Comparative effects of pharmacological interventions for the acute and long-term management of insomnia disorder in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Behavioural, cognitive, and pharmacological interventions can all be effective for insomnia. However, because of inadequate resources, medications are more frequently used worldwide. We aimed to estimate the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for the acute and long-term treatment of adults with insomnia disorder. METHODS In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and websites of regulatory agencies from database inception to Nov 25, 2021, to identify published and unpublished randomised controlled trials. We included studies comparing pharmacological treatments or placebo as monotherapy for the treatment of adults (≥18 year) with insomnia disorder. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (ie, quality of sleep measured by any self-rated scale), treatment discontinuation for any reason and due to side-effects specifically, and safety (ie, number of patients with at least one adverse event) both for acute and long-term treatment. We estimated summary standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PU4QJ. FINDINGS We included 170 trials (36 interventions and 47 950 participants) in the systematic review and 154 double-blind, randomised controlled trials (30 interventions and 44 089 participants) were eligible for the network meta-analysis. In terms of acute treatment, benzodiazepines, doxylamine, eszopiclone, lemborexant, seltorexant, zolpidem, and zopiclone were more efficacious than placebo (SMD range: 0·36-0·83 [CINeMA estimates of certainty: high to moderate]). Benzodiazepines, eszopiclone, zolpidem, and zopiclone were more efficacious than melatonin, ramelteon, and zaleplon (SMD 0·27-0·71 [moderate to very low]). Intermediate-acting benzodiazepines, long-acting benzodiazepines, and eszopiclone had fewer discontinuations due to any cause than ramelteon (OR 0·72 [95% CI 0·52-0·99; moderate], 0·70 [0·51-0·95; moderate] and 0·71 [0·52-0·98; moderate], respectively). Zopiclone and zolpidem caused more dropouts due to adverse events than did placebo (zopiclone: OR 2·00 [95% CI 1·28-3·13; very low]; zolpidem: 1·79 [1·25-2·50; moderate]); and zopiclone caused more dropouts than did eszopiclone (OR 1·82 [95% CI 1·01-3·33; low]), daridorexant (3·45 [1·41-8·33; low), and suvorexant (3·13 [1·47-6·67; low]). For the number of individuals with side-effects at study endpoint, benzodiazepines, eszopiclone, zolpidem, and zopiclone were worse than placebo, doxepin, seltorexant, and zaleplon (OR range 1·27-2·78 [high to very low]). For long-term treatment, eszopiclone and lemborexant were more effective than placebo (eszopiclone: SMD 0·63 [95% CI 0·36-0·90; very low]; lemborexant: 0·41 [0·04-0·78; very low]) and eszopiclone was more effective than ramelteon (0.63 [0·16-1·10; very low]) and zolpidem (0·60 [0·00-1·20; very low]). Compared with ramelteon, eszopiclone and zolpidem had a lower rate of all-cause discontinuations (eszopiclone: OR 0·43 [95% CI 0·20-0·93; very low]; zolpidem: 0·43 [0·19-0·95; very low]); however, zolpidem was associated with a higher number of dropouts due to side-effects than placebo (OR 2·00 [95% CI 1·11-3·70; very low]). INTERPRETATION Overall, eszopiclone and lemborexant had a favorable profile, but eszopiclone might cause substantial adverse events and safety data on lemborexant were inconclusive. Doxepin, seltorexant, and zaleplon were well tolerated, but data on efficacy and other important outcomes were scarce and do not allow firm conclusions. Many licensed drugs (including benzodiazepines, daridorexant, suvorexant, and trazodone) can be effective in the acute treatment of insomnia but are associated with poor tolerability, or information about long-term effects is not available. Melatonin, ramelteon, and non-licensed drugs did not show overall material benefits. These results should serve evidence-based clinical practice. FUNDING UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre

A pharmacoeconomic analysis from Italian guidelines for the management of prolactinomas

Background: Prolactinoma, the most common pituitary adenoma, is usually treated with dopamine agonist (DA) therapy like cabergoline. Surgery is second-line therapy, and radiotherapy is used if surgical treatment fails or in relapsing macroprolactinoma. Objective: This study aimed to provide economic evidence for the management of prolactinoma in Italy, using a cost-of-illness and cost-utility analysis that considered various treatment options, including cabergoline, bromocriptine, temozolomide, radiation therapy, and surgical strategies. Methods: The researchers conducted a systematic literature review for each research question on scientific data- bases and surveyed a panel of experts for each therapeutic procedure's specific drivers that contributed to its total cost. Results: The average cost of the first year of treatment was euro2,558.91 and euro3,287.40 for subjects with micro- prolactinoma and macroprolactinoma, respectively. Follow-up costs from the second to the fifth year after ini- tial treatment were euro798.13 and euro1,084.59 per year in both groups. Cabergoline had an adequate cost-utility profile, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of euro3,201.15 compared to bromocriptine, based on a willingness-to-pay of euro40,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the reference economy. Endoscopic sur- gery was more cost-effective than cabergoline, with an ICER of euro44,846.64. Considering a willingness-to-pay of euro40,000/QALY, the baseline findings show cabergoline to have high cost utility and endoscopic surgery just a tad above that. Conclusions: Due to the favorable cost-utility profile and safety of surgical treatment, pituitary surgery should be considered more frequently as the initial therapeutic approach. This management choice could lead to better outcomes and an appropriate allocation of healthcare resources

Quality improvement strategies at primary care level to reduce inequalities in diabetes care: an equity-oriented systematic review

Abstract Background There is evidence that disparities exist in diabetes prevalence, access to diabetes care, diabetes-related complications, and the quality of diabetes care. A wide range of interventions has been implemented and evaluated to improve diabetes care. We aimed to review trials of quality improvement (QI) interventions aimed to reduce health inequities among people with diabetes in primary care and to explore the extent to which experimental studies addressed and reported equity issues. Methods Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled studies published between January 2005 and May 2016. We adopted the PROGRESS Plus framework, as a tool to explore differential effects of QI interventions across sociodemographic and economic factors. Results From 1903 references fifty-eight randomized trials met the inclusion criteria (with 17.786 participants), mostly carried out in USA. The methodological quality was good for all studies. Almost all studies reported the age, gender/sex and race distribution of study participants. The majority of trials additionally used at least one further PROGRESS-Plus factor at baseline, with education being the most commonly used, followed by income (55%). Large variation was observed between these studies for type of interventions, target populations, and outcomes evaluated. Few studies examined differential intervention effects by PROGRESS-plus factors. Existing evidence suggests that some QI intervention delivered in primary care can improve diabetes-related health outcomes in social disadvantaged population subgroups such as ethnic minorities. However, we found very few studies comparing health outcomes between population subgroups and reporting differential effect estimates of QI interventions. Conclusions This review provides evidence that QI interventions for people with diabetes is feasible to implement and highly acceptable. However, more research is needed to understand their effective components as well as the adoption of an equity-oriented approach in conducting primary studies. Moreover, a wider variety of socio-economic characteristics such as social capital, place of residence, occupation, education, and religion should be addressed

Revisione sistematica per valutare l\u2019efficacia, l\u2019accettabilit\ue0 e la sicurezza degli antipsicotici di seconda generazione per il trattamento della depressione unipolare e bipolare [Systematic review to evaluate the efficacy, acceptability and safety of second-generation antipsychotics for the treatment of unipolar and bipolar depression]

Summary. Background. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that depression affects about 121 million people in the world and in terms of years of illness, by the year 2020 could become the second most prevalent disease in the world population after cardiovascular diseases. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) seems to induce remission in depression when added to an antidepressant. Aim. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of SGAs for the treatment of depression. Methods. We searched five bibliographic databases. We assessed the quality of evidence using Cochrane and GRADE criteria. Results. We included 42 RCTs. Where possible, we made a statistical synthesis of results. For efficacy outcomes, in direct comparisons in unipolar and bipolar patients with acute depressive episode, and in unipolar patients who did not respond to previous treatments with antidepressants (non-responders), SGAs gave better results than placebo, moderate to low certainty of evidence. In the comparison with antidepressants, in unipolar and bipolar patients with acute depressive episode the evidence was in favour of SGAs high certainty of evidence; while in the non-responder unipolar patients (the included studies considered only this typology of patients) the evidence was in favour of the antidepressants, low certainty of evidence. For safety outcomes, the results were in favour of placebo for patients with at least one adverse event, and in favour of SGAs for the number of patients with serious adverse events, for both comparisons the certainty of evidence was moderate. Comparing the SGAs with antidepressants, no differences were observed for patients with at least one adverse event, high certainty of evidence; while serious adverse events were less acute in patients treated with SGAs, moderate certainty evidence. The results of direct and indirect comparisons made with the network meta-analysis showed no differences for most of the outcomes considered, not showing a clear superiority of a drug compared to the others. Conclusions. These results showed a moderate effect in favour of SGAs compared to antidepressants in patients, unipolar and bipolar, with a new acute depressive episode and confirm that in patients non-responders, antidepressants may remain more effective. \ua9 2018 Il Pensiero Scientifico Editore s.r.l. All rights reserved

Additional file 2: of Quality improvement strategies at primary care level to reduce inequalities in diabetes care: an equity-oriented systematic review

Table S1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria (PICOS). (DOCX 14 kb

Additional file 4: of Quality improvement strategies at primary care level to reduce inequalities in diabetes care: an equity-oriented systematic review

Table S3. Characteristics of eligible studies assessing the efficacy of QI interventions in participants with type 2 diabetes. (DOCX 71 kb

Additional file 1: of Quality improvement strategies at primary care level to reduce inequalities in diabetes care: an equity-oriented systematic review

Search strategy for PubMed. (DOCX 17 kb