Xiao Qirong, Lin Bicun, Wang Hanyu, Zhan Weiwu, Chen Ping
Fujian Provincial Key Laboratory on Hematology, Fujian Institute of Hematology, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Central Laboratory, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 May 25;8:656792. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.656792. eCollection 2021.
To compare the therapeutic efficacies of high dose dexamethasone, prednisone and rituximab in combination with dexamethasone for newly diagnosed ITP (Immune Thrombocytopenia, ITP) patients. Relevant publications for this study were obtained by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CNKI (National Knowledge Infrastructure, CNKI) databases following the PRISMA guidelines. A total of, 15 publications were retrieved that contained sufficient data from 1,362 patients for high quality analysis of this study endpoints. Data analysis was carried out using Stata 11.0 software. The primary outcomes were OR (Overall Response, OR) at 1 month after intervention and SR at 6 and 12 months. The secondary outcomes were AEs and relapse. There were no differences in the OR, while the SR was higher at 6 months ( = 0.001) as well as 12 months ( < 0.001) in the rituximab + dexamethasone group. In addition, the incidences of AEs ( = 0.008) were also higher in the rituximab + dexamethasone group. Dexamethasone was superior to prednisone based on OR ( = 0.006). We found no differences in SR at 6 months between dexamethasone and prednisone but SR at 12 months was higher in the dexamethasone group ( = 0.014). The relapse rate was higher in the high dose dexamethasone group compared to the rituximab + dexamethasone group ( = 0.042). This demonstrated that new treatment options such as Rituximab + dexamethasone, could be a good alternative to traditional therapy in improving long-term response and reducing the rate of relapse. However, further studies are required on the increased risk of AEs associated with Rituximab + dexamethasone.
比较高剂量地塞米松、泼尼松以及利妥昔单抗联合地塞米松对新诊断的免疫性血小板减少症(ITP)患者的治疗效果。本研究的相关出版物通过遵循PRISMA指南检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane和中国知网(CNKI)数据库获得。共检索到15篇出版物,其中包含来自1362例患者的足够数据,可用于对本研究终点进行高质量分析。使用Stata 11.0软件进行数据分析。主要结局为干预后1个月的总缓解率(OR)以及6个月和12个月时的持续缓解率(SR)。次要结局为不良事件(AE)和复发情况。OR无差异,而利妥昔单抗联合地塞米松组在6个月时的SR更高(P = 0.001),在12个月时也更高(P < 0.001)。此外,利妥昔单抗联合地塞米松组的AE发生率也更高(P = 0.008)。基于OR,地塞米松优于泼尼松(P = 0.006)。我们发现地塞米松和泼尼松在6个月时的SR无差异,但地塞米松组在12个月时的SR更高(P = 0.014)。高剂量地塞米松组的复发率高于利妥昔单抗联合地塞米松组(P = 0.042)。这表明诸如利妥昔单抗联合地塞米松等新的治疗方案,在改善长期缓解和降低复发率方面可能是传统疗法的良好替代方案。然而,需要进一步研究利妥昔单抗联合地塞米松相关的AE风险增加问题。