Block-and-replace regimen versus titration of antithyroid drugs: a recent meta-analysis.

Endokrynologia Polska Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-18 DOI:10.5603/ep.99555
Ana-Maria Stancu, Corin Badiu
{"title":"Block-and-replace regimen versus titration of antithyroid drugs: a recent meta-analysis.","authors":"Ana-Maria Stancu, Corin Badiu","doi":"10.5603/ep.99555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Drug therapy for Graves' disease (GD) is the first-line treatment in Europe. The use of a specific regimen for the administration of anti-thyroid drugs (ATDs) is still controversial. The objective was to compare block-and-replace therapy (BRT) with a titration (T) regimen in terms of incidence of overt hypothyroidism and development of Graves' orbitopathy (GO) over 18 months of treatment.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Two databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library) and reference lists were searched. Prospective and retrospective observational cohort studies were included. Data collection and analysis were performed independently by 2 authors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two studies with 716 GD patients (40.36% treated with BRT, 59.64% with T regimen) were included. No statistically significant differences were observed between the ATDs regimens used in terms of incidence of overt hypothyroidism during 18 months of treatment [Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) odds ratio (OR): 1.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-3.16, p-value = 0.24]. GD patients who followed BRT were less likely to achieve control of thyroid function than patients on T regimen (M-H OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.34-0.88, p = 0.01). One study reported fewer thyroid function tests (TFT) during BRT than during the T regimen. The other study included patients without GO at baseline and reported a lower incidence of GO during BRT than in the T regimen (9.1% versus 17.8%), with no statistical difference between the 2 regimens (M-H OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.19-1.14, p = 0.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>BRT may be more useful than the T regimen for patients with complicated GD or for those who required fewer TFTs.</p>","PeriodicalId":93990,"journal":{"name":"Endokrynologia Polska","volume":" ","pages":"317-327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endokrynologia Polska","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/ep.99555","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Drug therapy for Graves' disease (GD) is the first-line treatment in Europe. The use of a specific regimen for the administration of anti-thyroid drugs (ATDs) is still controversial. The objective was to compare block-and-replace therapy (BRT) with a titration (T) regimen in terms of incidence of overt hypothyroidism and development of Graves' orbitopathy (GO) over 18 months of treatment.

Material and methods: Two databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library) and reference lists were searched. Prospective and retrospective observational cohort studies were included. Data collection and analysis were performed independently by 2 authors.

Results: Two studies with 716 GD patients (40.36% treated with BRT, 59.64% with T regimen) were included. No statistically significant differences were observed between the ATDs regimens used in terms of incidence of overt hypothyroidism during 18 months of treatment [Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) odds ratio (OR): 1.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-3.16, p-value = 0.24]. GD patients who followed BRT were less likely to achieve control of thyroid function than patients on T regimen (M-H OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.34-0.88, p = 0.01). One study reported fewer thyroid function tests (TFT) during BRT than during the T regimen. The other study included patients without GO at baseline and reported a lower incidence of GO during BRT than in the T regimen (9.1% versus 17.8%), with no statistical difference between the 2 regimens (M-H OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.19-1.14, p = 0.10).

Conclusion: BRT may be more useful than the T regimen for patients with complicated GD or for those who required fewer TFTs.

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
抗甲状腺药物的阻滞替代疗法与滴定疗法:最新荟萃分析。
导言:在欧洲,药物治疗是巴塞杜氏病(GD)的一线治疗方法。关于抗甲状腺药物(ATDs)的具体用药方案仍存在争议。该研究旨在比较阻滞替代疗法(BRT)与滴定疗法(T)在治疗18个月期间明显甲状腺功能减退症和巴塞杜氏眼病(GO)的发生率:对两个数据库(PubMed、Cochrane Library)和参考文献列表进行了检索。纳入了前瞻性和回顾性观察性队列研究。数据收集和分析由两位作者独立完成:结果:共纳入了两项研究,716 名广东患者(40.36% 接受了 BRT 治疗,59.64% 接受了 T 方案治疗)。在治疗的18个月期间,所采用的ATD方案在明显甲减的发生率方面没有发现明显的统计学差异[Mantel-Haenszel(M-H)几率比(OR):1.54,95%置信区间(CI):0.75-3.16,P值=0.24]。与接受T方案治疗的患者相比,接受BRT治疗的GD患者甲状腺功能得到控制的可能性较低(M-H OR:0.55,95% CI:0.34-0.88,P = 0.01)。一项研究报告称,BRT期间的甲状腺功能检测(TFT)次数少于T方案。另一项研究纳入了基线无GO的患者,并报告BRT期间GO的发生率低于T方案(9.1%对17.8%),两种方案之间无统计学差异(M-H OR:0.47,95% CI:0.19-1.14,P = 0.10):结论:对于复杂的 GD 患者或需要较少 TFT 的患者,BRT 可能比 T 方案更有用。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
4-phenylbutyric acid attenuates diabetes mellitus secondary to thiamine-responsive megaloblastic anaemia syndrome by modulating endoplasmic reticulum stress. Advances in imaging examination of bone density and bone quality. Antibodies against the receptor for insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1RAb), insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) in the serum of patients with Graves' and Basedow's disease with and without orbitopathy. Assessment of fracture risk based on FRAX score and Polish guidelines in patients with newly diagnosed osteoporosis. Fracture risk assessment based on FRAX scores and Polish guidelines in patients with newly diagnosed osteopaenia.
×
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