ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of prostacyclin for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH).MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, WanFang Data, CBM and CNKI databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared prostacyclin with placebo from inception to April 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsEleven RCTs including 2 549 participants were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with placebo group, prostacyclin group was superior to the placebo group in 6-min walk distance (MD=31.10, 95%CI 16.89 to 45.30, P<0.001), mortality (RR=0.62, 95%CI 0.41 to 0.94,P=0.03), Brog score (MD=–0.88, 95%CI –1.28 to –0.49, P<0.001), mean pulmonary arterial pressure (MD=–3.31, 95%CI –4.34 to –2.29,P<0.001) and cardiac index (MD=0.32, 95%CI 0.14 to 0.51,P<0.001). However, there were no differences between two groups in reducing delaying time to clinical deterioration (RR=1.27, 95%CI 0.99 to 1.63,P=0.06), tolerability (RR=0.74, 95%CI 0.42 to 1.31, P=0.30) and pulmonary vascular resistance (MD=–4.35, 95%CI –8.85 to 0.15, P=0.06).ConclusionsCurrent evidence reveals that prostacyclin therapy appears to be superior to the placebo in reducing the mortality, improving excise capacity, respiratory and cardiac function, and ameliorating mean pulmonary arterial pressure for pulmonary arterial hypertension. However, the efficacy of prostacyclin in delaying time to clinical deterioration, tolerability and pulmonary vascular resistance for PAH is not clear. Due to the limited quality and quantity of included studies, more high quality RCTs are required for further verification.
ObjectiveTo analyze the efficacy, hospitalization cost and cost-effect of different treatments for multiple myeloma, so as to provide references for the treatment and development medical insurance payment policy of multiple myeloma.MethodsA total of 60 cases of multiple myeloma patients who were treated in the General Hospital of Shenyang Military Command from January 1st, 2013 to December 31st, 2017 were included. According to the treatment method, they were categorized into the traditional treatment group (n=37) and novel drug treatment group (n=23). The total response rate and hospitalisation expenses for patients with medical insurance of the two groups were calculated and compared, and cost-effectiveness analysis was then performed.ResultsThe overall response rate in patients in traditional treatment group was 56.76% (21/37), and in novel drug treatment group was 82.61% (19/23) (χ2=4.366, P=0.039). The annual average drug fee, annual average novel drug fee, secondary average drug fee, secondary average novel drug fee, annual average total cost, and secondary average total cost of the medical insurance patients in the novel drug treatment group were significantly higher than those in the traditional treatment group (P<0.05). The annual average cost of personal and coordinated payment for the medical insurance patients in the novel drug treatment group were 172 229.53 yuan and 48 237.51 yuan, respectively, which were significantly higher than the traditional treatment group (P<0.01). The cost-effectiveness ratio of the traditional treatment group was 884.44 yuan/%, the novel drug treatment group was 2 821.80 yuan/%, the cost-effective incremental ratio was 7 075.75 yuan/%, the incremental cost-effective ratio was 7 075.75 yuan/%, and the sensitivity analysis was consistent with the results.ConclusionsThe total response rate of novel drug treatment is significantly higher than traditional treatment. However, novel drug treatment costs higher, and patient's economic burden is also higher. The traditional treatment is superior to novel drug treatment in cost-effectiveness analysis.
Objective To systematically review the health economic evaluation studies of medicines for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). MethodsThe PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, and WanFang Data, as well as the CRD database specifically for health economics were electronically searched from inception to June 2022, and related journals in the field of health economics and the websites of HTA institutions in various countries were manually searched. The quality of the studies was assessed using the CHEERS checklist. The basic characteristics of health economics evaluation publications were summarized, the quality of model structures and methodologies was assessed and economic evaluation results were compared among different treatments. Results A total of 17 studies were included, and cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted from the perspectives of the health system, patients, the whole society, and medical insurance payers. The economic evaluation models were relatively unified, but there were differences in methods and results reporting, and the quality needed to be improved. The research objects were mainly the comparison of hypomethylating agents, targeted medicine and traditional chemotherapy regimens, as well as the comparison of different chemotherapy combinations and different drug dosages. Conclusion Real-world studies are mainly focused on traditional chemotherapy regimens, and model-based health economic evaluations, such as Markov models, are more frequently applied to newly developed targeted drugs and demethylation drugs. Among all treatments, the chemotherapy regimens including cytarabine, midostaurin, and decitabine are found to be more cost-effective.
ObjectiveTo understand the latest research progress in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and explore the optimal treatment strategy. Method The latest literature on the treatment of AGC was retrieved and reviewed. Results For patients with AGC, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, palliative therapy, nutritional support, and traditional Chinese medicine therapy were currently adopted in clinic, the combination of them were used usually. Some patients obtained good therapeutic effects by new chemotherapy drugs and antibody conjugated drugs. In the era of first-line immunotherapy or targeted therapy, first-line immunotherapy alone, immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy, double immunotherapy, and immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenesis targeted drugs for AGC had represented some survival benefits. ConclusionsThe research, development, and widespread application of new anti-tumor drugs have continuously expanded the treatment methods for AGC. The development of tumor molecular biology provides an opportunity for the treatment of AGC, and the precise diagnosis and treatment pattern guided by molecular typing is gradually maturing. However, the treatment of AGC is still facing challenges. In the era of precision medicine, facing the higher heterogeneity of gastric cancer, the dilemma of precise treatment of drugs for AGC, and the research and development of new anti-tumor drugs, the optimal treatment mode of AGC still needs more clinical exploration. It is necessary to comprehensively consider various aspects such as the patient’s physical condition, previous treatment status, and drug accessibility.
ANGPTL, a group of secreted glycoproteins, is widely expressed in vivo and is involved in many pathophysiological processes such as glycolipid metabolism, stem cell survival, local inflammation, vascular leakage and angiogenesis. Many kinds of ANGPTL are closely related to the occurrence and development of DR, especially ANGPTL4, which has gradually become a new hotspot in the field of DR Research. ANGPTL is involved in glucose metabolism and lipid metabolism, promotes increased vascular permeability, pathological angiogenesis, and participates in intraocular inflammation. ANGPTL is a promising molecular target. It can not only be used as a biomarker to predict the occurrence and progression of DR, but also provide new ideas for the treatment of DR By making antibody drugs to interfere with this molecule.