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.

Amantadine and rimantadine for influenza A in adults

Abstract: Background Amantadine hydrochloride (amantadine) and rimantadine hydrochloride (rimantadine) have antiviral properties, but they are not widely used due to a lack of knowledge of their potential value and concerns about possible adverse effects. This review was first published in 1999 and updated for the fourth time in April 2008. Objectives The objective of this review was to assess the efficacy, effectiveness and safety ('effects') of amantadine and rimantadine in healthy adults. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to April Week 4, 2008), EMBASE (1990 to April 2008) and reference lists of articles. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing amantadine and/or rimantadine with placebo, control medication or no intervention, or comparing doses or schedules of amantadine and/or rimantadine in healthy adults. Data collection and analysis For prophylaxis (prevention) trials we analysed the numbers of participants with clinical influenza (influenza-like-illness or ILI) or with confirmed influenza A and adverse effects. Analysis for treatment trials was of the mean duration of fever, length of hospital stay and adverse effects. Main results Amantadine prevented 25% of ILI cases (95% confidence interval (CI) 13% to 36%), and 61% of influenza A cases (95% CI 35% to 76%). Amantadine reduced duration of fever by one day (95% CI 0.7 to 1.2). Rimantadine demonstrated comparable effectiveness, but there were fewer trials and the results for prophylaxis were not statistically significant. Both amantadine and rimantadine induced significant gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects. Adverse effects of the central nervous system and study withdrawals were significantly more common with amantadine than rimantadine. Neither drug affected the rate of viral shedding from the nose or the course of asymptomatic influenza. Authors' conclusions Amantadine and rimantadine have comparable efficacy and effectiveness in relieving or treating symptoms of influenza A in healthy adults, although rimantadine induces fewer adverse effects than amantadine. The effectiveness of both drugs in interrupting transmission is probably low. Resistance of influenza viruses to amantadine is a serious worldwide problem as shown by recent virological surveillances. Both drugs have adverse gastrointestinal (stomach and gut) effects, but amantadine can also have serious effects on the nervous system. They should only be used in an emergency when all other measures fail.

Problems in the Design and Reporting of Trials of Antifungal Agents Encountered During Meta-analysis

Abstract: Meta-analyses may become biased if the reported data in the individual trials are biased and if overlap among trials cannot be identified. We describe the unanticipated problems we encountered in collecting data for a meta-analysis comparing a new antifungal agent, fluconazole, with amphotericin B in patients with cancer complicated by neutropenia. In 3 large trials that comprised 43% of the patients identified for the meta-analysis, results for amphotericin B were combined with results for nystatin in a "polyene" group. Because nystatin is recognized as an ineffective drug in these circumstances, this approach creates a bias in favor of fluconazole. Furthermore, 79% of the patients were randomized to receive oral amphotericin B, which is poorly absorbed and not an established treatment, in contrast to intravenous amphotericin B, which was administered in 4 of 5 placebo-controlled trials, or 86% of patients. It was unclear whether there was overlap among the "polyene" trials, and it is possible that results from single-center trials were included in multicenter trial reports. We were unable to obtain information to clarify these issues from the trial authors or the manufacturer of fluconazole. Two of 11 responding authors replied that the data were with the drug manufacturer and two indicated that they did not have access to their data because of change of affiliation. In the meta-analyses, fluconazole and amphotericin B (mostly given orally) had similar effects (13 trials), whereas nystatin was no better than placebo (3 trials). Since individual trials are rarely conclusive, investigators, institutions, and pharmaceutical companies should provide essential details about their work to ensure that meta-analyses can accurately reflect the studies conducted and that patients will realize maximum benefits from treatments. We recommend that investigators keep copies of their trial data to help facilitate accurate and unbiased meta-analyses.

Underrepresentation of Elderly People in Randomised Controlled Trials. The Example of Trials of 4 Widely Prescribed Drugs

Abstract: Background We aimed to determine the representation of elderly people in published reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We focused on trials of 4 medications—pioglitazone, rosuvastatin, risedronate, and valsartan—frequently used by elderly patients with chronic medical conditions. Methods and Findings We selected all reports of RCTs indexed in PubMed from 1966 to April 2008 evaluating one of the 4 medications of interest. Estimates of the community-based “on-treatment” population were from a national health insurance database (SNIIR-AM) covering approximately 86% of the population in France. From this database, we evaluated data claims from January 2006 to December 2007 for 1,958,716 patients who received one of the medications of interest for more than 6 months. Of the 155 RCT reports selected, only 3 studies were exclusively of elderly patients (2 assessing valsartan; 1 risedronate). In only 4 of 37 reports (10.8%) for pioglitazone, 4 of 22 (18.2%) for risedronate, 3 of 29 (10.3%) for rosuvastatine and 9 of 67 (13.4%) for valsartan, the proportion of patients aged 65 or older was within or above that treated in clinical practice. In 62.2% of the reports for pioglitazone, 40.9% for risedronate, 37.9% for rosuvastatine, and 70.2% for valsartan, the proportion of patients aged 65 or older was lower than half that in the treated population. The representation of elderly people did not differ by publication date or sample size. Conclusions Elderly patients are poorly represented in RCTs of drugs they are likely to receive.

The nature of evidence resources and knowledge translation for health promotion practitioners

Abstract: Governments and other public health agencies have become increasingly interested in evidence-informed policy and practice. Translating research evidence into programmatic change has proved challenging and the evidence around how to effectively promote and facilitate this process is still relatively limited. This paper presents the findings from an evaluation of a series of evidence-based health promotion resources commissioned by the Victorian Department of Human Services. The evaluation used qualitative methods to explore how practitioners for whom the resources were intended, viewed and used them. Document and literature review and analysis, and a series of key informant interviews and focus groups were conducted. The findings clearly demonstrate that the resources are unlikely to act as agents for change unless they are linked to a knowledge management process that includes practitioner engagement. This paper also considers the potential role of knowledge brokers in helping to identify and translate evidence into practice. Language: en

Challenges in meta-analyses with observational studies

Abstract: Objective Meta-analyses of observational studies are frequently published in the literature, but they are generally considered suboptimal to those involving randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. This is due to the increased risk of biases that observational studies may entail as well as because of the high heterogeneity that might be present. In this article, we highlight aspects of meta-analyses with observational studies that need more careful consideration in comparison to meta-analyses of RCTs. Methods We present an overview of recommendations from the literature with respect to how the different steps of a meta-analysis involving observational studies should be comprehensively conducted. We focus more on issues arising at the step of the quantitative synthesis, in terms of handling heterogeneity and biases. We briefly describe some sophisticated synthesis methods, which may allow for more flexible modelling approaches than common meta-analysis models. We illustrate the issues encountered in the presence of observational studies using an example from mental health, which assesses the risk of myocardial infarction in antipsychotic drug users. Results The increased heterogeneity observed among studies challenges the interpretation of the diamond, while the inclusion of short exposure studies may lead to an exaggerated risk for myocardial infarction in this population. Conclusions In the presence of observational study designs, prior to synthesis, investigators should carefully consider whether all studies at hand are able to answer the same clinical question. The potential for a quantitative synthesis should be guided through examination of the amount of clinical and methodological heterogeneity and assessment of possible biases.