Suppr超能文献

支持注射用促肾上腺皮质激素用于美国食品药品监督管理局批准适应症的临床证据特征:一项范围综述

Characterization of the Clinical Evidence Supporting Repository Corticotropin Injection for FDA-Approved Indications: A Scoping Review.

作者信息

Tran Kim A, Harrod Curtis, Bourdette Dennis N, Cohen David M, Deodhar Atul A, Hartung Daniel M

机构信息

College of Pharmacy, Oregon State University at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.

Center for Evidence-based Policy, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2022 Feb 1;182(2):206-217. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.7171.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Repository corticotropin injection is an expensive medication that was approved in 1952 for the treatment of many inflammatory conditions. The clinical evidence supporting the use of repository corticotropin (hereinafter referred to as corticotropin) has been weak, perhaps because its approval predated the modern review standards of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the clinical evidence supporting the use of corticotropin for its FDA-approved indications.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Studies were identified via electronic searches of Ovid MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from database inception to May 12, 2021 (the MEDLINE search was updated on June 8, 2021). Bibliographies of retrieved articles were also reviewed through ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA documents, and the manufacturer's website. Search terms included HP Acthar, ACTH gel, repository corticotropin, and terms for specific diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, nephrotic syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, and West syndrome (or spasms, infantile). The review included randomized clinical trials (RCTs), nonrandomized and single-arm clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies that compared corticotropin with an active comparator, placebo, or no treatment. Data were extracted by 1 reviewer and verified by a second. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. Studies were qualitatively synthesized by indication to summarize important design features and results.

FINDINGS

Of 1059 records screened, 203 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. A total of 41 studies involving 2235 participants met inclusion criteria; of those, 11 involved infantile spasms, 10 involved multiple sclerosis (MS), 11 involved rheumatological conditions, 7 involved nephrotic syndrome, 1 involved ocular conditions, and 1 involved sarcoidosis. Overall, 19 studies either included a single arm or exclusively compared different corticotropin dosing strategies. The evidence was most robust for the treatment of infantile spasms and MS. The largest number of studies comparing corticotropin with an active agent (n = 4) or placebo (n = 5) pertained to MS, with almost all studies finding that corticotropin performed better than placebo but no different than corticosteroids. For the treatment of infantile spasms, 8 controlled studies were identified (6 were randomized); of those, only 1 small RCT found corticotropin to be significantly superior to corticosteroids. Studies of patients with other conditions (n = 20) frequently lacked a control group (n = 12), were placebo-controlled (n = 5), or exclusively examined different corticotropin dosing strategies (n = 2). Placebo-controlled RCTs of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, optic neuritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and nephrotic syndrome were generally small and did not consistently demonstrate that corticotropin was superior to placebo. Blinded RCTs showed a similar or greater number of adverse effects with corticotropin relative to corticosteroids.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this scoping review, few RCTs supported the clinical benefit of corticotropin for most FDA-approved indications. Most RCTs found that corticotropin was not superior to corticosteroids for treating relapses of MS or infantile spasms.

摘要

重要性

长效促肾上腺皮质激素注射液是一种昂贵的药物,于1952年被批准用于治疗多种炎症性疾病。支持使用长效促肾上腺皮质激素(以下简称促肾上腺皮质激素)的临床证据一直很薄弱,可能是因为其批准时间早于美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)的现代审评标准。

目的

描述支持促肾上腺皮质激素用于FDA批准适应症的临床证据。

证据综述

通过对Ovid MEDLINE、护理及相关健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)进行电子检索来识别研究,检索时间从数据库建立至2021年5月12日(MEDLINE检索于2021年6月8日更新)。还通过ClinicalTrials.gov、FDA文件和制造商网站对检索到的文章的参考文献进行了审查。检索词包括惠普促皮质素、促肾上腺皮质激素凝胶、长效促肾上腺皮质激素以及特定疾病的术语,如多发性硬化症、肾病综合征、类风湿性关节炎和韦斯特综合征(或婴儿痉挛症)。该综述纳入了随机临床试验(RCT)、非随机和单臂临床试验以及前瞻性队列研究,这些研究将促肾上腺皮质激素与活性对照药、安慰剂或不治疗进行了比较。数据由一名审阅者提取,并由另一名审阅者进行核实。分歧通过讨论解决。按适应症对研究进行定性综合,以总结重要的设计特点和结果。

研究结果

在筛选的1059条记录中,对203篇全文文章进行了资格评估。共有41项研究涉及2235名参与者,符合纳入标准;其中,11项涉及婴儿痉挛症,10项涉及多发性硬化症(MS),11项涉及风湿性疾病,7项涉及肾病综合征,1项涉及眼部疾病,1项涉及结节病。总体而言,19项研究要么只包括单臂,要么专门比较了不同的促肾上腺皮质激素给药策略。治疗婴儿痉挛症和MS的证据最为充分。比较促肾上腺皮质激素与活性药物(n = 4)或安慰剂(n = 5)的研究中,涉及MS的最多,几乎所有研究都发现促肾上腺皮质激素的表现优于安慰剂,但与皮质类固醇无差异。对于婴儿痉挛症的治疗,共识别出8项对照研究(6项为随机对照);其中,只有1项小型RCT发现促肾上腺皮质激素明显优于皮质类固醇。对其他疾病患者(n = 20)的研究经常缺乏对照组(n = 12),为安慰剂对照(n = 5),或专门研究了不同的促肾上腺皮质激素给药策略(n = 2)。类风湿性关节炎、强直性脊柱炎、视神经炎、系统性红斑狼疮和肾病综合征的安慰剂对照RCT一般规模较小,并未一致证明促肾上腺皮质激素优于安慰剂。盲法RCT显示,与皮质类固醇相比,促肾上腺皮质激素的不良反应数量相似或更多。

结论与意义

在这项范围综述中,很少有RCT支持促肾上腺皮质激素对大多数FDA批准适应症的临床益处。大多数RCT发现,促肾上腺皮质激素在治疗MS复发或婴儿痉挛症方面并不优于皮质类固醇。

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