目的:为了评估疗效,左乙拉西坦(LEV)治疗癫痫的安全性和经济性。
方法:PubMed,Scopus,Cochrane图书馆,OpenGrey.欧盟和ClinicalTrials.gov被搜索进行系统评价(SRs),荟萃分析,随机对照试验(RCT),观察性研究,2007年1月至2018年4月发布的病例报告和经济研究。我们使用气泡图以图形方式显示纳入研究的信息,并进行荟萃分析以定量综合证据。
结果:共获得14,803条记录。我们纳入了30份SR/荟萃分析,34项随机对照试验,18项观察性研究,筛选过程后的58例病例报告和2项经济学研究。纳入的SRs招募了小儿癫痫患者,妊娠期癫痫,局灶性癫痫,全身性癫痫和难治性局灶性癫痫。对纳入的随机对照试验的荟萃分析表明,LEV与卡马西平一样有效(CBZ;治疗6个月:58.9%vs64.8%,OR=0.76,95%CI:0.50-1.16;12个月:54.9%vs55.5%,OR=1.24,95%CI:0.79-1.93),奥卡西平(57.7%vs59.8%,OR=1.34,95%CI:0.34-5.23),苯巴比妥(50.0%vs50.9%,OR=1.20,95%CI:0.51-2.82)和拉莫三嗪(LTG;61.5%vs57.7%,OR=1.22,95%CI:0.90-1.66)。SRs和观察性研究表明,孕妇的畸形率和宫内死亡率较低,以及认知副作用的低风险。但是不能排除精神和行为副作用。与CBZ相比,LEV降低了因不良事件导致的停药(OR=0.52,95%CI:0.41-0.65),而LEV与安慰剂和LTG比较时没有发现差异。使用决策树模型对难治性癫痫进行的两次成本效益评估显示,加拿大每无癫痫发作日获得76.18美元,韩国每无癫痫发作日获得44美元。
结论:LEV与CBZ一样有效,奥卡西平,苯巴比妥和LTG对孕妇和认知功能具有优势。有限的证据支持其成本效益。
■PROSPERO(编号CRD42017069367)。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and economics of levetiracetam (LEV) for epilepsy.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey.eu and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, case reports and economic studies published from January 2007 to April 2018. We used a bubble plot to graphically display information of included studies and conducted meta-analyses to quantitatively synthesize the evidence.
RESULTS: A total of 14,803 records were obtained. We included 30 SRs/meta-analyses, 34 RCTs, 18 observational studies, 58 case reports and 2 economic studies after the screening process. The included SRs enrolled patients with pediatric epilepsy, epilepsy in pregnancy, focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy and refractory focal epilepsy. Meta-analysis of the included RCTs indicated that LEV was as effective as carbamazepine (CBZ; treatment for 6 months: 58.9% vs 64.8%, OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.50-1.16; 12 months: 54.9% vs 55.5%, OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.79-1.93), oxcarbazepine (57.7% vs 59.8%, OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.34-5.23), phenobarbital (50.0% vs 50.9%, OR=1.20, 95% CI: 0.51-2.82) and lamotrigine (LTG; 61.5% vs 57.7%, OR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.90-1.66). SRs and observational studies indicated a low malformation rate and intrauterine death rate for pregnant women, as well as low risk of cognitive side effects. But psychiatric and behavioral side effects could not be ruled out. LEV decreased discontinuation due to adverse events compared with CBZ (OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.41-0.65), while no difference was found when LEV was compared with placebo and LTG. Two cost-effectiveness evaluations for refractory epilepsy with decision-tree model showed US$ 76.18 per seizure-free day gained in Canada and US$ 44 per seizure-free day gained in Korea.
CONCLUSIONS: LEV is as effective as CBZ, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital and LTG and has an advantage for pregnant women and in cognitive functions. Limited evidence supports its cost-effectiveness.
UNASSIGNED: PROSPERO (No CRD 42017069367).