Suppr超能文献

比较戒烟药物治疗和电子烟的临床疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Comparative clinical effectiveness and safety of tobacco cessation pharmacotherapies and electronic cigarettes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK.

Department of Basic Psychology and Methodology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.

出版信息

Addiction. 2022 Apr;117(4):861-876. doi: 10.1111/add.15675. Epub 2021 Oct 11.

Abstract

AIM

To determine how varenicline, bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and electronic cigarettes compare with respect to their clinical effectiveness and safety.

METHOD

Systematic reviews and Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, in any setting, of varenicline, bupropion, NRT and e-cigarettes (in high, standard and low doses, alone or in combination) in adult smokers and smokeless tobacco users with follow-up duration of 24 weeks or greater (effectiveness) or any duration (safety). Nine databases were searched until 19 February 2019. Primary outcomes were sustained tobacco abstinence and serious adverse events (SAEs). We estimated odds ratios (ORs) and treatment rankings and conducted meta-regression to explore covariates.

RESULTS

We identified 363 trials for effectiveness and 355 for safety. Most monotherapies and combination therapies were more effective than placebo at helping participants to achieve sustained abstinence; the most effective of these, estimated with some imprecision, were varenicline standard [OR = 2.83, 95% credible interval (CrI) = 2.34-3.39] and varenicline standard + NRT standard (OR = 5.75, 95% CrI = 2.27-14.88). Estimates were higher in smokers receiving counselling than in those without and in studies with higher baseline nicotine dependence scores than in those with lower scores. Varenicline standard + NRT standard showed a high probability of being ranked best or second-best. For safety, only bupropion at standard dose increased the odds of experiencing SAEs compared with placebo (OR = 1.27, 95% CrI = 1.04-1.58), and we found no evidence of effect modification.

CONCLUSIONS

Most tobacco cessation monotherapies and combination therapies are more effective than placebo at helping participants to achieve sustained abstinence, with varenicline appearing to be most effective based on current evidence. There does not appear to be strong evidence of associations between most tobacco cessation pharmacotherapies and adverse events; however, the data are limited and there is a need for improved reporting of safety data.

摘要

目的

比较伐伦克林、安非他酮、尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)和电子烟在临床疗效和安全性方面的差异。

方法

系统评价和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析,纳入在任何环境下,接受伐伦克林、安非他酮、NRT 和电子烟(高、中、低剂量,单独或联合使用)治疗的成年吸烟者和无烟烟草使用者的随机对照试验,随访时间至少 24 周(有效性)或任何持续时间(安全性)。检索了 9 个数据库,直到 2019 年 2 月 19 日。主要结局是持续的烟草戒断和严重不良事件(SAEs)。我们估计了比值比(ORs)和治疗等级,并进行了荟萃回归以探索协变量。

结果

我们确定了 363 项有效性试验和 355 项安全性试验。大多数单药治疗和联合治疗在帮助参与者实现持续戒断方面比安慰剂更有效;其中最有效的,估计有些不精确,是伐伦克林标准[OR=2.83,95%可信区间(CrI)=2.34-3.39]和伐伦克林标准+NRT 标准[OR=5.75,95% CrI=2.27-14.88]。在接受咨询的吸烟者中,估计值高于未接受咨询者,在基线尼古丁依赖评分较高的研究中,估计值高于评分较低者。伐伦克林标准+NRT 标准极有可能被评为最佳或第二佳。安全性方面,只有标准剂量的安非他酮与安慰剂相比,增加了发生 SAE 的几率(OR=1.27,95% CrI=1.04-1.58),且我们未发现有效果修饰。

结论

大多数烟草戒断的单药治疗和联合治疗在帮助参与者实现持续戒断方面比安慰剂更有效,基于当前证据,伐伦克林似乎最有效。大多数烟草戒断药物治疗与不良事件之间似乎没有强有力的关联证据;然而,数据有限,需要改善安全性数据的报告。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/de01/9293179/4f32fe425df8/ADD-117-861-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验