当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Clinical adverse effects of endothelin receptor antagonists: Insights from the meta-analysis of 4894 patients from 24 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials

文献详情

资源类型:
机构: [a]Department of Pharmacy, Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Tongji Medical College, Wuhan, China [b]Department of Pharmacy, RenJi Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China [c]Department of Cardiology, RenJi Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai, China [d]School of Pharmacy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China [e]Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China [f]Geriatric ICU, Jiangsu Province Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Adverse drug event Endothelin Endothelin receptor antagonists Meta-analysis

摘要:
Background-Evidence of the clinical safety of endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) is limited and derived mainly from individual trials; therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis. Methods and Results-After systematic searches of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and the ClinicalTrials.gov website, randomized controlled trials with patients receiving ERAs (bosentan, macitentan, or ambrisentan) in at least 1 treatment group were included. All reported adverse events of ERAs were evaluated. Summary relative risks and 95% CIs were calculated using random- or fixed-effects models according to between-study heterogeneity. In total, 24 randomized trials including 4894 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that the incidence of abnormal liver function (7.91% versus 2.84%; risk ratio [RR] 2.38, 95% CI 1.36-4.18), peripheral edema (14.36% versus 9.68%; RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.20-1.74), and anemia (6.23% versus 2.44%; RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.78-4.07) was significantly higher in the ERA group compared with placebo. In comparisons of individual ERAs with placebo, bosentan (RR 3.78, 95% CI 2.42-5.91) but not macitentan (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.42- 3.31) significantly increased the risk of abnormal liver function, whereas ambrisentan (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.45) significantly decreased that risk. Bosentan (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.06-2.03) and ambrisentan (RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.40-2.91) but not macitentan (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.81-1.46) significantly increased the risk of peripheral edema. Bosentan (RR 3.09, 95% CI 1.52-6.30) and macitentan (RR 2.63, 95% CI 1.54-4.47) but not ambrisentan (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.20-8.48) significantly increased the risk of anemia. ERAs were not found to increase other reported adverse events compared with placebo. Conclusions-The present meta-analysis showed that the main adverse effects of treatment with ERAs were hepatic transaminitis (bosentan), peripheral edema (bosentan and ambrisentan), and anemia (bosentan and macitentan). © 2016 The Authors.

基金:
语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2015]版:
大类 | 2 区 医学
小类 | 3 区 心脏和心血管系统
最新[2025]版:
大类 | 1 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 心脏和心血管系统
第一作者:
第一作者机构: [a]Department of Pharmacy, Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Tongji Medical College, Wuhan, China
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:17069 今日访问量:2 总访问量:918 更新日期:2025-04-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 首都医科大学宣武医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:北京市西城区长椿街45号宣武医院