论文部分内容阅读
目的采用系统评价方法,评估干扰素(IFN)治疗蕈样霉菌病(MF)的疗效及安全性。方法计算机检索截止2010年5月的Cochrane协作网系统评价方法,纳入所有比较IFN与其他方法治疗MF的随机对照试验及临床对照试验进行质量评价,采用RevMan 5.0.24软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入6篇符合标准的已发表文献,包括142例受试者。Meta分析结果显示:IFNα-单独使用对MF的疗效优于安慰剂组[OR=69.36,95%CI(3.71~1 296.64)]及地精丹方剂[OR=35.53,95%CI(1.78~710.56)];而IFNα-与胸腺肽[OR=15.11,95%CI(0.71~322.61)]及IFNα-+阿维A酯[OR=3.10,95%CI(0.79~12.12)]的临床疗效差异无统计学意义;IFN-γ联合窄谱中波紫外线(NB-UVB)治疗与单用NB-UVB的临床疗效差异无统计学意义[OR=15.00,95%CI(0.46~485.32)]。90%的患者出现轻度“流感样症状”的不良反应,多可缓解及消退。结论 IFN是目前治疗MF的一线用药,疗效确切且大部分患者耐受性较好。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of interferon (IFN) in the treatment of mycosis fungoides (MF) by systematic reviews. METHODS: The Cochrane Collaboration systematic review was performed by computer as of May 2010 to evaluate the quality of all randomized controlled trials and controlled trials comparing MF with IFN and other treatments. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0.24 software. Results A total of 6 published articles that met the criteria were included, including 142 subjects. The results of Meta analysis showed that the effect of IFNα-alone on MF was better than that of placebo [OR = 69.36,95% CI 3.71-1 296.64] and gnomes [OR = 35.53,95% CI 1.78-710.56] ], While there was no significant difference in the clinical efficacy between IFNα- and thymosin [OR = 15.11,95% CI (0.71 ~ 322.61)] and IFNα- + adevone ester [OR = 3.10,95% CI (0.79-12.12) There was no significant difference in clinical efficacy between IFN-γ combined with NB-UVB and NB-UVB alone [OR = 15.00,95% CI (0.46 ~ 485.32)]. 90% of patients with mild “flu-like symptoms” adverse reactions, and more can be alleviated and dissipated. Conclusion IFN is the first-line treatment of MF, the exact effect and most patients with better tolerance.