ScholarAI
ScholarAIby Jenni AI

Built for Researchers

Accelerate your research and writing process with Jenni

Try

Growth hormone axis treatments for HIV‐associated lipodystrophy: a systematic review of placebo‐controlled trials

T. Sivakumar, Oj Mechanic, D. A. Fehmie, Bt Paul•September 1, 2011•29 citations
DOI10.1111/j.1468-1293.2010.00906.x
Sourcehttps://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1293.2010.00906.x
Jenni AI

Chat with this paper

Extract insights, manage references, and accelerate your research

Continue your research
– It's free

Abstract

BACKGROUND: HIV-associated lipodystrophy is a disorder of fat metabolism that occurs in patients with HIV infection. It can cause metabolic derangements and negative self-perceptions of body image, and result in noncompliance with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Growth hormone (GH) axis drugs have been evaluated for treatment of this disorder, but no systematic review has been conducted previously. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the review was to compare the effects of GH axis drugs vs. placebo in changing visceral adipose tissue (VAT), subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) and lean body mass (LBM) in patients with HIV-associated lipodystrophy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1996-2009), CENTRAL (Issue 4, 2009), Web of Science, Summons, Google Scholar, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website, and Clinicaltrials.gov from 13 October 2009 to 7 June 2010. We excluded newspaper articles and book reviews from the Summons search; this was the only search limitation applied. We also manually reviewed references of included articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomized placebo-controlled trial (RCT); study participants with HIV-associated lipodystrophy; intervention consisting of GH, growth hormone releasing hormone (GHRH), tesamorelin or insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1); study including at least one primary outcome of interest: change in VAT, SAT or LBM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed study quality using a standardized form. The authors of one study were contacted for missing information. The main effect was calculated as a summary of the mean differences in VAT, SAT and LBM between the intervention and placebo groups in the included studies. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess different GH axis drug classes. RESULTS: Ten RCTs including 1511 patients were included in the review. All had a low risk of bias and passed the test of heterogeneity for each primary outcome....