Page 108 - 《中国药房》2020年22期
P. 108

银杏叶提取物治疗阿尔茨海默病有效性、安全性和经济性的快速

        卫生技术评估                Δ


               *
        任晓蕾 ,刘 一 ,詹轶秋,张春燕,黄 琳,封宇飞(北京大学人民医院药剂科,北京 100044)
                       #
        中图分类号 R742          文献标志码 A           文章编号 1001-0408(2020)22-2786-05
        DOI   10.6039/j.issn.1001-0408.2020.22.17

        摘   要   目的:快速评价银杏叶提取物(EGb)治疗阿尔茨海默病(AD)的有效性、安全性和经济性,为临床药物选择和决策提供循
        证依据。方法:系统检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、中国知网、中国生物医学数据库、万方数据等中英文
        数据库,同时检索国内外快速卫生技术评估(HTA)机构官方网站及相关数据库,检索时限均为建库起至 2020 年 8 月 10 日,收集
        EGb对比安慰剂治疗AD的HTA报告、系统评价/Meta分析和药物经济学研究。筛选文献、提取资料后,分别采用HTA核查清单、
        系统综述质量评价工具量表2、综合卫生经济评价报告标准量表评价纳入HTA报告、系统评价/Meta分析和药物经济学研究的质
        量,采用定性描述方法汇总纳入研究的结论。结果:共纳入9篇文献,其中8篇为系统评价、1篇为药物经济学研究。有效性方面,
        EGb组患者的简易智能状态检查评分、120 mg EGb组患者的阿尔茨海默氏病评估量表-认知分量表(ADAS-Cog)评分与安慰剂组
        比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);EGb组患者的痴呆生活质量量表评分显著高于安慰剂组,简短认知能力测试评分、神经精
        神科问卷(NPI)评分、NPI-照顾者版评分、160 mg EGb 组和 240 mg EGb 组患者的 ADAS-Cog 评分均显著低于对照组(P<0.05)。
        患者的日常生活活动能力(ADL)评分结果不一致,EGb组患者的ADL评分显著低于安慰剂组(P<0.05)或两组比较差异无统计
        学意义(P>0.05);按剂量进行亚组分析结果显示,120 mg EGb 组患者的 ADL 评分与安慰剂组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>
        0.05);而240 mg EGb组患者的ADL评分显著低于安慰剂组(P<0.05)。临床总体印象改变(CGIC)评分的亚组分析结果显示,小
        于200 mg EGb和治疗26周时EGb组患者的CGIC评分与安慰剂组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);大于200 mg EGb和治疗
        24周时EGb组患者的CGIC评分均显著高于安慰剂组(P<0.05)。安全性方面,EGb组患者的不良反应发生率、严重不良反应发
        生率与安慰剂组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);按剂量进行亚组分析结果显示,240 mg EGb组患者的不良反应发生率显著
        高于安慰剂组(P<0.05)。经济学方面,EGb治疗AD具有成本-效益,可间接节省AD患者的护理费用。结论:EGb治疗AD的有
        效性尚不确切,但安全性与经济性均较好。
        关键词 银杏叶提取物;阿尔茨海默病;快速卫生技术评估;有效性;安全性;经济性
        Rapid Health Technology Assessment for Effectiveness,Safety and Economics of Ginkgo biloba Extract in
        the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease
        REN Xiaolei,LIU Yi,ZHAN Yiqiu,ZHANG Chunyan,HUANG Lin,FENG Yufei(Dept. of Pharmacy,People’s
        Hospital of Peking University,Beijing 100044,China)

        ABSTRACT    OBJECTIVE:To rapidly evaluate the effectiveness,safety and economics of Ginkgo biloba extract(EGb)in the
        treatment of Alzheimer’s disease(AD)patients,and to provide evidence-based reference for clinical drug selection and decision.
        METHODS:Retrieved from PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,Web of Science,CNKI,CBM,Wanfang database,health
        technology assessment(HTA)organization websites and database during the inception to Aug. 10,2020,HTA reports,systematic
        reviews/Meta-analysis,and pharmacoeconomic studies of EGb versus placebo in the treatment of AD were collected. After literature
        screening and data extration,HTA checklist,AMSTAR-2 scale and CHEERS scale were used respectively to evaluate the literature
        quality of the included HTA report,systematic review/Meta-analysis and pharmacoeconomics studies. The conclusion of the
        included studies were summarized by using qualitative description. RESULTS:A total of 9 literatures were included,involving 8
        systematic reviews and 1 economic studies. In terms of effectiveness,there was no statistical significance in MMSE score of EGb
        group,ADAS-Cog score of 120 mg EGb group,compared with placebo group(P>0.05). Dementia Quality of Life(DQoL)score
        of EGb group was significantly higher than that of placebo group. The scores of short cognitive aptitude tests,neuropsychiatric
        inventory(NPI),NPI caregiver version score,ADAS-Cog score of 160 mg EGb group and 240 mg EGb group were significantly
        lower than those of control group (P<0.05). ADL scores of patients were inconsistent;ADL scores of EGb group were
        significantly lower than those of placebo group(P<0.05),or there was no significant difference between 2 groups(P>0.05);
                                                            subgroup analysis by dose showed that there was no
            Δ 基金项目:北京大学人民医院研究与发展基金(科研)项目(No.
                                                            significant difference in ADL score between 120 mg EGb
        RDY2019-39)
            *主管药师,硕士。研究方向:临床药学。电话:010-88325751。             group and placebo group (P>0.05);ADL score of 240 mg
        E-mail:renxiaolei83@126.com                         EGb group were signicantly lower than that of placebo group
            # 通信作者:副主任药师,硕士。研究方向:临床药学。电话:                  (P<0.05). Subgroup analysis of clinical global impression
        010-88325751。E-mail:lyi1267@126.com                 change (CGIC) score showed that there was no significant


        ·2786 ·  China Pharmacy 2020 Vol. 31 No. 22                                 中国药房    2020年第31卷第22期
   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113