临床荟萃

• 荟萃分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

联合吸入芜地溴铵与糖皮质激素/长效β2受体激动剂治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病有效性和安全性的系统评价

  

  1. 1.中公网医疗信息技术有限公司,北京 100028;2.陆军总医院 药理科, 北京 100700
  • 出版日期:2019-01-20 发布日期:2019-01-30
  • 通讯作者: 通信作者:曾明, Email:cute_z@126.com

Efficacy and safety of umeclidinium/inhaled corticosteroid/ longacting β2agonist in treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a metaanalysis

  1. 1.CIS Technology Service Co. Ltd,  Beijing 100028, China;
    2. Department of  Pharmacology, Beijing Army General Hospital, Beijing 100700, China
  • Online:2019-01-20 Published:2019-01-30
  • Contact: Corresponding author: Zeng Ming, Email:cute_z@126.com

摘要: 目的 系统评价芜地溴铵(Umeclidinium,UMEC)与糖皮质激素/长效β2受体激动剂(UMEC/ICS/LABA)三联吸入治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的有效性和安全性。方法 检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials(CENTRAL)、ClinicalTrail.gov、CBM、VIP、CNKI、WanFang Data等数据库,搜集含UMEC与ICS/LABA三联治疗COPD的随机对照试验,检索时限均从建库至2018年5月28日。由2位评价员独立筛选文献、提取资料并评价纳入研究的偏倚风险后,采用RevMan5.3和R软件进行数据处理分析。结果  纳入7个RCT,共13 219例患者。UMEC 62.5 μg/ICS/LABA vs 安慰剂(PBO)/ICS/LABA,UMEC 62.5 μg试验组能显著改善1秒用力呼气量谷值(Trough FEV1)[MD=0.13,95%CI(0.10,0.15),P<0.00001]、0~6小时加权平均1秒用力呼气量(0~6 h wmFEV1)[MD=0.16,95%CI(0.14,0.17),P<0.00001]、1秒用力呼气量峰值(Peak FEV1)[MD=0.16,95%CI(0.14,0.18),P<0.00001]、用力肺活量谷值(Trough FVC)[MD=0.21,95%CI(0.19,0.23),P<0.00001]等肺功能评价指标;并能改善生存质量评价指标,如圣乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)评分[MD=-1.83,95%CI(-2.31,-1.34),P<0.00001]、过度呼吸困难指数(TDI)评分[MD=0.54,95%CI(0.29,0.78),P<0.00001]、COPD评估测试(CAT)评分[MD=-0.93,95%CI(-1.29,-0.57),P<0.00001];同时,减少救援药物(沙丁胺醇)的使用、降低COPD急性加重率[RR=0.84,95%CI(0.79,0.89),P<0.00001],并且不增加药物相关不良反应[RR=1.00,95%CI(0.90,1.12),P=0.99]。UMEC 125 μg/ICS/LABA vs PBO/ICS/LABA,UMEC 125 μg试验组同样能改善肺功能指标和生存质量评价指标,同时能减少救援药物(沙丁胺醇)的使用,但在COPD急性加重方面与对照组差异无统计学意义[RR=0.57,95%CI(0.24,1.37),P=0.21],并增加药物相关不良反应[RR=1.44,95%CI(1.00,2.08),P=0.05]。结论  UMEC 62.5  μg、125  μg与ICS/LABA三联吸入治疗COPD能显著改善患者的肺功能,提高患者生存质量,两者差异不明显,且UMEC 62.5  μg不良反应发生风险低,推荐使用该剂量。受纳入研究数量的限制,上述结论尚需更多高质量的研究予以验证。

关键词: 肺疾病,  , 慢性阻塞性, 芜地溴铵, 三联, 系统评价, meta分析

Abstract: Objective  To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of umeclidinium/ inhaled corticosteroid/ longacting β2agonist (UMEC/ICS/LABA) in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD).Methods  PubMed,  Embase,  Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials(CENTRAL),  ClinicalTrail.gov,  CBM,  VIP,  CNKI and WanFang Data were electronically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about UMEC/ICS/LABA for COPD from inception to May 28, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literatures,  extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then,  metaanalysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 and R software. Results  Seven RCTs involving 13 219 patients were included. UMEC 62.5 μg/ICS/LABA vs PBO/ICS/LABA:UMEC 62.5 μg/ICS/LABA could significantly improve the lung function (trough FEV1[MD=0.13,  95%CI=0.10 to 0.15,  P<0.00001],  06 h  wmFEV1[MD=0.16,  95%CI  0.14 to 0.17,  P<0.00001],  Peak FEV1[MD=0.16,  95%CI 0.14 to 0.18,  P<0.00001],  Trough FVC [MD=0.21,  95%CI 0.19 to 0.23, P<0.00001])  and the quality of life (SGRQ score[MD=-1.83,  95%CI -2.31 to 1.34,  P<0.00001],  TDI score[MD=0.54,  95%CI 0.29 to 0.78,  P<0.00001],  CAT score[MD=-0.93,  95%CI -1.29 to -0.57,  P<0.00001]),  reduce the use of rescue drugs(salbutamol) and the rate of COPD acute exacerbation  (RR=0.84,95%CI[0.79,0.89],P<0.00001)  while not increase the drugrelating adverse events (RR=1.00,95%CI[0.90,1.12],P=0.99]. ②UMEC 125 μg/ICS/LABA vs PBO/ICS/LABA : UMEC 125 μg/ICS/LABA could significantly improve the lung function and the quality of life,  reduce the use of rescue drugs(salbutamol).However there is no difference in the rate of COPD acute exacerbation [RR=0.57,95%CI(0.24,1.37),P=0.21]  and a higher  drugrelating adverse events rate than the control group [RR=1.44,95%CI(1.00,2.08),P=0.05] .Conclusion  Both UMEC 62.5  μg and 125  μg  in combination with ICS/LABA are superior to PBO/ICS/LABA in the treatment of COPD patients,  which can significantly improve lung function and the quality of life. UMEC 62.5  μg is preferred because of the lower adverse events rate. However,  due to the limitation of quantity of included studies,  this conclusion should be further confirmed by more high quality studies. 

Key words: pulmonary disease, , chronic obstructive;umeclidinium; triple;systematic review;metaanalysis