Suppr超能文献

哪种生物制剂对鼻息肉最有效:度普利尤单抗、奥马珠单抗还是美泊利单抗?一项网状Meta分析。

Which Is the Best Biologic for Nasal Polyps: Dupilumab, Omalizumab, or Mepolizumab? A Network Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Wu Qingwu, Zhang Yana, Kong Weifeng, Wang Xinyue, Yuan Lianxiong, Zheng Rui, Qiu Huijun, Huang Xuekun, Yang Qintai

机构信息

Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.

Department of Allergy, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2022;183(3):279-288. doi: 10.1159/000519228. Epub 2021 Oct 4.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Compared with the placebo, biologics are beneficial in reducing nasal polyp mass and safe in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). However, there lacks a head-to-head randomized trial comparing biologics. We aimed to determine the best biologic for CRSwNP.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), which was registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42021226766). A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library on December 29, 2020. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing biologics in adult patients for CRSwNP were included.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with 1,190 patients comparing 3 different biologics (dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab) and the placebo were included. Dupilumab had the best efficacy in terms of nasal polyp score (NPS), Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) score, University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) score, and nasal congestion score (NCS) for surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values of 0.900, 0.916, 1.000, and 0.807, respectively. Omalizumab ranked second in efficacy in terms of SNOT-22, UPSIT, and NCS for SUCRA values of 0.606, 0.500, and 0.693, respectively. Mepolizumab ranked second in efficacy in terms of NPS for SUCRA values of 0.563 and had the highest risk of adverse events (AEs) for SUCRA values of 0.746.

CONCLUSION

This is the first NMA that compared different biologics in patients with CRSwNP. Based on the efficacy (NPS) and safety (AEs), dupilumab is the best choice and omalizumab is the second best option for CRSwNP. Although mepolizumab ranked second in efficacy, it had the highest risk of AEs.

摘要

引言

与安慰剂相比,生物制剂在减少鼻息肉体积方面有益,且对慢性鼻-鼻窦炎伴鼻息肉(CRSwNP)患者安全。然而,缺乏比较生物制剂的直接头对头随机试验。我们旨在确定治疗CRSwNP的最佳生物制剂。

方法

我们进行了一项系统评价和网状Meta分析(NMA),该研究已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO)注册(注册号:CRD42021226766)。2020年12月29日,我们在PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆进行了全面检索。仅纳入评估生物制剂用于成年CRSwNP患者的随机对照试验(RCT)。

结果

纳入了9项RCT,共1190例患者,比较了3种不同生物制剂(度普利尤单抗、奥马珠单抗和美泊利单抗)与安慰剂。就鼻息肉评分(NPS)、鼻窦结局测试-22(SNOT-22)评分、宾夕法尼亚大学嗅觉识别测试(UPSIT)评分和鼻充血评分(NCS)而言,度普利尤单抗疗效最佳,累积排序曲线下面积(SUCRA)值分别为0.900、0.916、1.000和0.807。就SNOT-22、UPSIT和NCS而言,奥马珠单抗疗效排名第二,SUCRA值分别为0.606、0.500和0.693。就NPS而言,美泊利单抗疗效排名第二,SUCRA值为0.563,且不良事件(AE)风险最高,SUCRA值为0.746。

结论

这是第一项比较CRSwNP患者不同生物制剂的NMA。基于疗效(NPS)和安全性(AE),度普利尤单抗是CRSwNP的最佳选择,奥马珠单抗是第二佳选择。尽管美泊利单抗疗效排名第二,但其AE风险最高。

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