Suppr超能文献

硫唑嘌呤用于多发性硬化症患者。

Azathioprine for people with multiple sclerosis.

作者信息

Ridley Ben, Nonino Francesco, Baldin Elisa, Casetta Ilaria, Iuliano Gerardo, Filippini Graziella

机构信息

IRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Venice, Italy.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Dec 9;12(12):CD015005. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015005.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an immune-mediated, chronic, inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, impacting around 2.8 million people worldwide. Characterised by recurrent relapses or progression, or both, it represents a substantial global health burden, affecting people, predominantly women, at a young age (the mean age of diagnosis is 32 years). Azathioprine is used to treat chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, and it is used in clinical practice as an off-label intervention for MS, especially where access to on-label disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for MS is limited. Given this, a review of azathioprine's benefits and harms would be timely and valuable to inform shared healthcare decisions.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of azathioprine (AZA) for relapsing and progressive multiple sclerosis (MS), compared to other disease-modifying treatments (DMTs), placebo or no treatment. Specifically, we will assess the following comparisons. AZA compared with other DMTs or placebo as first-choice treatment for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis AZA compared with other DMTs or placebo for relapsing forms of MS when switching from another DMT AZA compared with other DMTs or placebo as first-choice treatment for progressive forms of MS AZA compared with other DMTs or placebo for progressive forms of MS when switching from another DMT SEARCH METHODS: We conducted an extensive search for relevant literature using standard Cochrane search methods. The most recent search date was 9 August 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) lasting 12 months or more that compared azathioprine versus DMTs, placebo or no intervention in adults with MS. We considered evidence from non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) as these studies may provide additional evidence not available from RCTS. We excluded cluster-randomised trials, cross-over trials, interrupted time series, case reports and studies of within-group design with no control group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. There were three outcomes we considered to be critical: disability, relapse and serious adverse events (SAEs, as defined in the studies). We were also interested in other important outcomes: quality-of-life (QoL) impairment (mental score), short-term adverse events (gastrointestinal disorders), long-term adverse events (neoplasms) and mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 studies: eight RCTs (1076 participants included in meta-analyses) and six NRSIs (1029 participants). These studies involved people with relapsing and progressive MS. Most studies included more women (57 to 83%) than men, with participants' average age at the onset of MS being between 29.4 and 33.4 years. Five RCTs and all six NRSIs were conducted in Europe (1793 participants); two RCTs were conducted in the USA (126 participants) and one in Iran (94 participants). The RCTs lasted two to three years, while NRSIs looked back up to 10 years. Four studies received some funding or support from commercial interests and five were funded by government or philanthropy; the other five provided no information about funding. There are three ongoing studies. Comparison groups included other DMTs (interferon beta and cyclosporine A), placebo or no treatment. Below, we report on azathioprine as a 'first choice' treatment compared to interferon beta for people with relapsing MS. None of the studies reported on any critical or important outcome for this comparison for progressive MS. No study was retrieved comparing azathioprine to placebo or other DMTs for either relapsing or progressive MS. Furthermore, the NRSIs did not provide information not already covered in the RCTs. Azathioprine as a first-choice treatment compared to other DMTs (specifically, interferon beta) for relapsing MS - The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of azathioprine on the number of people with disability progression over two years compared to interferon beta (risk ratio (RR) 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.58; 1 RCT, 148 participants; very low certainty evidence). - Azathioprine may decrease the number of people with relapses over a one- to two-year follow-up compared to interferon beta (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.86; 2 RCTs, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence). - Azathioprine may result in a possible increase in the number of people with SAEs over two years in comparison with interferon beta (RR 6.64, 95% CI 0.35 to 126.27; 1 RCT, 148 participants; low-certainty evidence). - The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of azathioprine on the number of people with the short-term adverse event of gastrointestinal disorders over two years compared to interferon beta (RR 5.30, 95% CI 0.15 to 185.57; 2 RCTs, 242 participants; very low certainty evidence). We found no evidence comparing azathioprine to other DMTs for QoL impairment (mental score), long-term adverse events (neoplasms) or mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Azathioprine has been proposed as an alternative treatment for MS when access to approved, on-label DMTs is limited, especially in resource-limited settings. The limited evidence available suggests that azathioprine may result in a modest benefit in terms of relapse frequency, with a possible increase in SAEs, when compared to interferon beta-1b, for people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. The evidence for the effect on disability progression and short-term adverse events is very uncertain. Caution is required in interpreting the conclusions of this review since our certainty in the available evidence on the benefits and harms of azathioprine in multiple sclerosis is low to very low, implying that further evidence is likely to change our conclusions. An important limitation we noted in the available evidence is the lack of long-term comparison with other treatments and the failure of most studies to measure outcomes that are important to people with multiple sclerosis, such as quality of life and cognitive decline. This is especially the case in the evidence relevant to people with progressive forms of multiple sclerosis.

摘要

背景

多发性硬化症(MS)是一种由免疫介导的中枢神经系统慢性炎性脱髓鞘疾病,全球约有280万人受其影响。其特征为复发或病情进展,或两者兼具,给全球健康带来了沉重负担,主要影响年轻人群,尤其是女性(平均诊断年龄为32岁)。硫唑嘌呤用于治疗慢性炎症和自身免疫性疾病,在临床实践中被用作MS的非适应证干预措施,特别是在获得MS适应证疾病修饰治疗(DMTs)受限的情况下。鉴于此,对硫唑嘌呤的益处和危害进行综述,对于为共同的医疗决策提供信息而言,既及时又有价值。

目的

评估硫唑嘌呤(AZA)与其他疾病修饰治疗(DMTs)、安慰剂或不治疗相比,对复发型和进展型多发性硬化症(MS)的益处和危害。具体而言,我们将评估以下比较。硫唑嘌呤与其他DMTs或安慰剂作为复发型多发性硬化症的首选治疗方法;从另一种DMT转换时,硫唑嘌呤与其他DMTs或安慰剂用于复发型MS;硫唑嘌呤与其他DMTs或安慰剂作为进展型MS的首选治疗方法;从另一种DMT转换时,硫唑嘌呤与其他DMTs或安慰剂用于进展型MS。检索方法:我们使用标准的Cochrane检索方法对相关文献进行了广泛检索。最近的检索日期为2023年8月9日。

入选标准

我们纳入了持续12个月或更长时间的随机对照试验(RCTs),这些试验比较了硫唑嘌呤与DMTs、安慰剂或对成年MS患者不进行干预的情况。我们考虑了干预措施的非随机研究(NRSIs)的证据,因为这些研究可能提供RCTs中没有的额外证据。我们排除了整群随机试验、交叉试验、中断时间序列、病例报告以及无对照组的组内设计研究。

数据收集与分析

我们遵循标准的Cochrane方法。我们认为有三个结果至关重要:残疾、复发和严重不良事件(SAEs,如研究中所定义)。我们还关注其他重要结果:生活质量(QoL)损害(心理评分)、短期不良事件(胃肠道疾病)、长期不良事件(肿瘤)和死亡率。

主要结果

我们纳入了14项研究:8项RCTs(荟萃分析中纳入1076名参与者)和6项NRSIs(1029名参与者)。这些研究涉及复发型和进展型MS患者。大多数研究纳入的女性(57%至83%)多于男性,MS发病时参与者的平均年龄在29.4岁至33.4岁之间。5项RCTs和所有6项NRSIs在欧洲进行(1793名参与者);2项RCTs在美国进行(126名参与者),1项在伊朗进行(94名参与者)。RCTs持续了两到三年,而NRSIs回顾了长达10年的时间。4项研究获得了商业利益的一些资金或支持,5项由政府或慈善机构资助;其他5项未提供资金信息。有3项正在进行的研究。比较组包括其他DMTs(干扰素β和环孢素A)、安慰剂或不治疗。下面,我们报告硫唑嘌呤作为复发型MS患者与干扰素β相比的“首选”治疗方法。对于进展型MS的这种比较,没有研究报告任何关键或重要结果。未检索到将硫唑嘌呤与安慰剂或其他DMTs用于复发型或进展型MS的比较研究。此外,NRSIs没有提供RCTs中未涵盖的信息。硫唑嘌呤作为复发型MS与其他DMTs(具体为干扰素β)相比的首选治疗方法 - 与干扰素β相比,硫唑嘌呤对两年内残疾进展人数的影响证据非常不确定(风险比(RR)0.19,95%置信区间(CI)0.02至1.58;1项RCT,148名参与者;极低确定性证据)。 - 与干扰素β相比,硫唑嘌呤在一到两年的随访中可能减少复发人数(RR 0.61,95% CI 0.43至0.86;2项RCT,242名参与者;低确定性证据)。 - 与干扰素β相比,硫唑嘌呤在两年内可能导致SAEs人数可能增加(RR 6.64,95% CI 0.35至126.27;1项RCT,148名参与者;低确定性证据)。 - 与干扰素β相比,硫唑嘌呤对两年内胃肠道疾病短期不良事件人数的影响证据非常不确定(RR 5.30,95% CI 0.15至185.57;2项RCT,242名参与者;极低确定性证据)。我们没有发现将硫唑嘌呤与其他DMTs用于QoL损害(心理评分)、长期不良事件(肿瘤)或死亡率比较的证据。

作者结论

当获得批准的适应证DMTs受限,特别是在资源有限的环境中时,硫唑嘌呤已被提议作为MS的替代治疗方法。现有有限证据表明,对于复发缓解型多发性硬化症患者,与干扰素β-1b相比,硫唑嘌呤在复发频率方面可能产生适度益处,但SAEs可能增加。关于对残疾进展和短期不良事件影响的证据非常不确定。由于我们对硫唑嘌呤在多发性硬化症中益处和危害的现有证据的确定性低至极低,意味着进一步的证据可能会改变我们的结论,因此在解释本综述的结论时需要谨慎。我们在现有证据中注意到的一个重要局限性是缺乏与其他治疗方法的长期比较,并且大多数研究未能测量对多发性硬化症患者重要的结果,如生活质量和认知下降。对于进展型多发性硬化症患者的相关证据尤其如此。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/302c/11626701/fd7f51c49135/tCD015005-FIG-01.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