Cardiac resynchronization therapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Studies of cardiac resynchronization therapy in addition to an implantable cardioverter defibrillator in patients with mild to moderate congestive heart failure had not been shown to reduce mortality until the recent RAFT trial (Resynchronization/Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial). We performed a meta-analysis including the RAFT trial to determine the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without an implantable defibrillator on mortality.

Methods

We searched electronic databases and other sources for reports of randomized trials using a parallel or crossover design. We included studies involving patients with heart failure receiving optimal medical therapy that compared cardiac resynchronization therapy with optimal medical therapy alone, or cardiac resynchronization therapy plus an implantable defibrillator with a standard implantable defibrillator. The primary outcome was mortality. The optimum information size was considered to assess the minimum amount of information required in the literature to reach reliable conclusions about cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Results

Of 3071 reports identified, 12 studies (n = 7538) were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with optimal medical therapy alone, cardiac resynchronization therapy plus optimal medical therapy significantly reduced mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62–0.85). Compared with an implantable defibrillator alone, cardiac resynchronization therapy plus an implantable defibrillator significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.96). This last finding remained significant among patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I or II disease (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67–0.96) but not among those with class III or IV disease (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69–1.07). Analysis of the optimum information size showed that the sequential monitoring boundary was crossed, which suggests no need for further clinical trials.

Interpretation

The cumulative evidence is now conclusive that the addition of cardiac resynchronization to optimal medical therapy or defibrillator therapy significantly reduces mortality among patients with heart failure.Congestive heart failure is currently reaching epidemic proportions in Canada, with 500 000 Canadians affected and 50 000 new patients identified each year.¹ It accounts for more than 100 000 hospital admissions per year and has a one-year mortality ranging from 15% to 50%, depending on the severity of heart failure.² By 2050, the number of patients with heart failure is projected to increase threefold.²Advances in medical therapies have resulted in substantial reductions in mortality associated with congestive heart failure.^3–7 The use of devices has recently become an important adjuvant therapy.⁸ Cardiac resynchronization therapy involves pacing from both the right and left ventricles simultaneously to improve myocardial efficiency (see radiographs in Appendix 1, at www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/cmaj.101685/DC1). Cardiac resynchronization therapy has been shown to reduce morbidity and, when compared with medical therapy alone, to reduce mortality.^9–13 Until recently, it was not shown to reduce mortality among patients who also received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Among patients receiving optimal medical therapy, the Resynchronization/Defibrillation for Ambulatory Heart Failure Trial (RAFT) showed the superiority of cardiac resynchronization therapy in addition to an implantable defibrillator over a standard implantable defibrillator in reducing mortality and the combined outcome of death from any cause or hospital admission related to heart failure.¹⁴We performed a meta-analysis to further assess the effect on mortality of cardiac resynchronization therapy with and without an implantable defibrillator among patients with mildly symptomatic and advanced heart failure.     

Efficacy of short-term high-dose statin in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy: a meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials

Background

A few studies focused on statin therapy as specific prophylactic measures of contrast-induced nephropathy have been published with conflicting results. In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we aimed to assess the effectiveness of shor-term high-dose statin treatment for the prevention of CIN and clinical outcomes and re-evaluate of the potential benefits of statin therapy.

Methods

We searched PubMed, OVID, EMBASE, Web of science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for randomized controlled trials comparing short-term high-dose statin treatment versus low-dose statin treatment or placebo for preventing CIN. Our outcome measures were the risk of CIN within 2–5 days after contrast administration and need for dialysis.

Results

Seven randomized controlled trials with a total of 1,399 patients were identified and analyzed. The overall results based on fixed-effect model showed that the use of short-term high-dose statin treatment was associated with a significant reduction in risk of CIN (RR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.34–0.76, p = 0.001; I² = 0%). The incidence of acute renal failure requiring dialysis was not significant different after the use of statin (RR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.05–2.10, p = 0.24; I² = 0%). The use of statin was not associated with a significant decrease in the plasma C-reactive protein level (SMD −0.64, 95% CI: −1.57 to 0.29, P = 0.18, I² = 97%).

Conclusions

Although this meta-analysis supports the use of statin to reduce the incidence of CIN, it must be considered in the context of variable patient demographics. Only a limited recommendation can be made in favour of the use of statin based on current data. Considering the limitations of included studies, a large, well designed trial that incorporates the evaluation of clinically relevant outcomes in participants with different underlying risks of CIN is required to more adequately assess the role for statin in CIN prevention.     

The safety and efficacy of achieving very low LDL-cholesterol concentrations with high dose statin therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The benefits of lipid lowering with statins are established in patients with or at risk for coronary artery disease. Recent trials with high doses of potent statins have examined treating to very low levels of LDL-cholesterol. Concerns have been raised about the safety of this strategy. This review examines the safety and efficacy of treating to very low LDL-cholesterol. RECENT FINDINGS: Four clinical trials, Treating to New Targets (TNT) and Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) in stable coronary artery disease and Aggrastat to Zocor (A to Z) and Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy (PROVE IT)-TIMI 22 following acute coronary syndromes, have examined intensive statin therapy compared to moderate statin therapy. These trials and a meta-analysis demonstrated that intensive statin therapy reduces cardiovascular events. Subsequent analyses from these trials suggest that very low levels of LDL-cholesterol can be achieved safely and may improve clinical outcomes. A note of caution regarding hemorrhagic events following stroke with intensive statin therapy was raised by the Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction of Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) trial despite impressive reductions in cardiovascular events. SUMMARY: A growing body of evidence suggests progressive benefit for lowering LDL-cholesterol aggressively with intensive statin therapy in coronary artery disease. Future trials will be needed to define whether there is a level of LDL-cholesterol beyond which further benefit is not seen or safety concerns emerge.     

Effect of statin therapy on paraoxonase-1 status: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 clinical trials

BackgroundDecreased activity of the enzyme paraoxonase-1 (PON1) has been demonstrated in cardiovascular diseases. Statins, the forefront of pharmacotherapy for dyslipidemia, have been shown to enhance PON1 activity but clinical findings have not been conclusive.ObjectiveTo systematically review the clinical findings on the impact of statin therapy on PON1 status (protein concentrations and activities of paraoxonase and arylesterase) and calculate an effect size for the mentioned effects through meta-analysis of available data.MethodsScopus and Medline databases were searched to identify clinical trials. A random-effects model and the generic inverse variance method were used for quantitative data synthesis. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using the one-study remove approach. Random-effects meta-regression was performed to assess the impact of potential confounders on the estimated effect sizes.ResultsMeta-analysis suggested that statin therapy is associated with a significant elevation of PON1 paraoxonase and arylesterase activities, but not PON1 protein concentration. The PON1-enhancing effects of statins were robust in the sensitivity analyses and were independent of statin dose, treatment duration and changes in plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration.ConclusionThe increase of paraoxonase and arylesterase activities with statins is a pleiotropic lipid-independent clinical benefit that may partly explain the putative effects of statins in preventing cardiovascular outcomes.     

Toremifene and tamoxifen have similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

A meta-analysis of randomized trials was performed to compare the efficacy of toremifene (TOR) with tamoxifen (TAM) in patients with breast cancer. A total of 4,768 intention-to-treat patients from nine randomized trials were identified, with 2,587 patients in TOR group and 2,181 patients in TAM group. The primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). The ORR for TOR group was 26.2 % (303/1,156), whereas the ORR for TAM group was 25.2 % (284/1,128). The pooled RR suggested that the ORR were not statistically different between the two therapeutic groups (RR 1.04, 95 % CI 0.91–1.20, P = 0.57). The median TTP was 6.7 months for the TOR group and 9.7 months for the TAM group. The median OS was 30.1 months for the TOR group and 31.7 months for the TAM group. There were no significant difference in TTP and OS between two therapeutic groups (for TTP: HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.82–1.00; for OS: HR 1.02, 95 % CI 0.91–1.15). Adverse events were generally similar in two therapeutic groups, but TOR may cause fewer vaginal bleeding (4.0 vs. 6.7 %, P < 0.01), headache (0.2 vs. 3.1 %, P = 0.02) and thromboembolic events (4.7 vs. 7.0 %, P = 0.04). Sensitivity analyses were performed by deleting a single study each time; all the results were not materially altered. In summary, the results of this meta-analysis suggest that TOR and TAM have similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with breast cancer.     

Effectiveness of cell- and colony stimulating factor-based therapy for liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background aimsCirrhosis is the 11th leading cause of death worldwide. Because of the limitations of liver transplantation, cell- and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)-based therapies are considered potential treatment methods. This work analyzes the effectiveness of cell- and G-CSF-based therapies by network meta-analysis.MethodsA literature search was performed in four databases from inception to September 10, 2021. Registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating cell-based therapies and/or G-CSF-based therapies for cirrhosis patients were included. Traditional and network meta-analyses were analyzed in terms of survival, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) score, alanine aminotransferase levels and aspartate aminotransferase levels.ResultsTwenty-four studies were included in this analysis. The results showed that G-CSF-based therapies (odds ratio [OR], 2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49–3.79, P < 0.01) and cell-based therapies (OR, 1.54, 95% CI, 1.00–2.40, P = 0.048) improved the transplantation-free survival rate compared with standard medical treatment. Network analysis results showed that G-CSF combined with erythropoietin (EPO) and growth hormone (GH) had a therapeutic advantage, and cell-based therapy with mononuclear cell (MNC) hepatic artery injection and intravenous mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) combined with G-CSF also had a relative advantage in terms of survival outcome. For the MELD score, G-CSF plus GH and MSC portal vein injection had relative advantages. G-CSF plus GH and G-CSF plus EPO had advantages in terms of CTP scores. The included strategies demonstrated no obvious improvement in liver injury indicators.ConclusionsCell-based therapy has potential therapeutic effects for liver cirrhosis. Among cell-based therapies, intravenous MSCs and hepatic artery injection of MNCs have advantageous therapeutic effects. The use of G-CSF was also noted in regimens that improved survival outcomes. However, more well-designed, large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm this conclusion.     

The safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stem cell therapy in diabetic lower extremity vascular disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Background aimsSeveral studies have shown the efficacy of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy for lower extremity vascular disease (LEVD) in diabetic patients, but the results are not consistent. Therefore, the authors conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the safety and efficacy of MSC therapy in diabetic patients with LEVD.MethodsEight available databases were searched in both English and Chinese to identify RCTs comparing MSC therapy-based conventional treatment with conventional treatment alone in diabetic patients with LEVD. Three investigators independently screened the literature, extracted the data and assessed the risk bias. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 and Stata 14.0.ResultsA total of 10 studies involving 453 patients were included. Compared with conventional treatment only, patients receiving MSC therapy-based conventional treatment had a higher ulcer healing rate, greater number of reduced ulcers and shorter complete healing time. MSC therapy also increased ankle–brachial index and transcutaneous oxygen pressure. In addition, four of the included studies showed that MSC therapy significantly improved the number of new collateral vessels. Moreover, no more adverse events were recorded in the MSC group.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that MSC therapy promotes ulcer healing in diabetic LEVD patients with ulcers, improves blood supply and has a favorable safety profile. More large and well-designed RCTs with long-term follow-up are still needed to explore the safety and efficacy of MSC therapy in diabetic patients with LEVD.     

Efficacy and safety of telavancin in clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The epidemiology and antibiotic resistance of Staphylococcus aureus have evolved, underscoring the need for novel antibiotics, particularly against methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Telavancin is a bactericidal lipoglycopeptide with potent activity against Gram-positive pathogens.

Objective

To systematically review and synthesize the available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating telavancin in the treatment of patients with infections due to Gram-positive organisms with the methodology of meta-analysis.

Results

Six RCTs comparing telavancin with vancomycin were included; 4 (2229 patients) referred to complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs) and 2 (1503 patients) to hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). Regarding cSSTIs, telavancin and vancomycin showed comparable efficacy in clinically evaluable patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.10 [95% confidence intervals: 0.82–1.48]). Among patients with MRSA infection, telavancin showed higher eradication rates (OR = 1.71 [1.08–2.70]) and a trend towards better clinical response (OR = 1.55 [0.93–2.58]). Regarding HAP, telavancin was non-inferior to vancomycin in terms of clinical response in two Phase III RCTs; mortality rates for the pooled trials were comparable with telavancin (20%) and vancomycin (18.6%). Pooled data from cSSTIs and HAP studies on telavancin 10 mg/kg indicated higher rates of serum creatinine increases (OR = 2.22 [1.38–3.57]), serious adverse events (OR = 1.53 [1.05–2.24]), and adverse event-related withdrawals (OR = 1.49 [1.14–1.95]) among telavancin recipients.

Conclusion

Telavancin might be an alternative to vancomycin in cases of difficult-to-treat MRSA infections. The potent antistaphylococcal activity of telavancin should be weighted against the potential for nephrotoxicity.     

Parathyroid hormone versus bisphosphonate treatment on bone mineral density in osteoporosis therapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone (PTH) represent the antiresorptive and anabolic classes of drugs for osteoporosis treatment. Bone mineral density (BMD) is an essential parameter for the evaluation of anti-osteoporotic drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of PTH versus bisphosphonates on BMD for the treatment of osteoporosis.

Methods/Principal Findings

We performed a literature search to identify studies that investigated the effects of PTH versus bisphosphonates treatment on BMD. A total of 7 articles were included in this study, representing data on 944 subjects. The pooled data showed that the percent change of increased BMD in the spine is higher with PTH compared to bisphosphonates (WMD = 5.90, 95% CI: 3.69–8.10, p<0.01,). In the hip, high dose (40 µg) PTH (1–34) showed significantly higher increments of BMD compared to alendronate (femoral neck: WMD = 5.67, 95% CI: 3.47–7.87, p<0.01; total hip: WMD = 2.40, 95%CI: 0.49–4.31, p<0.05). PTH treatment has yielded significantly higher increments than bisphosphonates with a duration of over 12 months (femoral neck: WMD = 5.67, 95% CI: 3.47–7.86, p<0.01; total hip: WMD = 2.40, 95% CI: 0.49–4.31, P<0.05) and significantly lower increments at 12 months (femoral neck: WMD = −1.05, 95% CI: −2.26–0.16, p<0.01; total hip: WMD: −1.69, 95% CI: −3.05–0.34, p<0.05). In the distal radius, a reduction in BMD was significant between PTH and alendronate treatment. (WMD = −3.68, 95% CI: −5.57–1.79, p<0.01).

Discussion

Our results demonstrated that PTH significantly increased lumbar spine BMD as compared to treatment with bisphosphonates and PTH treatment induced duration- and dose-dependent increases in hip BMD as compared to bisphosphonates treatment. This study has also disclosed that for the distal radius, BMD was significantly lower from PTH treatment than alendronate treatment.     

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus conventional oxygen therapy in patients with acute respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common and life-threatening medical emergency in patients admitted to the hospital. Currently, there is a lack of large-scale evidence on the use of high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC) in patients with ARF. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated whether there were differences between HFNC therapy and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) for treating patients with ARF.

Methods

The EMBASE, Medline, and Wanfang databases and the Cochrane Library were searched. Two investigators independently collected the data and assessed the quality of each study. Randomized controlled trials that compared HFNC therapy with COT in patients with ARF were included. RevMan 5.3 was used to conduct the meta-analysis.

Results

Four studies that involved 703 patients with ARF were included, with 371 patients in the HFNC group and 332 patients in the COT group. In the overall estimates, there were no significant differences between the HFNC and COT groups in the rates of escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.37, 1.27; z?=?1.20, P?=?0.23), intubation (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55, 1.00; z?=?1.95, P?=?0.05), mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.36, 1.88; z?=?0.47, P?=?0.64), or ICU transfer (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.57, 2.09; z?=?0.26, P?=?0.79) during ARF treatment. However, the subgroup analysis showed that HFNC therapy may decrease the rate of escalation of respiratory support (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.97; z?=?2.15, P?=?0.03) and the intubation rate (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53, 0.97; z?=?2.15, P?=?0.03) when ARF patients were treated with HFNC therapy for ≥24 h compared with COT.

Conclusions

HFNC therapy was similar to COT in ARF patients. The subgroup analysis showed that HFNC therapy may decrease the rate of escalation of respiratory support and the intubation rate when ARF patients were treated with HFNC for ≥24 h compared with COT. Further high-quality, large-scale studies are needed to confirm our results.

     

Intrathoracic infusion therapy with Lentinan and chemical irritants for malignant pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 65 randomized controlled trials

BackgroundAderivative of Shiitake mushrooms, Lentinan is used to control malignant pleural effusion (MPE) through intrathoracic infusion.PurposeTo determine the clinical response, survival and safety of Lentinan plus chemical irritants, and the optimal combinations with chemical irritants, indication, threshold and optimal regimen for achieving the desired responses.Study designWe performed a new systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines.MethodsWe collected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding Lentinan plus chemical irritants from Chinese and English electronic databases (from inception until March 2019). We evaluated their bias risk, synthesized data using meta-analysis, and summarized evidence quality following the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.ResultsWe included 65 RCTs involving 4,080 patients and nine chemical irritants. Most trials had unclear bias risk. Lentinan with cisplatin significantly improved complete response [Risk ratio (RR) = 1.68, 95% confidence intervals (CI) (1.51 to 1.87), p < 0.00001, Fig.3a] and quality of life [RR = 1.51 95% CI (1.41 to 1.62), p < 0.00001, Fig.4], and decreased the risk of treatment failure, myelosuppression, gastrointestinal reaction, and chest pain. For patients with moderate to large volume of the pleural effusion, primary treatment, KPS score ≥ 50–60, or anticipated survival time ≥ 3months, Lentinan (3–4 mg/time, once a week for three to four times) withcisplatin (30–40 mg/m² or 50–60 mg/m²) significantly improved complete response and decreased failure. Most results were robust and moderate quality.ConclusionThe results suggest that Lentinan with chemical irritants, especially cisplatin is beneficial to the patient with MPE, and provide evidence for the indication, threshold, and optimal regimen that may achieve success and decrease failure.     

Respiratory fluoroquinolones for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

We investigated whether the use of respiratory fluoroquinolones was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with the use of macrolides and β-lactams among adults with pneumonia.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Current Contents, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane with no language restrictions. Two reviewers independently extracted data from published trials that compared fluoroquinolones (levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, gemifloxacin) with macrolides or β-lactams or both. A meta-analysis was performed with the clinical outcomes of mortality, treatment success and adverse outcomes.

Results

We included 23 trials in our meta-analysis. There was no difference in mortality among patients who received fluoroquinolones or the comparator antibiotics (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.65–1.12). Pneumonia resolved in more patients who received fluoroquinolones compared with the comparator antibiotics for the included outcomes in the intention-to-treat population (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00–1.36), clinically evaluable population (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06–1.50) and the microbiologically assessed population (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.28–2.20). Fluoroquinolones were more effective than a combination of β-lactam and macrolide (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02–1.90). They were also more effective for patients with severe pneumonia (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.02–3.29), those who required admission to hospital (OR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.04–1.61) and those who required intravenous therapy (OR = 1.44, 15% CI 1.13–1.85). Fluoroquinolones were more effective than β-lactam and macrolide in open-label trials (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.08–1.69) but not in blinded randomized controlled trials (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.85–1.50).

Interpretation

Fluoroquinolones were associated with higher success of treatment for severe forms of pneumonia; however, a benefit in mortality was not evident. A randomized controlled trial that includes patients with severe pneumonia with or without bacteremia is needed.Community-acquired pneumonia is among the leading reasons for hospital admission¹ and resource consumption.^2,3 It is the most frequent cause of community-acquired infections among patients admitted to intensive care units.⁴ In addition, it is among the leading causes of death worldwide.Physicians must choose an optimal therapeutic regimen that eliminates the infection effectively, minimizes the risk of developing drug resistance and does not compromise the safety of the patient. The combination of β-lactam and macrolide covers the most common possible pathogens involved in the pathogenesis of pneumonia.⁵ More recently, fluoroquinolones with enhanced activity against Streptococcus pneumoniae were introduced in clinical practice. The favourable pharmacokinetic profile of fluoroquinolones allows for once daily administration, often eliminating the need for parenteral treatment. Furthermore, initial treatment with fluoroquinolones was among the predictors of lower treatment failure among patients with pneumonia.⁶In 2007, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society released new guidelines for the management of care for adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia.⁷ In these guidelines, levofloxacin, gemifloxacin and moxifloxacin were reported to be equally effective as the combination of β-lactam and macrolide, and were proposed to be the preferred treatment option for patients who require admission to hospital, as well as for patients with comorbidity who receive treatment as outpatients. In addition to being safe, these fluoroquinolones are more effective against the most common types of bacteria responsible for the development of community-acquired pneumonia.⁷ For example, S. pneumoniae strains are not fully susceptible to ciprofloxacin. On the other hand, trovafloxacin, clinafloxacin, gatifloxacin and other quinolones are not used because of safety concerns or because they are not widely available. The trials that compared fluoroquinolones with other antibiotics regimens for the treatment of pneumonia were designed on the basis of noninferiority (i.e., an antibiotic is equally effective to a comparator), and several were conducted in order to receive approval from the relevant agencies.We sought to examine whether the use of fluoroquinolones was associated with more advantages or disadvantages than the use of macrolides or β-lactams in terms of mortality, resolution of pneumonia and adverse effects.     

Garlic for hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundIn the past decade, garlic has become one of the most popular complementary therapies for blood pressure (BP) control used by hypertensive patients. Numerous clinical studies have focused on the BP-lowering effect of garlic, but results have been inconsistent. Overall, there is a dearth of information available to guide the clinical community on the efficacy of garlic in hypertensive patients.AimTo systematically review the medical literature to investigate the current evidence of garlic for the treatment of hypertension.MethodsPubMed, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE were searched for appropriate articles from their respective inceptions until August 2014. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials comparing garlic vs. a placebo in patients with hypertension were considered. Papers were independently reviewed by two reviewers and were analyzed using Cochrane software Revman 5.2.ResultsA total of seven randomized, placebo-controlled trials were identified. Compared with the placebo, this meta-analysis revealed a significant lowering effect of garlic on both systolic BP (WMD: −6.71 mmHg; 95% CI: −12.44 to −0.99; P = 0.02) and diastolic BP (WMD: −4.79 mmHg; 95% CI: −6.60 to −2.99; P < 0.00001). No serious adverse events were reported in any of the trials.ConclusionThe present review suggests that garlic is an effective and safe approach for hypertension. However, more rigorously designed randomized controlled trials focusing on primary endpoints with long-term follow-up are still warranted before garlic can be recommended to treat hypertensive patients.     

CAR T-cell therapy: Balance of efficacy and safety

Early results from clinical trials of autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-expressing T cells for the therapy of B-cell malignancies have encouraged extending the potency of this therapy to other cancers. However, the success of using CAR T-cells to treat patients with solid tumors has been limited. In this review, we summarize current knowledge on the design and applications of CARs for the targeted therapy of cancer. We describe existing issues that limit the widespread application of CAR T cells and discuss the optimization steps needed to further improve safety and efficacy of this therapeutic platform.     

The efficacy and safety of adding bevacizumab in neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundPatients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) are more likely to suffer local recurrence and distant metastases, contributing to worse prognoses. Considering the provided dramatic reduction of local recurrences, neoadjuvant CRT (nCRT) followed by curative resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) and adjuvant chemotherapy has been established as standard therapy for LARC patients. However, the efficacy of adding bevacizumab in neoadjuvant therapy, especially in induction therapy-containing nCRT for LARC patients remains uncertain.MaterialsPubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to retrieve records on the application of bevacizumab in a neoadjuvant setting for LARC patients. The endpoints of interest were pCR and the rates of patients suffering Grade 3/4 bevacizumab-specific adverse events, namely bleeding, wound healing complications, and gastrointestinal perforation.Results29 cohorts covering 1134 subjects were included in this systematic review. The pooled pCR rate for bevacizumab-relevant cohorts was 21% (95% confidence interval (95% CI), 17–25%; I² = 61.8%), the pooled estimates of Grade 3/4 bleeding, Grade 3/4 wound healing complication, Grade 3/4 gastrointestinal perforation were 1% (95% CI, 0–3%; I² = 0%), 2% (95% CI, 1–5%; I² = 4.7%), and 2% (95% CI, 0–5%; I² = 0%), respectively.ConclusionThe addition of bevacizumab in the nCRT, especially in the TNT, for LARC patients provides promising efficacy and acceptable safety. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to the small amount of relevant data and need further confirmation by future studies.     

The efficacy and safety of Curcuma longa extract and curcumin supplements on osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of Curcuma longa extract and curcumin supplements on osteoarthritis (OA).Methods: The databases such as Pubmed and Cochrane Library were searched to collect the article about Curcuma longa extract and curcumin in the treatment of OA. Then, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected and their data were extracted. Finally, the RevMan5.3 was utilized for risk of bias assessment and meta-analysis, the STATA15.0 were utilized for publication bias assessment, and GRADE tool were used for the evidence quality assessment of primary outcomes.Results: A total of 15 RCTs involving 1621 participants were included. (1) Compared with placebo, Curcuma longa extract and curcumin (C.) can decrease the visual analog scale (VAS) and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score-pain, the WOMAC score-function and the WOMAC score-stiffness. In terms of adverse events, Curcuma longa extract and curcumin are comparable with those of placebo. (2) Compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), Curcuma longa extract and curcumin have similar effects on joint pain, function and stiffness. The incidence of adverse events in Curcuma longa extract and curcumin was lower. (3) Compared with the NSAIDs group, C.+NSAIDs can also decrease the VAS and WOMAC score-pain, the WOMAC score-function and the WOMAC score-stiffness. In terms of adverse events, the addition of Curcuma longa extract and curcumin to NSAIDs did not increase adverse events.Conclusion: Curcuma longa extract and curcumin may be a safer and effective supplement for OA patients. It is recommended to use Curcuma longa extract and curcumin supplement for OA patients for more than 12 weeks.