Search

Introduction: Fenfluramine (FFA) is an amphetamine derivative that promotes the release and blocks the neuronal reuptake of serotonin. Initially introduced as an appetite suppressant, FFA also showed antiseizure properties. This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of FFA for the treatment of seizures in patients with epilepsy. Methods: We systematically searched (in week 3 of June 2022) MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry. Randomized, double- or single-blinded, placebo-controlled studies of FFA in patients with epilepsy and uncontrolled seizures were identified. Efficacy outcomes included the proportions of patients with ≥ 50% and 100% reductions in baseline seizure frequency during the treatment period. Tolerability outcomes included the proportions of patients who withdrew from treatment for any reason and suffered adverse events (AEs). The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The risk ratio (RR) along with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated for each outcome. Results: Three trials were identified and a total of 469 Dravet syndrome (DS) and Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) subjects were randomized. All three trials were judged to be at low risk of biases. In patients with DS, the RRs for ≥ 50% and 100% reductions in convulsive seizure frequency for the FFA group compared to placebo were 5.61 (95% CI 2.73–11.54) and 4.71 (95% CI 0.57–39.30), respectively. In patients with LGS, the corresponding RRs for ≥ 50% and 100% reductions in drop seizure frequency were 2.58 (95% CI 1.33–5.02) and 0.50 (95% CI 0.031–7.81), respectively. The drug was withdrawn for any reason in 10.1% and 5.8% of patients receiving FFA and placebo, respectively (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.89–3.59). Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 5.4% and 1.2% of FFA- and pl

INTRODUCTION: Prospective cohort studies on the association between subclinical thyroid dysfunction and depressive symptoms have yielded conflicting findings, possibly because of differences in age, sex, thyroid-stimulating hormone cut-off levels or degree of baseline depressive symptoms. Analysis of

INTRODUCTION: Although previous conventional meta-analyses and network meta-analyses have provided some important findings about pharmacological treatments for children and adolescents with depressive disorders in the past decades, several questions still remain unsolved by the aggregate data from those meta-analyses. Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) enables exploration of the impacts of individual characteristics on treatment effects, allowing matching of treatments to specific subgroups of patients. We will perform an IPD-MA to assess the efficacy and tolerability of new-generation antidepressants for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically search for all double-blind randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared any new-generation antidepressant with placebo for the acute treatment of major depressive disorder in children and adolescents, in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, LILACS and ProQuest Dissertations. We will contact all corresponding authors of included RCTs and ask for their cooperation in this project by providing individual participant data from the original trials. The primary outcomes will include efficacy, measured as the mean change of depression symptoms by Children's Depression Rating Scale Revised (CDRS-R), and tolerability, measured as the proportion of patients who withdrew from the trials early due to adverse effects. The secondary outcomes will include response rates, remission rates, deterioration rate, all-cause discontinuation, suicidal-related outcomes and global functioning outcome. Using the raw de-identified study data, we will use mixed-effects logistic and linear regression models to perform the IPD-MAs. The risk of bias of included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We will also detect the publication bias and effects of non-participation of eligible studi

INTRODUCTION: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is common among children and adolescents who are exposed to trauma, and it is often associated with significant negative impacts on their psychosocial functioning and quality of life. Many types of psychotherapies have been found to be effective for PTSD in children and adolescents. However, due to the lack of direct comparisons between different psychotherapies, the hierarchy of treatment efficacy is still unclear. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of various types of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search will be conducted among eight electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress (PILOTS) and ProQuest Dissertations, from inception to October 2017. Randomised controlled trials, regardless of language, publication year and publication type, comparing any psychotherapies for PTSD to any control condition or alternative treatment in children and adolescents (18 years old or less) diagnosed with full or subclinical PTSD will be included. Study duration and the number of treatment sessions will not be limited. The primary outcome will be PTSD symptom severity at post-treatment as measured by a rating scale reported by the child, parent or a clinician. The secondary outcomes will include: (1) efficacy at follow-up; (2) acceptability (all-cause discontinuation); (3) anxiety symptom severity; (4) depressive symptom severity and (5) quality of life and functional improvement. Bayesian network meta-analyses for all relative outcome measures will be performed. We will conduct subgroup and sensitivity network meta-analyses to determine whether the findings are affected by study characteristics. The quality of the evidence contributing to network est

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend psychosocial interventions for cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction as first-line treatment, but it is still unclear which intervention, if any, should be offered first. We aimed to estimate the comparative effectiveness of all available psychosocial interventions (alone or in combination) for the short- and long-term treatment of people with cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any structured psychosocial intervention against an active control or treatment as usual (TAU) for the treatment of cocaine and/or amphetamine addiction in adults. Primary outcome measures were efficacy (proportion of patients in abstinence, assessed by urinalysis) and acceptability (proportion of patients who dropped out due to any cause) at the end of treatment, but we also measured the acute (12 weeks) and long-term (longest duration of study follow-up) effects of the interventions and the longest duration of abstinence. Odds ratios (ORs) and standardised mean differences were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed with the Cochrane tool, and the strength of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We followed the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA) guidelines, and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42017042900). We included 50 RCTs evaluating 12 psychosocial interventions or TAU in 6,942 participants. The strength of evidence ranged from high to very low. Compared to TAU, contingency management (CM) plus community reinforcement approach was the only intervention that increased the number of abstinent patients at the end of treatment (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.24-6.51, P = 0.013), and also at 12 weeks (OR 7.60, 95% CI 2.03-28.37, P = 0.002) and at longest follow-up (OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.3

INTRODUCTION: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a major public health issue. Pharmacological treatments play an important role in the multimodal treatment of ADHD. Currently, there is a lack of up-to-date and comprehensive evidence on how available ADHD drugs compare and rank in terms of efficacy and tolerability, in children or adolescents as well as in adults. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), to rank pharmacological treatments for ADHD according to their efficacy and tolerability profiles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search a broad range of electronic databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science, with no date or language restrictions. We will also search for unpublished studies using international clinical trial registries and contacting relevant drug companies. We will identify and include available parallel-group, cross-over and cluster randomised trials that compare methylphenidate, dexmethylphenidate, amphetamine derivatives (including lisdexamfetamine), atomoxetine, clonidine, guanfacine, bupropion or modafinil (as oral therapy) either with each other or to placebo, in children, adolescents or adults with ADHD. Primary outcomes will be efficacy (indicated by reduction in severity of ADHD core symptoms measured on a standardised scale) and tolerability (the proportion of patients who left a study early due to side effects). Secondary outcomes will be global functioning, acceptability (proportion of patients who left the study early by any cause) and changes in blood pressure and body weight. NMA will be conducted in STATA within a frequentist framework. The quality of RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. ETHICS AND DISS

INTRODUCTION: Depressive disorder is common in children and adolescents, with important consequences and serious impairments in terms of personal and social functioning. While both pharmacological and psychological interventions have been shown to be effective, there is still uncertainty about the balance between these and what treatment strategy should be preferred in clinical practice. Therefore, we aim to compare and rank in a network meta-analysis (NMA) the commonly used psychological, pharmacological and combined interventions for depressive disorder in children and adolescents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will update the literature search of two previous NMAs for the identification of trials of antidepressant and psychotherapy alone for depressive disorder in children and adolescents. For identification of trials of combination interventions, seven databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LiLACS) will be searched from date of inception. We will also search ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and check relevant reports on the US Food and Drug Administration website for unpublished data. Building on our previous findings in the field, we will include any commonly prescribed oral antidepressants and any manualised or structured psychotherapies, as well as their combinations. Randomised controlled trials assessing any active intervention against active comparator or pill placebo/psychological controls in acute treatment for depressive disorder in children and adolescents will be included. The primary outcomes will be efficacy (mean change in depressive symptoms), and acceptability of treatment (dropout rate due to any cause). The secondary outcomes will be remission rate, tolerability of treatment (dropouts for adverse events), as well as suicide-related outcomes (suicidal behaviour or ideation). We will perform Bayesian NMAs for all relative outcome

Background: Different therapeutic strategies are available for treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) including immunosuppressants, immunomodulators, and monoclonal antibodies. Their relative effectiveness in the prevention of relapse or disability progression is unclear due to the limited number of direct comparison trials. A summary of the results, including both direct and indirect comparisons of treatment effects, may help to clarify the above uncertainty. Objectives: To estimate the relative efficacy and acceptability of interferon ß-1b (IFNß-1b) (Betaseron), interferon ß-1a (IFNß-1a) (Rebif and Avonex), glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, intravenous immunoglobulins, and long-term corticosteroids versus placebo or another active agent in participants with MS and to provide a ranking of the treatments according to their effectiveness and risk-benefit balance. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane MS Group Trials Register, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports. The most recent search was run in February 2012. Selection criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one of the 11 treatments for use in adults with MS and that reported our pre-specified efficacy outcomes were considered for inclusion. Data collection and analysis: Identifying search results and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Data synthesis was performed by pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis that was performed within a Bayesian framework. The body of evidence for outcomes within the pairwise meta-analysis was assessed according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate, or high quality. Main results: Forty-four trials were included in this review, in which 17,401 participants had been randomised. Twenty-three trials included relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) (9096 participants, 52%), 18 trials included progressive MS (7726, 44%), and three

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 STRATEGY: 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

INTRODUCTION: Depressive disorders are among the most common psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents, and have adverse effects on their psychosocial functioning. Questions concerning the efficacy and safety of antidepressant medications in the treatment of depression in children and adolescents, led us to integrate the direct and indirect evidence using network meta-analysis to create hierarchies of these drugs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Seven databases with PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, LiLACS and PsycINFO will be searched from 1966 to December 2013 (updated to May, 2015). There are no restrictions on language or type of publication. Randomised clinical trials assessing first-generation and newer-generation antidepressant medications against active comparator or placebo as acute treatment for depressive disorders in children and adolescents (under 18 years of age) will be included. The primary outcome for efficacy will be mean improvement in depressive symptoms, as measured by the mean change score of a depression rating scale from baseline to post-treatment. The tolerability of treatment will be defined as side effect discontinuation, as defined by the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment due to adverse events during the trial. We will also assess the secondary outcome for efficacy (response rate), acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) and suicide-related outcomes. We will perform the Bayesian network meta-analyses for all relative outcome measures. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. DISSEMINATION: The network meta-analysis will provide useful information on antidepressant treatment for child and adolescent depression. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication or conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42015016023.

Previous meta-analyses of psychotherapies for child and adolescent depression were limited because of the small number of trials with direct comparisons between two treatments. A network meta-analysis, a novel approach that integrates direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled studies, was undertaken to investigate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. Systematic searches resulted in 52 studies (total N=3805) of nine psychotherapies and four control conditions. We assessed the efficacy at post-treatment and at follow-up, as well as the acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) of psychotherapies and control conditions. At post-treatment, only interpersonal therapy (IPT) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) were significantly more effective than most control conditions (standardized mean differences, SMDs ranged from -0.47 to -0.96). Also, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than play therapy. Only psychodynamic therapy and play therapy were not significantly superior to waitlist. At follow-up, IPT and CBT were significantly more effective than most control conditions (SMDs ranged from -0.26 to -1.05), although only IPT retained this superiority at both short-term and long-term follow-up. In addition, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than problem-solving therapy. Waitlist was significantly inferior to other control conditions. With regard to acceptability, IPT and problem-solving therapy had significantly fewer all-cause discontinuations than cognitive therapy and CBT (ORs ranged from 0.06 to 0.33). These data suggest that IPT and CBT should be considered as the best available psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. However, several alternative psychotherapies are understudied in this age group. Waitlist may inflate the effect of psychotherapies, so that psychological placebo or treatment-as-usual may be preferable as a control condition in psychotherapy trials.

RATIONALE. Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a well-recognized complication of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and can present with different patterns on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of the chest. It has been recently shown that a definite HRCT usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern is highly specific and moderately sensitive for a histopathologic UIP pattern. The aims of the present study were: i) to evaluate the prevalence of the UIP pattern on HRCT in patients with RA-ILD, as compared with patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and ii) to assess the level of agreement between two experienced chest radiologists in detecting the UIP pattern in the two groups of patients. METHODS. 30 patients with RA and at least one chest HRCT showing interstitial changes were retrospectively identified from a single-center cohort of RA patients. Fifty-two patients with IPF based on current diagnostic criteria served as diseased controls. For patients who had more than one HRCT the more recent HRCT was selected. Two experienced thoracic radiologists (radiologist A and B) blinded to patient diagnosis scored all HRCT images independently. Radiologic patterns were categorized as definite UIP, possible UIP or inconsistent with UIP according to the most current international guidelines. The prevalence of the different patterns was assessed for both groups and compared by using the chi square test. The concordance between radiologists was determined using the Cohen kappa score. RESULTS. Radiologist A detected 4 definite UIP (13%), 10 possible UIP (33%) and 16 inconsistent with UIP patterns (53%) among patients with RA-ILD and 16 definite UIP (30%), 24 possible UIP (46%) and 12 inconsistent with UIP patterns (23%) among patients with IPF (chi square 0.016). Radiologist B identified 6 definite UIP (20%), 9 possible UIP (30%) and 15 inconsistent with UIP patterns (50%) in the RA-ILD group and 23 definite UIP (44%), 16 possible UIP (30%) and 13 inconsistent with UIP p

Rationale Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a specific form of progressive fibrosing interstitial pneumonia of unknown cause. Common pathogenic mechanisms with chronic fibrotic disorders involving other organs are likely. Yet, data on the co-existence of subclinical fibrotic disease across multiple organs in patients with IPF are lacking. The present study aimed to investigate the prevalence of subclinical liver fibrosis among patients with IPF. Methods Patients referred to the Center for Rare Lung Disease of the University Hospital of Modena, with a diagnosis of IPF according to recent guidelines and without previous history of liver diseases underwent hepatic transient elastography (FibroScan®), a non-invasive technique measuring liver stiffness, which routinely used for the assessment of hepatic fibrosis in patients with chronic liver diseases. Hepatic fibrotic status is expressed in a scale from 0 (absence of hepatic fibrosis) to 4 (severe liver fibrosis / cirrhosis). Patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥29 (confidence limit of the instrument) were excluded. Patients, in which any degree of hepatic fibrosis was detected, underwent screening for possible secondary causes of liver fibrosis. Results Among 48 IPF patients (34 males, mean age 69 years), 11 (23%) were excluded because of high BMI. In 8 out 37 patients (22%) it was not possible to obtain successful measurements due to the excess of subcutaneous adipose tissue in the chest wall, or narrow intercostal spaces. Thirteen of 37 patients (35%) had abnormal hepatic transient elastography results: 4 patients fell within the range F1-F2 (6.1-7.6 kPa), 6 in F2 (7.4-8.4 kPa), one in F2-F3 (9.5 kPa), 1 in F4 (14.3 kPa) and 1 was identified as probable fibrosis not otherwise classifiable. In all cases, secondary causes of hepatic fibrosis were excluded. Minor impairment of markers of liver injury was found in a minority of patients with liver fibrosis, with AST and ALT values exceeding the threshold value respe

Background. Accurate identification and treatment of contacts with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is a desirable goal to achieve effective tuberculosis (TB) control in areas with low prevalence of disease. In immigrants from high prevalence countries, especially in those who are close contacts of active TB cases, the low specificity of the tuberculin skin test (TST) represents an obstacle to the identification of truly infected BCG-vaccinated individuals. The Interferon-Gamma (IFN-g) Release Assays (IGRAs), based on M. tuberculosis -specific antigens, might improve LTBI diagnosis in this population. Methods. In a retrospective study, we assess the performance of the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-IT, Cellestis Ltd., Victoria, Australia) assay and the TST in 84 adult immigrants from high prevalence countries: 68 (80.9%) of those individuals were close contacts of active TB cases. Results. In 84 immigrants (mean age 37.7 ± 11.6 years, 46.3 % were males, 46.3% were BCG-vaccinated) TST was positive in 68 (80.9%) individuals: among these TST-positive individuals, 26 (38.2%) were negative with QFT-IT. QFT-IT assay tested positive in 44 (52.4%) subjects (TST vs QFT-IT: 80.9% vs 52.4%, p< 0.001). Two (2.4%) subjects tested QFT-IT-indeterminate and was TST-positive. Diagnostic overall agreement between TST and QFT-IT was 63.4% (k=0.23). Conclusions. These preliminary data suggest that the rate of LTBI among adult immigrants from TB endemic countries, in our study most of them also close contacts of active TB cases, is significantly lower when detected by QFT-IT, than by TST. Moreover, our findings suggest that using an IGRA test for LTBI screening in this high risk population might reduce the number of candidates to preventive treatment and can provide potential substantial benefits for TB control.