A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo effect in clinical trials on chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.

The Prostate Pub Date : 2022-05-01 Epub Date: 2022-02-08 DOI:10.1002/pros.24311
Andrey Morozov, Andrey Bazarkin, Diana Babaevskaya, Mark Taratkin, Vasily Kozlov, Aleksandr Suvorov, Leonid Spivak, Jonathan McFarland, Giorgio I Russo, Dmitry Enikeev
{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo effect in clinical trials on chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome.","authors":"Andrey Morozov, Andrey Bazarkin, Diana Babaevskaya, Mark Taratkin, Vasily Kozlov, Aleksandr Suvorov, Leonid Spivak, Jonathan McFarland, Giorgio I Russo, Dmitry Enikeev","doi":"10.1002/pros.24311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is a common practice to control efficacy of pharmacological treatment with a placebo group. However, placebo itself may affect subjective and even objective results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the placebo effect on symptoms of CP/CPPS to improve future clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search at three databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science) was conducted to identify double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials on the treatment of CP/CPPS published until April 2021. The primary outcome - National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score.</p><p><strong>Secondary outcomes: </strong>Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and prostate volume.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3502 studies were identified. Placebo arms of 42 articles (5512 patients, median 31 patients) were included in the systematic review. Systematic review identified positive changes in the primary endpoint, meta-analysis of 10 articles found that NIH-CPSI total score results were significantly influenced by placebo, mean difference -4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.31, -2.09). Mean difference of NIH-CPSI pain domain was -2.31 (95% CI: -3.4, -1.21), urinary domain -1.12 (95% CI: -1.62, -0.62), quality of life domain -1.67 (95% CI: -2.38, -0.96); p < 0.001 for all. In case of the objective indicator - Qmax, there were three articles included in the meta-analysis. Qmax mean change from baseline was 0.68 (95% CI: -0.85, 2.22, p = 0.38). Systematic review showed no significant changes in pain, measured by VAS or other scores, IPSS and PVR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Placebo significantly affected the subjective parameters (NIH-CPSI) and limitedly affected various other measurements of pain (visual analog scale, McGill pain questionnaire). There was no long-term effect on IPSS and objective measurements (Qmax, PVR). This study can be used in further clinical trials to develop general rules of CPPS treatment assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":501684,"journal":{"name":"The Prostate","volume":" ","pages":"633-656"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Prostate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.24311","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/2/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: It is a common practice to control efficacy of pharmacological treatment with a placebo group. However, placebo itself may affect subjective and even objective results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the placebo effect on symptoms of CP/CPPS to improve future clinical trials.

Methods: A search at three databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science) was conducted to identify double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials on the treatment of CP/CPPS published until April 2021. The primary outcome - National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score.

Secondary outcomes: Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and prostate volume.

Results: A total of 3502 studies were identified. Placebo arms of 42 articles (5512 patients, median 31 patients) were included in the systematic review. Systematic review identified positive changes in the primary endpoint, meta-analysis of 10 articles found that NIH-CPSI total score results were significantly influenced by placebo, mean difference -4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.31, -2.09). Mean difference of NIH-CPSI pain domain was -2.31 (95% CI: -3.4, -1.21), urinary domain -1.12 (95% CI: -1.62, -0.62), quality of life domain -1.67 (95% CI: -2.38, -0.96); p < 0.001 for all. In case of the objective indicator - Qmax, there were three articles included in the meta-analysis. Qmax mean change from baseline was 0.68 (95% CI: -0.85, 2.22, p = 0.38). Systematic review showed no significant changes in pain, measured by VAS or other scores, IPSS and PVR.

Conclusions: Placebo significantly affected the subjective parameters (NIH-CPSI) and limitedly affected various other measurements of pain (visual analog scale, McGill pain questionnaire). There was no long-term effect on IPSS and objective measurements (Qmax, PVR). This study can be used in further clinical trials to develop general rules of CPPS treatment assessment.

慢性前列腺炎/慢性盆腔疼痛综合征临床试验中安慰剂效应的系统回顾和meta分析。
背景:用安慰剂组来控制药物治疗的疗效是一种常见的做法。然而,安慰剂本身可能会影响主观甚至客观的结果。本研究的目的是评估安慰剂对CP/CPPS症状的影响,以改善未来的临床试验。方法:检索三个数据库(Scopus、MEDLINE和Web of Science),以确定截至2021年4月发表的关于CP/CPPS治疗的双盲安慰剂对照临床试验。主要终点是美国国立卫生研究院慢性前列腺炎症状指数(NIH-CPSI)评分。次要结局:Qmax、PVR、IPSS和前列腺体积。结果:共纳入3502项研究。系统评价纳入了42篇安慰剂组(5512例患者,中位31例患者)。系统评价发现主要终点出现积极变化,10篇文章的荟萃分析发现,安慰剂显著影响NIH-CPSI总分结果,平均差异为-4.2(95%可信区间[CI]: -6.31, -2.09)。NIH-CPSI疼痛域平均差值为-2.31 (95% CI: -3.4, -1.21),尿域平均差值为-1.12 (95% CI: -1.62, -0.62),生活质量域平均差值为-1.67 (95% CI: -2.38, -0.96);p结论:安慰剂显著影响主观参数(NIH-CPSI),有限影响其他疼痛测量(视觉模拟量表,McGill疼痛问卷)。对IPSS和客观测量(Qmax, PVR)无长期影响。本研究可用于进一步的临床试验,以制定CPPS治疗评估的一般规则。
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
小红书