作为炎症性肠病维持疗法的生物疗法和小分子疗法试验中安慰剂的危害:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 30.9 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Beatriz Gros, Jonathan Blackwell, Jonathan Segal, Christopher J Black, Alexander C Ford, Shahida Din
{"title":"作为炎症性肠病维持疗法的生物疗法和小分子疗法试验中安慰剂的危害:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Beatriz Gros, Jonathan Blackwell, Jonathan Segal, Christopher J Black, Alexander C Ford, Shahida Din","doi":"10.1016/S2468-1253(24)00233-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomised placebo-controlled trials for the induction of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remission involve potential harms to those receiving placebo. Whether these harms are also apparent with placebo during maintenance of remission trials in IBD is unclear. We aimed to examine the potential harms associated with receiving placebo in trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis and luminal Crohn's disease in a meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched several medical literature databases including MEDLINE (from Jan 1, 1946, to May 31, 2024), Embase and Embase Classic (Jan 1, 1947, to May 31, 2024), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to May 31, 2024, for randomised placebo-controlled trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission in adults with IBD reporting data on adverse events over a period of 20 weeks or more. There were no language restrictions or prespecified exclusion criteria. We extracted summary data and pooled data using a random-effects model for any treatment-emergent adverse event, drug-related adverse event, infection, worsening of IBD activity, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events, serious infection, serious worsening of IBD activity, or venous thromboembolic events, reporting relative risks (RRs) for placebo versus active drug with 95% CIs for each outcomes. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024542624).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our search identified 10 826 citations, of which 45 trials including 16 562 patients (10 319 [62·3%] receiving active drug and 6243 [37·7%] placebo) were eligible. The risks of any treatment-emergent adverse event (7297/9546 [76·4%] patients on active drug vs 4415/5850 [75·5%] on placebo; RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·99-1·04; I<sup>2</sup> =47%), serious infection (260/10 242 [2·5%] vs 155/6149 [2·5%]; 0·97, 0·79-1·19; I<sup>2</sup> =0%), or venous thromboembolic event (12/4729 [0·3%] vs 9/2691 [0·3%]; 0·72, 0·31-1·66; I<sup>2</sup> =0%) were not significantly lower with active drug than placebo. The risks of any infection (3208/8038 [39·9%] vs 1713/4809 [35·6%]; 1·14, 1·05-1·23; I<sup>2</sup> =60%) or any drug-related adverse event (1094/2997 [36·5%] vs 609/1950 [31·2%]; 1·24, 1·02-1·50; I<sup>2</sup> =75%) were higher with active drug than placebo. However, the risks of any worsening of IBD activity (1038/8090 [12·8%] vs 1181/5191 [22·8%]; 0·58, 0·52-0·64; I<sup>2</sup> =40%), any withdrawal due to adverse events (610/10 282 [5·9%] vs 561/6207 [9·0%]; 0·71, 0·60-0·84; I<sup>2</sup> =43%), any serious adverse events (1066/10 292 [10·4%] vs 742/6198 [12·0%]; 0·85, 0·77-0·94; I<sup>2</sup> =17%), or any serious worsening of IBD activity (101/5707 [1·8%] vs 143/3640 [3·9%]; 0·55, 0·42-0·71; I<sup>2</sup> =0%) were lower with active drug than placebo. 21 randomised controlled trials were judged as low risk of bias across all domains.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>In maintenance of remission trials in IBD, placebo was associated with some clinically significant potential harms. Patients should be counselled about these before participating in clinical trials and consideration given to alternative designs to test novel drugs in IBD.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>None.</p>","PeriodicalId":56028,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":30.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Harms with placebo in trials of biological therapies and small molecules as maintenance therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Beatriz Gros, Jonathan Blackwell, Jonathan Segal, Christopher J Black, Alexander C Ford, Shahida Din\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S2468-1253(24)00233-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomised placebo-controlled trials for the induction of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remission involve potential harms to those receiving placebo. Whether these harms are also apparent with placebo during maintenance of remission trials in IBD is unclear. We aimed to examine the potential harms associated with receiving placebo in trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis and luminal Crohn's disease in a meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched several medical literature databases including MEDLINE (from Jan 1, 1946, to May 31, 2024), Embase and Embase Classic (Jan 1, 1947, to May 31, 2024), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to May 31, 2024, for randomised placebo-controlled trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission in adults with IBD reporting data on adverse events over a period of 20 weeks or more. There were no language restrictions or prespecified exclusion criteria. We extracted summary data and pooled data using a random-effects model for any treatment-emergent adverse event, drug-related adverse event, infection, worsening of IBD activity, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events, serious infection, serious worsening of IBD activity, or venous thromboembolic events, reporting relative risks (RRs) for placebo versus active drug with 95% CIs for each outcomes. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024542624).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our search identified 10 826 citations, of which 45 trials including 16 562 patients (10 319 [62·3%] receiving active drug and 6243 [37·7%] placebo) were eligible. The risks of any treatment-emergent adverse event (7297/9546 [76·4%] patients on active drug vs 4415/5850 [75·5%] on placebo; RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·99-1·04; I<sup>2</sup> =47%), serious infection (260/10 242 [2·5%] vs 155/6149 [2·5%]; 0·97, 0·79-1·19; I<sup>2</sup> =0%), or venous thromboembolic event (12/4729 [0·3%] vs 9/2691 [0·3%]; 0·72, 0·31-1·66; I<sup>2</sup> =0%) were not significantly lower with active drug than placebo. The risks of any infection (3208/8038 [39·9%] vs 1713/4809 [35·6%]; 1·14, 1·05-1·23; I<sup>2</sup> =60%) or any drug-related adverse event (1094/2997 [36·5%] vs 609/1950 [31·2%]; 1·24, 1·02-1·50; I<sup>2</sup> =75%) were higher with active drug than placebo. However, the risks of any worsening of IBD activity (1038/8090 [12·8%] vs 1181/5191 [22·8%]; 0·58, 0·52-0·64; I<sup>2</sup> =40%), any withdrawal due to adverse events (610/10 282 [5·9%] vs 561/6207 [9·0%]; 0·71, 0·60-0·84; I<sup>2</sup> =43%), any serious adverse events (1066/10 292 [10·4%] vs 742/6198 [12·0%]; 0·85, 0·77-0·94; I<sup>2</sup> =17%), or any serious worsening of IBD activity (101/5707 [1·8%] vs 143/3640 [3·9%]; 0·55, 0·42-0·71; I<sup>2</sup> =0%) were lower with active drug than placebo. 21 randomised controlled trials were judged as low risk of bias across all domains.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>In maintenance of remission trials in IBD, placebo was associated with some clinically significant potential harms. Patients should be counselled about these before participating in clinical trials and consideration given to alternative designs to test novel drugs in IBD.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>None.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":30.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(24)00233-4\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(24)00233-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:用于诱导炎症性肠病(IBD)缓解的随机安慰剂对照试验可能会对接受安慰剂治疗的患者造成伤害。目前尚不清楚在 IBD 的缓解维持试验中安慰剂是否也会造成这些伤害。我们的目的是通过一项荟萃分析,研究在维持溃疡性结肠炎和管腔克罗恩病缓解的许可生物制剂和小分子药物试验中,接受安慰剂可能带来的危害:我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。我们检索了多个医学文献数据库,包括MEDLINE(1946年1月1日至2024年5月31日)、Embase和Embase Classic(1947年1月1日至2024年5月31日),以及Cochrane对照试验中央登记册(从数据库建立之初至2024年5月31日),检索了用于维持成人IBD患者缓解的许可生物制剂和小分子药物的随机安慰剂对照试验,这些试验报告了20周或20周以上的不良事件数据。没有语言限制或预先确定的排除标准。我们提取了汇总数据,并采用随机效应模型对任何治疗引发的不良事件、药物相关不良事件、感染、IBD活动恶化、因不良事件而停药、严重不良事件、严重感染、IBD活动严重恶化或静脉血栓栓塞事件进行了汇总,报告了安慰剂与活性药物的相对风险系数(RRs)以及各结果的 95% CIs。该荟萃分析方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42024542624)上注册:我们的搜索发现了 10 826 篇引文,其中 45 项试验包括 16 562 名患者(10 319 名患者[62-3%]接受活性药物治疗,6243 名患者[37-7%]接受安慰剂治疗)符合条件。任何治疗引发的不良事件(7297/9 546 [76-4%] 接受活性药物治疗的患者 vs 4415/5850 [75-5%] 接受安慰剂治疗的患者;RR 1-01,95% CI 0-99-1-04;I2 =47%)、严重感染(260/10 242 [2-5%] vs 155/6149 [2-5%];严重感染(260/10 242 [2-5%] vs 155/6149 [2-5%];0-97,0-79-1-19;I2 =0%)或静脉血栓栓塞事件(12/4729 [0-3%] vs 9/2691 [0-3%];0-72,0-31-1-66;I2 =0%)在使用活性药物后并不显著低于安慰剂。使用活性药物发生任何感染(3208/8038 [39-9%] vs 1713/4809 [35-6%];1-14,1-05-1-23;I2 =60%)或任何药物相关不良事件(1094/2997 [36-5%] vs 609/1950 [31-2%];1-24,1-02-1-50;I2 =75%)的风险高于安慰剂。然而,IBD 活动恶化的风险(1038/8090 [12-8%] vs 1181/5191 [22-8%];0-58,0-52-0-64;I2 =40%)、因不良事件而停药的风险(610/10 282 [5-9%] vs 561/6207 [9-0%];0-71,0-60-0-84;I2 =43%)、任何严重不良事件(1066/10 292 [10-4%] vs 742/6198 [12-0%];0-85,0-77-0-94;I2 =17%)或任何严重的 IBD 活动恶化(101/5707 [1-8%] vs 143/3640 [3-9%];0-55,0-42-0-71;I2 =0%),活性药物均低于安慰剂。21项随机对照试验在所有领域均被判定为低偏倚风险:在IBD的维持缓解试验中,安慰剂与一些具有临床意义的潜在危害有关。在参与临床试验之前,应就这些问题向患者提供咨询,并考虑采用其他设计来测试治疗 IBD 的新药:无。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Harms with placebo in trials of biological therapies and small molecules as maintenance therapy in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Randomised placebo-controlled trials for the induction of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remission involve potential harms to those receiving placebo. Whether these harms are also apparent with placebo during maintenance of remission trials in IBD is unclear. We aimed to examine the potential harms associated with receiving placebo in trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis and luminal Crohn's disease in a meta-analysis.

Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched several medical literature databases including MEDLINE (from Jan 1, 1946, to May 31, 2024), Embase and Embase Classic (Jan 1, 1947, to May 31, 2024), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to May 31, 2024, for randomised placebo-controlled trials of licensed biologics and small molecules for maintenance of remission in adults with IBD reporting data on adverse events over a period of 20 weeks or more. There were no language restrictions or prespecified exclusion criteria. We extracted summary data and pooled data using a random-effects model for any treatment-emergent adverse event, drug-related adverse event, infection, worsening of IBD activity, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events, serious infection, serious worsening of IBD activity, or venous thromboembolic events, reporting relative risks (RRs) for placebo versus active drug with 95% CIs for each outcomes. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024542624).

Findings: Our search identified 10 826 citations, of which 45 trials including 16 562 patients (10 319 [62·3%] receiving active drug and 6243 [37·7%] placebo) were eligible. The risks of any treatment-emergent adverse event (7297/9546 [76·4%] patients on active drug vs 4415/5850 [75·5%] on placebo; RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·99-1·04; I2 =47%), serious infection (260/10 242 [2·5%] vs 155/6149 [2·5%]; 0·97, 0·79-1·19; I2 =0%), or venous thromboembolic event (12/4729 [0·3%] vs 9/2691 [0·3%]; 0·72, 0·31-1·66; I2 =0%) were not significantly lower with active drug than placebo. The risks of any infection (3208/8038 [39·9%] vs 1713/4809 [35·6%]; 1·14, 1·05-1·23; I2 =60%) or any drug-related adverse event (1094/2997 [36·5%] vs 609/1950 [31·2%]; 1·24, 1·02-1·50; I2 =75%) were higher with active drug than placebo. However, the risks of any worsening of IBD activity (1038/8090 [12·8%] vs 1181/5191 [22·8%]; 0·58, 0·52-0·64; I2 =40%), any withdrawal due to adverse events (610/10 282 [5·9%] vs 561/6207 [9·0%]; 0·71, 0·60-0·84; I2 =43%), any serious adverse events (1066/10 292 [10·4%] vs 742/6198 [12·0%]; 0·85, 0·77-0·94; I2 =17%), or any serious worsening of IBD activity (101/5707 [1·8%] vs 143/3640 [3·9%]; 0·55, 0·42-0·71; I2 =0%) were lower with active drug than placebo. 21 randomised controlled trials were judged as low risk of bias across all domains.

Interpretation: In maintenance of remission trials in IBD, placebo was associated with some clinically significant potential harms. Patients should be counselled about these before participating in clinical trials and consideration given to alternative designs to test novel drugs in IBD.

Funding: None.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
50.30
自引率
1.10%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology is an authoritative forum for key opinion leaders across medicine, government, and health systems to influence clinical practice, explore global policy, and inform constructive, positive change worldwide. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology publishes papers that reflect the rich variety of ongoing clinical research in these fields, especially in the areas of inflammatory bowel diseases, NAFLD and NASH, functional gastrointestinal disorders, digestive cancers, and viral hepatitis.
×
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