Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials for chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) |
Kim D-Y, Lee J-S, Park S-Y, Kim S-J, Son C-G |
Journal of Translational Medicine 2020 Jan 6;18(7):Epub |
systematic review |
BACKGROUND: Although medical requirements are urgent, no effective intervention has been proven for chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME). To facilitate the development of new therapeutics, we systematically reviewed the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CFS/ME to date. METHODS: RCTs targeting CFS/ME were surveyed using two electronic databases, PubMed and the Cochrane library, through April 2019. We included only RCTs that targeted fatigue-related symptoms, and we analyzed the data in terms of the characteristics of the participants, case definitions, primary measurements, and interventions with overall outcomes. RESULTS: Among 513 potentially relevant articles, 55 RCTs met our inclusion criteria; these included 25 RCTs of 22 different pharmacological interventions, 28 RCTs of 18 non-pharmacological interventions and 2 RCTs of combined interventions. These studies accounted for a total of 6,316 participants (1,568 males and 4,748 females, 5,859 adults and 457 adolescents). CDC 1994 (Fukuda) criteria were mostly used for case definitions (42 RCTs, 76.4%), and the primary measurement tools included the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS, 36.4%) and the 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36, 30.9%). Eight interventions showed statistical significance: 3 pharmacological (Staphypan Berna, poly-I:poly-C12U and CoQ10+NADH) and 5 non-pharmacological therapies (cognitive-behavior-therapy-related treatments, graded-exercise-related therapies, rehabilitation, acupuncture and abdominal Tuina). However, there was no definitely effective intervention with coherence and reproducibility. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review integrates the comprehensive features of previous RCTs for CFS/ME and reflects on their limitations and perspectives in the process of developing new interventions.
|