In dogs with atopic skin disease, is lokivetmab more effective than oclacitinib in reducing the score of a recognised scoring system?

B. Cheung
{"title":"In dogs with atopic skin disease, is lokivetmab more effective than oclacitinib in reducing the score of a recognised scoring system?","authors":"B. Cheung","doi":"10.18849/ve.v7i2.569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PICO question \nIn dogs with atopic skin disease, is lokivetmab more effective than oclacitinib in reducing the Canine Atopic Dermatitis Lesion Index score (or some other recognised scoring system)? \n  \nClinical bottom line \nCategory of research question \nTreatment \nThe number and type of study designs reviewed \nOne randomised controlled trial and one before and after study were critically appraised \nStrength of evidence \nWeak \nOutcomes reported \nOne randomised controlled trial studied the effects of lokivetmab and oclacitinib and found that both drugs were similar in reducing the Canine Atopic Dermatitis Lesion Index (CADESI-03) score. \nAn additional study was evaluated but had non-standardised data as it was a before-and-after study on use of lokivetmab. The paper noted that dogs’ response to oclacitinib can be used to predict how well these dogs respond to lokivetmab. This study also reported a reduction in Pruritus Visual Analog Scale (PVAS) score between before and after lokivetmab administration \nConclusion \nIn view of the strength of evidence and outcomes from the studies, there is insufficient quality of evidence to answer the PICO question and so further comparative study is required \n  \nHow to apply this evidence in practice \nThe application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. \nKnowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care. \n  \n","PeriodicalId":257905,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Evidence","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Evidence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v7i2.569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PICO question In dogs with atopic skin disease, is lokivetmab more effective than oclacitinib in reducing the Canine Atopic Dermatitis Lesion Index score (or some other recognised scoring system)?   Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed One randomised controlled trial and one before and after study were critically appraised Strength of evidence Weak Outcomes reported One randomised controlled trial studied the effects of lokivetmab and oclacitinib and found that both drugs were similar in reducing the Canine Atopic Dermatitis Lesion Index (CADESI-03) score. An additional study was evaluated but had non-standardised data as it was a before-and-after study on use of lokivetmab. The paper noted that dogs’ response to oclacitinib can be used to predict how well these dogs respond to lokivetmab. This study also reported a reduction in Pruritus Visual Analog Scale (PVAS) score between before and after lokivetmab administration Conclusion In view of the strength of evidence and outcomes from the studies, there is insufficient quality of evidence to answer the PICO question and so further comparative study is required   How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.  
对于患有特应性皮肤病的狗,lokivetmab是否比oclacitinib更有效地降低公认评分系统的评分?
对于患有特应性皮肤病的狗,在降低犬特应性皮炎病变指数评分(或其他公认的评分系统)方面,lokivetmab是否比oclacitinib更有效?临床结论研究问题类别治疗研究设计的数量和类型回顾了一项随机对照试验和一项研究前后的研究进行了严格评价证据强度弱结果报告一项随机对照试验研究了lokivetmab和oclacitinib的作用,发现两种药物在降低犬特应性皮炎病变指数(CADESI-03)评分方面相似。另一项研究进行了评估,但数据未标准化,因为这是对lokivetmab使用前后的研究。该论文指出,狗对奥克拉西替尼的反应可以用来预测这些狗对lokivetmab的反应。本研究还报道了使用lokivetmab前后瘙痒视觉模拟量表(PVAS)评分的降低。结论从研究的证据强度和结果来看,PICO问题的证据质量不足,需要进一步的比较研究。如何将这些证据应用于实践中,证据应用于实践应考虑多种因素,不限于:个人的临床专业知识,病人的情况和业主的价值观,你工作的国家,地点或诊所,你面前的个案,治疗和资源的可用性。知识摘要是帮助加强或告知决策的资源。他们不会凌驾于从业者的责任或判断之上,去做对他们照顾的动物最好的事情。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信