Journal of comparative effectiveness research
-
Aim: This meta-analysis, only including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), was conducted to assess separately and compare the therapeutic efficacy of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSCs) and bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) at the same follow-up time. Methods: Potential relevant researches were identified from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov. The data, from clinical trials concentrating on knee OA treated with ADMSCs or BMSCs, were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with knee OA in visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lysholm knee scale (Lysholm) and Tegner activity scale (Tegner). ⋯ The improvement of Lysholm scores was of no statistical significance compared with control groups, although treatment outcome at 12-month follow-up was better than that at 24-month follow-up, which was debatable because only data of one clinical trial were pooled in the analysis (12 months: MD = 7.50; 95% CI: -1.94 to 16.94; p = 0.12; 24 months: MD = 5.10; 95% CI: -3.02 to 13.22; p = 0.22). Finally, by comparing the statistical results of VAS and WOMAC scores, it could be concluded that the therapeutic effect of ADMSCs on knee OA was more effective than that of BMSCs. Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed that regeneration with BMSCs or ADMSCs had a great application potential in the treatment of patients with knee OA, and ADMSCs tended to be superior to BMSCs according to the limited clinical evidences available.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy and safety of dabrafenib in combination with trametinib versus competing adjuvant therapies for high-risk melanoma.
Aim To conduct a systematic literature review of high-risk resectable cutaneous melanoma adjuvant therapeutics and compare safety and efficacy. Methods: The systematic literature review included randomized controlled trials investigating: dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB + TRAM), nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, vemurafenib, chemotherapy and interferons. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and safety. ⋯ Results: Across relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and OS, DAB + TRAM had the lowest estimated hazards of respective events relative to all other treatments (exception relative to nivolumab in OS). Differences were significant relative to placebo, chemotherapy, interferons and ipilimumab. Conclusion: DAB + TRAM has improved efficacy over historical treatment options (ipilimumab, interferons and chemotherapy) and comparable efficacy with other targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitors.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
An indirect comparison of ustekinumab and vedolizumab in the therapy of TNF-failure Crohn's disease patients.
An indirect comparison of ustekinumab versus vedolizumab in patients with active moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease who were nonresponsive or intolerant to previous TNF-antagonist therapy. ⋯ No significant differences between vedolizumab and ustekinumab in clinical response and clinical remission for induction and remission in maintenance phase of TNF refractory patients therapy were revealed. In addition, no significant disparities in the risk of adverse events suggest a similar safety profile.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Efficacy and safety of ustekinumab in the induction therapy of TNF-α-refractory Crohn's disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
The aim of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab in the induction therapy of anti-TNF-α failure patients with Crohn's disease. ⋯ The clinical response was significantly higher for TNF-α antagonist failure patients who received ustekinumab as well as in subgroups of secondary nonresponders or intolerant patients but not in case of primary nonresponders. Ustekinumab occurred as safe as placebo in the induction as well as in a maintenance phase of therapy.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Comparing radial and femoral access for coronary angiography and interventions.
Cardiac catheterization and coronary intervention via the radial approach is increasingly adopted as the preferred vascular access to avoid transfemoral vascular complications. Recent clinical trials have confirmed that radial access reduces vascular complications and local bleeding with similar procedural efficacy. ⋯ Operators experienced in transradial percutaneous coronary intervention can achieve comparable clinical outcomes to the transfemoral approach and minimize vascular complications. Radial artery access is likely to become widely accepted as the preferred percutaneous coronary intervention approach.