Usha Rani Somaraju1, Arturo Solis-Moya. 1. Department of Biochemistry, Malla Reddy Medical College for Women, Suraram Main Road, Jeedimetla Qutbullapur Municipality, Hyderabad, India, 500 055.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most people with cystic fibrosis (80% to 90%) need pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy to prevent malnutrition. Enzyme preparations need to be taken whenever food is taken, and the dose needs to be adjusted according to the food consumed. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy is needed to guide clinical practice, as there is variability between centres with respect to assessment of pancreatic function, time of commencing treatment, dose and choice of supplements. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in children and adults with cystic fibrosis and to compare the efficacy and safety of different formulations of this therapy and their appropriateness in different age groups. Also, to compare the effects of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis according to different diagnostic subgroups (e.g. different ages at introduction of therapy and different categories of pancreatic function). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search: 14 August 2014.We also searched an ongoing trials website and the websites of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture pancreatic enzyme replacements for any additional trials. Most recent search: 12 May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in people of any age, with cystic fibrosis and receiving pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, at any dosage and in any formulation, for a period of not less than four weeks, compared to placebo or other pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy preparations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trials and extracted outcome data. They also assessed the risk of bias of the trials included in the review. MAIN RESULTS: One parallel trial and 11 cross-over trials of children and adults with cystic fibrosis were included in the review. The number of participants in each trial varied between 14 and 129 with a total of 426 participants included in the review. All the included trials were for a duration of four weeks. The included trials had mostly an unclear risk of bias from the randomisation process as the details of this were not given; they also mostly had a high risk of attrition bias and reporting bias.We could not combine data from all the trials as they compared different formulations. Findings from individual studies provided insufficient evidence to determine the size and precision of the effects of different formulations. Ten studies reported information on the review's primary outcome (nutritional status); however, we were only able to combine data from two small cross-over studies (n = 41). The estimated gain in body weight was imprecise, 0.32 kg (95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.67, P = 0.07). Combined data from the same studies gave statistically significant results favouring enteric-coated microspheres over enteric-coated tablets for our secondary outcomes stool frequency, abdominal pain and fecal fat excretion. Data from another single small cross-over study also favoured enteric-coated microspheres over non-enteric-coated tablets with adjuvant cimetidine in terms of stool frequency. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence of benefit from enteric-coated microspheres when compared to non-enteric coated pancreatic enzyme preparations up to one month. In the only comparison where we could combine any data, the fact that these were cross-over studies is likely to underestimate the level of inconsistency between the results of the studies due to over-inflation of confidence intervals from the individual studies.There is no evidence on the long-term effectiveness and risks associated with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. There is also no evidence on the relative dosages of enzymes needed for people with different levels of severity of pancreatic insufficiency, optimum time to start treatment and variations based on differences in meals and meal sizes. There is a need for a properly designed trial that can answer these questions.
BACKGROUND: Most people with cystic fibrosis (80% to 90%) need pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy to prevent malnutrition. Enzyme preparations need to be taken whenever food is taken, and the dose needs to be adjusted according to the food consumed. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy is needed to guide clinical practice, as there is variability between centres with respect to assessment of pancreatic function, time of commencing treatment, dose and choice of supplements. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in children and adults with cystic fibrosis and to compare the efficacy and safety of different formulations of this therapy and their appropriateness in different age groups. Also, to compare the effects of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis according to different diagnostic subgroups (e.g. different ages at introduction of therapy and different categories of pancreatic function). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Most recent search: 14 August 2014.We also searched an ongoing trials website and the websites of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture pancreatic enzyme replacements for any additional trials. Most recent search: 12 May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in people of any age, with cystic fibrosis and receiving pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, at any dosage and in any formulation, for a period of not less than four weeks, compared to placebo or other pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy preparations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trials and extracted outcome data. They also assessed the risk of bias of the trials included in the review. MAIN RESULTS: One parallel trial and 11 cross-over trials of children and adults with cystic fibrosis were included in the review. The number of participants in each trial varied between 14 and 129 with a total of 426 participants included in the review. All the included trials were for a duration of four weeks. The included trials had mostly an unclear risk of bias from the randomisation process as the details of this were not given; they also mostly had a high risk of attrition bias and reporting bias.We could not combine data from all the trials as they compared different formulations. Findings from individual studies provided insufficient evidence to determine the size and precision of the effects of different formulations. Ten studies reported information on the review's primary outcome (nutritional status); however, we were only able to combine data from two small cross-over studies (n = 41). The estimated gain in body weight was imprecise, 0.32 kg (95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.67, P = 0.07). Combined data from the same studies gave statistically significant results favouring enteric-coated microspheres over enteric-coated tablets for our secondary outcomes stool frequency, abdominal pain and fecal fat excretion. Data from another single small cross-over study also favoured enteric-coated microspheres over non-enteric-coated tablets with adjuvant cimetidine in terms of stool frequency. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence of benefit from enteric-coated microspheres when compared to non-enteric coated pancreatic enzyme preparations up to one month. In the only comparison where we could combine any data, the fact that these were cross-over studies is likely to underestimate the level of inconsistency between the results of the studies due to over-inflation of confidence intervals from the individual studies.There is no evidence on the long-term effectiveness and risks associated with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. There is also no evidence on the relative dosages of enzymes needed for people with different levels of severity of pancreatic insufficiency, optimum time to start treatment and variations based on differences in meals and meal sizes. There is a need for a properly designed trial that can answer these questions.
Authors: Ariane Menden; Davane Hall; Coral Hahn-Townsend; Courtney A Broedlow; Utsav Joshi; Andrew Pearson; Fiona Crawford; James E Evans; Nichole Klatt; Stefan Crynen; Michael Mullan; Ghania Ait-Ghezala Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-03-21 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Igor E Khatkov; Igor V Maev; Sayyar R Abdulkhalov; Sergey A Alekseenko; Ruslan B Allikhanov; Igor G Bakulin; Natalia V Bakulina; Andrey U Baranovskiy; Ekaterina V Beloborodova; Elena A Belousova; Sergey E Voskanyan; Lyudmila V Vinokurova; Vladimir B Grinevich; Vladimir V Darvin; Elena A Dubtsova; Tatiana G Dyuzheva; Vyacheslav I Egorov; Mikhail G Efanov; Roman E Izrailov; Vyacheslav L Korobka; Bogdan N Kotiv; Nikolay Yu Kokhanenko; Yury A Kucheryavy; Maria A Livzan; Vladimir K Lyadov; Karine A Nikolskaya; Marina F Osipenko; Victor D Pasechnikov; Ekaterina Yu Plotnikova; Oleg A Sablin; Vladimir I Simanenkov; Victor V Tsvirkun; Vladislav V Tsukanov; Alexey V Shabunin; Dmitry S Bordin; Professional Medical Society Pancreatic Club Russia Journal: Turk J Gastroenterol Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 1.852