Safety and efficacy of moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), affects approximately 18.6 million individuals worldwide and poses a significant healthcare related challenge. Despite the established efficacy of both high-intensity statin monotherapy (HIS) and moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe (MIS+EZT) in ASCVD management, the optimal treatment strategy remains unclear. METHODS A thorough literature study was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases, focusing on studies that compared the effects of moderate-intensity statins plus ezetimibe with high-intensity statin monotherapy in ASCVD patients. RESULTS In the 13 included studies, involving 8,592 patients, 4,525 (52.67%) of which received moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe treatment. The follow-up period ranged from 4 to 156 weeks, with participant ages varying LDL-C from 55.2 to 71 years old. Analysis revealed significant MIS+EZT-associated with greater percentages of patients achieved the goal in Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL-C) < 70 (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.76; 95% CI [1.26; 2.45]; p=0.001; I²=73%), LDL-C reduction (Mean Difference (MD) -5.05 mg/dL; 95% CI [-9.02;-1.07]; p<0.013; I²=56%;); Total Cholesterol reduction (MD -7.91 mg/ dL; 95% CI [-14.90; -0.91]; p<0.027; I²=60%); Triglycerides reduction (MD -8.20 mg/ dL; 95% CI [-13.05; -3.35]; p<0.001; I²=2%;); There was no statistical difference between groups in Drug Adverse reaction (Risk Ratio (RR) 1.19; 95% CI [0.79; 1.78]; p=0.404; I²=0%); and Drug intolerance (RR 0.78; 95% CI [0.32; 1.92]; p=0.584; I²=35%). CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis highlights the effectiveness of MIS+EZT in improving significant lipid profile components for ASCVD patients, as can been seen through the greater percentage of patients achieving the LDL-C <70 mg/dL target and lower LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglycerides levels. Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between the two groups.

Liraglutide for the Treatment of Weight Regain After Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of liraglutide for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity is well established, but their role in the treatment of weight regain after bariatric surgery remains unclear. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases in January 2024. A random-effects model was employed to compute mean differences (MD) and events per 100 observations with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous and binary endpoints. Statistical analysis was performed using R software. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included and 881 individuals. Patients were mostly female (50%), aged 36 to 55 years, with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 39.4 kg/m2, and had BS surgery 5 years prior. Over a mean follow-up time ranging from 3 months to 4 years, it was observed a statistically significant reduction in BMI (MD - 8.56 kg/m2; 95% CI 3.34 to 13.79; p < 0.01) and a mean reduction in total weight (MD - 16.03 kg; 95% CI 0.03 to 32.02; p = 0.05) after liraglutide use. Additionally, 65% of patients undertaking liraglutide showed total body weight loss (BWL) above 5% (65.8 events per 100 observations; 95% CI 54.96 to 75.20; p < 0.01), while 26% lost more than 10% of total BWL (26.77 events per 100 observations; 95% CI 19.17 to 36.02; p < 0.01). A limitation is a variability between the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of liraglutide for weight management in patients who experience weight regain after BS. Liraglutide is well tolerated and promotes significant weight loss, providing clinicians with a therapeutic option for this clinical challenge.

High-Dose versus Low-Dose Oxytocin for Labor Augmentation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background/Objectives: Although oxytocin administration is recommended for delayed labor progress, there is no consensus over the preferred optimal dose of oxytocin. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of pregnancy outcomes comparing high-dose versus low-dose oxytocin regimens for augmentation of delayed labor. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for studies comparing high-dose with low-dose oxytocin for labor augmentation from inception up to May 2023. The outcomes assessed were cesarean rate, instrumental delivery rate, postpartum hemorrhage, neonatal death, and uterine tachysystole. Subgroup analysis was performed with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched studies. Statistical analysis was performed using Rstudio. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics, and a random-risk effect was used if I2 > 50%. Results: Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria, and eighteen were RCTs. A total of 14.834 patients were included, of whom 7.921 (53.3%) received high-dose and 6.913 (46.6%) received low-dose oxytocin during labor augmentation. No statistical differences were found in cesarean delivery, neonatal mortality, postpartum hemorrhage and vaginal instrumentation rate. However, uterine tachysystole incidence was significantly higher with high-dose oxytocin (95% Cl, 1.30-1.94, p = 0.3; 0.6; I2 = 9%). Conclusions: Labor augmentation with a low-dose oxytocin regimen is effective as with a high-dose regimen, but with significantly less uterine tachysystole events, which can lead to intrauterine and neonatal complications. Our findings suggest that a low-dose regimen may be safe and effective for labor augmentation in medical practice.

Gantenerumab for early Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Gantenerumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting amyloid ß protein (Aß) in early Alzheimer's disease (AD). The authors sought to evaluate gantenerumab safety and efficacy in early AD patients. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched until 2 December 2023. Data were examined using the Mantel-Haenszel method and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-regression analysis was conducted to evaluate a possible link between baseline Clinical Dementia Rating Scale - Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) at follow-up. R, version 4.2.3, was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 4 RCTs and 2848 patients were included, of whom 1580 (55%) received subcutaneous gantenerumab. Concerning clinical scores, the placebo group achieved better rates of change in the Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog13) (SMD -0.11; 95% CI -0.19- -0.03; p = 0.008569; I2 = 0%). Gantenerumab was strongly associated with the occurrence of ARIA-E and ARIA-H: (19.67% vs. 2.31%; RR 9.46; 95% CI 5.55-16.11; p = <0.000001; I2 = 10%) and (21.95% vs. 12.38%; RR 1.79; 95% CI 1.50-2.13; p = <0.000001; I2 = 0%), respectively. DISCUSSION: In this meta-analysis, consistent results suggest that gantenerumab is not safe and efficient for early AD, showing no improvement in clinical scores for AD and being associated with the occurrence of ARIA-E and ARIA-H.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-CD38 Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

The benefit of associating anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies to proteasome inhibitor (PI)/immunomodulatory agent (IA) and dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) remains unclear. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that investigated the addition of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies to a therapy composed of PI/IA and dexamethasone versus PI/IA and dexamethasone alone for treating relapsed or refractory MM. Hazard ratios (HRs) or risk ratios (RRs) were computed for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Six studies comprising 2191 patients were included. Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody significantly improved progression-free survival (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.43-0.61; p < 0.001) and overall survival (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.63-0.83; p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in hematological adverse events, such as neutropenia (RR 1.41; 95% CI 1.26-1.58; p < 0.01) and thrombocytopenia (RR 1.14; 95% CI 1.02-1.27; p = 0.02), in the group treated with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Also, there was a significant increase in non-hematological adverse events, such as dyspnea (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.38-2.13; p < 0.01) and pneumonia (RR 1.34; 95% CI 1.13-1.59; p < 0.01), in the group treated with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. In conclusion, the incorporation of an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody demonstrated a promising prospect for reshaping the established MM treatment paradigms.

Efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

The benefit of associating anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies to proteasome inhibitor (PI)/immunomodulatory agent (IA) and dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) remains unclear. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that investigated the addition of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies to a therapy composed of PI/IA and dexamethasone versus PI/IA and dexamethasone alone for treating relapsed or refractory MM. Hazard ratios (HRs) or risk ratios (RRs) were computed for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Six studies comprising 2191 patients were included. Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody significantly improved progressionfree survival (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.43­0.61; p < 0.001) and overall survival (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.63­0.83; p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in hematological adverse events, such as neutropenia (RR 1.41; 95% CI 1.26­1.58; p < 0.01) and thrombocytopenia (RR 1.14; 95% CI 1.02­1.27; p = 0.02), in the group treated with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Also, there was a significant increase in non-hematological adverse events, such as dyspnea (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.38­2.13; p < 0.01) and pneumonia (RR 1.34; 95% CI 1.13­1.59; p < 0.01), in the group treated with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. In conclusion, the incorporation of an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody demonstrated a promising prospect for reshaping the established MM treatment paradigms.