Reacciones al estrés y aspectos psicoterapéuticos / Reactions to Stress and Psychotherapeutic Aspects

Resumen El periodismo científico de este artículo versa sobre una excepción habitual en el ambiente especializado, acerca de diversos trastornos mentales (TM) asociados al estrés y su comorbilidad, inadecuado enfrentamiento por el paciente/familia, su condición genético-epigenética y el deficiente manejo brindado de algunos profesionales de la salud. El desdén del manejo psicoterapéutico (prejuicio-impreparación) dificulta la atención adecuada de los casos. Se insta a desarrollar apego maternofilial apropiado, medidas para el logro de la salud mental social y programas asistenciales para atender los casos.

Abstract The scientific journalism of this article deals with a common exception in the specialized environment about various mental disorders associated with stress and its comorbidity, inadequate confrontation by the patient/family, its genetic-epigenetic condition and the deficient management provided by some health professionals. The disdain of psychotherapeutic management (prejudice- lack of preparation) hinders the adequate attention of cases. It is of the utmost importance to develop proper maternal and filial attachment, adequate measures for the achievement of social mental health and assistance programs to attend the cases.

Network meta-analysis: application and practice using R software / 한국역학회지

The objective of this study is to describe the general approaches to network meta-analysis that are available for quantitative data synthesis using R software. We conducted a network meta-analysis using two approaches: Bayesian and frequentist methods. The corresponding R packages were “gemtc” for the Bayesian approach and “netmeta” for the frequentist approach. In estimating a network meta-analysis model using a Bayesian framework, the “rjags” package is a common tool. “rjags” implements Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation with a graphical output. The estimated overall effect sizes, test for heterogeneity, moderator effects, and publication bias were reported using R software. The authors focus on two flexible models, Bayesian and frequentist, to determine overall effect sizes in network meta-analysis. This study focused on the practical methods of network meta-analysis rather than theoretical concepts, making the material easy to understand for Korean researchers who did not major in statistics. The authors hope that this study will help many Korean researchers to perform network meta-analyses and conduct related research more easily with R software.

Network meta-analysis: application and practice using R software / 한국역학회지

The objective of this study is to describe the general approaches to network meta-analysis that are available for quantitative data synthesis using R software. We conducted a network meta-analysis using two approaches: Bayesian and frequentist methods. The corresponding R packages were “gemtc” for the Bayesian approach and “netmeta” for the frequentist approach. In estimating a network meta-analysis model using a Bayesian framework, the “rjags” package is a common tool. “rjags” implements Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation with a graphical output. The estimated overall effect sizes, test for heterogeneity, moderator effects, and publication bias were reported using R software. The authors focus on two flexible models, Bayesian and frequentist, to determine overall effect sizes in network meta-analysis. This study focused on the practical methods of network meta-analysis rather than theoretical concepts, making the material easy to understand for Korean researchers who did not major in statistics. The authors hope that this study will help many Korean researchers to perform network meta-analyses and conduct related research more easily with R software.

Comparative efficacy of biological agents in methotrexate-refractory rheumatoid arthritis patients: a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Biological agents (biologics) targeting proinflammatory signaling have emerged as an important treatment option in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite the clinical effectiveness of biologics for patients with RA who do not respond to ‘traditional’ disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), there are concerns regarding their cost and long-term safety. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of various biologics and traditional DMARDs in RA patients refractory to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Four DMARDs (hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, MTX, leflunomide) and five anti-tumor necrosis factor drugs (adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, and certolizumab) were selected. A systematic search of published studies was performed from inception through July 2013. Randomized trials of adults with MTX-refractory RA comparing two or more of the selected medications were included. Among 7,938 titles identified, in total, 16 head-to-head trials were selected. Two reviewers independently abstracted the study data and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias. Comparative efficacy was analyzed using a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison (MTC). RESULTS: In total, 9, 4, and 11 studies were included for the outcome measures of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Disease Activity Score 28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) < 2.6 (remission), and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 response, respectively. The treatments with the highest efficacy for each outcome measure were certolizumab combined with MTX, golimumab combined with MTX, and certolizumab combined with MTX, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on MTC analysis, using data from published randomized controlled trials, certolizumab and golimumab combined with MTX showed the highest efficacy in the three outcome measures (HAQ, DAS28-ESR < 2.6, and ACR 70 response) in MTX-refractory RA patients.

Comparative efficacy of biological agents in methotrexate-refractory rheumatoid arthritis patients: a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Biological agents (biologics) targeting proinflammatory signaling have emerged as an important treatment option in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite the clinical effectiveness of biologics for patients with RA who do not respond to ‘traditional’ disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), there are concerns regarding their cost and long-term safety. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of various biologics and traditional DMARDs in RA patients refractory to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Four DMARDs (hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, MTX, leflunomide) and five anti-tumor necrosis factor drugs (adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, and certolizumab) were selected. A systematic search of published studies was performed from inception through July 2013. Randomized trials of adults with MTX-refractory RA comparing two or more of the selected medications were included. Among 7,938 titles identified, in total, 16 head-to-head trials were selected. Two reviewers independently abstracted the study data and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias. Comparative efficacy was analyzed using a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison (MTC). RESULTS: In total, 9, 4, and 11 studies were included for the outcome measures of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Disease Activity Score 28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) < 2.6 (remission), and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 response, respectively. The treatments with the highest efficacy for each outcome measure were certolizumab combined with MTX, golimumab combined with MTX, and certolizumab combined with MTX, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on MTC analysis, using data from published randomized controlled trials, certolizumab and golimumab combined with MTX showed the highest efficacy in the three outcome measures (HAQ, DAS28-ESR < 2.6, and ACR 70 response) in MTX-refractory RA patients.

Network meta-analysis: application and practice using Stata / 한국역학회지

This review aimed to arrange the concepts of a network meta-analysis (NMA) and to demonstrate the analytical process of NMA using Stata software under frequentist framework. The NMA tries to synthesize evidences for a decision making by evaluating the comparative effectiveness of more than two alternative interventions for the same condition. Before conducting a NMA, 3 major assumptions—similarity, transitivity, and consistency—should be checked. The statistical analysis consists of 5 steps. The first step is to draw a network geometry to provide an overview of the network relationship. The second step checks the assumption of consistency. The third step is to make the network forest plot or interval plot in order to illustrate the summary size of comparative effectiveness among various interventions. The fourth step calculates cumulative rankings for identifying superiority among interventions. The last step evaluates publication bias or effect modifiers for a valid inference from results. The synthesized evidences through five steps would be very useful to evidence-based decision-making in healthcare. Thus, NMA should be activated in order to guarantee the quality of healthcare system.

Network meta-analysis: application and practice using Stata / 한국역학회지

This review aimed to arrange the concepts of a network meta-analysis (NMA) and to demonstrate the analytical process of NMA using Stata software under frequentist framework. The NMA tries to synthesize evidences for a decision making by evaluating the comparative effectiveness of more than two alternative interventions for the same condition. Before conducting a NMA, 3 major assumptions—similarity, transitivity, and consistency—should be checked. The statistical analysis consists of 5 steps. The first step is to draw a network geometry to provide an overview of the network relationship. The second step checks the assumption of consistency. The third step is to make the network forest plot or interval plot in order to illustrate the summary size of comparative effectiveness among various interventions. The fourth step calculates cumulative rankings for identifying superiority among interventions. The last step evaluates publication bias or effect modifiers for a valid inference from results. The synthesized evidences through five steps would be very useful to evidence-based decision-making in healthcare. Thus, NMA should be activated in order to guarantee the quality of healthcare system.

Application of Bayesian Mixed Treatment Comparison Method in Pharmacoeconomics Evaluation / 中国药房

OBJECTIVE:To explore the basic principles,advantages and application prospects of Bayesian mixed treatment comparison (MTC),and provide theoretic support for making reasonable decisions of pharmacoeconomics. METHODS:The prob-lems existing in model and method that had been used in the study of pharmacoeconomics as starting point,literature research was used to sort out the domestic development and applications of MTC and study its application and development prospect. RESULTS &CONCLUSIONS:The evaluation methods of pharmacoeconomics play an important role in selection of essential medicines,medi-care insurance directory medicines,basic health and basic public health programs,the results directly affect the total effective rate of medical resources’configuration. The current research models cannot effectively solve the problem,for example,decision tree model is difficult to make evaluation of long-term treatment;Markov model and the use of multiple attribute utility theory are restricted by the model parameters;discrete event simulation is limited because it depends on the epidemiological study and clinical trial. MTC, an extension approach of the traditional Meta-analysis,is an effective new method developed recently to analyze and compare the di-rect or indirect evidence of several different clinical treatment factors in order to make a comprehensive evaluation of the various inter-ventions in the absence of evidence support. So the MTC can make up for the limitation of current evaluation methods.

Simultaneous Comparison of Efficacy and Tolerability of Second-Generation Antipsychotics in Schizophrenia: Mixed-Treatment Comparison Analysis Based on Head-to-Head Trial Data

OBJECTIVE: Second-generation antipsychotics have been repeatedly shown to be superior to placebo. However, the comparative efficacy among these drugs has not been systematically evaluated. In this study, we used Mixed Treatment Comparison (MTC) procedures to elucidate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of second-generation antipsychotics. METHODS: Seven antipsychotics were selected based on the availability of the relevant data. Data were gathered from a series of review article published by the Cochrane Collaboration. Six outcome measures were analyzed: 1) percentage of no clinically important response as defined by the original authors, 2) PANSS total score change from baseline to endpoint, 3) percentage of akathisia, 4) percentage of antiparkinson medication use, 5) percentage of total body weight increase more than 7%, and 6) percentage of drop-out due to any reasons. RESULTS: All the second-generation antipsychotics included in this study showed fairly similar efficacy but widely different tolerability. In terms of efficacy, amisulpride, clozapine and olanzapine were ranked higher than aripiprazole, quetiapine and ziprasidone. Clozapine and olanzapine were superior in terms of akathisia and extrapyramidal symptom risk, but, far more prone to induce clinically important weight gain. CONCLUSION: Using MTC methodology, we could line up the second generation antipsychotics according to their hierarchical superiority in terms of efficacy and tolerability. Though the wide overlap among the confidence intervals and the inconsistency between the direct and indirect comparison results may limit the validity of these results, it may still allow the important insights into the relative merits of the available drugs.

Comparaciones indirectas: una herramienta para la toma de decisiones en salud / Indirect comparisons: Tool for decision-making in health

Resumen Para el desarrollo de políticas sanitarias y económicas en el sector salud, es necesario que la toma de decisiones esté basada en la evidencia. El desarrollo de nuevas tecnologías para el cuidado de la salud se ha incrementado en las últimas décadas permitiendo la aparición, cada vez más rápida, de múltiples alternativas farmacológicas para el manejo de una misma patología; dada la cantidad de intervenciones se hace indispensable comparar las relevantes, en especial, mediante la realización de ensayos clínicos controlados, con el fin de evaluar y determinar la mejor alternativa en términos de beneficios, menores efectos adversos y costos. Sin embargo, debido a la ausencia de este tipo de estudios dado su alto costo, las comparaciones indirectas de tratamientos como las redes de meta-análisis y las comparaciones mixtas de tratamientos, son una herramienta útil para la selección de la mejor opción. Esta revisión, proporciona una orientación sobre la interpretación de las comparaciones indirectas, los métodos, supuestos, validez, métodos de análisis, beneficios y limitaciones, con el fin de proporcionar herramientas suficientes para la adecuada toma de decisiones en salud.

Abstract For the development of health and economic policies in the health system, it is necessary for decision making is based on evidence. The development of new technologies for health care has increased in recent decades, allowing the appearance, fastest growing, multi-drug alternatives for handling the same pathology, given the number of interventions is essential to compare all relevant specially through controlled clinical trials, to evaluate and determine the best alternative in terms of benefits, fewer side effects and costs. However, due to the absence of this type of study due to its high cost, indirect comparisons of treatments such as networks of meta-analysis and mixed treatment comparisons provide a useful tool for selecting the best treatment option. This review provides guidance on the interpretation of indirect comparisons, methods, assumptions, validity, analysis methods, benefits and limitations in order to provide sufficient tools for proper decision-making in health.