Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of memantine in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about memantine vs. donepezil for patients with AD from January 1989 to July 2011 were searched in CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, MEDLINE, OVID, EMbase and The Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures, extracted the data, and evaluated the methodological quality. Then meta-analyses were conducted by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results The total 12 RCTs were included. Among the 2 716 patients involved, 1 459 were in the memantine group, while the other 1 302 were in the donepezil group. The results of meta-analyses showed that the efficacy of the memantine group was superior to that of the donepezil group in MMSE (MD=0.53, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.85, P=0.001), CIBIC-Plus (MD= –0.19, 95%CI –0.31 to –0.07, P=0.002), NPI (MD= –2.9, 95%CI –4.57 to –1.22, P=0.000 7) and SIB (MD=3.12, 95%CI 0.57 to 5.67, P=0.02), with significant differences; but the efficacy of the two groups was similar in ADCS-ADL19 (MD=0.29, 95%CI –0.03 to 0.60, P=0.07). There was no significant difference between the two groups in incidence of side effects (RR=1.14, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.38, P=0.17), but the tolerability of the memantine group was much better (RR=0.78, 95%CI 0.63 to 0.97, P=0.03). Conclusion Based on the current studies, memantine is superior to donepezil in treating Alzheimer’s disease (AD) at present. Although the side effects are similar to donepezil, memantine has much better intolerability and is considered to be safe and effective. For the quality restrictions and possible publication bias of the included studies, more double blind RCTs with high quality are required to further assess the effects.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Leflunomide (LEF) in the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), so as to provide scientific proof for applying LEF in China. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the effect of LEF on patients with RA from January 1989 to January 2011 were searched from the following databases, CNKI, WanFang Data, MEDLINE, EMbase and CBM. After two reviewers independently screened the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted the data and assessed the quality, the data were analyzed by RevMan 5.0 software. Results Among 3247 patients in 16 included RCTs, 1711 patients were in the LEF group, while the other 1536 patients were in the Methotrexate (MXT) group. The results of meta-analyses showed there was no significant difference in the efficacy between LEF and MXT (RR=1.03, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.11, Pgt;0.05), but a significant difference was found in the side reaction (RR=0.67, 95%CI 0.49 to 0.94, Plt;0.05). Conclusion Based on the current studies, Leflunomide is as effective as the commonly-used Methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatiod arthritis at present, much safer than Methotrexate, and thought as a safe and effective SAARD. For the quality restrictions of the included studies, more double blind RCTs with high quality are required to further assess the effects.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of trimetazidine (TMZ) in the treatment of Stable Angina Pectoris (SAP). Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of Trimetazidine in treating patients with SAP were retrieved in the following databases as CNKI (1997 to June 2011), WanFang Data (1989 to June 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2011), EMbase (1974 to June 2011), CBM (1989 to June 2011) and Cochrane Central Database (1989 to June 2011). The literature which met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected, data were extracted, the quality was evaluated, and meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of 15 RCTs involving 1 500 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that, compared with the control group, TMZ was significantly superior in the following 5 aspects: the time to 1 mm drop of ST segment (WMD=0.84, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.93, P=0.000 01), duration of doing exercise (WMD=0.82, 95%CI 0.73 to 0.91, P=0.000 01), and time to onset of angina (WMD=1.18, 95%CI 0.87 to 1.50, Plt;0.000 01) in the treadmill test, weekly mean number of angina attacks (WMD= –1.79, 95%CI –1.93 to –1.66, Plt;0.000 01), and weekly side effects between TMZ and the control group (RR=0.83, 95%CI 0.52 to 1.32, P=0.42). Conclusion Based on current studies, TMZ is superior to other medicines in the control group for SAP at present, and it has no significant difference in side effects compared with the control group, so it is regarded as an effective and safe drug. For the quality restrictions and possible publication bias of the included studies, this conclusion needs to be confirmed by more high quality, large sample, multi-center, double blind RCTs.