Su Pengli, Leng Yuanyuan, Liu Jun, Yu Yanan, Wang Zhong, Dang Haixia
Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Feb 7;12:803676. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.803676. eCollection 2021.
Given the limitations of three-step analgesic therapy and the extensive use of traditional Chinese medicine injections (TCMIs) for cancer-related pain (CRP), this network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different regimens of TCMIs for CRP. A literature search was conducted in seven electronic databases for all related articles published before 12 April 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were screened by a prior eligible criteria. The quality of literature was evaluated by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We used Stata 16.0 software to analyze data including total pain relief rate, quality of life, and the incidence of adverse reactions. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability values were applied to rank the interventions. Radar map was used to exhibit the most outstanding regimen for a certain outcome. Synthetic sorting bubble diagram was performed to show the relatively better regimen by integrating two or three outcomes. A total of 84 RCTs involving 8,044 patients were included. The results indicated that YDZYR + AN (Yadanziyouru injection plus analgesic) ranked first for pain relief rate, closely followed by KLT + AN (Kanglaite injection plus analgesic). AD + AN (Aidi injection plus analgesic) ranked first for quality of life, KLT + AN following closely. The total adverse reaction rate of FFKS + AN (Fufangkushen injection plus analgesic) was the lowest, and the constipation rate of FFKS was the lowest. In terms of the incidence of nausea and vomiting, KLT + AN was the best choice. In the plots analysis, the results of integrated total incidence of adverse reactions and pain relief rate analysis indicated that FFKS + AN was the most appropriate regimen. Meanwhile, it had the lowest incidence of integrated constipation, nausea and vomiting, and total adverse reactions. KLT + AN was the best in alleviating pain and improving quality of life integrated outcomes. In conclusion, FFKS + AN was the best treatment regimen for the pain relief rate and total adverse reaction rate, and it was also the safest regimen for CRP treatment. KLT + AN was the most effective choice. Further, compared with analgesic treatment alone for patients with CRP, TCMIs + AN combination treatment strategies are significantly more effective. However, more high-quality RCTs are required to support these conclusions. (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/export_details_pdf.php), identifier (ChiCTR-ONC-CRD42021267829).
鉴于三步镇痛疗法的局限性以及中药注射剂(TCMIs)在癌症相关疼痛(CRP)治疗中的广泛应用,本网络荟萃分析(NMA)旨在比较不同TCMIs方案治疗CRP的疗效和安全性。于2021年4月12日前在七个电子数据库中检索所有相关文章。根据预先设定的纳入标准筛选随机对照试验(RCTs)。采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估文献质量。使用Stata 16.0软件分析数据,包括总疼痛缓解率、生活质量和不良反应发生率。应用累积排序曲线下面积(SUCRA)概率值对干预措施进行排序。使用雷达图展示某一结局最突出的方案。通过综合两到三个结局制作综合排序气泡图以显示相对较好的方案。共纳入84项RCTs,涉及8044例患者。结果表明,鸦胆子油乳+镇痛药(YDZYR + AN)在疼痛缓解率方面排名第一,康莱特注射液+镇痛药(KLT + AN)紧随其后。艾迪注射液+镇痛药(AD + AN)在生活质量方面排名第一,KLT + AN紧随其后。复方苦参注射液+镇痛药(FFKS + AN)的总不良反应率最低,且FFKS的便秘发生率最低。在恶心呕吐发生率方面,KLT + AN是最佳选择。在综合分析中,综合不良反应总发生率和疼痛缓解率分析结果表明,FFKS + AN是最合适的方案。同时,其综合便秘、恶心呕吐及总不良反应发生率最低。KLT + AN在缓解疼痛和改善生活质量综合结局方面最佳。总之,FFKS + AN在疼痛缓解率和总不良反应率方面是最佳治疗方案,也是治疗CRP最安全的方案。KLT + AN是最有效的选择。此外,与单纯镇痛药治疗CRP患者相比,TCMIs + AN联合治疗策略显著更有效。然而,需要更多高质量的RCTs来支持这些结论。(https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/export_details_pdf.php),标识符(ChiCTR-ONC-CRD42021267829)