Suppr超能文献

行政健康数据库中类风湿性关节炎患者生物治疗的安全性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Safety of biological therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in administrative health databases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

de Queiroz Mariana Jorge, de Castro Caroline Tianeze, Albuquerque Flavia Caixeta, Brandão Celmário Castro, Gerlack Leticia Farias, Pereira Daniella Cristina Rodrigues, Barros Sandra Castro, Andrade Wenderson Walla, Bastos Ediane de Assis, Azevedo Jessé de Nobrega Batista, Carreiro Roberto, Barreto Mauricio Lima, Santos Djanilson Barbosa

机构信息

Department of Pharmaceutical Assistance and Strategic Inputs, Ministry of Health, Brasília, Brazil.

Institute of Collective Health, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.

出版信息

Front Pharmacol. 2022 Aug 11;13:928471. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.928471. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic inflammatory disease that affects the synovial fluid of joints, tendons, and some extra-articular sites. Biologic agents have been highly effective and are comparable in reducing RA symptoms, slowing disease progression, and improving physical function; however, concerns have been raised about the risks of several potential adverse effects. Thus, this study aimed to assess the safety of biological therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in observational studies using administrative health databases. PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 21 October 2021. The analysis was divided into five groups: tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) versus non-TNFi; TNFi versus csDMARDs; bDMARDs versus csDMARDs; abatacept versus bDMARDs; and TNFi versus Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi). The adverse events were cancer, cardiovascular events, infection, herpes zoster, tuberculosis, and death. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model estimated risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Thirty-one studies were eligible for inclusion in the present systematic review, published from 2014 to 2021. A total of 1,039,398 RA patients were assessed. The 31 studies evaluated eleven different biological drugs. No significant differences were found regarding safety between TNFi versus non-TNFi (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.92-1.28; < 0.01; I = 93.0%), TNFi versus csDMARDs (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.75-1.10; < 0.01; I = 87.0%), bDMARDs versus csDMARDs (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.82-1.20; < 0.01; I = 93.0%), abatacept versus bDMARDs (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.54-1.18; < 0.01; I = 90.0%), and TNFi versus JAKi (RR 3.54; 95% CI 0.30-42.09; = 0.01; I = 81.0%). In the subgroup analysis, among studies comparing abatacept to TNFi, a lower risk of cardiovascular events was associated with abatacept (RR 0.37; 95% CI 0.24-0.55). Our results do not suggest an increased risk of adverse events associated with biological therapy in treating RA patients, indicating a lower risk of cardiovascular events with abatacept than TNFi. However, these findings must be interpreted with caution given the limitations of this study and the low/very low certainty of the evidence. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?, identifier [CRD42020190838].

摘要

类风湿关节炎(RA)是一种全身性炎症性疾病,会影响关节的滑液、肌腱以及一些关节外部位。生物制剂已被证明非常有效,在减轻RA症状、减缓疾病进展和改善身体功能方面具有可比性;然而,人们对几种潜在不良反应的风险表示担忧。因此,本研究旨在通过行政健康数据库在观察性研究中评估类风湿关节炎患者生物治疗的安全性。检索了PubMed、Embase、Lilacs、Ovid、Scopus和Web of Science数据库,检索时间从建库至2021年10月21日。分析分为五组:肿瘤坏死因子抑制剂(TNFi)与非TNFi;TNFi与传统合成改善病情抗风湿药(csDMARDs);生物制剂改善病情抗风湿药(bDMARDs)与csDMARDs;阿巴西普与bDMARDs;以及TNFi与 Janus激酶抑制剂(JAKi)。不良事件包括癌症、心血管事件、感染、带状疱疹、结核病和死亡。研究的方法学质量通过纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行评估。采用随机效应模型估计风险比及95%置信区间。共有31项研究符合纳入本系统评价的标准,发表时间为2014年至2021年。共评估了1,039,398例RA患者。这31项研究评估了11种不同的生物药物。在TNFi与非TNFi(风险比1.08;95%置信区间0.92 - 1.28;P < 0.01;I² = 93.0%)、TNFi与csDMARDs(风险比0.91;95%置信区间0.75 - 1.10;P < 0.01;I² = 87.0%)、bDMARDs与csDMARDs(风险比0.99;95%置信区间0.82 - 1.20;P < 0.01;I² = 93.0%)、阿巴西普与bDMARDs(风险比0.80;95%置信区间0.54 - 1.18;P < 0.01;I² = 90.0%)以及TNFi与JAKi(风险比3.54;95%置信区间0.30 - 42.09;P = 0.01;I² = 81.0%)之间,未发现安全性方面的显著差异。在亚组分析中,在比较阿巴西普与TNFi的研究中,阿巴西普与较低的心血管事件风险相关(风险比0.37;95%置信区间0.24 - 0.55)。我们的结果并未表明生物治疗在治疗RA患者时会增加不良事件风险,表明阿巴西普导致心血管事件的风险低于TNFi。然而,鉴于本研究的局限性以及证据的低/极低确定性,这些发现必须谨慎解读。https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?,标识符[CRD42020190838]

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b7f/9407686/ce8c6dfb1743/fphar-13-928471-g001.jpg

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