Efficacy of 5-HT3 Antagonists and 5-HT4 Agonists in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional disorder. 5-Hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) is a key modulator of gastrointestinal sensorimotor function. Many patients have IBS that can be difficult to treat, which has led to the development of newer agents, such as 5-HT(3) antagonists and 5-HT(4) agonists. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the efficacy of all available 5-HT agents in IBS. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to June 2008). Trials recruiting adults with IBS in primary, secondary, or tertiary care comparing 5-HT(3) antagonists or 5-HT(4) agonists with placebo were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated from the reciprocal of the risk difference. RESULTS: The strategic search identified 1,593 citations. A total of 29 RCTs were eligible for inclusion; placebo was compared with 5-HT(3) antagonists in 11 RCTs, with tegaserod in 11, and with mixed 5-HT(3) antagonists/5-HT(4) agonists in 7. The study quality was generally high. The RR of IBS symptoms persisting with 5-HT(3) antagonists vs. placebo was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71-0.86), with a similar benefit for both alosetron and cilansetron. Tegaserod was also superior to placebo (RR=0.85; 95% CI: 0.80-0.90). Renzapride and cisapride had no benefit in IBS. CONCLUSIONS: Alosetron, cilansetron, and tegaserod are all effective in the treatment of IBS. Serious adverse events were rare in the eligible RCTs included in this systematic review.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".