Guo Kangle, Zhou Liying, Shang Xue, Yang Chaoqun, E Fenfen, Wang Yan, Xu Meng, Wu Yanan, Li Yanfei, Li Meixuan, Yang Kehu, Li Xiuxia
Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, China; Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Health Technology Assessment Center/Evidence-Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Evidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2022 Dec 1;241:109672. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109672. Epub 2022 Oct 23.
Based on randomized controlled trials, a network meta-analysis was conducted to compare treatment effects across varenicline and related smoking interventions.
English databases were screened for randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of varenicline as treatment for smoking. The risk of bias in included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook tool. Stata 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis, and the GRADE approach was used to assess the evidence credibility on the tobacco treatment effects of different interventions.
Thirty-four studies involving 26,130 smokers were included in the network meta-analysis. Varenicline and 11 other interventions were reported, yielding 66 pairs of comparisons. Network meta-analysis showed that varenicline monotherapy or its combination with other interventions were superior in achieving smoking cessation compared to bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy, counselling, and placebo. Furthermore, compared to the varenicline, evident abstinence superiority was found in varenicline + bupropion (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval [1.02, 2.18]). Finally, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value indicated that varenicline + bupropion has the highest probability to become the best intervention.
Varenicline monotherapy increased the odds of smoking cessation further than bupropion monotherapy, nicotine replacement therapy, counselling, and placebo, while varenicline combined with other interventions may even achieve a better abstinence effect. More credible evidence has been reported indicating that the combination of varenicline and bupropion is a superior treatment for smoking.
基于随机对照试验,进行了一项网状Meta分析,以比较伐尼克兰及相关戒烟干预措施的治疗效果。
检索英文数据库,查找报告伐尼克兰作为戒烟治疗效果的随机对照试验。使用Cochrane手册工具评估纳入试验的偏倚风险。采用Stata 15.1软件进行网状Meta分析,并使用GRADE方法评估不同干预措施对烟草治疗效果的证据可信度。
网状Meta分析纳入了34项研究,涉及26130名吸烟者。报告了伐尼克兰及其他11种干预措施,产生了66对比较。网状Meta分析表明,与安非他酮、尼古丁替代疗法、咨询和安慰剂相比,伐尼克兰单药治疗或其与其他干预措施联合使用在实现戒烟方面更具优势。此外,与伐尼克兰相比,伐尼克兰+安非他酮在戒烟方面具有明显优势(优势比=1.49,95%置信区间[1.02,2.18])。最后,累积排名曲线下面积值表明,伐尼克兰+安非他酮成为最佳干预措施的概率最高。
与安非他酮单药治疗、尼古丁替代疗法、咨询和安慰剂相比,伐尼克兰单药治疗进一步提高了戒烟几率,而伐尼克兰与其他干预措施联合使用甚至可能取得更好的戒烟效果。有更多可靠证据表明,伐尼克兰与安非他酮联合使用是一种更优的戒烟治疗方法。