Cochrane Collaboration

About: Cochrane Collaboration is a nonprofit organization based out in Oxford, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Systematic review & Randomized controlled trial. The organization has 1995 authors who have published 3928 publications receiving 382695 citations.

Interferon β for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: a systematic review

Abstract: Background It is unclear whether recombinant β interferons (IFNβ) can be effective in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). The aim was to determine whether IFNβ can reduce the risk of disability and cognitive impairment progression in SPMS. Methods Using Cochrane methodology, we reviewed all randomised placebo controlled trials of IFNβ in SPMS patients (1995–March 2012). Results 5 trials (3082 patients) were included. After 3 years, interferons did not reduce disability progression, confirmed at 6 months (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16). A small reduction in the number of patients who had relapses during the first 3 years of treatment (RR 0.91, 0.84 to 0.97) was found. No analysis of cognitive data was possible. More treated than placebo patients dropped out for adverse events. Conclusion 3 year treatment with IFNβ does not delay permanent disability in SPMS but reduces relapse risk, indicating that the anti-inflammatory effect of IFNβ is unable to prevent MS progression once it has become established.

Exercise-Based Interventions to Enhance Long-Term Sustainability of Physical Activity in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Abstract: Exercise is a form of physical activity (PA). PA is an important marker of health and quality of life in older adults. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to assess the effect of exercise-based interventions on an at least six-month follow up PA measure, and to describe the specific strategies implemented during the intervention to strengthen the sustainability of PA in community-dwelling 65+ year-old adults. We registered and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42017070892) of randomized clinical trials (RCT). We searched three electronic databases during January 2018 to identify RCT assessing any type of exercise-based intervention. Studies had to report a pre-, post-, and at least 6-month post-intervention follow-up. To be included, at least one PA outcome had to be assessed. The effect of exercise-based interventions was assessed compared to active (e.g., a low-intensity type of exercise, such as stretching or toning activities) and non-active (e.g., usual care) control interventions at several time points. Secondary analyses were conducted, restricted to studies that reported specific strategies to enhance the sustainability of PA. The intervention effect was measured on self-reported and objective measures of time spent in PA, by means of standardized mean differences. Standardized mean differences of PA level were pooled. Pooled estimates of effect were computed with the DerSimonian–Laird method, applying a random effects model. The risk of bias was also assessed. We included 12 studies, comparing 18 exercise intervention groups to four active and nine non-active control groups. Nine studies reported specific strategies to enhance the long-term sustainability of PA. The strategies were mostly related to the self-efficacy, self-control, and behavior capability principles based on the social cognitive theory. Exercise interventions compared to active control showed inconclusive and heterogeneous results. When compared to non-active control, exercise interventions improved PA time at the six-months follow up (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.30; 95%CI 0.15 to 0.44; four studies; 724 participants; I2 0%), but not at the one- or two-years follow-ups. No data were available on the mid- and long-term effect of adding strategies to enhance the sustainability of PA. Exercise interventions have small clinical benefits on PA levels in community-dwelling older adults, with a decline in the observed improvement after six months of the intervention cessation.

Evidence for analgesic effect in acute pain - 50 years on.

Abstract: The basic design of studies to measure the analgesic effect of drugs in acute pain was worked out in the 1950s and 1960s, was rigorously tested at the time, and established randomisation and double blinding as essential standards for objective assessment of analgesic efficacy [7]. The design became the conventional way to establish analgesic efficacy, typically performed early in the development of new pain-relieving drugs. Several individual patient analyses have confirmed the validity of methods for evaluating efficacy [2,3,16,18,19], but not adverse events [6]. A recent change has been the way in which outcomes are handled. While the original use of average summed pain intensity difference or total pain relief over 4–6 hours has statistical value, emphasis is now placed on the individual patient’s response, particularly the proportion of patients achieving the outcome of at least 50% of the maximum possible pain relief. Unsurprisingly, patient satisfaction is highly correlated with good pain relief [13], and the 50% cut point is regarded as acceptable [10]. Even the earliest studies emphasised large variability between individuals and between treatment groups where numbers are small [8]. Imprecision of estimates of effect obtained with small numbers is a key reason for valuing research synthesis and metaanalysis over individual trial results [17]. Perhaps appropriately, given that these methods have been used extensively for over 50 years, the Cochrane Collaboration (www.thecochranelibrary.com) has now published an overview of systematic reviews of single-dose oral analgesics in acute pain [15]. The overview included 35 separate Cochrane reviews of single-dose oral analgesics tested at different doses in acute postoperative pain models; the reviews included about 350 individual studies with about 45,000 patients. It updates and extends the Oxford league table of analgesics in acute pain (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/ painpag/acutrev/analgesics/leagtab.html). A useful time, then, for a good look at what we have.

Chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer in the elderly population.

Abstract: Background Approximately 50% of patients with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are over 70 years of age at diagnosis. Despite this fact, these patients are underrepresented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). As a consequence, the most appropriate regimens for these patients are controversial, and the role of single-agent or combination therapy is unclear. In this setting, a critical systematic review of RCTs in this group of patients is warranted. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of different cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens for previously untreated elderly patients with advanced (stage IIIB and IV) NSCLC. To also assess the impact of cytotoxic chemotherapy on quality of life. Search methods We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1966 to 31 October 2014), EMBASE (1974 to 31 October 2014), and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1982 to 31 October 2014). In addition, we handsearched the proceedings of major conferences, reference lists from relevant resources, and the ClinicalTrial.gov database. Selection criteria We included only RCTs that compared non-platinum single-agent therapy versus non-platinum combination therapy, or non-platinum therapy versus platinum combination therapy in patients over 70 years of age with advanced NSCLC. We allowed inclusion of RCTs specifically designed for the elderly population and those designed for elderly subgroup analyses. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed search results, and a third review author resolved disagreements. We analyzed the following endpoints: overall survival (OS), one-year survival rate (1yOS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), major adverse events, and quality of life (QoL). Main results We included 51 trials in the review: non-platinum single-agent therapy versus non-platinum combination therapy (seven trials) and non-platinum combination therapy versus platinum combination therapy (44 trials). Non-platinum single-agent versus non-platinum combination therapy Low-quality evidence suggests that these treatments have similar effects on overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.17; participants = 1062; five RCTs), 1yOS (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.07; participants = 992; four RCTs), and PFS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07; participants = 942; four RCTs). Non-platinum combination therapy may better improve ORR compared with non-platinum single-agent therapy (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.26; participants = 1014; five RCTs; low-quality evidence). Differences in effects on major adverse events between treatment groups were as follows: anemia: RR 1.10, 95% 0.53 to 2.31; participants = 983; four RCTs; very low-quality evidence; neutropenia: RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.65; participants = 983; four RCTs; low-quality evidence; and thrombocytopenia: RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.89; participants = 914; three RCTs; very low-quality evidence. Only two RCTs assessed quality of life; however, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis because of the paucity of available data. Non-platinum therapy versus platinum combination therapy Platinum combination therapy probably improves OS (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.85; participants = 1705; 13 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence), 1yOS (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96; participants = 813; 13 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence), and ORR (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.85; participants = 1432; 11 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence) compared with non-platinum therapies. Platinum combination therapy may also improve PFS, although our confidence in this finding is limited because the quality of evidence was low (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93; participants = 1273; nine RCTs). Effects on major adverse events between treatment groups were as follows: anemia: RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.76; participants = 1437; 11 RCTs; low-quality evidence; thrombocytopenia: RR 3.59, 95% CI 2.22 to 5.82; participants = 1260; nine RCTs; low-quality evidence; fatigue: RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.38; participants = 1150; seven RCTs; emesis: RR 3.64, 95% CI 1.82 to 7.29; participants = 1193; eight RCTs; and peripheral neuropathy: RR 7.02, 95% CI 2.42 to 20.41; participants = 776; five RCTs; low-quality evidence. Only five RCTs assessed QoL; however, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis because of the paucity of available data. Authors' conclusions In people over the age of 70 with advanced NSCLC who do not have significant co-morbidities, increased survival with platinum combination therapy needs to be balanced against higher risk of major adverse events when compared with non-platinum therapy. For people who are not suitable candidates for platinum treatment, we have found low-quality evidence suggesting that non-platinum combination and single-agent therapy regimens have similar effects on survival. We are uncertain as to the comparability of their adverse event profiles. Additional evidence on quality of life gathered from additional studies is needed to help inform decision making.

Behavioural and cognitive behavioural training interventions for assisting foster carers in the management of difficult behaviour

Abstract: Behavioural and cognitive behavioural training interventions for assisting foster carers in the management of difficult behaviour - no strong evidence yetProviding training for foster carers is thought to enhance caring attitudes and skills, help foster carers deal more effectively with foster children's behaviour, and decrease foster carer attrition Although training programs have proliferated, there has been minimal evaluative research to determine whether they are effectiveThis review attempted to determine the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural training interventions Only six trials involving 463 foster carers were included Results suggest little evidence of effect on looked-after children, foster carers and fostering agency outcomes