Surface Under The Cumulative Ranking Values Research Articles

Network Meta-Analysis of Comparing Different Dosages of Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker With Proton-Pump Inhibitor in Acid-Related Disorders.

Potassium-competitive acid blockers have emerged as a promising treatment of acid-related disorders. However, the optimal dosage for maximizing their efficacy remains unclear. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of various dosages of potassium-competitive acid blockers and proton-pump inhibitors for treating acid-related disorders. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to July 16, 2023. Data extraction was performed independently by 2 authors. The Cochrane Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials tool (RoB 2.0) was used for bias assessment. The efficacy and safety were compared using the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Twelve articles were included in the present meta-analysis. For gastric/duodenal ulcers, keverprazan 30 mg (K30) exhibited the highest surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) value (92.8%) for healing rate. In terms of total adverse events, lansoprazole 30 mg (L30) exhibited the lowest SUCRA value (25.3%) in the treatment of gastric/duodenal ulcers. For the healing rate in erosive esophagitis, the maximum SUCRA value of vonoprazan 40 mg (V40) was 90.7% in the first subgroup (erosive esophagitis using vonoprazan, keverprazan, and lansoprazole) and the maximum SUCRA value of T50 was 72.1% in the second subgroup (erosive esophagitis using tegoprazan, fexuprazan, and esomeprazole). For the total adverse events in erosive esophagitis, L15 exhibited the lowest SUCRA value (12.2%) in the first group and E40 exhibited the lowest SUCRA value (24.4%) in the second group. K30 may be the most effective dosage for increasing the healing rate of gastric/duodenal ulcers. For erosive esophagitis, V40 and T50 may be the preferred dosages.

Efficacy and Safety of Bone Marrow Derived Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Stroke: Evidence from Network Meta-analysis.

Several types of stem cells are available for the treatment of stroke patients. However, the optimal type of stem cell remains unclear. To analyze the effects of bone marrow-derived stem cell therapy in patients with ischemic stroke by integrating all available direct and indirect evidence in network meta-analyses. We searched several databases to identify randomized clinical trials comparing clinical outcomes of bone marrow-derived stem cell therapy vs. conventional treatment in stroke patients. Pooled relative risks (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were reported. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) was used to rank the probabilities of each agent regarding different outcomes. Overall, 11 trials with 576 patients were eligible for analysis. Three different therapies, including mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), mononuclear stem cells (MNCs), and multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs), were assessed. The direct analysis demonstrated that stem cell therapy was associated with significantly reduced all-cause mortality rates (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.93; I2=0%). Network analysis demonstrated MSCs ranked first in reducing mortality (RR 0.42, 95% CrI 0.15 to 0.86) and improving modified Rankin Scale score (MD -0.59 95% CI -1.09 to -0.09), with SUCRA values 80%, and 98%, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed intravenous transplantation was superior to conventional therapy in reducing all-cause mortality (RR 0.53, 95% CrI 0.29 to 0.88). Using stem cell transplantation was associated with reduced risk of death and improved functional outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke. Additional large trials are warranted to provide more conclusive evidence.

Clinical effects of chemical drugs, fecal microbiota transplantation, probiotics, dietary fiber, and acupuncture in the treatment of chronic functional constipation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Currently, there are increasingly diverse treatment modalities for chronic functional constipation (CFC). This study aims to compare the relative efficacy and safety of chemical drugs, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), probiotics, dietary fiber, and acupuncture in the treatment of patients with CFC. We searched relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in five databases up to November 2023. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried out using R Studio 4.2.1. Cumulative ranking probability plots, assessed through the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA), were employed to rank the included drugs for various outcome measures. We included a total of 45 RCT studies with 17 118 patients with CFC. From the SUCRA values and NMA results FMT showed the best utility in terms of clinical efficacy, Bristol stool form scale scores, patient assessment of constipation quality of life scores, and the treatment modality with the lowest ranked incidence of adverse effects was electroacupuncture. Subgroup analysis of the chemotherapy group showed that sodium A subgroup analysis of the chemical group showed that sodium picosulfate 10 mg had the highest clinical efficacy. FMT is more promising in the treatment of CFC and may be more effective in combination with the relatively safe treatment of acupuncture.

The Efficacy of Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics in Patients Who Have Undergone Abdominal Operation, in Terms of Bowel Function Post-Operatively: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Abdominal operations may lead to post-operative bowel dysfunction, while administration of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics may limit its manifestation. Τhe study aimed to assess the efficacy of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics in patients who undergone abdominal operation, in terms of bowel function post-operatively. PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central), Embase, US Registry of clinical trials, and sources of grey literature were searched. The relative effect sizes were estimated, and we obtained the relative ranking of the interventions using cumulative ranking curves. In total, 30 studies were included in the analysis. For the outcome of post-operative ileus, probiotics was superior to placebo/no intervention (relative risk, RR: 0.38; 95%CI: 0.14-0.98) with the highest SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) value (92.1%). For time to first flatus, probiotics (MD: -0.47; 95%CI: -0.78 to -0.17) and synbiotics (MD: -0.53; 95%CI: -0.96 to -0.09) were superior to placebo/no intervention. For time to first defecation and for post-operative abdominal distension probiotics were superior to placebo/no intervention. For post-operative hospitalization days, synbiotics were superior to placebo/no intervention (MD: -3.07; 95%CI: -4.80 to -1.34). Administration of probiotics in patients who had undergone abdominal surgery reduced the prevalence of post-operative ileus, time to first flatus, time to first defecation, and prevalence of post-operative abdominal distension. Synbiotics reduce time to first flatus and post-operative hospitalization days.

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy: a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized clinical controlled trials

PurposeThe best approach for minimally invasive adrenalectomy is still under debate.MethodsA systematic search of randomized clinical trials was carried out. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was made reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded both in-hospital mortality and morbidity. The secondary endpoints were operative time (OP), blood loss (BL), length of stay (LOS), conversion, incisional hernia, and disease recurrence rate.ResultsEight studies were included, involving 359 patients clustered as follows: 175 (48.7%) in the TPLA arm; 55 (15.3%) in the RPLA arm; 10 (2.8%) in the Ro-TPLA arm; 25 (7%) in the TPAA arm; 20 (5.6%) in the SILS-LA arm; and 74 (20.6%) in the RPA arm. The RPLA had the highest probability of being the safest approach (SUCRA 69.6%), followed by RPA (SUCRA 63.0%). TPAA, Ro-TPLA, SILS-LA, and TPLA have similar probability of being safe (SUCRA values 45.2%, 43.4%, 43.0%, and 38.5%, respectively). Analysis of the secondary endpoints confirmed the superiority of RPA regarding OP, BL, LOS, and incisional hernia rate.ConclusionsThe best choice for patients with adrenal masses candidate for minimally invasive surgery seems to be RPA. An alternative could be RPLA. The remaining approaches could have some specific advantages but do not represent the first minimally invasive choice.

Preoperative carbohydrate loading before elective abdominal surgery: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized controlled trials

The preoperative use of carbohydrate loading (CHO) is recommended in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, even if the advantages remain debatable. The aim was to evaluate the CHO benefits in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. A systematic search of randomized clinical trials was made. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was carried out, reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded the morbidity rate. The secondary endpoints were aspiration/regurgitation rates, the length of stay (LOS), the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), the changes (Δ) in insulin sensitivity or resistance, and the postoperative C- reactive protein (CRP) values. CHO loading and water administration had a similar probability of being the approach with a lower morbidity rate (SUCRA=62.4% and 64.7%). CHO and clear water also had a similar chance of avoiding the PONV (SUCRA of 80.8% and 77%). The aspiration regurgitation rate was not relevant in non-fasting patients (0.06%). CHO administration was associated with the shorter hospitalization (SUCRA 86.9%), with the best metabolic profile (SUCRA values for insulin resistance and sensitivity were 81.1% and 76%). CHO enriched was the best approach for postoperative CRP values. Preoperative fasting was the worst approach for morbidity, PONV, insulin resistance and sensitivity, and CRP (SUCRA values of 32.1%, 21.7%, 10.2%, 3.2%, and 2.0%). Both preoperative CHO loading and clear water use were superior to the fasting about morbidity. CHO drinks use could provide specific advantages, reduce the PONV rate, and improve carbohydrate homeostasis, inflammatory pathway, and hospitalization.

Network Meta-analysis of the Therapeutic Effects of Hypoglycemic Drugs and Intensive Lifestyle Modification on Impaired Glucose Tolerance

PurposeIn the Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Type 2 Diabetes in China (2017 edition), intensive lifestyle interventions are recommended for preventing the progression of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) to type 2 diabetes mellitus. Acarbose and metformin can also be considered if intensive lifestyle modification has been ineffective for 6 months. But the effects of intensive lifestyle modification and glucose-lowering drug interventions that work best in the population with IGT are unclear. This network meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of intensive lifestyle modification, acarbose, and metformin in treating populations with IGT. MethodsWe systematically searched both Chinese- and English-language databases, including China Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, VIP, and Wanfang, for articles published between database inception and September 2019. Randomized, controlled clinical trials in patients with IGT treated with acarbose, metformin, and intensive lifestyle modification were assessed for eligibility. The data from all included studies were evaluated by 2 reviewers independently in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention version 6.0. A network meta-analysis was performed by using R software version 3.6.1. FindingsThe data from 53 randomized controlled trials were included in the review, with a sample size of 21,208 patients. Compared with the control group, the use of acarbose, metformin, and/or intensive lifestyle modification was associated with reduced rates of progression to diabetes (relative risks [RRs] [95% credible intervals]: acarbose, 0.37 [0.29–0.47]; metformin, 0.39 [0.30–0.50]; intensive lifestyle modification, 0.61 [0.50–0.73]). The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) value of acarbose was 88.35%, supporting that acarbose was more effective in reducing the rate of progression to diabetes compared with controls. With acarbose, metformin, and intensive lifestyle modification, the rates of achieving a normal glucose level were increased by RR = 2.1, 1.7, and 1.2, respectively when compared with control group. The SUCRA value of acarbose was 99.69%, supporting the optimal effect of acarbose in achieving a normal blood glucose level. ImplicationsIn this meta-analysis in patients with IGT, compared with controls, acarbose and metformin were associated with decreased rates of progression to diabetes and increased rates of achieving a normal glucose level. Acarbose use was associated with an increased rate of achieving a normal glucose level, while intensive lifestyle modification was not.

PMS41 The Challenges Of Comparing Therapeutic Responses Of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Treatments: A Network Meta-Analysis (NMA) On Two Composite Endpoint

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease with multisystemic involvement. There are no established guidelines to evaluate treatment responses, which makes evaluation of potential SLE interventional treatments challenging. Composite endpoints (CEPs) have been developed to detect therapeutic effects across different disease manifestations. The most commonly used CEPs are SLE Responder Index (SRI-4) and the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-Based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA); the comparability of response levels measured by these two CEPs is not demonstrated. A systematic literature review identified five randomized-controlled trials which investigated 11 active treatments by assessing both SRI-4 and BICLA after 48/52 weeks. A random-effects meta-analysis using a binomial likelihood model was conducted for both CEPs. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve. SUCRA values range between 0 and 1, with a higher value indicating a higher likelihood of a treatment to be the most effective option. The range of SUCRA values was wider using BICLA (35%–60%) than for SRI-4 (42%–55%), indicating a difference in sensitivity between both endpoints when capturing treatment responses. Treatment rankings varied between both CEPs with the treatment ranked most effective using BICLA (SUCRA=59.7%), only ranked fifth when compared using SRI-4 (SUCRA=47.5%). The second-best treatment in the BICLA comparison (SUCRA=51.7%) was ranked the second-worst in the SRI-4 comparison (SUCRA=41.7%). The treatment ranked first in the SRI-4 comparison (SUCRA=54.6%) occupied the third rank in the BICLA comparison (SUCRA=49.0%). Treatment rankings differed between the two analysed CEPs. This highlights the need for future research to increase the understanding of the unique attributes of the CEPs when considering potential treatments. The difference in sensitivity between CEPs to evaluate and compare therapeutic responses should be considered if indirect treatment comparisons are conducted to appropriately inform formal value assessments and reimbursement decision-making for future interventions in SLE.

Comparative Efficacy of Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Interventions for Acne Vulgaris: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Acne has several effects on physical symptoms, but the main impacts are on the quality of life, which can be improved by treatment. There are several acne treatments but less evidence comparing their relative efficacy. Thus, we assessed the comparative efficacy of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for acne. We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to April 2019, to include randomized controlled trials for acne that compared topical antibiotics (TA), benzoyl peroxide (BPO), topical retinoids (TR), oral antibiotics (OA), lasers, light devices including LED device (LED), photodynamic therapy (PDT), and intense pulsed light, chemical peels (CP), miscellaneous therapies or complementary and alternative medicine (MTCAM), or their combinations. We performed Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effects for all treatments compared with placebo and each other. Mean differences (MDs) of lesions count and risk ratios of adverse events with their 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated, and all interventions were ranked by the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values. Additional frequentist additive network meta-analysis was performed to detect the robustness of results and potential interaction effects. Sensitivity analyses were carried out with different priors, and metaregression was to adjust for nine potential effect modifiers. In the result, seventy-three randomized controlled trials (27,745 patients with mild to moderate acne), comparing 30 grouped intervention categories, were included with low to moderate risk of bias. For adverse effects, OA had more risk in combination treatment with others. For noninflammatory lesions reduction, seventeen interventions had significant differences comparing with placebo and three interventions (TR+BPO: MD = −21.89, 95%CrI [−28.97, −14.76]; TR+BPO+MTCAM: −22.48 [−34.13, −10.70]; TA+BPO+CP: −20.63 [−33.97, −7.13]) were superior to others with 94, 94, and 91% SUCRA values, respectively. For inflammatory lesions reduction, nineteen interventions were significantly better than placebo, and three interventions (TR+BPO: MD = −12.13, 95%CrI [−18.41, −5.80]; TR+BPO+MTCAM: −13.21 [−.39, −3.04]; LED: −11.30 [−18.34, −4.42]) were superior to others (SUCRA: 81, 81, and 77%, respectively). In summary of noninflammatory and inflammatory lesions results, TR+BPO and TA+BPO were the best options compared to others. The frequentist model showed similar results as above. In summary, current evidence supports the suggestion that TR+BPO and TA+BPO are the best options for mild to moderate acne. LED is another option for inflammatory lesions when drug resistance occurs. All the combinations involved with OA showed more risk of adverse events than others. However, the evidence of this study should be cautiously used due to the limitations.

Comparative efficacy of pulmonary surfactant in respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

The comparative efficacy of pulmonary surfactant in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of different pulmonary surfactant in the treatment of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants and to provide an evidence-based reference for clinical use. MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials databases were electronically searched from inception to January 2019. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data, and then R and RevMan 5.3 software packages were used to perform network meta-analysis. The relative risk of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants associated with six different pulmonary surfactant was analysed, including beractant (Survanta), surfactant A (Alveofact), calfactant (Infasurf), poractant (Curosurf), lucinactant (Surfaxin), and colfosceril (Exosurf). Patients with the following drugs appeared to have significantly reduced mortality of respiratory distress syndrome compare with beractant: surfactant A (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.90), calfactant (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85-0.97), poractant (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.67-0.77), lucinactant (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.71-0.90), and colfosceril (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99). The SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) values for each of the drugs were: beractant (8.9%), surfactant A (93.8%), calfactant (40.3%), poractant (65.4%), lucinactant (59.8%), and colfosceril (31.6%). Compared with beractant, other pulmonary surfactants are more effective to reduce the mortality of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants. Surfactant A drugs appeared to have the best efficacy in reducing mortality of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants.

Brigatinib and Alectinib for ALK Rearrangement-Positive Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With or Without Central Nervous System Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

To date, no head-to-head trials have compared the efficacy of brigatinib and alectinib against anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement-positive (ALK-p), ALK-inhibitor-naïve, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with central nervous system (CNS) metastasis. We conducted an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) between brigatinib and alectinib, with crizotinib as a common comparator, using a Bayesian model with non-informative prior distribution and assessed the between-study heterogeneity of the studies. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and efficacy was ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve values. ITC analysis showed that there were no significant differences in PFS between the brigatinib and alectinib arms. However, the SUCRA values revealed that alectinib ranked the highest by efficacy in the overall patient population, whereas brigatinib ranked the highest by efficacy in the CNS metastasis sub-group. Although there were no significant differences in the incidence of G3–5 adverse events between the brigatinib and alectinib arms in the overall patient population, the data were deemed insufficient for the CNS metastasis sub-group analysis. This study provides critical information to clinicians regarding the efficacy of brigatinib for ALK-p, ALK-inhibitor-naïve, advanced NSCLC patients, with and without CNS metastasis. Larger randomized, controlled trials are warranted to confirm our results.

P728 Comparative assessment of faecal microbiota transplantation and current therapies as induction treatment for active refractory ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract Background Emerging evidence suggests that faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) can induce remission in patients with refractory to standard treatment ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of FMT and current therapies as induction treatments in UC. We searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and grey literature sources up to October 2019. We included randomised controlled trials of patients with active UC that compared FMT, infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab and tofacitinib to each other or placebo. Efficacy outcomes were clinical remission and response. Safety outcomes were incidence of any adverse event (AE), serious AEs and infections. We conducted random-effects network meta-analysis and ranked treatments based on the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results Twenty trials (5177 patients) were included in the analysis. There was only one head to head RCT (vedolizumab vs. adalimumab). FMT was superior to placebo for induction of clinical remission (OR 2.80; 95% CI 1.50–5.23) and response (OR 2.53; 95% CI 1.53–4.20). No indirect comparisons between FMT and licensed treatments reached statistical significance for efficacy outcomes. On SUCRA analysis, FMT (SUCRA 0.57, 0.58) had comparable SUCRA values with golimumab (SUCRA 0.53, 0.39) and vedolizumab (SUCRA 0.58, 0.61) in terms of clinical remission and response respectively. Infliximab (SUCRA 0.71, 0.93) and tofacitinib (SUCRA 0.85, 0.75) were ranked highest while adalimumab (SUCRA 0.23, 0.21) was ranked lowest. There was no increase in the rates of any AEs for FMT and licensed therapies and no differences in indirect comparisons. Vedolizumab (SUCRA 0.81) was the safest option, followed by tofacitinib (SUCRA 0.55). FMT (SUCRA 0.38) had comparable SUCRA values with adalimumab (SUCRA 0.37) and golimumab (SUCRA 0.47). Only tofacitinib increased the incidence of infections compared with placebo (OR 1.51; 95%CI 1.05–2.19). Based on SUCRAs, FMT (SUCRA 0.83) was the safest in terms of infections. Vedolizumab had lower incidence of serious AEs compared with FMT and placebo, while FMT was ranked as the least safe treatment. In subgroup analysis, FMT through the lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract was superior to placebo (OR 3.92; 95%CI 1.94–7.92) and performed numerically better than FMT through the upper GI tract (OR 0.29; 95%CI 0.08–1.13). Conclusion Evidence suggests that FMT could be an efficacious and safe alternative induction therapy for refractory UC. Lower GI delivery of FMT might be more effective. Due to the absence of head-to-head trials and the limited size of FMT trials, conclusions must be interpreted with caution.

P735 Comparative assessment of probiotics and standard therapies for mild to moderate ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract Background We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare probiotics to current therapies in the induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods We systematically searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL up to November 2018. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with mild to moderate UC that compared probiotics, sulfasalazine, mesalamine (low dose <2 g/day, standard dose ≥ 2 g/day), olsalazine, balsalazide, budesonide, budesonide MMX and beclomethasone either alone or in combination with topical therapy, to each other or placebo. We excluded trials where <50% of the population had extensive or left-sided colitis. Outcomes were remission (induction studies), relapse (maintenance studies) and discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability). We conducted random-effects network meta-analysis and ranked treatments based on the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results Forty-eight trials (probiotics 6 trials) of induction therapy and 30 trials (probiotics 6 trials) of maintenance therapy were included in the analysis. In studies with probiotics concomitant treatment, mainly mesalamine, were allowed. At induction, probiotics were not superior to placebo (OR 1.43; 95%CI 0.84–2.42) and they were inferior to combined oral and topical mesalamine therapy (OR 0.28; 95%CI 0.12–0.66) and combined mesalamine and beclomethasone therapy (OR 0.27; 95%CI 0.09–0.83). On SUCRA analysis, combination therapies (SUCRA 0.92 and 0.93) were ranked the highest followed by balsalazide (SUCRA 0.71), budesonide ΜΜΧ (SUCRA 0.68), standard dose mesalamine (SUCRA 0.52), beclomethasone (SUCRA 0.50), olsalazine (SUCRA 0.41), probiotics (SUCRA 0.29), low dose mesalamine (SUCRA 0.26) and sulfasalazine (SUCRA 0.23) in terms of inducing remission. Probiotics were well tolerated. At maintenance, probiotics (OR 0.35; 95%CI 0.19–0.62) and their combination with mesalamine (OR 0.38; 95%CI 0.15–0.99) had lower rate of relapse compared with placebo, but there were no differences when compared with other treatments. On SUCRA analysis, probiotics either alone or combined with mesalamine had comparable SUCRA values to standard dose mesalamine (SUCRA 0.59) and sulfasalazine (SUCRA 0.68). The combination of oral and rectal mesalamine was superior to placebo (OR 0.10; 95%CI 0.04–0.26) and all other treatments and it was ranked highest (SUCRA 0.99). Probiotics were ranked the best tolerated option in terms of discontinuation due to adverse events (SUCRA 0.80). Conclusion Probiotics are well tolerated but they are not effective in inducing remission in active UC. They may be effective when added to mesalamine therapy in preventing relapse of quiescent UC, but large, well-designed RCTs are needed.

Treatment for Infected Pancreatic Necrosis Should be Delayed, Possibly Avoiding an Open Surgical Approach: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

To evaluate all invasive treatments for suspected IPN. The optimal invasive treatment for suspected IPN remains unclear. A systematic search of randomized clinical trials comparing at least 2 invasive strategies for the treatment of suspected IPN was carried out. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was made reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded both the in-hospital mortality and major morbidity rates. The secondary endpoints were mortality, length of stay, intensive care unit stay, the pancreatic fistula rate, and exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. Seven studies were included, involving 400 patients clustered as following: 64 (16%) in early surgical debridement (ED); 27 (6.7%) in peritoneal lavage (PL); 45 (11.3%) in delayed surgical debridement (DD), 169 (42.3%) in the step-up approach with minimally invasive debridement (SUA-DD) and 95 (23.7%) with endoscopic debridement (SUA-EnD). The step-up approach with endoscopic debridement had the highest probability of being the safest approach (SUCRA 87.1%), followed by SUA-DD (SUCRA 59.5%); DD, ED, and PL had the lowest probability of being safe (SUCRA values 27.6%, 31.4%, and 44.4%, respectively). Analysis of the secondary endpoints confirmed the superiority of SUA-EnD regarding length of stay, intensive care unit stay, pancreatic fistula rate, and new-onset diabetes. The SUA approaches are similar regarding exocrine function. Mortality was reduced by any delayed approaches (DD, SUA-DD, or SUA-EnD). The first choice for suspected IPN seemed to be SUA-EnD. An alternative could be SUA-DD. PL, ED, and DD should be avoided.

Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine for Primary Hypertension: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

Background Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine (TCPM) is now being used more and more extensively for primary hypertension in China. However, the comparative efficacy and safety of it need more clarified evidence. Thus, we conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare TCPMs with other interventions. Methods We searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to April 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with diagnosis of primary hypertension that compared the efficacy of TCPMs with antihypertension drugs (ADs). Two researchers screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias independently. The primary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). The secondary outcomes were adverse effects (AEs), total cholesterol (TC), and triglyceride (TG). We used the Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare interventions and described the categorical variable and the continuous variable as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD), respectively. Besides, we ranked all interventions via the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values and conducted metaregression with nine covariates as additional analysis. Results We included 192 studies with 23366 patients diagnosed as primary hypertension in total. For SBP reduction, eighteen interventions were significantly better than AD. Among them, Yinxingye (YXY) + AD (MD = −12, 95% CrI [−16, −8.5]) was superior to others in the rank plot with SUCRA 0.91. For DBP reduction, sixteen interventions were significantly better than AD. Among them, Qinggan Jiangya (QGJY) + AD (MD = −8.7, 95% CrI [−12, −5.5]) and Qiju Dihuang (QJDH) + AD (MD = −8.8, 95% CrI [−12, −5.2]) were superior to others in the rank plot with SUCRA 0.89. To summarize the SUCRA values, we found that QGJY + AD and YXY + AD had the most significant reductions for both SBP and DBP. YXY + AD was the best one for both TC (MD = −1.3, 95% CrI [−1.9, −0.64]) and TG (MD = −0.52, 95% CrI [−0.92, −0.11]) reductions. Considering adverse effects, we found two interventions had significant differences comparing with AD. Among them, YXY + AD was the best one with SUCRA of 0.01. Conclusion In all TCPMs, QGJY + AD and YXY + AD may be the best options for hypertension. Meanwhile, YXY + AD can improve blood lipids in patients with hypertension. However, due to the vague reports of adverse effects and other limitations, more evidence, especially that provided by high-quality studies, is needed to prove the advantages of TCMPs.

Bevacizumab or PARP-inhibitors maintenance therapy for platinum-sensitive (PS) recurrent ovarian cancer (rOC)? A network meta-analysis (NMA).

5564 Background: Patients (pts) experiencing a PS rOC are generally re-exposed to a platinum based-chemotherapy (CT). In this setting, the addition of a targeted agent like bevacizumab (BEV) or PARP inhibitors (PARPi) as concomitant and/or maintenance therapy has shown to improve progression free survival (PFS). In the absence of direct comparison in randomized trials (RCTs), we have performed a NMA to evaluate differences in terms of efficacy between BEV and PARPi in pts with PS rOC, according to BRCA status. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Medline for RCTs involving pts with PS rOC treated with BEV (n = 3, 1563 pts) or PARPi (n = 5, 1839 pts). Only trials with PFS as primary endpoint were included. Trials in first line setting were excluded. Analyses have been done pooling pts who had received PARPi in three groups, according to the available data on BRCA genes status: all comers (AC), BRCA mutated pts (BRCAm) and BRCA wild-type pts (BRCAwt). A frequentist approach has been used with R statistical software. To rank the effect size of treatments, surface under the cumulative ranking value (SUCRA) has been applied. Results: In AC pts, PARPi improved PFS compared to BEV (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70, 95% CI 0.54-0.91, test of heterogeneity [I2] = 40.5%). In BRCAm pts the gain in PFS for PARPi was even higher compared to BEV (HR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.36-0.59, I2= 17.2%). In BRCAwt pts the benefit of PARPi over BEV was not statistically significant (HR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.63-1.20, I2= 35.7%) but PARPi had the highest likelihood of being ranked as the best treatment in terms of efficacy according to SUCRA (90% and 60%, respectively for PARPi and BEV). Hazard ratio for PFS between PARPi, BEV and CT in the three cohorts are reported in the table. Conclusions: According to indirect comparisons, PARPi performed the best for the treatment of PS rOC, especially in BRCAm pts who had not previously received PARPi. BEV could be still an option in BRCAwt pts. [Table: see text]

The safety and efficacy of biologic agents in treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: A network meta-analysis.

Objective:Previous studies have shown that biologic agents out of the nine medicines might be beneficial for the treatment of SLE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the most effective medication of six biologic agents in treatment of SLE using network meta-analysis (NMA). The performance of these processes is ranked according to the results of this analysis.Methods:Multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library was used to identify applicable articles and collect relevant data to analyzed by using STATA (13.0) software. The papers included in this study were divided into control group (placebo) and observation group (one of the six medicines).Results:A total of 21 eligible RCTs of biologic agents were identified, a total of 995 papers were included, and the results showed that the belimumab had the highest probability of being the most clinically efficacious intervention, with a surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve of 75.0, was significantly superior (P < 0.05) to placebo alone. The blisibimod was the worst, with a SUCRA value of 29.4. The other biologic agents (atacicept, blisibimod, epratuzumab, rituximab, tabalumab) were insignificantly superior (P > 0.05) to placebo alone.Conclusions:Belimumab had the highest probability of being the best treatment for SLE compared with the other biologic agents (atacicept, blisibimod, epratuzumab, rituximab, tabalumab). The other biologic agents indicated an insignificant difference in efficacy for the treatment of SLE compared with placebo.

Network meta-analysis of the efficacy and adverse effects of several treatments for advanced/metastatic prostate cancer

This network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and adverse effects of several treatments for advanced/metastatic prostate cancer (PC). The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of treatments for advanced/metastatic PC. Eighteen studies covering 6,340 patients were included in this analysis. The calculated were odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals, and the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that overall survival rates achieved with radiotherapy or endocrine therapy were lower than obtained with radiotherapy + endocrine therapy. The endocrine therapy includes estrogen therapy, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (LHRH-A), anti-androgen therapy (ADT), ADT + LHRH-A and estrogen therapy + LHRH-A, and its SUCRA values indicated that for overall response rate, estrogen therapy + LHRH-A ranked the highest (92.6%); for overall survival rate, ADT ranked the highest (75.2%); for anemia, estrogen therapy ranked the highest (88.2%); and for diarrhea and hot flushes, ADT ranked the highest (diarrhea, 87.4%; hot flushes, 89.3%). Cluster analysis on the endocrine therapy showed that ADT + LHRH-A achieved the highest overall survival and overall response rates in the treatment of advanced/metastatic PC. Estrogen therapy and ADT had the lowest incidences of diarrhea and anemia. Thus, combined radiotherapy + endocrine therapy had higher overall survival rate, and among the endocrine therapy, in terms of overall response rate and overall survival rate, ADT + LHRH-A may be a better regimen in the treatment of advanced or metastatic PC.

An investigation of the impact of using different methods for network meta-analysis: a protocol for an empirical evaluation

BackgroundNetwork meta-analysis, a method to synthesise evidence from multiple treatments, has increased in popularity in the past decade. Two broad approaches are available to synthesise data across networks, namely, arm- and contrast-synthesis models, with a range of models that can be fitted within each. There has been recent debate about the validity of the arm-synthesis models, but to date, there has been limited empirical evaluation comparing results using the methods applied to a large number of networks. We aim to address this gap through the re-analysis of a large cohort of published networks of interventions using a range of network meta-analysis methods.MethodsWe will include a subset of networks from a database of network meta-analyses of randomised trials that have been identified and curated from the published literature. The subset of networks will include those where the primary outcome is binary, the number of events and participants are reported for each direct comparison, and there is no evidence of inconsistency in the network. We will re-analyse the networks using three contrast-synthesis methods and two arm-synthesis methods. We will compare the estimated treatment effects, their standard errors, treatment hierarchy based on the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve, the SUCRA value, and the between-trial heterogeneity variance across the network meta-analysis methods. We will investigate whether differences in the results are affected by network characteristics and baseline risk.DiscussionThe results of this study will inform whether, in practice, the choice of network meta-analysis method matters, and if it does, in what situations differences in the results between methods might arise. The results from this research might also inform future simulation studies.