针对IL-5的单克隆抗体治疗严重嗜酸性粒细胞哮喘的安全性和有效性:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析

Noor Alam , S. Latha , Anoop Kumar
{"title":"针对IL-5的单克隆抗体治疗严重嗜酸性粒细胞哮喘的安全性和有效性:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Noor Alam ,&nbsp;S. Latha ,&nbsp;Anoop Kumar","doi":"10.1016/j.hsr.2023.100103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Recently, mepolizumab and benralizumab have been approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Thus, the main objective of the current study was to find out the exact efficacy and safety profile of mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The relevant randomized controlled trials were searched in PubMed and clinical trials websites from inception to January 2022. All the analysis were done using RevMan5.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There is a significant reduction of asthma exacerbation in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group. However, there is no significant differences were observed in the FEV1 change. Overall adverse drug reactions (ADRs) such as headache and injection site reactions are found non-significant in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group, however, bronchitis, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), sinusitis, and serious adverse event (SAEs) were found to be significantly less. The subgroup analysis has also shown a similar kind of efficacy in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group however, safety analysis results have shown better safer profile of benralizumab as compared to mepolizumab. The sensitivity analysis results have shown non-alteration in the conclusion of the study regarding efficacy parameters however, overall adverse events, sinusitis, and nasopharyngitis results are altered after the exclusion of outliers.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Mepolizumab and benralizumab appear to be safe and effective in treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. However, more data is required to draw a valid conclusion, particularly with mepolizumab.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73214,"journal":{"name":"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5 in severe eosinophilic asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials\",\"authors\":\"Noor Alam ,&nbsp;S. Latha ,&nbsp;Anoop Kumar\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hsr.2023.100103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Recently, mepolizumab and benralizumab have been approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Thus, the main objective of the current study was to find out the exact efficacy and safety profile of mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The relevant randomized controlled trials were searched in PubMed and clinical trials websites from inception to January 2022. All the analysis were done using RevMan5.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There is a significant reduction of asthma exacerbation in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group. However, there is no significant differences were observed in the FEV1 change. Overall adverse drug reactions (ADRs) such as headache and injection site reactions are found non-significant in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group, however, bronchitis, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), sinusitis, and serious adverse event (SAEs) were found to be significantly less. The subgroup analysis has also shown a similar kind of efficacy in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group however, safety analysis results have shown better safer profile of benralizumab as compared to mepolizumab. The sensitivity analysis results have shown non-alteration in the conclusion of the study regarding efficacy parameters however, overall adverse events, sinusitis, and nasopharyngitis results are altered after the exclusion of outliers.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Mepolizumab and benralizumab appear to be safe and effective in treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. However, more data is required to draw a valid conclusion, particularly with mepolizumab.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632023000296\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632023000296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近,mepolizumab和benralizumab已被批准用于治疗严重嗜酸性粒细胞哮喘。因此,本研究的主要目的是找出mepolizumab和benralizumab治疗严重嗜酸性粒细胞哮喘的确切疗效和安全性。方法检索PubMed及临床试验网站自成立至2022年1月的相关随机对照试验。所有的分析都是使用RevMan5完成的。结果mepolizumab和benralizumab组哮喘发作明显减少。然而,在FEV1的变化中没有观察到显著差异。mepolizumab和benralizumab组的总体药物不良反应(adr)如头痛和注射部位反应无显著性,但支气管炎、鼻咽炎、上呼吸道感染(URTI)、鼻窦炎和严重不良事件(SAEs)明显减少。亚组分析也显示了mepolizumab和benralizumab组相似的疗效,然而,安全性分析结果显示,与mepolizumab相比,benralizumab更安全。敏感性分析结果显示,研究结论的疗效参数没有变化,但在排除异常值后,总体不良事件、鼻窦炎和鼻咽炎的结果发生了变化。结论mepolizumab和benralizumab治疗重度嗜酸性粒细胞哮喘安全有效。然而,需要更多的数据来得出有效的结论,特别是mepolizumab。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5 in severe eosinophilic asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting IL-5 in severe eosinophilic asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Recently, mepolizumab and benralizumab have been approved for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma.

Objective

Thus, the main objective of the current study was to find out the exact efficacy and safety profile of mepolizumab and benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma.

Methods

The relevant randomized controlled trials were searched in PubMed and clinical trials websites from inception to January 2022. All the analysis were done using RevMan5.

Results

There is a significant reduction of asthma exacerbation in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group. However, there is no significant differences were observed in the FEV1 change. Overall adverse drug reactions (ADRs) such as headache and injection site reactions are found non-significant in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group, however, bronchitis, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), sinusitis, and serious adverse event (SAEs) were found to be significantly less. The subgroup analysis has also shown a similar kind of efficacy in the mepolizumab and benralizumab group however, safety analysis results have shown better safer profile of benralizumab as compared to mepolizumab. The sensitivity analysis results have shown non-alteration in the conclusion of the study regarding efficacy parameters however, overall adverse events, sinusitis, and nasopharyngitis results are altered after the exclusion of outliers.

Conclusion

Mepolizumab and benralizumab appear to be safe and effective in treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. However, more data is required to draw a valid conclusion, particularly with mepolizumab.

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
Health sciences review (Oxford, England)
Health sciences review (Oxford, England) Medicine and Dentistry (General)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
75 days
×
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