Suppr超能文献

成人偏头痛发作急性期药物干预的比较效果:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Comparative effects of drug interventions for the acute management of migraine episodes in adults: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

BMJ. 2024 Sep 18;386:e080107. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-080107.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare all licensed drug interventions as oral monotherapy for the acute treatment of migraine episodes in adults.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, EU Clinical Trials Register, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, as well as websites of regulatory agencies and pharmaceutical companies without language restrictions until 24 June 2023.

METHODS

Screening, data extraction, coding, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently and in duplicate. Random effects network meta-analyses were conducted for the primary analyses. The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants who were pain-free at two hours post-dose and the proportion of participants with sustained pain freedom from two to 24 hours post-dose, both without the use of rescue drugs. Certainty of the evidence was graded using the confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) online tool. Vitruvian plots were used to summarise findings. An international panel of clinicians and people with lived experience of migraine co-designed the study and interpreted the findings.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Double blind randomised trials of adults (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of migraine according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders.

RESULTS

137 randomised controlled trials comprising 89 445 participants allocated to one of 17 active interventions or placebo were included. All active interventions showed superior efficacy compared with placebo for pain freedom at two hours (odds ratios from 1.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 2.34) for naratriptan to 5.19 (4.25 to 6.33) for eletriptan), and most of them also for sustained pain freedom to 24 hours (odds ratios from 1.71 (1.07 to 2.74) for celecoxib to 7.58 (2.58 to 22.27) for ibuprofen). In head-to-head comparisons between active interventions, eletriptan was the most effective drug for pain freedom at two hours (odds ratios from 1.46 (1.18 to 1.81) to 3.01 (2.13 to 4.25)), followed by rizatriptan (1.59 (1.18 to 2.17) to 2.44 (1.75 to 3.45)), sumatriptan (1.35 (1.03 to 1.75) to 2.04 (1.49 to 2.86)), and zolmitriptan (1.47 (1.04 to 2.08) to 1.96 (1.39 to 2.86)). For sustained pain freedom, the most efficacious interventions were eletriptan and ibuprofen (odds ratios from 1.41 (1.02 to 1.93) to 4.82 (1.31 to 17.67)). Confidence in accordance with CINeMA ranged from high to very low. Sensitivity analyses on Food and Drug Administration licensed doses only, high versus low doses, risk of bias, and moderate to severe headache at baseline confirmed the main findings for both primary and secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, eletriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, and zolmitriptan had the best profiles and they were more efficacious than the recently marketed drugs lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant. Although cost effectiveness analyses are warranted and careful consideration should be given to patients with a high risk cardiovascular profile, the most effective triptans should be considered as preferred acute treatment for migraine and included in the WHO List of Essential Medicines to promote global accessibility and uniform standards of care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework https://osf.io/kq3ys/.

摘要

目的

比较所有已许可的药物干预措施作为口服单药治疗成人偏头痛发作的急性治疗。

设计

系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

数据来源

Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、Medline、Embase、ClinicalTrials.gov、EU 临床试验注册中心、世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台,以及监管机构和制药公司的网站,无语言限制,检索时间截至 2023 年 6 月 24 日。

方法

筛选、数据提取、编码和偏倚风险评估均由独立的两人小组进行。主要分析采用随机效应网络荟萃分析。主要结局指标为:给药后两小时无疼痛的参与者比例;给药后两小时至 24 小时无疼痛缓解且无使用解救药物的参与者比例。使用置信度网络荟萃分析(CINeMA)在线工具对证据的确定性进行分级。使用 Vitruvian 图总结研究结果。一个由临床医生和偏头痛患者组成的国际小组共同设计了这项研究,并解释了研究结果。

入选研究的标准

根据国际头痛疾病分类,对成年人(≥18 岁)进行双盲随机对照试验。

结果

纳入了 137 项随机对照试验,共 89445 名参与者被分配到 17 种活性干预措施或安慰剂组。与安慰剂相比,所有活性干预措施在两小时内疼痛缓解方面均显示出更好的疗效(比值比从纳曲普坦的 1.73(95%置信区间 1.27 至 2.34)到依替立坦的 5.19(4.25 至 6.33)),并且大多数在 24 小时内持续缓解疼痛方面也显示出更好的疗效(比值比从塞来昔布的 1.71(1.07 至 2.74)到布洛芬的 7.58(2.58 至 22.27))。在活性干预措施的头对头比较中,依替立坦是两小时内最有效的药物(比值比从 1.46(1.18 至 1.81)到 3.01(2.13 至 4.25)),其次是利扎曲坦(1.59(1.18 至 2.17)到 2.44(1.75 至 3.45))、舒马曲坦(1.35(1.03 至 1.75)到 2.04(1.49 至 2.86))和佐米曲坦(1.47(1.04 至 2.08)到 1.96(1.39 至 2.86))。在持续缓解疼痛方面,最有效的干预措施是依替立坦和布洛芬(比值比从 1.41(1.02 至 1.93)到 4.82(1.31 至 17.67))。与 CINeMA 相符的信心范围从高到非常低。仅对食品和药物管理局许可剂量、高剂量与低剂量、偏倚风险以及基线时中度至重度头痛的敏感性分析,确认了主要和次要结局的主要发现。

结论

总体而言,依替立坦、利扎曲坦、舒马曲坦和佐米曲坦的效果最好,它们比最近上市的药物拉米替坦、rimegepant 和ubrogepant 更有效。虽然需要进行成本效益分析,并应仔细考虑心血管风险较高的患者,但应将最有效的曲坦类药物视为偏头痛的首选急性治疗药物,并将其纳入世界卫生组织基本药物清单,以促进全球可及性和统一的护理标准。

系统评价注册

Open Science Framework https://osf.io/kq3ys/。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6a3a/11409395/94a755097aa0/karw080107.va.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