Efficacy and Safety of MAO-B Inhibitors Safinamide and Zonisamide in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

IF 7.4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY CNS drugs Pub Date : 2023-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-16 DOI:10.1007/s40263-023-01048-x
Laila Aboulatta, Lara Haidar, Ahmed Abou-Setta, Nicole Askin, Rasheda Rabbani, Alekhya Lavu, Payam Peymani, Ryan Zarychanski, Sherif Eltonsy
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of MAO-B Inhibitors Safinamide and Zonisamide in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Laila Aboulatta, Lara Haidar, Ahmed Abou-Setta, Nicole Askin, Rasheda Rabbani, Alekhya Lavu, Payam Peymani, Ryan Zarychanski, Sherif Eltonsy","doi":"10.1007/s40263-023-01048-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>In Parkinson's disease, safinamide and zonisamide are novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors with a dual mechanism of action involving the inhibition of sodium and calcium channels and the subsequent release of glutamate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy and safety of both drugs compared with placebo on motor symptoms, cognitive function, and quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Scopus, PsycINFO, and trials registries up to March 2023 for randomized controlled trials of adults with Parkinson's disease administered either safinamide or zonisamide and published in English. We excluded single-arm trials or if neither the efficacy nor safety outcomes of interest were reported. Primary outcomes were the change from baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale section III (UPDRS-III) and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included a change from baseline in OFF-time, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 to evaluate quality of life, and Mini-Mental State Examination for cognitive function assessment. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1. Random-effect models were used to calculate the pooled mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses by medication, doses, Parkinson's disease stage, and risk of bias were conducted. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Sensitivity analysis was conducted, and publication bias were evaluated. This meta-analysis was not externally funded, and the protocol is available on the Open Science Framework Registration ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AMNP5 ).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 3570 screened citations, 16 trials met inclusion criteria (4314 patients with Parkinson's disease). Ten safinamide trials were conducted in several countries. Six zonisamide trials were included, five of which were conducted in Japan and one in India. UPDRS Part III scores were significantly lower with both monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors than with placebo (MD = -  2.18; 95% CI -  2.88 to -  1.49; I <sup>2</sup> =63%; n = 14 studies). A subgroup analysis showed a significant improvement in UPDRS-III in safinamide (MD = -  2.10; 95% CI -  3.09 to -  1.11; I<sup>2</sup> = 71%; n = 8 studies) and zonisamide (MD = -  2.31; 95% CI -  3.35 to -  1.27; I<sup>2</sup> = 52%; n = 6 studies) compared with placebo. Monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors significantly decreased OFF-time compared with placebo. No significant differences in cognitive function (Mini-Mental State Examination), whereas an improvement in quality of life (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 scores) was observed. There was no significant difference in incidence rates of serious adverse events among all examined doses of zonisamide and safinamide compared with placebo. Two trials were reported as a high risk of bias and sensitivity analyses confirmed the primary analysis results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Evidence suggests that novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors not only improve motor symptoms but also enhance patients' quality of life. The meta-analysis showed that both medications have a similar safety profile to placebo with regard to serious adverse events. The overall findings emphasize the effectiveness of safinamide and zonisamide in the treatment of Parkinson's disease as adjunct therapy. Further long-term studies examining the impact of these medications on motor and non-motor symptoms are necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":10508,"journal":{"name":"CNS drugs","volume":" ","pages":"941-956"},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CNS drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-023-01048-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: In Parkinson's disease, safinamide and zonisamide are novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors with a dual mechanism of action involving the inhibition of sodium and calcium channels and the subsequent release of glutamate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy and safety of both drugs compared with placebo on motor symptoms, cognitive function, and quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Scopus, PsycINFO, and trials registries up to March 2023 for randomized controlled trials of adults with Parkinson's disease administered either safinamide or zonisamide and published in English. We excluded single-arm trials or if neither the efficacy nor safety outcomes of interest were reported. Primary outcomes were the change from baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale section III (UPDRS-III) and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included a change from baseline in OFF-time, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 to evaluate quality of life, and Mini-Mental State Examination for cognitive function assessment. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1. Random-effect models were used to calculate the pooled mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses by medication, doses, Parkinson's disease stage, and risk of bias were conducted. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Sensitivity analysis was conducted, and publication bias were evaluated. This meta-analysis was not externally funded, and the protocol is available on the Open Science Framework Registration ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AMNP5 ).

Results: Of 3570 screened citations, 16 trials met inclusion criteria (4314 patients with Parkinson's disease). Ten safinamide trials were conducted in several countries. Six zonisamide trials were included, five of which were conducted in Japan and one in India. UPDRS Part III scores were significantly lower with both monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors than with placebo (MD = -  2.18; 95% CI -  2.88 to -  1.49; I 2 =63%; n = 14 studies). A subgroup analysis showed a significant improvement in UPDRS-III in safinamide (MD = -  2.10; 95% CI -  3.09 to -  1.11; I2 = 71%; n = 8 studies) and zonisamide (MD = -  2.31; 95% CI -  3.35 to -  1.27; I2 = 52%; n = 6 studies) compared with placebo. Monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors significantly decreased OFF-time compared with placebo. No significant differences in cognitive function (Mini-Mental State Examination), whereas an improvement in quality of life (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 scores) was observed. There was no significant difference in incidence rates of serious adverse events among all examined doses of zonisamide and safinamide compared with placebo. Two trials were reported as a high risk of bias and sensitivity analyses confirmed the primary analysis results.

Conclusions: Evidence suggests that novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors not only improve motor symptoms but also enhance patients' quality of life. The meta-analysis showed that both medications have a similar safety profile to placebo with regard to serious adverse events. The overall findings emphasize the effectiveness of safinamide and zonisamide in the treatment of Parkinson's disease as adjunct therapy. Further long-term studies examining the impact of these medications on motor and non-motor symptoms are necessary.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
背景与目的:在帕金森病中,沙非胺和唑尼沙胺是新型单胺氧化酶- b抑制剂,具有双重作用机制,包括抑制钠和钙通道以及随后的谷氨酸释放。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是检查两种药物与安慰剂相比对帕金森病患者运动症状、认知功能和生活质量的疗效和安全性。方法:我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane Central、Scopus、PsycINFO和截至2023年3月的试验注册库,检索了使用沙非胺或唑尼沙胺的成年帕金森病患者的随机对照试验,并以英文发表。我们排除了单臂试验,或者没有相关疗效和安全性结果的报道。主要结局是统一帕金森病评定量表第III部分(UPDRS-III)的基线变化和严重不良事件。次要结果包括OFF-time的基线变化,帕金森病问卷39(用于评估生活质量)和认知功能评估的迷你精神状态检查(Mini-Mental State Examination)。meta分析使用Review Manager 5.4.1进行。采用随机效应模型计算合并平均差异(MDs)和95%置信区间(ci)的风险比。按用药、剂量、帕金森病分期和偏倚风险进行亚组分析。我们使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。进行敏感性分析,评价发表偏倚。这项荟萃分析没有外部资助,该方案可在开放科学框架注册(https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AMNP5)上获得。结果:在筛选的3570篇引文中,16项试验符合纳入标准(4314例帕金森病患者)。在几个国家进行了10项沙芬胺试验。其中包括6项佐尼沙胺试验,其中5项在日本进行,1项在印度进行。单胺氧化酶- b抑制剂组UPDRS第三部分评分显著低于安慰剂组(MD = - 2.18;95% CI - 2.88 ~ - 1.49;I 2 =63%;N = 14项研究)。亚组分析显示沙芬胺组UPDRS-III显著改善(MD = - 2.10;95% CI - 3.09 ~ - 1.11;I2 = 71%;n = 8项研究)和唑尼沙胺(MD = - 2.31;95% CI - 3.35 ~ - 1.27;I2 = 52%;N = 6项研究)与安慰剂相比。与安慰剂相比,单胺氧化酶- b抑制剂显著减少了off时间。认知功能(迷你精神状态检查)无显著差异,而生活质量(帕金森病问卷39分)有改善。与安慰剂相比,所有检查剂量的唑尼沙胺和沙非胺的严重不良事件发生率没有显著差异。两项试验报告为高偏倚风险,敏感性分析证实了主要分析结果。结论:有证据表明,新型单胺氧化酶- b抑制剂不仅能改善运动症状,还能提高患者的生活质量。荟萃分析显示,两种药物在严重不良事件方面与安慰剂具有相似的安全性。总的研究结果强调沙非胺和唑尼沙胺作为辅助疗法治疗帕金森病的有效性。进一步的长期研究检查这些药物对运动和非运动症状的影响是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CNS drugs
CNS drugs 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
3.30%
发文量
82
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: CNS Drugs promotes rational pharmacotherapy within the disciplines of clinical psychiatry and neurology. The Journal includes: - Overviews of contentious or emerging issues. - Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on pharmacological approaches to managing neurological and psychiatric illnesses. - Systematic reviews that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. - Adis Drug Reviews of the properties and place in therapy of both newer and established drugs in neurology and psychiatry. - Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies with a strong link to clinical practice, such as clinical pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies, clinical trials, meta-analyses, outcomes research, and pharmacoeconomic and pharmacoepidemiological studies. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in CNS Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
期刊最新文献
Long-Term (12-Month) Safety and Tolerability of STS101 (Dihydroergotamine Nasal Powder) in the Acute Treatment of Migraine: Data from the Phase 3 Open-Label ASCEND Study. Efficacy of Cariprazine in the Psychosis Spectrum: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials in Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder. Research Progress on NMDA Receptor Enhancement Drugs for the Treatment of Depressive Disorder. A Multicenter, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Long-term Safety and Efficacy of Adjunctive Brexpiprazole 2 mg Daily in Japanese Patients with Major Depressive Disorder. Recent Advances in Pharmacologic Treatments of Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Breakthrough in Sight.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1