Scholarlink

<p>This systematic review aims to summarize the therapeutic benefits and safety profile of long-acting PEGylated recombinant human growth hormone (PEG‑rhGH) compared with daily recombinant human growth hormone (DGH) in pediatric growth hormone deficiency (PGHD) participants. We conducted an extensive literature review utilizing multiple databases, and evaluated change in height standard deviation score (∆Ht-SDS) as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included change in height velocity (∆HV) and incidence of total adverse events (AEs). The meta-analysis focused on comparing the standard dose of PEG‑rhGH (0.20&#xa0;mg/kg/w) and DGH. The systematic review encompassed ten studies involving a total of 1,393 participants. In RCTs and cohort studies, ∆Ht-SDS at 6 months showed no significant difference between PEG-rhGH and DGH (RCTs: MD = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.02 to 0.07, <i>p</i> = 0.32; Cohort studies: MD = -0.02, 95%CI: -0.24 to 0.19, <i>p</i> = 0.82). However, PEG-rhGH had superior ∆Ht-SDS (MD = 0.19, 95%CI: 0.03 to 0.35, <i>p</i> = 0.02) at 12 months. Results from RCTs also showed that the incidence of total AEs was comparable for PEG-rhGH and DGH (OR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.49, <i>p</i> = 0.45). PEG-rhGH showed superior efficacy to DGH at 12 months and comparable efficacy at other time points. The safety profiles were similar for the two treatments.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison between long-acting pegylated and daily recombinant human growth hormone for pediatric growth hormone deficiency a systematic review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月23日

查看全文
  • Jun Zhang,
  • Song Guo,
  • Tingting Wang,
  • Qiuli Chen

摘要

This systematic review aims to summarize the therapeutic benefits and safety profile of long-acting PEGylated recombinant human growth hormone (PEG‑rhGH) compared with daily recombinant human growth hormone (DGH) in pediatric growth hormone deficiency (PGHD) participants. We conducted an extensive literature review utilizing multiple databases, and evaluated change in height standard deviation score (∆Ht-SDS) as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included change in height velocity (∆HV) and incidence of total adverse events (AEs). The meta-analysis focused on comparing the standard dose of PEG‑rhGH (0.20 mg/kg/w) and DGH. The systematic review encompassed ten studies involving a total of 1,393 participants. In RCTs and cohort studies, ∆Ht-SDS at 6 months showed no significant difference between PEG-rhGH and DGH (RCTs: MD = 0.02, 95%CI: -0.02 to 0.07, p = 0.32; Cohort studies: MD = -0.02, 95%CI: -0.24 to 0.19, p = 0.82). However, PEG-rhGH had superior ∆Ht-SDS (MD = 0.19, 95%CI: 0.03 to 0.35, p = 0.02) at 12 months. Results from RCTs also showed that the incidence of total AEs was comparable for PEG-rhGH and DGH (OR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.49, p = 0.45). PEG-rhGH showed superior efficacy to DGH at 12 months and comparable efficacy at other time points. The safety profiles were similar for the two treatments.