抗抑郁药对戒烟的疗效和安全性:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q3 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY Addiction Biology Pub Date : 2023-07-19 DOI:10.1111/adb.13303
Xinxin Deng, Xue Shang, Kangle Guo, Liying Zhou, Yongsheng Wang, Yanan Wu, Shanshan Liang, Fenfen E, Wendi Liu, Ziyi Wang, Xiuxia Li, Kehu Yang
{"title":"抗抑郁药对戒烟的疗效和安全性:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析","authors":"Xinxin Deng,&nbsp;Xue Shang,&nbsp;Kangle Guo,&nbsp;Liying Zhou,&nbsp;Yongsheng Wang,&nbsp;Yanan Wu,&nbsp;Shanshan Liang,&nbsp;Fenfen E,&nbsp;Wendi Liu,&nbsp;Ziyi Wang,&nbsp;Xiuxia Li,&nbsp;Kehu Yang","doi":"10.1111/adb.13303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT<sub>S</sub>) on different antidepressant interventions involving smoking cessation in populations (September 2022). The STATA 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis. The Cochrane bias risk tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the evidence credibility for the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation. In all, 107 RCTs involving 42 744 patients were included. Seven studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. All trials reported 18 interventions and 153 pairwise comparisons were generated. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo, varenicline + bupropion (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [2.34, 5.34]), selegiline + nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [1.20, 11.92]), nortriptyline + NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.21, 4.47), nortriptyline (OR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.11,2.26]), naltrexone + bupropion (OR = 3.84, 95% CI [1.39, 10.61]), bupropion + NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.87, 2.81]) and bupropion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI [1.53, 1.89]) showed benefits with respect to smoking cessation. In addition, bupropion + NRT showed better effects than bupropion (OR = 1.35, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]) and NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI [1.13, 1.69]) alone. The final cumulative ranking curve showed that varenicline + bupropion was the most likely to be the best intervention. There was moderate- to very-low-certainty evidence that most interventions showed benefits for smoking cessation compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapies. Varenicline + bupropion had a higher probability of being the best intervention for smoking cessation.</p>","PeriodicalId":7289,"journal":{"name":"Addiction Biology","volume":"28 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of antidepressants for smoking cessation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Xinxin Deng,&nbsp;Xue Shang,&nbsp;Kangle Guo,&nbsp;Liying Zhou,&nbsp;Yongsheng Wang,&nbsp;Yanan Wu,&nbsp;Shanshan Liang,&nbsp;Fenfen E,&nbsp;Wendi Liu,&nbsp;Ziyi Wang,&nbsp;Xiuxia Li,&nbsp;Kehu Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/adb.13303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT<sub>S</sub>) on different antidepressant interventions involving smoking cessation in populations (September 2022). The STATA 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis. The Cochrane bias risk tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the evidence credibility for the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation. In all, 107 RCTs involving 42 744 patients were included. Seven studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. All trials reported 18 interventions and 153 pairwise comparisons were generated. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo, varenicline + bupropion (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [2.34, 5.34]), selegiline + nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [1.20, 11.92]), nortriptyline + NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.21, 4.47), nortriptyline (OR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.11,2.26]), naltrexone + bupropion (OR = 3.84, 95% CI [1.39, 10.61]), bupropion + NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.87, 2.81]) and bupropion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI [1.53, 1.89]) showed benefits with respect to smoking cessation. In addition, bupropion + NRT showed better effects than bupropion (OR = 1.35, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]) and NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI [1.13, 1.69]) alone. The final cumulative ranking curve showed that varenicline + bupropion was the most likely to be the best intervention. There was moderate- to very-low-certainty evidence that most interventions showed benefits for smoking cessation compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapies. Varenicline + bupropion had a higher probability of being the best intervention for smoking cessation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Addiction Biology\",\"volume\":\"28 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Addiction Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/adb.13303\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction Biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/adb.13303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了评估抗抑郁药在帮助吸烟者戒烟方面的有效性、安全性和耐受性,我们检索了五个数据库,检索了涉及人群戒烟的不同抗抑郁药干预措施的随机对照试验(RCTS)(2022年9月)。采用STATA 15.1软件进行网络meta分析。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险,使用CINeMA评估不同干预措施对戒烟效果的证据可信度。共纳入107项随机对照试验,共42 744例患者。7项研究被评为低偏倚风险。所有试验均报告了18项干预措施和153项两两比较。网络meta分析显示,与安慰剂相比,伐尼克兰+安非他酮(OR = 3.53, 95% CI[2.34, 5.34])、selegiline +尼古丁替代疗法(NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI[1.20, 11.92])、去甲替林+ NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI[1.21, 4.47])、去甲替林(OR = 1.58, 95% CI[1.11,2.26])、纳曲酮+安非他酮(OR = 3.84, 95% CI[1.39, 10.61])、安非他酮+ NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI[1.87, 2.81])和安非他酮(OR = 1.70, 95% CI[1.53, 1.83])、[1.89])在戒烟方面显示出益处。此外,安非他酮+ NRT的治疗效果优于单独安非他酮(OR = 1.35, 95% CI[1.12, 1.64])和NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI[1.13, 1.69])。最终的累积排序曲线显示,伐尼克兰+安非他酮最有可能成为最佳干预措施。有中等到极低确定性的证据表明,与安慰剂相比,大多数干预措施都显示出戒烟的益处,包括单一疗法和联合疗法。伐尼克兰+安非他酮更有可能成为戒烟的最佳干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Efficacy and safety of antidepressants for smoking cessation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants in helping smokers quit tobacco dependence, five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTS) on different antidepressant interventions involving smoking cessation in populations (September 2022). The STATA 15.1 software was used to perform network meta-analysis. The Cochrane bias risk tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and CINeMA was used to evaluate the evidence credibility for the effect of different interventions on smoking cessation. In all, 107 RCTs involving 42 744 patients were included. Seven studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. All trials reported 18 interventions and 153 pairwise comparisons were generated. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with placebo, varenicline + bupropion (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [2.34, 5.34]), selegiline + nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (OR = 3.78, 95% CI [1.20, 11.92]), nortriptyline + NRT (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.21, 4.47), nortriptyline (OR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.11,2.26]), naltrexone + bupropion (OR = 3.84, 95% CI [1.39, 10.61]), bupropion + NRT (OR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.87, 2.81]) and bupropion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI [1.53, 1.89]) showed benefits with respect to smoking cessation. In addition, bupropion + NRT showed better effects than bupropion (OR = 1.35, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]) and NRT (OR = 1.38, 95% CI [1.13, 1.69]) alone. The final cumulative ranking curve showed that varenicline + bupropion was the most likely to be the best intervention. There was moderate- to very-low-certainty evidence that most interventions showed benefits for smoking cessation compared with placebo, including monotherapy and combination therapies. Varenicline + bupropion had a higher probability of being the best intervention for smoking cessation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Addiction Biology
Addiction Biology 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
118
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Addiction Biology is focused on neuroscience contributions and it aims to advance our understanding of the action of drugs of abuse and addictive processes. Papers are accepted in both animal experimentation or clinical research. The content is geared towards behavioral, molecular, genetic, biochemical, neuro-biological and pharmacology aspects of these fields. Addiction Biology includes peer-reviewed original research reports and reviews. Addiction Biology is published on behalf of the Society for the Study of Addiction to Alcohol and other Drugs (SSA). Members of the Society for the Study of Addiction receive the Journal as part of their annual membership subscription.
期刊最新文献
N-acetylcysteine as a treatment for substance use cravings: A meta-analysis The potential mechanisms underlying the effect of acute alcohol use on duration perception Key insights into cannabis-cancer pathobiology and genotoxicity Multi-domain predictors of grip strength differentiate individuals with and without alcohol use disorder Integration of pharmacochemistry, pharmacodynamics and metabolomics to reveal active ingredients and mechanism of Nan Bao detox capsule alleviating methamphetamine addiction
×
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