Background A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to systematically evaluate the effects of berberine on the inflammatory markers of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and related disorders. Method Databases that were searched from inception to October 2020 included PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers independently selected articles and extracted data. The pooled evaluations were entered and analyzed in Review Manager 5.3. Results Of the 7387 publications screened, 52 studies were included, and the related trials involved 4616 patients. Pooled estimates showed that the use of berberine could significantly reduce the concentration level of C-reactive protein (CRP) [standardized mean difference (SMD) = − 1.54, 95% confidence intervals (CI) − 1.86, − 1.22, p < 0.05], tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) [SMD = − 1.02, 95% CI − 1.27, − 0.77, p < 0.05], and interleukin 6 (IL-6) [SMD = − 1.17, 95% CI − 1.53, − 0.81, p < 0.05] among patients with MetS and related disorders. However, it did not affect the level of interleukin 1β (IL-1β) [SMD = − 0.81, 95% CI − 1.80, 0.17, p = 0.11]. Conclusion Overall, the use of berberine in patients with MetS and related disorders appeared to significantly decrease several inflammatory markers. Further multi-center and rigorous investigations with larger patient populations are encouraged to confirm the effect of berberine on MetS and related disorders.

Background: Multiagent chemotherapy is the primary treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), of which asparaginases including Escherichia coli L-asparaginase (E. coli L-Asp) and pegylated-asparaginase (PEG-Asp), are cornerstone components. The study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of PEG-Asp with E. coli L-Asp in Chinese children with ALL. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PEG-Asp versus E. coli L-Asp in Chinese children with ALL. Two reviewers independently selected articles and extracted data. Risk-of-bias assessment was conducted with Cochrane recommendation tool. Pooled estimates and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for all outcomes in Review Manager 5.3. Results: Out of the 470 publications screened, 15 studies were included, involving 1,194 patients. Pooled estimates showed that there were no significant differences in complete responses (CR), overall response rate (ORR), gastrointestinal symptoms, and coagulation abnormalities rate between the PEG-Asp and E. coli L-Asp groups (all P>0.05). Hypersensitivity (RR =0.63; 95% CI, 0.40-1.01; Ρ=0.05) and hepatic injury rate (RR =0.45; 95% CI, 0.27-0.75; Ρ=0.002) were lower in the PEG-Asp group. The frequency of administration and length of hospital stay of patients in the PEG-Asp group were less than those in the E. coli L-Asp group (both Ρ<0.0001).Conclusions: Current evidence pointed out a similar efficacy in the two groups. The PEG-Asp group showed a lower hypersensitivity and hepatic injury rate. In addition, using PEG-Asp decreased the frequency of administration and the length of hospital stay, which, to some extent, might reduce patients' burden caused by medical resource consumption.

Background The disutilities of adverse events (AEs) are important inputs for cost-utility analysis (CUA), reflecting the impacts of AEs on health outcomes. Health technology assessment institutions and scholars have proposed recommendations for applying disutility values in economic evaluations. Objectives This study aimed to identify the current use of disutilities of AEs as model parameters in the CUA of cancer drug therapy and to compare the discrepancies between the use of disutilities and published recommendations. Methods A systematic search was conducted on the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, as well as the official websites of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) for CUAs of drug therapy for cancer published in English from January 2019 to April 2022. Information about the use of disutilities of AEs (whether and how disutilities were used, or why they were not used) in selected studies was extracted and compared with published recommendations. Descriptive analyses were used to summarize the results. Results A total of 467 CUAs were included, 54% (254/467) of which included disutilities of AEs in their model. The proportion that included these disutilities increased from 2019 to 2021, ranging from 47% (51/107) to 61% (116/190). Only 6% (15/254) of the CUAs using disutilities of AEs considered all five recommendations about the justification for inclusion and exclusion, description of values and sources, grades of AEs, calculation, and uncertainty analyses. Only 15% (72/467) provided a clear justification for inclusion and exclusion of disutilities of AEs, and 7% (17/254) did not provide values or sources. In total, 69% (175/254) of the analyses focused on AEs of grade 3 or greater, and 11% (28/254) applied utility decrements for grades 1 and 2. Disutilities of AEs were generally calculated using the incidence rates, which were clearly stated in 49% (65/132) of the analyses. Uncertainty analyses were conducted in 84% (214/254) of the CUAs. Conclusions The current use of disutilities of AEs in CUAs shows some discrepancies with recommendations proposed in the literature. One is that detailed information about the use of disutilities of AEs was not reported and the other is that essential methods to analyze the impact of AEs on quality-adjusted life-years were not thoroughly conducted. Therefore, it is suggested that researchers should attach importance to the impact of AEs on health-related quality of life. Furthermore, an application process was developed for the disutilities of AEs to remind and guide researchers to correctly use the disutilities of AEs as parameters in the decision-analytic model...

ObjectivesTo determine the effects of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) on the quality of life (QoL) among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).DesignMeta-analysis.Data sources and eligibility criteriaPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang and VIP databases were searched to collect randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which were conducted to evaluate the effect of bDMARDs in the treatment of patients with PsA and reported QoL-related outcomes, from inception to November 2020 and updated on 19 February 2022.Data extraction and synthesisOutcomes about Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Dermatology Life Quality Index, physical component summary and mental component summary of the Short Form 36, EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 50/75/90/100 were extracted by two reviewers independently. Data were pooled using the fixed or random effects methods and considered as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio with 95% CI.ResultsOut of 3190 articles screened, 37 RCTs (with 47 articles reported) were included. Pooled estimates showed that bDMARDs were superior versus placebo on all outcomes. Against methotrexate (MTX) and tofacitinib, bDMARDs showed no statistically significant advantages or significant disadvantages. Similar results were found for bDMARDs+MTX versus MTX. For HAQ-DI, the results of the subgroups of bDMARDs versus placebo, bDMARDs+MTX versus MTX, bDMARDs versus tofacitinib and bDMARDs versus MTX were −0.21 (MD, 95% CI, −0.23 to –0.18), −0.22 (MD, 95% CI, −0.58 to 0.14), –0.01 (MD, 95% CI, −0.05 to 0.04) and –0.03 (MD, 95% CI, −0.04 to –0.02), respectively.ConclusionsCompared with placebo, bDMARDs taken by patients with PsA appear to significantly improve the QoL. Compared with other therapeutic agents, more studies are required to confirm the effect of single and combined bDMARDs use further.

Background: Multi-agent chemotherapy is the primary treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), of which the asparaginase including Escherichia coli L-asparaginase (E. coli L-Asp) and Pegylated-asparaginase (PEG-Asp) is a cornerstone component. The study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of PEG-Asp with E. coli L-Asp in Chinese children with ALL. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PEG-Asp versus E. coli L-Asp in Chinese children with ALL. Two reviewers independently selected articles and extracted data. Risk-of-bias assessment used the Cochrane recommendation tool. Pooled estimates and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all outcomes in Review Manager 5.3. Results: 15 studies of a total of 470 publications were included, involving 1 194 patients. Pooled estimates showed that there were no significant differences in CR, ORR, gastrointestinal symptoms, and coagulation abnormalities rate between the PEG-Asp and E. coli L-Asp group (all P>0.05). Hypersensitivity (RR=0.63; 95%CI 0.40-1.01; Ρ=0.05) and hepatic injury rate (RR=0.45; 95%CI 0.27-0.75; Ρ=0.002) were lower in the PEG-Asp group. The frequency of administration and length of hospital stay of patients in the PEG-Asp group was less than that in the E. coli L-Asp group (both Ρ<0.0001). Conclusions: Current evidence pointed out a similarity efficacy in the two groups. While the PEG-Asp group had a lower hypersensitivity and hepatic injury rate. Besides, using PEG-Asp decreased the frequency of administration and the length of hospital stay, which, to some extent, might reduce patients' burden caused by medical resources consumption.