Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of mesalazine versus sulfasalazine in the treatment of ulcerative colitis.Methods The literatures were searched from PubMed (1966 to January 2010), the Cochrane Library (1966 to January 2010), EMbase (1974 to January 2010), CNKI (1994 to January 2010), VIP (1989 to January 2010), and CBM (1978 to January 2010). The data were extracted, the quality of studies was evaluated according to The Cochrane Handbook, and meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Results Sixteen RCTs involving 1 333 patients were included in this study. The results of meta-analyses showed that the total effective rate of the mesalazine group was significantly higher than that of the sulfasalazine group (RR=1.10, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.17, Plt;0.05), and significant differences were noted in the total remission rate (RR=1.82, 95%CI 1.14 to 2.91, Plt;0.05), while there was no significant difference in the relapse rate between the two groups (RR=0.86, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.29, Pgt;0.05). Twelve RCTs reported adverse effects and meta-analyses showed that the incidence of adverse effects was significantly lower in the mesalazine group than in the sulfasalazine group (RR=0.56, 95%CI 0.42 to 0.73, Plt;0.05). Conclusion Analyses show that mesalazine is much more effective and safe in the management of ulcerative colitis than sulfasalazine. However, there is a moderate risk of bias due to methodological quality problems in all 16 included RCTs, so more strictly-designed multi-centered randomized controlled trials with high quality in large-scale are needed to confirm this result.
【摘要】 目的 采用循证医学的方法评价硫唑嘌呤(aiathioprine,AZA)治疗溃疡性结肠炎(ulcerative colitis,UC)的有效性和安全性。 方法 计算机检索PubMed、Cochrane library、Embase、CNKI、维普和CBM数据库收集国内外关于AZA诊疗UC的随机对照试验(ramdomized controllel trial,RCT)。按Cochrane系统评价的方法评价纳入研究质量,并进行Meta分析。 结果 共纳入5个RCT,共262例UC患者。Meta分析结果显示,AZA治疗UC在缓解率方面与安慰剂比较,差异无统计学意义[P=1.19,95%CI(0.94,1.49),P=0.14];在复发率方面,两者比较差异有统计学意义[P=0.72,95%CI(0.54,0.95),P=0.02];全部不良反应方面和严重不良反应方面,两者比较差异无统计学意义,Meta分析结果分别为[P=2.52,95%CI(0.82,7.74),P=0.11]和[P=4.03,95%CI(0.88,18.53),P=0.07]。 结论 系统评价结果为AZA在疗效方面优于安慰剂,在不良反应发生率方面差异无统计学意义。但由于纳入的5个研究中没有高质量的RCT,且有1个可能产生高度偏倚,使得这一结论受到影响,有必要开展更多设计严谨,大样本、多中心的RCT。【Abstract】 Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of azathio-prine in the treatment of ulcerative colitis through an evidence-based method. Methods We searched the literature from databases like PubMed, Cochrane library, CNKI, VIP, and CBM, and evaluated the quality of studies according to Cochrane systematic review. Finally, Meta-analysis was performed. Results Five randomized controlled trials (RCT) were included in this study with a total of 262 patients. Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the rate of remission between azathio-prine and placebo in treating ulcerative colitis [P=1.19, 95%CI (0.94, 1.49),P=0.14]. There was significant difference in the relapse rate between the two treating methods [P=0.72, 95%CI (0.54, 0.95),P=0.02]. In addition, there was no statistical difference in all adverse effects [P=2.52, 95%CI (0.82, 7.74),P=0.11] and serious adverse effects [P=4.03, 95%CI (0.88, 18.53),P=0.07] between the two treating methods. Conclusion In the treatment of ulcerative colitis, azathio-prine has a significant advantage in efficacy than placebo, but there is no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between the two groups. However, none of the 5 RCT included in this review has a high quality and one of them even probably has a high bias, which has a big influence on our conclusion. Consequently, multi-center large-scale randomized controlled trials of higher quality are needed to make confirmation.
【摘要】 目的 了解2007年-2008年成都地区17家医院抗肿瘤药物的使用情况。 方法 以销售金额、用药频度(DDDs)对2007年、2008年成都地区17家医院抗肿瘤药物消耗数据进行分类统计、综合分析、对比。 结果 2008年成都地区17家医院抗肿瘤药物用药金额增长幅度较大,各亚类抗肿瘤药物中其它类抗肿瘤药物类、植物来源的抗肿瘤药、抗代谢药金额排序依次占前3位。销售金额前100位药物中,肿瘤药物占据8位,大多数是其它类抗肿瘤药物,且其用药频度也靠前。 结论 抗肿瘤药物用药金额和用药量都将快速增长,其中其它类抗肿瘤药物和植物来源的抗肿瘤药的发展尤被看好。【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the situation of antineoplastics used in Chengdu area from 2007 to 2008. Methods The consumption data of antineoplastics used in 17 hospitals of Chengdu area in 2007 and 2008 were classified, and the consumption sum and defined daily doses (DDDs) were analyzed. Results The total consumption sum of antineoplastics in 2008 increased sharply. Other antineoplastics, herbal-sourced antineoplastics and antimetabolism drugs ranked in the first three places. Among the top drugs in terms of consumption sum, antineoplastics took 8 places. Conclusion The consumption sum and DDDs of antineoplastics, especially other antineoplastics and herbal-sourced antineoplastics, will increase rapidly.