Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists

血管紧张素受体拮抗剂
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在晚期慢性肾脏病(CKD)患者中,开始使用血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEi)或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)治疗对替代治疗(KFRT)肾衰竭和死亡风险的影响尚不清楚.
    为了检查ACEi或ARB治疗开始的关联,相对于非ACEi或ARB比较器,KFRT和死亡率。
    OvidMedline和慢性肾脏疾病流行病学合作临床试验联合会,从1946年到2023年12月31日。
    完成了随机对照试验,测试了ACEi或ARB与比较物(安慰剂或ACEi或ARB以外的抗高血压药物)的关系,其中包括基线估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)低于30mL/min/1.73m2的患者。
    主要结果是KFRT,次要结局是KFRT前死亡。根据意向治疗原则使用Cox比例风险模型进行分析。根据基线年龄(<65vs.≥65岁),eGFR(<20vs.≥20mL/min/1.73m2),白蛋白尿(尿白蛋白-肌酐比值<300vs.≥300mg/g),和糖尿病病史。
    共纳入18项试验的1739名参与者,平均年龄为54.9岁,平均eGFR为22.2mL/min/1.73m2,其中624(35.9%)发生KFRT,133(7.6%)在34个月的中位随访期间死亡(IQR,19至40个月)。总的来说,ACEi或ARB治疗开始导致KFRT风险降低(调整后的风险比,0.66[95%CI,0.55至0.79]),但不是死亡(危险比,0.86[CI,0.58至1.28])。ACEi或ARB治疗与年龄之间无统计学意义的交互作用,eGFR,白蛋白尿,或糖尿病(所有交互作用P>0.05)。
    无法获得高钾血症或急性肾损伤的个体参与者水平数据。
    启动ACEi或ARB治疗可预防KFRT,但不是死亡,患有晚期CKD的人。
    美国国立卫生研究院。(PROSPERO:CRD42022307589)。
    UNASSIGNED: In patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), the effects of initiating treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) on the risk for kidney failure with replacement therapy (KFRT) and death remain unclear.
    UNASSIGNED: To examine the association of ACEi or ARB treatment initiation, relative to a non-ACEi or ARB comparator, with rates of KFRT and death.
    UNASSIGNED: Ovid Medline and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration Clinical Trials Consortium from 1946 through 31 December 2023.
    UNASSIGNED: Completed randomized controlled trials testing either an ACEi or an ARB versus a comparator (placebo or antihypertensive drugs other than ACEi or ARB) that included patients with a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) below 30 mL/min/1.73 m2.
    UNASSIGNED: The primary outcome was KFRT, and the secondary outcome was death before KFRT. Analyses were done using Cox proportional hazards models according to the intention-to-treat principle. Prespecified subgroup analyses were done according to baseline age (<65 vs. ≥65 years), eGFR (<20 vs. ≥20 mL/min/1.73 m2), albuminuria (urine albumin-creatinine ratio <300 vs. ≥300 mg/g), and history of diabetes.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 1739 participants from 18 trials were included, with a mean age of 54.9 years and mean eGFR of 22.2 mL/min/1.73 m2, of whom 624 (35.9%) developed KFRT and 133 (7.6%) died during a median follow-up of 34 months (IQR, 19 to 40 months). Overall, ACEi or ARB treatment initiation led to lower risk for KFRT (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.79]) but not death (hazard ratio, 0.86 [CI, 0.58 to 1.28]). There was no statistically significant interaction between ACEi or ARB treatment and age, eGFR, albuminuria, or diabetes (P for interaction > 0.05 for all).
    UNASSIGNED: Individual participant-level data for hyperkalemia or acute kidney injury were not available.
    UNASSIGNED: Initiation of ACEi or ARB therapy protects against KFRT, but not death, in people with advanced CKD.
    UNASSIGNED: National Institutes of Health. (PROSPERO: CRD42022307589).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    癌症治疗相关的心脏功能障碍(CTRCD)是与左心室射血分数(LVEF)下降相关的选定癌症治疗药物的并发症。血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)已确定在降低射血分数的心力衰竭中的益处。但其预防CTRCD的疗效仍存在争议.本系统评价评价了ACEI/ARB预防癌症治疗LVEF下降的疗效和安全性。我们系统地搜索了PubMed,Embase和Cochrane从1980年1月到2022年6月。感兴趣的研究是接受癌症治疗的LVEF正常和活动性恶性肿瘤患者的随机对照试验。与对照组相比,随机接受ACEI或ARB。结果是从基线到随访期结束时LVEF的变化。死亡,记录临床心力衰竭和药物不良反应。共筛选了3731条检索记录,纳入了12项研究,共有1645名参与者。九项研究评估了蒽环类药物诱导的LVEF下降的预防,其中五个显示出有益的效果(治疗组LVEF提高1%-14%),而四项研究显示没有效果。三项研究评估了预防曲妥珠单抗诱导的LVEF下降,其中一个在一部分参与者中显示出有益的效果(LVEF提高4%)。关于ACEI/ARB在预防接受蒽环类或曲妥珠单抗治疗的患者LVEF下降方面的功效,有混合数据,有证据表明,在最近的研究中没有观察到有临床意义的益处。
    Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a complication of selected cancer therapy agents associated with decline in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have established benefits in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, but their efficacy for preventing CTRCD remains controversial. This narrative systematic review assessed the efficacy and safety of ACEI/ARB in the prevention of cancer therapy LVEF decline. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane from January 1980 to June 2022. Studies of interest were randomised controlled trials of patients with normal LVEF and active malignancy receiving cancer therapy, randomised to receive either an ACEI or ARB compared with a control group. The outcome was the change in LVEF from baseline to the end of the follow-up period. Death, clinical heart failure and adverse drug reactions were recorded. A total of 3731 search records were screened and 12 studies were included, comprising a total of 1645 participants. Nine studies assessed the prevention of anthracycline-induced LVEF decline, of which five showed a beneficial effect (1%-14% higher LVEF in treated groups), whereas four studies showed no effect. Three studies assessed the prevention of trastuzumab-induced LVEF decline, of which one showed a beneficial effect (4% higher LVEF) in a subset of participants. There are mixed data regarding the efficacy of ACEI/ARB in preventing the LVEF decline in patients undergoing anthracycline or trastuzumab therapy, with evidence suggesting no clinically meaningful benefit observed in recent studies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    通过荟萃分析确定黄芪联合肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统(RAAS)阻滞剂治疗III期糖尿病肾病(DN)的有效性和安全性。
    PubMed,Embase,科克伦图书馆,威利,和WebofScience数据库搜索2007年8月至2022年8月发表的文章。纳入黄芪联合RAAS受体阻滞剂治疗III期DN的临床研究。采用RevMan5.1和Stata14.3软件进行Meta分析。
    本次荟萃分析共包括32篇论文,包含来自随机对照试验的2462名患者,1244人接受联合治疗,1218人仅接受RAAS阻滞剂。黄芪联合RAAS阻滞剂的总有效率(TER)(平均差[MD]3.63,95%置信区间[CI]2.59-5.09)和尿蛋白排泄率(UPER)显着降低,血清肌酐(Scr),血尿氮(BUN)和糖化血红蛋白(HbAlc)水平。在亚组分析中,联合黄芪和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂显著降低空腹血糖(FPG)和24h尿蛋白(24hUTP)水平,与黄芪和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂联合治疗比较。同时,后者显着降低了尿微量蛋白(β2-MG)。重要的是,敏感性分析证实了研究的稳定性,UPER未检测到发表偏倚,BUN,HbAlc,FPG,或β2-MG。然而,TER,SCr,24hUTP结果提示可能的发表偏倚。
    黄芪-RAAS阻滞剂联合治疗是安全的,可改善预后;然而,严格随机,大规模,多中心,需要双盲试验来评估其在III期DN中的疗效和安全性.
    肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统(RAAS)抑制剂通常用于治疗糖尿病性神经病(DN),黄芪成分已知可改善DN症状。我们旨在建立黄芪与RAAS抑制剂联合使用的有效性和安全性。黄芪联合RAAS抑制剂可提高糖尿病神经病变治疗的总有效率,降低尿蛋白排泄率,血清肌酐,血尿素氮和HbAlc.敏感性分析确认了研究的稳定性,而发表偏倚被检测为总有效率,血清肌酐,和24小时尿蛋白水平。
    UNASSIGNED: To determine the efficacy and safety of Astragalus combined with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers in treating stage III diabetic nephropathy (DN) by meta-analysis.
    UNASSIGNED: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Wiley, and Web of Science databases were searched for articles published between August 2007 and August 2022. Clinical studies on Astragalus combined with RAAS blockers for the treatment of stage III DN were included. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.1 and Stata 14.3 software.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 32 papers were included in this meta-analysis, containing 2462 patients from randomized controlled trials, with 1244 receiving the combination treatment and 1218 solely receiving RAAS blockers. Astragalus combined with RAAS blockers yielded a significantly higher total effective rate (TER) (mean difference [MD] 3.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.59-5.09) and significantly reduced urinary protein excretion rate (UPER), serum creatinine (Scr), blood urine nitrogen (BUN) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbAlc) levels. In subgroup analysis, combining astragalus and angiotensin receptor blocker significantly lowered fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 24 h urinary protein (24hUTP) levels, compared with the combined astragalus and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor treatment. Meanwhile, the latter significantly decreased the urinary microprotein (β2-MG). Importantly, the sensitivity analysis confirmed the study\'s stability, and publication bias was not detected for UPER, BUN, HbAlc, FPG, or β2-MG. However, the TER, SCr, and 24hUTP results suggested possible publication bias.
    UNASSIGNED: The astragalus-RAAS blocker combination treatment is safe and improves outcomes; however, rigorous randomized, large-scale, multi-center, double-blind trials are needed to evaluate its efficacy and safety in stage III DN.
    Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are commonly used to treat diabetic neuropathy (DN) and Astragalus membranaceus components are known to improve DN symptoms.We aimed to establish the efficacy and safety of using Astragalus combined with RAAS inhibitors.Astragalus combined with RAAS inhibitors enhances the total effective rate of diabetic neuropathy response to treatment and reduces urinary protein excretion rate, serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen and HbAlc.Sensitivity analysis affirms study stability, while publication bias was detected for total effective rate, serum creatinine, and 24 h urinary protein levels.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    夜间血压(BP)与心血管事件风险增加相关,并且是高血压患者心血管死亡的重要预测指标。
    夜间血压控制对于降低心血管风险非常重要。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在探讨血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARBs)降低轻中度高血压患者夜间血压的疗效。
    PICOS设计结构用于制定数据提取。所有统计计算和分析均采用R.
    纳入了77项研究,共有13,314名参与者。总体分析表明,不同ARB之间的夜间血压下降差异很大。Allisartan(13.04[95%CI(-18.41,-7.68)]mmHg),奥美沙坦(11.67[95%CI(-14.12,-9.21)]mmHg),替米沙坦(11.11[95%CI(-12.12,-10.11)]mmHg)与夜间收缩压降低幅度相关.在夜间血压下降率方面,只有Allisartan大于1。同时,最后4-6h动态血压的变化趋势与夜间血压基本一致。此外,Allisartan对浸渍BP模式患者的比例有改善作用。
    这项研究表明,对于轻度至中度高血压患者,Allisartan,奥美沙坦和替米沙坦在降低ARBs夜间血压方面更有优势,而Allisartan可以降低夜间血压比白天血压更多,并改善浸渍模式。
    这项荟萃分析探讨了血管紧张素IIAT1受体拮抗剂(ARBs)对轻度至中度高血压患者夜间血压(BP)降低的疗效。结果表明,对于轻度至中度高血压患者,Allisartan,奥美沙坦和替米沙坦在降低ARBs夜间血压方面更有优势。Allisartan可以比白天更有效地降低夜间血压,这也改善了浸渍模式。
    UNASSIGNED: Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) is correlated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and is an important predictor of cardiovascular death in hypertensive patients.
    UNASSIGNED: Nocturnal BP control is of great importance for cardiovascular risk reduction. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for nocturnal BP reduction in patients with mild to moderate hypertension.
    UNASSIGNED: PICOS design structure was used to formulate the data extraction. All statistical calculations and analyses were performed with R.
    UNASSIGNED: Seventy-seven studies with 13,314 participants were included. The overall analysis indicated that nocturnal BP drop varied considerably among different ARBs. Allisartan (13.04 [95% CI (-18.41, -7.68)] mmHg), olmesartan (11.67 [95% CI (-14.12, -9.21)] mmHg), telmisartan (11.11 [95% CI (-12.12, -10.11)] mmHg) were associated with greater reduction in nocturnal systolic BP. In the aspect of the nocturnal-diurnal BP drop ratio, only allisartan was greater than 1. While, the variation tendency of last 4-6 h ambulatory BP was basically consistent with nocturnal BP. Additionally, allisartan showed improvement effect in the proportion of patients with dipping BP pattern.
    UNASSIGNED: This study demonstrates that for patients with mild to moderate hypertension, allisartan, olmesartan and telmisartan have more advantages in nocturnal BP reduction among the ARBs, while allisartan can reduce nighttime BP more than daytime BP and improve the dipping pattern.
    This meta-analysis explores the efficacy of Angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonists (ARBs) on nocturnal blood pressure (BP) reduction in mild to moderate hypertension.The results demonstrate that for patients with mild to moderate hypertension, allisartan, olmesartan and telmisartan have more advantages in nocturnal BP reduction among the ARBs.Allisartan can reduce nighttime BP more effectively than daytime BP, which also improve the dipping pattern.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:心力衰竭是一种常见且严重的疾病,常并发舒张功能障碍。目前的标准疗法如ACEI和ARB在管理舒张功能方面的功效有限。Sacubitril/缬沙坦,一种新兴的疗法,有必要进行严格的研究,以阐明其对心力衰竭患者舒张功能的影响。
    方法:本系统综述和荟萃分析遵循系统综述和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目,并使用PICO模式。在4个数据库上进行了搜索-PubMed,Embase,WebofScience,和Cochrane图书馆-没有时间限制。严格定义了纳入和排除标准,使用Cochrane协作偏差风险工具进行质量评估。使用固定效应和随机效应模型进行统计分析,取决于通过I2统计和卡方检验评估的研究间异质性。
    结果:在1129个确定的出版物中,8项研究符合标准,并被纳入荟萃分析。这些研究包括随机对照试验和队列研究,并以不同的全球人群为特征。与标准疗法相比,使用Sacubitril/Valsartan治疗后,超声心动图参数E/e比值和LAVi显著降低。平均差分别为-1.38和-4.62,两者的P值<.01。
    结论:这项荟萃分析表明,与标准治疗相比,沙库必曲/缬沙坦可显著改善心力衰竭患者的舒张功能参数。这些发现强调了沙库必曲/缬沙坦在治疗心力衰竭方面的潜在益处。特别是舒张功能不全的患者。
    BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a common and severe condition, often complicated by diastolic dysfunction. Current standard therapies such as ACEIs and ARBs have limited efficacy in managing diastolic function. Sacubitril/Valsartan, an emerging therapy, warrants rigorous investigation to elucidate its impact on diastolic function in heart failure patients.
    METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and utilized the PICO schema. Searches were performed on 4 databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library-without temporal restrictions. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were strictly defined, and quality assessments were conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool. Both fixed-effects and random-effects models were used for statistical analysis, depending on inter-study heterogeneity assessed by I2 statistics and Chi-square tests.
    RESULTS: Out of 1129 identified publications, 8 studies met the criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. These studies consisted of both randomized controlled trials and cohort studies and featured diverse global populations. Significant reductions were found in the echocardiographic parameter E/e\' ratio and LAVi upon treatment with Sacubitril/Valsartan compared to standard therapies, with mean differences of -1.38 and -4.62, respectively, both with P values < .01.
    CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates that Sacubitril/Valsartan significantly improves diastolic function parameters in heart failure patients compared to standard treatments. These findings underscore the potential benefits of Sacubitril/Valsartan in the management of heart failure, particularly for patients with diastolic dysfunction.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:高血压与前列腺癌(PCa)及其进展的风险有关,然而,目前尚不清楚抗高血压药物是否会改变PCa风险或预后.本系统评价了钙通道阻滞剂(CCB)和肾素-血管紧张素系统(RAS)抑制剂在PCa风险和预后中的作用。这项审查是根据PRISMA2020指南进行的。
    方法:符合条件的研究包括同行评审的观察性研究,这些研究报告了CCB和RAS抑制剂在PCa中的作用,有可访问的全文,用英语写的.使用关键字的组合,5个电子书目数据库,包括WebofScience,EMBASE,PubMed,搜索了GoogleScholar和Scopus。
    结果:共检索到1,346项研究,其中18项符合纳入标准。13项研究报告降低或没有相关风险,改善预后,和生存与使用RAS抑制剂。对CCB的研究显示了PCa相关风险的证据。从检索到的研究中提取的数据集中在纳入的研究特征上,设置,作者,Year,感兴趣的结果,和风险比率。国家心脏对纳入研究的质量评估,肺,和血液研究所研究评估工具,表明所有研究都具有良好的质量。
    结论:RAS抑制剂的使用主要与PCa的风险降低或预后改善有关。CCB也可能与PCa的风险相关。这表明应积极监测患有CCB的高危患者的PCa。然而,需要从大规模的前瞻性,对照队列研究,以确定CCB对PCa的任何影响。
    BACKGROUND: Hypertension is associated with the risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and its progression, however, it remains unclear whether antihypertensive medicines alter PCa risk or prognosis. This systematic review evaluated the role of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors in the risk and prognosis of PCa. This review was performed in line with PRISMA 2020 guidelines.
    METHODS: Eligible studies comprised peer-reviewed observational studies which reported the role of CCBs and RAS inhibitors in PCa, had accessible full texts, and were written in English. Using a combination of keywords, 5 electronic bibliographic databases which included Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus were searched.
    RESULTS: A total of 1,346 studies were retrieved and 18 met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies reported reduced or no associated risk, improved prognosis, and survival with the use of RAS inhibitors. Studies on CCBs showed evidence of associated risk of PCa. Data extraction from retrieved studies focused on included study characteristics, setting, authors, year, outcomes of interest, and risk ratios. The quality assessment of included studies by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute study assessment tools, showed that all studies had good quality.
    CONCLUSIONS: The use of RAS inhibitors was mostly associated with lower risks or improved prognosis of PCa. CCBs may also be associated with risks of PCa. This suggests that high-risk patients managed with CCBs should be actively monitored for PCa. However, there is need for further evidence from large-scale prospective, controlled cohort studies to determine any influence of CCBs on PCa.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Review
    糖尿病(DM)是世界范围内最常见的疾病之一。极大地影响患者的生活质量。本文综述了丹参的研究进展,一种古老的中国植物,用于治疗DM及其相关并发症。对丹参的化学成分和药理作用进行了广泛的研究,包括其抗炎和抗氧化活性。通过改善糖尿病患者的周围神经功能和增加视网膜厚度,已证明其在预防和治疗糖尿病及其后果方面具有潜力。此外,丹参与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂联合使用时显示出有效性,血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB),和他汀类药物。还对丹参的安全性和耐受性进行了彻底的研究。尽管管理DM及其并发症具有既定的益处,需要进一步的研究来确定适当的用法,剂量,长期健康益处,和安全。
    Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide, greatly impacting patients\' quality of life. This article reviews the progress in Salvia miltiorrhiza, an ancient Chinese plant, for the treatment of DM and its associated complications. Extensive studies have been conducted on the chemical composition and pharmacological effects of S miltiorrhiza, including its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activities. It has demonstrated potential in preventing and treating diabetes and its consequences by improving peripheral nerve function and increasing retinal thickness in diabetic individuals. Moreover, S miltiorrhiza has shown effectiveness when used in conjunction with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and statins. The safety and tolerability of S miltiorrhiza have also been thoroughly investigated. Despite the established benefits of managing DM and its complications, further research is needed to determine appropriate usage, dosage, long-term health benefits, and safety.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    背景:胰腺癌(PC)是世界上最恶性的肿瘤和高侵袭性肿瘤之一。
    目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在研究肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统抑制剂的使用与PC的发生率和死亡率之间的关系。
    方法:电子搜索系统进行到2023年10月10日。在数据库中,包括Scopus,WebofScience(WOS),PubMed/MEDLINE,科克伦图书馆,和Embase。从文章中提取所需数据,并通过Stata15使用统计检验(卡方和I2)进行分析,森林地块,和出版偏差测试(Begg\和Egger\的测试)。
    结果:共有四项研究(2011-2019年;n=314,856)调查了RAS拮抗剂与PC风险之间的关系。血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARBs)之间没有发现显着关联(OR=0.94,95%CI:0.77-1.14,p=0.513),血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)(OR=0.96,95%CI:0.84-1.09,p=0.505),或联合治疗(ARBs+ACEI)(OR=0.97,95%CI:0.87-1.09,p=0.627)和PC风险。此外,9项研究(2010-2023;n=20,483)研究了肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统抑制剂与PC死亡率之间的关系.发现ARBs的PC死亡率显着降低(OR=0.81,95%CI:0.66-0.98,p=0.032),ACEI(OR=0.89,95%CI:0.80-0.99,p=0.038),和联合治疗(OR=0.83,95%CI:0.70-0.97,p=0.022)。在研究结果中没有发现发表偏倚的证据。
    结论:总之,而肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统抑制剂似乎并未影响PC风险,根据目前证据的荟萃分析,他们的使用与较低的PC死亡率相关.需要更严格和精心设计的研究来验证和支持这些发现。
    BACKGROUND: Pancreatic Cancer (PC) is one of the most malignant tumors and highly invasive neoplasms around the world.
    OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to study the relationship between the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and the incidence and mortality of PC.
    METHODS: The electronic search was conducted systematically until October 10, 2023. in databases, including Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The required data were extracted from the articles and were analyzed by Stata 15 using statistical tests (Chi-square and I2), Forest plots, and publication bias tests (Begg\'s and Egger\'s tests).
    RESULTS: A total of four studies (2011-2019; n=314,856) investigated the relationship between RAS antagonists and PC risk. No significant associations were found between angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.77-1.14, p=0.513), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR=0.96, 95% CI: 0.84-1.09, p=0.505), or combination therapy (ARBs + ACEIs) (OR=0.97, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09, p=0.627) and PC risk. Also, nine studies (2010-2023; n=20,483) examined the association between renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and PC mortality. Significant reductions in PC mortality were found for ARBs (OR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.66-0.98, p=0.032), ACEIs (OR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.99, p=0.038), and combination therapy (OR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.97, p=0.022). No evidence of publication bias was found in the study results.
    CONCLUSIONS: In summary, while renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors did not appear to impact PC risk, their use was associated with lower PC mortality based on this meta-analysis of the current evidence. More rigorous and well-designed studies are required to validate and support these findings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    目的:血管紧张素II阻滞是否是腹主动脉瘤(AAAs)的有效药物治疗尚未确定。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在确定血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEi)或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)处方与AAA生长和事件之间的关系。
    方法:MEDLINE,Embase,Scopus,WebofScience,和Cochrane图书馆数据库从开始到2024年1月4日进行搜索,没有语言限制.
    方法:在五个数据库中搜索随机对照试验(RCT)和观察性研究,这些研究报告ACEi或ARB处方与AAA生长之间的关联。修复,或破裂。主要结果是AAA增长,AAA破裂的次要结果,AAA修复,和AAA相关事件(破裂和修复相结合)。使用RCTs的“偏倚风险2”工具和用于观察性研究的改良纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估偏倚风险。使用建议分级评估证据的确定性,评估,发展,和评估(等级)。随机效应模型用于荟萃分析。
    结果:11项研究(两项随机对照试验,八项观察性研究,和一个荟萃分析的个体患者数据来自7个群体),涉及58,022名患者。ACEi处方与AAA生长的统计学显着降低无关(标准平均差0.01mm/年,95%置信区间[CI]-0.26-0.28;p=.93;I2=98%)或AAA修复(比值比[OR]0.73,95%CI0.50-1.09;p=.65;I2=61%),但与AAA破裂(OR0.87,95%CI0.81-0.93;p<.001;I2=26%)和AAA相关事件(OR0.82,95%CI0.72-0.95;p=.006;I2=80%)的风险显著降低相关。ARB处方与AAA增长或AAA相关事件风险降低无关。这两个RCT的偏倚风险很低,一项观察性研究的发生率很低,七个温和的,和一个高风险的偏见。根据GRADE分析,所有发现的证据确定性都很低。
    结论:ACEi或ARB处方与AAA增长之间没有关联,但ACEi处方与AAA破裂和AAA相关事件的风险降低相关,证据确定性非常低.
    OBJECTIVE: Whether angiotensin II blockade is an effective medical treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has not been established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the association between angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) prescription and AAA growth and events.
    METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception to 4 January 2024, with no language restrictions.
    METHODS: The five databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting the association between ACEi or ARB prescription and AAA growth, repair, or rupture. The primary outcome was AAA growth, with secondary outcomes of AAA rupture, AAA repair, and AAA related events (rupture and repair combined). Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool for RCTs and with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Random effects models were used for meta-analyses.
    RESULTS: Eleven studies (two RCTs, eight observational studies, and one meta-analysis of individual patient data from seven populations) involving 58 022 patients were included. ACEi prescription was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in AAA growth (standard mean difference 0.01 mm/year, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.26 - 0.28; p = .93; I2 = 98%) or AAA repair (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.50 - 1.09; p = .65; I2 = 61%), but was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of AAA rupture (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 - 0.93; p < .001; I2 = 26%) and AAA related events (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.95; p = .006; I2 = 80%). ARB prescription was not associated with significantly reduced AAA growth or a lower risk of AAA related events. The two RCTs had a low risk of bias, with one observational study having low, seven moderate, and one high risk of bias. All of the findings had a very low certainty of evidence based on the GRADE analysis.
    CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between ACEi or ARB prescription and AAA growth, but ACEi prescription was associated with a reduced risk of AAA rupture and AAA related events with very low certainty of evidence.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:由于令人鼓舞的临床前数据和支持性观察研究,人们对应用心血管药物(包括阿司匹林,血管紧张素转换酶[ACE]抑制剂,他汀类药物,和二甲双胍)被批准用于治疗高血压等疾病,高脂血症,和糖尿病进入肿瘤学领域。此外,考虑到癌症治疗的成本越来越高,这些药物为治疗或预防癌症复发提供了可能更实惠的途径.我们试图研究从心脏病学或抗炎药重新利用的药物治疗癌症的抗癌作用。我们特别评估了以下药物类别:HMG-CoA还原酶抑制剂(他汀类药物),环加氧酶抑制剂,阿司匹林,二甲双胍,血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂。我们还包括非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs),因为它们通过阻断前列腺素和减少炎症而发挥与阿司匹林相似的机制,这被认为是促进癌症发展的。
    方法:我们使用PubMed和WebofScience进行了系统的文献综述,检索词包括“阿司匹林,\"\"NSAID,\"\"他汀\"(包括特定的他汀类药物名称),“二甲双胍,“”ACE抑制剂,“和”ARBs“(包括特定的抗高血压药物名称)与”癌症的组合。搜索仅限于2000年至2023年之间发表的人类研究。
    方法:报告阳性结果的研究数量和百分比以及总生存期的汇总估计,无进展生存期,回应,和无病生存。
    结果:我们回顾了3094篇论文,纳入了67项随机临床试验。最常见的药物是二甲双胍(n=21;30.9%)。塞来昔布(n=20;29.4%),和辛伐他汀(n=8;11.8%)。只有一项研究测试了强心苷,没有一项研究了ACE抑制剂。最常见的肿瘤类型为非小细胞肺癌(n=19;27.9%);乳腺癌(n=8;20.6%)。结直肠(n=7;10.3%),和肝细胞(n=6;8.8%)。大多数研究是在II期试验中进行的(n=38;55.9%)。大多数研究在转移性癌症(n=49;72.1%)和一线背景(n=36;521.9%)中进行了测试。四项研究(5.9%)因应计困难而提前停止。大多数研究没有证明无进展生存期(86.1%的研究测试无进展生存期)或总生存期(94.3%的研究测试总生存期)有改善。5项研究的无进展生存率得到改善(7.4%),3项研究的总生存率提高(4.4%).两项研究的总生存率明显更差(3.8%的研究检测总生存率),一项研究的无进展生存期较差(2.8%的无进展生存期研究).
    结论:尽管有希望的临床前和基于人群的数据,心血管药物和抗炎药在治疗或预防癌症复发方面总体上没有显示出益处.这些发现可能有助于指导涉及这些药物应用于肿瘤学的未来潜在临床试验。
    BACKGROUND: Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer.
    METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including \"aspirin,\" \"NSAID,\" \"statin\" (including specific statin drug names), \"metformin,\" \"ACE inhibitors,\" and \"ARBs\" (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with \"cancer.\" Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023.
    METHODS: The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival.
    RESULTS: We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival).
    CONCLUSIONS: Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号