Search

Background Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biologics. Although there is consensus that these therapies reduce the frequency of relapses, their relative benefit in delaying new relapses or disability worsening remains unclear due to the limited number of direct comparison trials. Objectives To compare the benefit and acceptability of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif), glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine and immunoglobulins for the treatment of people with RRMS and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefit and acceptability, defined as the proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse event. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Trials Register, which contains trials from CENTRAL (2014, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 2014), EMBASE (1974 to 2014), CINAHL (1981 to 2014), LILACS (1982 to 2014), clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO trials registry, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports. We ran the most recent search in September 2014. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the 15 treatments as monotherapy, compared to placebo or to another active agent, for use in adults with RRMS. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently identified studies from the search results and performed data extraction. We performed data synthesis by pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence for outcomes within the network meta-analysis according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high. Main results We included 39 studies in this review, in which 25,113 participants were randomised. The majority of the included trials were short-term studies, with a median duration of 24 months. Twenty-four (60%) were placebo-controlled and 15 (40%) were head-to-head studies.Network meta-analysis showed that, in terms of a protective effect against the recurrence of relapses in RRMS during the first 24 months of treatment, alemtuzumab, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, and fingolimod outperformed other drugs. The most effective drug was alemtuzumab (risk ratio (RR) versus placebo 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.55; surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) 96%; moderate quality evidence), followed by mitoxantrone (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.81; SUCRA 92%; very low quality evidence), natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.66; SUCRA 88%; high quality evidence), and fingolimod (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.81; SUCRA 71%; moderate quality evidence).Disability worsening was based on a surrogate marker, defined as irreversible worsening confirmed at three-month follow-up, measured during the first 24 months in the majority of included studies. Both direct and indirect comparisons revealed that the most effective treatments were mitoxantrone (RR versus placebo 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.84; SUCRA 96%; low quality evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.48; SUCRA 94%; low quality evidence), and natalizumab (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.85; SUCRA 74%; moderate quality evidence).Almost all of the agents included in this review were associated with a higher proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse event compared to placebo. Based on the network meta-analysis methodology, the corresponding RR estimates versus placebo over the first 24 months of follow-up were: mitoxantrone 9.92 (95% CI 0.54 to 168.84), fingolimod 1.69 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.17), natalizumab 1.53 (95% CI 0.93 to 2.53), and alemtuzumab 0.72 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.61).Information on serious adverse events (SAEs) was scanty, characterised by heterogeneous results and based on a very low number of events observed during the short-term duration of the trials included in this review. Authors' conclusions Conservative interpretation of these results is warranted, since most of the included treatments have been evaluated in few trials. The GRADE approach recommends providing implications for practice based on moderate to high quality evidence. Our review shows that alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and fingolimod are the best choices for preventing clinical relapses in people with RRMS, but this evidence is limited to the first 24 months of follow-up. For the prevention of disability worsening in the short term (24 months), only natalizumab shows a beneficial effect on the basis of moderate quality evidence (all of the other estimates were based on low to very low quality evidence). Currently, therefore, insufficient evidence is available to evaluate treatments for the prevention of irreversible disability worsening.There are two additional major concerns that have to be considered. First, the benefit of all of these treatments beyond two years is uncertain and this is a relevant issue for a disease with a duration of 30 to 40 years. Second, short-term trials provide scanty and poorly reported safety data and do not provide useful evidence in order to obtain a reliable risk profile of treatments. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will be necessary also to evaluate non-randomised studies and post-marketing reports released from the regulatory agencies. Finally, more than 70% of the studies included in this review were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced the results.There are three needs that the research agenda should address. First, randomised trials of direct comparisons between active agents would be useful, avoiding further placebo-controlled studies. Second, follow-up of the original trial cohorts should be mandatory. Third, more studies are needed to assess the medium and long-term benefit and safety of immunotherapies and the comparative safety of different agents.

Introduction Anxiety disorders are associated with significant public health burden in young individuals. Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most commonly used psychotherapy for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents, but previous reviews were hindered by a limited number of trials with direct comparisons between different psychotherapies and their deliveries. Consequently, the main aim of this research was to investigate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of various types and deliveries of psychotherapies for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. Methods and analysis We will systematically search PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations and LiLACS for randomised controlled trials, regardless of whether participants received blinding or not, published from 1 January 1966 to 30 January 2015 (updated to 1 July 2015), that compared any psychotherapy with either a control condition or an active comparator with different types and/or different delivery formats for the acute treatment of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. Data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessments will be independently extracted by two reviewers. The primary outcome for efficacy will be mean overall change scores in anxiety symptoms (self-rated or assessor-rated) from baseline to post-treatment between two groups. The acceptability of treatment will be measured as the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment during the acute phase of treatment. We will assess efficacy, based on the standardised mean difference (SMD), and acceptability, based on the OR, using a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. Ethics and dissemination No ethical issues are foreseen. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be disseminated electronically and in print. The meta-analysis may be updated to inform and guide management of anxiety in children and adolescents. Trial registration number PROSPERO CRD42015016283.

To measure the effectiveness of antidepressants for adolescents and young adults with co-occurring depression and substance use disorder.Meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science and PsychINFO was conducted (from 1970 to 2013). Prospective, parallel groups, double-blind, controlled trials with random assignment to an antidepressant or placebo on young patients (age ≤ 25 years) who met diagnostic criteria of both substance use and unipolar depressive disorder were included. Five trials were selected for this analysis and included 290 patients.Our efficacy outcome measures were depression outcomes (dichotomous and continuous measures) and substance-use outcomes (change of frequency or quantity of substance-use). Secondary analysis was conducted to access the tolerability of antidepressant treatment.For dichotomous depression outcome, antidepressants group was significantly more effective than placebo group [risk ratio (RR) = 1.21; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.45], with low heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%). Although no statistically significant effects for continuous depression outcome [standardized mean differences (SMD) = -0.13; 95% CI, -0.55 to 0.30] were found with moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 63%), subgroup analysis showed that the medicine group with a sample size of more than 50 showed statistically significant efficacy compared with the placebo group (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.25). Moreover, there was no significant difference for substance-use outcomes and tolerability outcomes between the medication and placebo groups.Antidepressant medication has a small overall effect in reducing depression in young patients with combined depressive and substance-use disorders, but does not appear to improve substance use outcomes.

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Sunitinib and sorafenib are orally administered multikinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of advanced RCC. The limited pharmacokinetics data on sunitinib and sorafenib suggest that haemodialysis does not significantly alter plasma concentrations. In this retrospective study we define the safety and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) and end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis. Even though the retrospective nature of this survey and the relatively small sample size represent major limitations, these data indicate that treatment with sunitinib and sorafenib in this cohort of patients is feasible with no unexpected toxicity and good efficacy, results similar to those in the general population of patients with mRCC.To investigate the safety and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis (HD).Between July 2006 and December 2010, 24 patients undergoing HD were treated with sunitinib and/or sorafenib for mRCC in 14 Italian institutions. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of these patients to evaluate the administered doses of TKIs, treatment-related toxicities and the clinical response to therapy.Sunitinib was administered at 50 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in six patients, 37.5 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in seven patients (one patient subsequently increased the dose to 50 mg daily), 25 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in two patients and 12.5 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in one patient. Among the eight patients treated with sorafenib, four patients received 800 mg daily (400 mg every 12 h), three patients 400 mg daily and one patient 200 mg daily with a continuous schedule. The estimated median progression-free and overall survival periods of this cohort of patients were 10.3 months and 22.6 months, respectively. With regard to tolerability and safety, no unexpected adverse events were registered and no grade 4 haematological or non-haematological toxicities were reported.Sunitinib and sorafenib treatment is not contraindicated in patients with mRCC undergoing HD. The outcome of this patient population is similar to that observed in patients with normal renal function treated with TKIs. These results merit further confirmation by a larger prospective trial.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is increasingly used in the treatment of basal cell carcinoma (BCC). However, scant information is available about the impact of both patient- and lesion-related characteristics on the effectiveness of therapy. Therefore, on the basis of the current data, it is difficult to draw clear-cut indications to use PDT for treatment of BCC in clinical practice.To investigate the clinical and pathological determinants of response of BCC to PDT with methylaminolevulinate (MAL) and red light.The clinical and pathological characteristics of 194 BCCs in 135 patients, treated with MAL-PDT, were evaluated. Lesions were treated with MAL-PDT according to established methods and the response was assessed by clinical follow-up of the patients.Complete response to PDT was 62%, with a better response for superficial BCC (95/116, 82%) than nodular BCC (26/78, 33%). When determinants of response were analysed, the nodular type and the location on the limbs emerged as significant clinical predictors of failure. Among the pathological characteristics, the nodular and infiltrative histotypes, as well as ulceration and tumour thickness were associated with a lower response to therapy. Patients' age and gender, as well as the size of the lesions, were not found to be significant predictors.Optimization of PDT procedure for BCC requires a careful selection of the lesions. In particular, superficial BCCs, preferentially located on the trunk, show the best therapeutic response.

SummaryBackground Budesonide and mesalazine (mesalamine) are commonly used in the medical management of patients with mild to moderate Crohn's disease. Aim To assess their comparative efficacy and harm using the methodology of network meta-analysis. Methods A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov, through October 2014, was performed to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited adult patients with active or quiescent Crohn's disease, and compared budesonide or mesalazine with placebo, or against each other, or different dosing strategies of one drug. Results Twenty-five RCTs were combined using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Budesonide 9 mg/day, or at higher doses (15 or 18 mg/day), was shown superior to placebo for induction of remission [odds ratio (OR), 2.93; 95% credible interval (CrI), 1.52–5.39, and OR, 3.28; CrI, 1.46–7.55 respectively] and ranks at the top of the hierarchy of the competing treatments. For maintenance of remission, budesonide 6 mg/day demonstrated superiority over placebo (OR, 1.69; CrI, 1.05–2.75), being also at the best ranking position among all compared treatment strategies. No other comparisons (i.e. different doses of mesalazine vs. placebo or budesonide, for induction or maintenance of remission) reached significance. The occurrence of withdrawals due to adverse events was not shown different between budesonide, mesalazine and placebo, in both the induction and maintenance phases. Conclusions Budesonide, at the doses of 9 mg/day, or higher, for induction of remission in active mild or moderate Crohn's disease, and at 6 mg/day for maintenance of remission, appears to be the best treatment choice.

Several immunosuppressive drugs with different mechanisms of action are available to inhibit organ rejection after transplant. We analyzed different phenotypic and functional immunological parameters in liver-transplanted patients who received cyclosporin A (CsA) or Everolimus (Evr). In peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from 29 subjects receiving a liver transplant and treated with two different immunosuppressive regimens, we analyzed T cell activation and differentiation, regulatory T cells (Tregs) and Tregs expressing homing receptors such as the chemokine receptor CXCR3. T cell polyfunctionality was studied by stimulating cells with the superantigen staphylococcal enterotoxin B (SEB), and measuring the simultaneous production of interleukin (IL)-2 and interferon (IFN)-γ, along with the expression of a marker of cytotoxicity such as CD107a. The analyses were performed by polychromatic flow cytometry before transplantation, and at different time points, up to 220 days after transplant. Patients taking Evr had a higher percentage of total CD4+ and naïve CD4+ T cells than those treated with CsA; the percentage of CD8+ T cells was lower, but the frequency of naïve CD8+ T cells higher. Patients taking Evr showed a significantly higher percentage of Tregs, and Tregs expressing CXCR3. After stimulation with SEB, CD8+ T cells from Evr-treated patients displayed a lower total response, and less IFN-γ producing cells. The effects on the immune system, such as the preservation of the naïve T cell pool and the expansion of Tregs (that are extremely useful in inhibiting organ rejection), along with the higher tolerability of Evr, suggest that this drug can be safely used after liver transplantation, and likely offers immunological advantages. © 2012 International Society for Advancement of Cytometry.

Diagnosing pleural tuberculosis (plTB) might be difficult due to limited sensitivity of conventional microbiology tools. As M. tuberculosis (MTB)-specific T cells are recruited into pleural space in plTB, their detection may provide useful clinical information. To this aim, in addition to standard diagnostic tests, we used the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-IT) test in blood and pleural effusion (PE) samples from 48 patients with clinical suspicion of plTB, 18 (37.5%) of whom had confirmed plTB. Four of them (22.2%) tested positive with a nucleic acid amplification test for MTB. The tuberculin skin test was positive in most confirmed plTB cases (88.9%). Positive QFT-IT tests were significantly more frequent in patients with confirmed plTB, as compared to patients with an alternative diagnosis, both in blood (77.7 vs 36.6%, p=0.006) and in PE samples (83.3% vs 46.6%, p=0.02). In addition, both blood and PE MTB-stimulated IFN-γ levels were significantly higher in plTB patients (p=0.03 and p=0.0049 vs non-plTB, respectively). In blood samples, QFT-IT had 77.8% sensitivity and 63.3% specificity, resulting in 56.0% positive (PPV) and 82.6% negative (NPV) predictive values. On PE, QFT-IT sensitivity was 83.3% and specificity 53.3% (PPV 51.7% and NPV 84.2%). The optimal AUC-derived cut-off for MTB-stimulated pleural IFN-γ level was 3.01 IU/mL (77.8% sensitivity, 80% specificity, PPV 68.4% and NPV 82.8%). These data suggest that QFT-IT might have a role in ruling out plTB in clinical practice.

Background: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis is a chronic progressive lung disease with poor outcome and no effective treatment to date. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2003. Objectives: to assess the efficacy of non-steroid agents in adults with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Search methods: we searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register (30 March 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2010), Ovid MEDLINE to March week 5, 2010, EMBASE to week 13, 2010 and PubMed to April 2010, with additional handsearching, including abstracts of international conferences. We also contacted pharmaceutical companies and researchers in the field. Selection criteria: randomised studies comparing non-steroid drugs with placebo or steroids in adults with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Data collection and analysis: two authors independently assessed trial quality, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted pharmaceutical companies to obtain missing information, if any. We combined survival outcomes using Peto odds ratios or hazard ratios (HR). Main results: fifteen trials involving 10 different drugs were included. Two trials enrolling 1156 patients compared interferon gamma-1beta with placebo: interferon gamma-1beta did not significantly improve survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.64; P = 0.68). Four trials involving 1155 patients compared pirfenidone with placebo. Three trials, conducted in 1046 patients, provided data on progression-free survival: pirfenidone significantly reduced the risk of disease progression by 30% (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.88, P = 0.002). Data on the effect of pirfenidone on pulmonary function could only be assessed for two studies analysing 314 patients. Forced vital capacity or vital capacity was significantly improved by pirfenidone (mean difference 0.08 L, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.13, P = 0.0006). Authors' conclusions: based on available data, partly still unpublished, pirfenidone appears to improve progression-free survival and, to a lesser extent, pulmonary function in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. More data are needed on overall survival and quality of life on treatment. From the studies in this review, interferon gamma-1beta has not been shown to affect survival. Other agents evaluated in single studies either failed to provide evidence for a benefit or need to be assessed in larger randomised controlled trials