Suppr超能文献

精神分裂症或心境障碍患者迟发性运动障碍药物干预的疗效和可接受性:一项系统评价和网状Meta分析

Efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological interventions for tardive dyskinesia in people with schizophrenia or mood disorders: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

作者信息

Solmi Marco, Fornaro Michele, Caiolo Stefano, Lussignoli Marialaura, Caiazza Claudio, De Prisco Michele, Solini Niccolo, de Bartolomeis Andrea, Iasevoli Felice, Pigato Giorgio, Del Giovane Cinzia, Cipriani Andrea, Correll Christoph U

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Regional Centre for the Treatment of Eating Disorders and On Track: The Champlain First Episode Psychosis Program, Department of Mental Health, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Mol Psychiatry. 2025 Mar;30(3):1207-1222. doi: 10.1038/s41380-024-02733-z. Epub 2024 Dec 18.

Abstract

Tardive Dyskinesia (TD) can occur in people exposed to dopamine receptor antagonists (DRAs). Its clinical management remains challenging. We conducted a systematic review/random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) searching PubMed/MEDLINE/PsycINFO/ClinicalTrials.gov/Cochrane Central Register (22/05/2023, pre-defined protocol https://osf.io/b52ae/ ), for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological/brain stimulation interventions for DRA-induced TD in adults with schizophrenia or mood disorders. Primary outcomes were TD symptom change (standardized mean difference/SMD) and all-cause discontinuation (acceptability-risk ratio/RR). Sensitivity analyses were conducted. Global, local inconsistencies, risk of bias (RoB-2 tool), and confidence in evidence (CINeMA) were measured. We included 46 trials (n = 2844, age = 52.89 ± 9.94 years, males = 59.8%, schizophrenia = 84.6%, mood disorders = 15.4%), all testing pharmacological interventions versus placebo. We identified three subnetworks. In network 1, several treatments outperformed placebo on TD symptoms with large effect sizes (k = 34, n = 2269), encompassing 22 interventions versus placebo, but 18 had 1 RCTs only, and 15 had n ≤ 20. High heterogeneity (I = 57.1%; tau = 0.0797), and global inconsistency (Q = 32.64; df = 14; p = 0.0032) emerged. No significant differences emerged in acceptability. When restricting analyses to treatments with trials with n > 20 and >1 RCT, only valbenazine (k = 5, SMD = -0.69; 95% CI = -1.00, -0.37) and vitamin E (k = 7, SMD = -0.49; 95% CI = -0.87, -0.11) were superior to placebo. Deutetrabenazine outperformed placebo considering AIMS score and in low risk of bias trials only and with a moderate effect size for 24/36 mg (k = 2, SMD = -0.57/-0.60). Confidence in findings was low for deutetrabenazine and valbenazine, very low for all others. In network 2 (k = 2, n = 63), switch to molindone (k = 1, n = 9) versus switch to haloperidol worsened TD (SMD = 1.68; 95% CI = 0.61,2.76). In network 3 (k = 3, n = 194), antipsychotic wash-out+placebo (k = 1, n = 25) versus TAU+placebo (k = 1, n = 27) worsened TD (SMD = 1.30; 95% CI = 0.36,2.23). Despite large effect sizes for some treatments with very low quality/confidence, when considering higher quality evidence only valbenazine or deutetrabenazine are evidence-based first-line treatments for TD, and potentially vitamin E as second-line. Switching to molindone and antipsychotic washout should be avoided. More treatment options and higher-quality trials are needed.

摘要

迟发性运动障碍(TD)可发生于使用多巴胺受体拮抗剂(DRA)的人群中。其临床管理仍然具有挑战性。我们进行了一项系统评价/随机效应网络荟萃分析(NMA),检索了PubMed/MEDLINE/PsycINFO/ClinicalTrials.gov/考克兰中央对照试验注册库(2023年5月22日,预定义方案https://osf.io/b52ae/),以查找针对患有精神分裂症或情绪障碍的成年人中DRA诱导的TD的药物/脑刺激干预的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局为TD症状变化(标准化均数差/SMD)和全因停药(可接受性风险比/RR)。进行了敏感性分析。测量了整体、局部不一致性、偏倚风险(RoB - 2工具)和证据可信度(CINeMA)。我们纳入了46项试验(n = 2844,年龄 = 52.89 ± 9.94岁,男性 = 59.8%,精神分裂症 = 84.6%,情绪障碍 = 15.4%),所有试验均测试了药物干预与安慰剂的对比。我们识别出三个亚网络。在网络1中,几种治疗在TD症状方面优于安慰剂,效应量较大(k = 34,n = 2269),包括22种干预与安慰剂的对比,但其中18种仅有1项RCT,15种n ≤ 20。出现了高度异质性(I = 57.1%;tau = 0.0797)和整体不一致性(Q = 32.64;df = 14;p = 0.0032)。在可接受性方面未出现显著差异。当将分析限制于n > 20且有>1项RCT的试验的治疗时,仅丙戊酸(k = 5,SMD = -0.69;95%CI = -1.00,-0.37)和维生素E(k = 7,SMD = -0.49;95%CI = -0.87,-0.11)优于安慰剂。仅在低偏倚风险试验中且24/36 mg时效应量中等(k = 2,SMD = -0.57/-0.60)的情况下,氘代丁苯那嗪在AIMS评分方面优于安慰剂。对于氘代丁苯那嗪和丙戊酸,研究结果的可信度较低,对所有其他药物则非常低。在网络2(k = 2,n = 63)中,换用吗茚酮(k = 1,n = 9)与换用氟哌啶醇相比使TD恶化(SMD = 1.68;95%CI = 0.61,2.76)。在网络3(k = 3,n = 194)中,抗精神病药物洗脱+安慰剂(k = 1,n = 25)与常规治疗+安慰剂(k = 1,n = 27)相比使TD恶化(SMD = 1.30;95%CI = 0.36,2.23)。尽管某些治疗的效应量较大但质量/可信度非常低,仅考虑更高质量证据时,丙戊酸或氘代丁苯那嗪是基于证据的TD一线治疗药物,维生素E可能作为二线药物。应避免换用吗茚酮和抗精神病药物洗脱。需要更多的治疗选择和更高质量的试验。

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