Clinical drug investigation · 2022
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies of Defibrotide Prophylaxis for Veno-Occlusive Disease/Sinusoidal Obstruction Syndrome.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Corbacioglu Selim, Topaloglu Ozlem, Aggarwal Saurabh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Defibrotide is approved to treat severe veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (VOD/SOS) after haematopoietic cell transplantation in patients aged > 1 month in the European Union and for VOD/SOS with renal/pulmonary dysfunction post-haematopoietic cell transplantation in the United States. This meta-analysis estimated the incidence and risk of VOD/SOS after intravenous defibrotide prophylaxis using the published literature.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched through 30 November 2021 for defibrotide studies in VOD/SOS "prevention" or "prophylaxis," excluding phase I studies, case reports, studies with fewer than ten patients and reviews.
RESULTS: The search identified 733 records; 24 met inclusion criteria, of which 20 (N = 3005) evaluated intravenous defibrotide for VOD/SOS prophylaxis. Overall VOD/SOS incidence with intravenous defibrotide was 5%, with incidences of 5% in adults and 8% in paediatric patients. In eight studies with data on intravenous defibrotide prophylaxis vs controls (e.g. heparin, no prophylaxis), VOD/SOS incidence in controls was 16%. The risk ratio for developing VOD/SOS with defibrotide prophylaxis vs controls was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.12-0.71; p = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests a low incidence of VOD/SOS following intravenous defibrotide prophylaxis, regardless of age group, and a lower relative risk for VOD/SOS with defibrotide prophylaxis vs controls in patient populations at high risk of VOD/SOS.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched through 30 November 2021 for defibrotide studies in VOD/SOS "prevention" or "prophylaxis," excluding phase I studies, case reports, studies with fewer than ten patients and reviews.
RESULTS: The search identified 733 records; 24 met inclusion criteria, of which 20 (N = 3005) evaluated intravenous defibrotide for VOD/SOS prophylaxis. Overall VOD/SOS incidence with intravenous defibrotide was 5%, with incidences of 5% in adults and 8% in paediatric patients. In eight studies with data on intravenous defibrotide prophylaxis vs controls (e.g. heparin, no prophylaxis), VOD/SOS incidence in controls was 16%. The risk ratio for developing VOD/SOS with defibrotide prophylaxis vs controls was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.12-0.71; p = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests a low incidence of VOD/SOS following intravenous defibrotide prophylaxis, regardless of age group, and a lower relative risk for VOD/SOS with defibrotide prophylaxis vs controls in patient populations at high risk of VOD/SOS.