aged 6 to 18 years) and adults with moderate to severe asthma, triple therapy, compared with dual therapy, was significantly associated with fewer severe asthma exacerbations and modest improvements in asthma control without significant differences in quality of life or mortality.

摘要

重要性

添加长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)与吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)和长效β2-激动剂(LABA)用于中重度哮喘的益处和危害仍不清楚。

目的

系统地综合与中重度持续性未控制哮喘的儿童和成人有关的三联疗法(ICS、LABA 和 LAMA)与双效疗法(ICS 加 LABA)的结果和不良事件。

数据来源

2017 年 11 月至 2020 年 12 月 8 日,MEDLINE、Embase、CENTRAL、ICTRP、FDA 和 EMA 数据库,无语言限制。

研究选择

两位研究者独立选择了比较中重度哮喘患者三联疗法与双效疗法的随机临床试验(RCT)。

数据提取和综合

两位评审员独立提取数据并评估偏倚风险。使用随机效应荟萃分析,包括个体患者的恶化数据。使用 GRADE(推荐分级、评估、发展和评价)方法评估证据的确定性(质量)。

主要结果和措施

严重恶化、哮喘控制(使用哮喘控制问卷[ACQ-7]衡量,7 项中有 0 项[完全控制]至 6 项[严重控制];最小重要差异为 0.5)、生活质量(使用哮喘相关生活质量[AQoL]工具衡量;评分范围为 1[严重受损]至 7[无受损];最小重要差异为 0.5)、死亡率和不良事件。

结果

20 项使用 3 种 LAMA 类型的 RCT 纳入了 11894 名儿童和成人(平均年龄 52 岁[范围,9-71 岁];57.7%为女性)。高确定性证据表明,与双效疗法相比,三联疗法显著降低严重恶化风险(9 项试验[9932 名患者];22.7% vs 27.4%;风险比,0.83[95%CI,0.77 至 0.90])和改善哮喘控制(14 项试验[11230 名患者];标准化均数差[SMD],-0.06[95%CI,-0.10 至 -0.02];ACQ-7 量表平均差异,-0.04[95%CI,-0.07 至 -0.01])。哮喘相关生活质量(7 项试验[5247 名患者];SMD,0.05[95%CI,-0.03 至 0.13];AQLQ 评分平均差异,0.05[95%CI,-0.03 至 0.13];中等确定性证据)或死亡率(17 项试验[11595 名患者];0.12% vs 0.12%;风险比,0.96[95%CI,0.33 至 2.75];高确定性证据)在双效和三联疗法之间无显著差异。与双效疗法相比,三联疗法显著增加口干和发音困难(10 项试验[7395 名患者];3.0% vs 1.8%;风险比,1.65[95%CI,1.14 至 2.38];高确定性证据),但两组之间的治疗相关和严重不良事件无显著差异(中等确定性证据)。

结论和相关性

在中重度哮喘的儿童(6 至 18 岁)和成人中,与双效疗法相比,三联疗法与较少的严重哮喘恶化和适度改善哮喘控制相关,而生活质量或死亡率无显著差异。

相似文献

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