Giulia Carvalhal, Gonzalo Alberto Peralta-Jiménez, Maria Meritxell Roca Mora, Laith Ayasa, Vivian Barrera, Kavita Advani, Antonio Anzueto, Jafar Aljazeeri
{"title":"恩西芬汀与安慰剂治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病:随机临床试验的系统评价和荟萃分析","authors":"Giulia Carvalhal, Gonzalo Alberto Peralta-Jiménez, Maria Meritxell Roca Mora, Laith Ayasa, Vivian Barrera, Kavita Advani, Antonio Anzueto, Jafar Aljazeeri","doi":"10.1080/17476348.2025.2493367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ensifentrine in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched electronic databases and registries until 25 January 2025, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ensifentrine vs placebo in patients with COPD. Primary outcomes include forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) area under the curve (AUC), peak FEV₁, and morning trough FEV₁.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten RCTs involving 2,589 patients were included. Compared with placebo, ensifentrine improved FEV₁ AUC by 104.24 ml (95% CI, 74.03 to 133.44; moderate certainty) on day 1 and by 90.37 ml (95% CI, 54.94 to 125.81; moderate certainty) at study end. Ensifentrine increased peak FEV₁ by 140.99 ml on day 1 (95% CI, 107.48 to 174.5; moderate certainty) and by 118.98 ml at the final assessment (95% CI, 86.49 to 151.47; moderate certainty). Ensifentrine improved morning trough FEV₁ by 42.15 ml (95% CI, 19.87 to 64.43; high certainty). Dose-response analysis showed a bell-shaped curve for all outcomes. Ensifentrine did not significantly differ from placebo in adverse events or improvements in COPD symptoms and quality of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with placebo, ensifentrine improved lung function in COPD. Larger RCTs are needed to integrate this bronchodilator benefit with patient-centered outcomes.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration: </strong>CRD42024571928.</p>","PeriodicalId":94007,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"609-618"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ensifentrine vs placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Giulia Carvalhal, Gonzalo Alberto Peralta-Jiménez, Maria Meritxell Roca Mora, Laith Ayasa, Vivian Barrera, Kavita Advani, Antonio Anzueto, Jafar Aljazeeri\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17476348.2025.2493367\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ensifentrine in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched electronic databases and registries until 25 January 2025, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ensifentrine vs placebo in patients with COPD. Primary outcomes include forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) area under the curve (AUC), peak FEV₁, and morning trough FEV₁.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten RCTs involving 2,589 patients were included. Compared with placebo, ensifentrine improved FEV₁ AUC by 104.24 ml (95% CI, 74.03 to 133.44; moderate certainty) on day 1 and by 90.37 ml (95% CI, 54.94 to 125.81; moderate certainty) at study end. Ensifentrine increased peak FEV₁ by 140.99 ml on day 1 (95% CI, 107.48 to 174.5; moderate certainty) and by 118.98 ml at the final assessment (95% CI, 86.49 to 151.47; moderate certainty). Ensifentrine improved morning trough FEV₁ by 42.15 ml (95% CI, 19.87 to 64.43; high certainty). Dose-response analysis showed a bell-shaped curve for all outcomes. Ensifentrine did not significantly differ from placebo in adverse events or improvements in COPD symptoms and quality of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with placebo, ensifentrine improved lung function in COPD. Larger RCTs are needed to integrate this bronchodilator benefit with patient-centered outcomes.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration: </strong>CRD42024571928.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert review of respiratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"609-618\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert review of respiratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2025.2493367\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2025.2493367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价恩西芬汀治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的疗效和安全性。方法:我们检索了电子数据库和登记处,直到2025年1月25日,以比较埃西芬汀和安慰剂在COPD患者中的随机临床试验(rct)。主要指标包括一秒钟用力呼气量(FEV₁)曲线下面积(AUC)、峰值FEV₁和早晨通过FEV₁。结果:纳入10项随机对照试验,共2589例患者。与安慰剂相比,烯西芬汀使FEV 1 AUC提高了104.24 ml (95% CI, 74.03至133.44;中度确定性),减少90.37 ml (95% CI, 54.94 ~ 125.81;中等确定性)在研究结束时。恩西芬汀在第1天使FEV 1增加140.99 ml (95% CI, 107.48至174.5;中度确定性),最终评估时增加118.98毫升(95% CI, 86.49至151.47;温和的确定性)。恩西芬汀使早晨通过FEV 1改善42.15 ml (95% CI, 19.87至64.43;高确定性)。剂量-反应分析显示所有结果呈钟形曲线。在不良事件或COPD症状和生活质量的改善方面,恩西芬汀与安慰剂没有显著差异。结论:与安慰剂相比,恩西芬汀可改善COPD患者的肺功能。需要更大的随机对照试验来将这种支气管扩张剂的益处与以患者为中心的结果结合起来。普洛斯彼罗注册:CRD42024571928。
Ensifentrine vs placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Introduction: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ensifentrine in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Methods: We searched electronic databases and registries until 25 January 2025, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ensifentrine vs placebo in patients with COPD. Primary outcomes include forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) area under the curve (AUC), peak FEV₁, and morning trough FEV₁.
Results: Ten RCTs involving 2,589 patients were included. Compared with placebo, ensifentrine improved FEV₁ AUC by 104.24 ml (95% CI, 74.03 to 133.44; moderate certainty) on day 1 and by 90.37 ml (95% CI, 54.94 to 125.81; moderate certainty) at study end. Ensifentrine increased peak FEV₁ by 140.99 ml on day 1 (95% CI, 107.48 to 174.5; moderate certainty) and by 118.98 ml at the final assessment (95% CI, 86.49 to 151.47; moderate certainty). Ensifentrine improved morning trough FEV₁ by 42.15 ml (95% CI, 19.87 to 64.43; high certainty). Dose-response analysis showed a bell-shaped curve for all outcomes. Ensifentrine did not significantly differ from placebo in adverse events or improvements in COPD symptoms and quality of life.
Conclusions: Compared with placebo, ensifentrine improved lung function in COPD. Larger RCTs are needed to integrate this bronchodilator benefit with patient-centered outcomes.