Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: Efficacy and Safety of UDCA-Based Therapies in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis

Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07–2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05–1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11–2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59–20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15–33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09–12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23–17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53–20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.     

Assessment of the reporting of quality and outcome measures in hepatic resections: a call for 90-day reporting in all hepatectomy series

BackgroundThe aim of this paper is to assess the current state of quality and outcomes measures being reported for hepatic resections in the recent literature.MethodsMedline and PubMed databases were searched for English language articles published between 1 January 2002 and 30 April 2013. Two examiners reviewed each article and relevant citations for appropriateness of inclusion, which excluded papers of liver donor hepatic resections, repeat hepatectomies or meta-analyses. Data were extracted and summarized by two examiners for analysis.ResultsFifty-five studies were identified with suitable reporting to assess peri-operative mortality in hepatic resections. In only 35% (19/55) of the studies was the follow-up time explicitly stated, and in 47% (26/55) of studies peri-operative mortality was limited to in-hospital or 30 days. The time period in which complications were captured was not explicitly stated in 19 out of 28 studies. The remaining studies only captured complications within 30 days of the index operation (8/28). There was a paucity of quality literature addressing truly patient-centred outcomes.ConclusionQuality outcomes after a hepatic resection are inconsistently reported in the literature. Quality outcome studies for a hepatectomy should report mortality and morbidity at a minimum of 90 days after surgery.     

Early intervention in myelofibrosis and impact on outcomes: A pooled analysis of the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II studies

Background

In a pooled analysis of the phase 3 Controlled Myelofibrosis Study With Oral JAK Inhibitor Treatment I (COMFORT-I) and COMFORT-II clinical trials, adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis who received oral ruxolitinib at randomization or after crossover from placebo or best available therapy (BAT) had improved overall survival (OS).

Methods

This post hoc analysis of pooled COMFORT data examined relevant disease outcomes based on the disease duration (≤12 or >12 months from diagnosis) before ruxolitinib initiation.

Results

The analysis included 525 patients (ruxolitinib: ≤12 months, n = 84; >12 months, n = 216; placebo/BAT: ≤12 months, n = 66; >12 months, n = 159); the median age was 65.0–70.0 years. Fewer thrombocytopenia and anemia events were observed among patients who initiated ruxolitinib treatment earlier. At Weeks 24 and 48, the spleen volume response (SVR) was higher for patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (47.6% vs. 32.9% at Week 24, p = .0610; 44.0% vs. 26.9% at Week 48, p = .0149). In a multivariable analysis of factors associated with spleen volume reduction, a logistic regression model that controlled for confounding factors found that a significantly greater binary reduction was observed among patients with shorter versus longer disease duration (p = .022). At Week 240, OS was significantly improved among patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (63% [95% CI, 51%‒73%] vs. 57% [95% CI, 49%‒64%]; hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01‒2.31; p = .0430). Regardless of disease duration, a longer OS was observed for patients who received ruxolitinib versus those who received placebo/BAT.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that earlier ruxolitinib initiation for adult patients with intermediate-2 and high-risk myelofibrosis may improve clinical outcomes, including fewer cytopenia events, durable SVR, and prolonged OS.

Plain Language Summary

• Patients with myelofibrosis, a bone marrow cancer, often do not live as long as the general population. These patients may also have an enlarged spleen and difficult symptoms such as fatigue.
• Two large clinical trials showed that patients treated with the drug ruxolitinib lived longer and had improved symptoms compared to those treated with placebo or other standard treatments.
• Here it was examined whether starting treatment with ruxolitinib earlier (i.e., within a year of diagnosis) provided benefits versus delaying treatment.
• Patients who received ruxolitinib within a year of diagnosis lived longer and experienced fewer disease symptoms than those whose treatment was delayed.