Systematic review and meta‑analysis of observational studies to check the protective role of non‑steroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs in Alzheimer's disease.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Akash Asthana, Shashank Tripathi, Rachna Agarwal
{"title":"Systematic review and meta‑analysis of observational studies to check the protective role of non‑steroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs in Alzheimer's disease.","authors":"Akash Asthana, Shashank Tripathi, Rachna Agarwal","doi":"10.55782/ane-2023-2467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major neurodegenerative disease, affecting more than two third cases of dementia in the world. Non‑steroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used anti‑inflammatory analgesic agents representing 7.7% of worldwide prescriptions of which 90% are in patients over 65 years old. Based on mixed findings a systematic review and meta‑analysis were conducted to develop a better understanding of the protective role of NSAIDs in AD. We used three database PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase to identify the literatures. The studies following cohort and case‑control design were investigated separately to check the effect of NSAIDs on AD, by the using their fundamental indicators (relative risk and odds ratio). The fixed effect or random effects model were used to estimate the pooled relative risk and pooled odds ratio separately for both the study design, based on magnitude of heterogeneity. A total of 14 studies were selected for meta‑analysis. Eight studies were following cohort study design, whereas, six studies were following case‑control study design. In meta‑analysis of cohort studies, the pooled relative risk was 0.67 with 95% C.I 0.39 to 1.15, which was statistically insignificant. In meta‑analysis of case‑control studies, the pooled odds ratio was 0.71 with 95% C.I 0.46 to 1.10, which was statistically insignificant. NSAIDs do not act as a protective factor for Alzheimer's disease. Additionally, methodologically sound randomized controlled trials are required to produce a robust result.</p>","PeriodicalId":7032,"journal":{"name":"Acta neurobiologiae experimentalis","volume":"83 4","pages":"386-394"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta neurobiologiae experimentalis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55782/ane-2023-2467","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major neurodegenerative disease, affecting more than two third cases of dementia in the world. Non‑steroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used anti‑inflammatory analgesic agents representing 7.7% of worldwide prescriptions of which 90% are in patients over 65 years old. Based on mixed findings a systematic review and meta‑analysis were conducted to develop a better understanding of the protective role of NSAIDs in AD. We used three database PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase to identify the literatures. The studies following cohort and case‑control design were investigated separately to check the effect of NSAIDs on AD, by the using their fundamental indicators (relative risk and odds ratio). The fixed effect or random effects model were used to estimate the pooled relative risk and pooled odds ratio separately for both the study design, based on magnitude of heterogeneity. A total of 14 studies were selected for meta‑analysis. Eight studies were following cohort study design, whereas, six studies were following case‑control study design. In meta‑analysis of cohort studies, the pooled relative risk was 0.67 with 95% C.I 0.39 to 1.15, which was statistically insignificant. In meta‑analysis of case‑control studies, the pooled odds ratio was 0.71 with 95% C.I 0.46 to 1.10, which was statistically insignificant. NSAIDs do not act as a protective factor for Alzheimer's disease. Additionally, methodologically sound randomized controlled trials are required to produce a robust result.

对观察性研究进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,检查非甾体抗炎药对阿尔茨海默病的保护作用。
阿尔茨海默病(AD)是一种主要的神经退行性疾病,影响着全球三分之二以上的痴呆症病例。非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)是一种广泛使用的抗炎镇痛药,占全球处方药的 7.7%,其中 90% 用于 65 岁以上的患者。由于研究结果不一,我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,以更好地了解非甾体抗炎药在抗老年痴呆症中的保护作用。我们使用了 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Embase 三个数据库来查找文献。我们分别调查了采用队列和病例对照设计的研究,利用其基本指标(相对风险和几率比率)来检验非甾体抗炎药对AD的影响。根据异质性的大小,采用固定效应或随机效应模型分别估计两种研究设计的汇总相对风险和汇总几率比。共有 14 项研究被选中进行荟萃分析。其中 8 项研究采用队列研究设计,6 项研究采用病例对照研究设计。在队列研究的荟萃分析中,汇总的相对风险为 0.67,95% C.I 为 0.39 至 1.15,在统计学上并不显著。在病例对照研究的荟萃分析中,汇总的几率比为 0.71,95% C.I 为 0.46 至 1.10,在统计学上并不显著。非甾体抗炎药不是阿尔茨海默病的保护因素。此外,需要进行方法可靠的随机对照试验才能得出可靠的结果。
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
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
40
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis (ISSN: 0065-1400 (print), eISSN: 1689-0035) covers all aspects of neuroscience, from molecular and cellular neurobiology of the nervous system, through cellular and systems electrophysiology, brain imaging, functional and comparative neuroanatomy, development and evolution of the nervous system, behavior and neuropsychology to brain aging and pathology, including neuroinformatics and modeling.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信