Suppr超能文献

双重食欲素受体拮抗剂治疗原发性失眠的疗效和安全性:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

The efficacy and safety of dual orexin receptor antagonists in primary insomnia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, 215006, China; Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Department of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, 215006, China; Department of Neurosurgery, Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, 215200, China.

出版信息

Sleep Med Rev. 2022 Feb;61:101573. doi: 10.1016/j.smrv.2021.101573. Epub 2021 Nov 26.

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of dual orexin receptor antagonists (DORAs) for primary insomnia have been well verified in several large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over the past several decades. However, there have been few systematic comparisons of different DORAs, and the best DORA for insomniacs has remained unclear. Here, Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for RCTs (through December 31, 2020) to evaluate different DORAs versus a placebo. We pooled data from 13 RCTs. DORAs were superior to the placebo in all efficacy outcomes except the subjective number of awakenings (P = 0.90), but also showed higher risks of somnolence, abnormal dreams, fatigue, and dry mouth (somnolence: P < 0.00001; abnormal dreams: P = 0.03; fatigue: P = 0.001; dry mouth: P = 0.007). No statistical differences were found between any two of the DORAs in terms of primary efficacy outcomes. However, lemborexant yielded the three-highest surfaces under the curve ranking area (SUCRA) values (78.25%, 96.25% and 89.13%). Taken together, we conclude that DORAs are superior to the placebo in terms of efficacy and safety measures.

摘要

在过去几十年的几项大型随机对照试验 (RCT) 中,双重食欲素受体拮抗剂 (DORA) 治疗原发性失眠的疗效和安全性已得到充分验证。然而,不同 DORA 之间的系统比较很少,对于失眠症患者来说,哪种 DORA 最好仍不清楚。在这里,我们检索了 Medline、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 clinicaltrials.gov 上的 RCT(截至 2020 年 12 月 31 日),以评估不同的 DORA 与安慰剂相比。我们对 13 项 RCT 的数据进行了汇总。DORA 在所有疗效结局上均优于安慰剂,除了主观觉醒次数(P=0.90)外,但也显示出更高的嗜睡、异常梦境、疲劳和口干风险(嗜睡:P<0.00001;异常梦境:P=0.03;疲劳:P=0.001;口干:P=0.007)。在主要疗效结局方面,任何两种 DORA 之间均未发现统计学差异。然而,lemborexant 的曲线下面积排序区域(SUCRA)值最高(78.25%、96.25%和 89.13%)。总的来说,我们得出结论,DORA 在疗效和安全性措施方面优于安慰剂。

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