| Literature DB >> 25079927 |
Mario Fioravanti1, Taku Nakashima2, Jun Xu3, Amit Garg4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety profile of nicergoline compared with placebo and other active agents from published randomised controlled trials.Entities:
Keywords: Ergot derivatives; Ergotism; Fibrosis; Meta-analysis; Nicergoline
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25079927 PMCID: PMC4120366 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005090
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1PRISMA flow for included studies.
Study methods for included randomised controlled trials
| Study name | Study duration | Country | Blinding | Intervention | Comparator | Daily dose of nicergoline (mg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arrigo | 14 weeks | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Battaglia | 6 months | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Battaglia | 6 months | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Ergot mesylates | 60 |
| Battaglia | 12 months | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Bes | 24 months | France | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Bossi | – | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Buflomedil | 8 |
| Brola | 1 month | Poland | Single-blind | Nicergoline | Pentoxifylline | 30 |
| Cascone | 1 month | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 15 |
| Colombeau and Ballanger | 15 days | France | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 40 |
| Crook | 6 months | USA | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Dubreuil | 1 month | France | Double-blind | Nicergoline | GBE | NR |
| Felisati | 3 months | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Forette | 3 weeks | France | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 30 |
| Gessner | 12 weeks | Germany | Double-blind | Nicergoline | GBE | 15 |
| Herrmann | 6 months | Germany | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Kugler and Meurer-Krull | 6 months | Germany | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Dihydroergotamine | 30 |
| Lu | 12 weeks | China | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Aniracetam | 60 |
| Marolda | 20 days | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Eburnamonine | 15–20 |
| Materna | 12 weeks | Germany | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Flunarizine | 10–30 |
| Nakashima | 6 months | Japan | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Imidapril | 15 |
| Nappi | 12 months | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Nishiyama | 4 weeks | Japan | Open-label | Nicergoline | Placebo | 45 |
| Pilkowska | 3 months | Poland | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Pogliani 1979 | 3 months | Germany | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 15 |
| Ronchi | 6 days | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | |
| Saletu | 8 weeks | Austria | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 30–60 |
| Setyopranoto | – | Indonesia | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Winblad | 6 months | Europe | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Placebo | 60 |
| Zucconi and Terzi Bolaffio | 1 month | Italy | Double-blind | Nicergoline | Dihydroergotoxine | 2 intramuscular |
GBE, ginkgo biloba extract; NR, not reported.
Figure 2Results of meta-analysis, all withdrawals: nicergoline versus placebo.
Meta-analysis of withdrawal rate across included studies
| Outcome | Intervention | Comparator | Studies | N | Fixed effects | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR (95% CI) | p Value | I2 (%) | |||||
| Total withdrawals | Nicergoline | Placebo | 8 | 1234 | 0.92 (0.70 to 1.21) | 0.57 | 0 |
| Nicergoline | Active agents | 3 | 201 | 0.45 (0.10 to 1.95) | 0.28 | 18 | |
| Withdrawals due to AE | Nicergoline | Placebo | 3 | 565 | 1.13 (0.61 to 2.09)* | 0.7 | 0 |
*RR value greater than 1 denotes higher rate of AEs with nicergoline compared with the comparator drug and a value less than 1 denotes vice versa.
AE, adverse event.
Meta-analysis of overall AEs
| Outcome | Intervention | Comparator | Studies | N | Fixed effects | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR (95% CI) | p Value | I2 (%) | |||||
| Any AE | Nicergoline | Placebo | 10 | 1448 | 1.05 (0.93 to 1.20)* | 0.42 | 0 |
| Any AE | Nicergoline | Active agents | 4 | 292 | 1.19 (0.71 to 2.01)* | 0.51 | 5 |
| Any AE | Nicergoline | Ergot derivatives | 2 | 200 | 1.22 (0.63 to 2.34)* | 0.56 | 19 |
| Any SAE | Nicergoline | Placebo | 2 | 482 | 0.85 (0.50 to 1.45) | 0.54 | 35 |
| Anxiety | Nicergoline | Placebo | 2 | 482 | 0.59 (0.39 to 0.88) | 0.01 | 0 |
| Diarrhoea | Nicergoline | Placebo | 2 | 188 | 0.85 (0.24 to 3.05) | 0.8 | 0 |
| Diarrhoea | Nicergoline | Ergot derivatives | 2 | 200 | 0.99 (0.14 to 6.92) | 0.99 | 0 |
| Dizziness | Nicergoline | Placebo | 3 | 260 | 0.63 (0.15 to 2.57) | 0.51 | 0 |
| Dizziness | Nicergoline | Active agents | 2 | 116 | 1.00 (0.18 to 5.58)* | 1.0 | 0 |
| Drowsiness | Nicergoline | Placebo | 2 | 442 | 0.34 (0.05 to 2.12) | 0.24 | 0 |
| Fatigue | Nicergoline | Placebo | 2 | 378 | 0.71 (0.14 to 3.53) | 0.68 | 18 |
| Fatigue | Nicergoline | Active agents | 3 | 260 | 1.24 (0.35 to 4.47)* | 0.74 | 0 |
| Fatigue | Nicergoline | Ergot derivatives | 2 | 200 | 1.79 (0.40 to 7.98)* | 0.45 | 0 |
| Gastric upset | Nicergoline | Placebo | 6 | 1037 | 0.94 (0.58 to 1.52) | 0.8 | 0 |
| Hot flushes | Nicergoline | All comparisons | 3 | 470 | 3.65 (0.61 to 21.93) | 0.16 | 0 |
| Headache | Nicergoline | Placebo | 5 | 1004 | 1.28 (0.63 to 2.60)* | 0.24 | 0 |
| Hypotension | Nicergoline | Placebo | 2 | 378 | 1.49 (0.26 to 8.72)* | 0.66 | 0 |
| Insomnia | Nicergoline | Placebo | 3 | 498 | 1.81 (0.39 to 8.29)* | 0.45 | 0 |
| Itching | Nicergoline | All comparisons | 2 | 108 | 3.23 (0.35 to 30.08)* | 0.3 | 0 |
*RR value greater than 1 denotes higher rate of AEs with nicergoline compared with the comparator drug and a value less than 1 denotes vice versa.
AE, adverse event; SAE, serious AE.
Figure 3Results of meta-analysis, any adverse events: nicergoline versus placebo.