对乙酰氨基酚与布洛芬在婴儿期的应用:PIPPTamariki试验未发现湿疹或毛细支气管炎的风险差异

对乙酰氨基酚与布洛芬在婴儿期的应用:PIPPTamariki试验未发现湿疹或毛细支气管炎的风险差异

引言:挑战对乙酰氨基酚-过敏假说

二十多年来,儿科医学界一直存在关于早期生活对乙酰氨基酚(扑热息痛)暴露安全性的持久争论。特别是国际儿童哮喘和过敏研究(ISAAC)等大量观察性研究报道了婴儿期对乙酰氨基酚使用与哮喘、喘息和湿疹发病率增加之间的关联。这些发现引发了生物学假说,即对乙酰氨基酚可能耗尽全身谷胱甘肽,引发氧化应激,并使免疫反应转向Th2介导的过敏表型。

然而,观察数据本质上容易受到指征混淆的影响——即导致退烧药使用的潜在感染或发热,而不是药物本身,可能是随后出现的过敏性疾病的真实驱动因素。为了填补这一关键证据缺口,PIPPTamariki试验被设计为一项严格的随机对照试验(RCT),比较对乙酰氨基酚与布洛芬在婴儿第一年内用于退热或止痛的效果,重点关注湿疹和毛细支气管炎的发展。

亮点

1. PIPPTamariki试验发现,随机分配到对乙酰氨基酚组和布洛芬组的婴儿在一岁时湿疹的发生率没有统计学上的显著差异。

2. 在婴儿第一年内因毛细支气管炎、病毒性喘息或哮喘住院的比率在两组治疗之间相当。

3. 这些结果提供了高级别的证据,表明临床医生可以继续推荐对乙酰氨基酚或布洛芬用于婴儿的症状缓解,而无需担心不同的过敏或下呼吸道疾病风险。

研究设计与方法

PIPPTamariki试验是一项多中心、开放标签、平行组、优效性随机对照试验,在新西兰奥克兰和惠灵顿的三个地点进行。该研究于2018年4月至2023年7月期间招募了3,923名年龄小于8周的婴儿。

随机化与干预

参与者以1:1的比例随机分配接受对乙酰氨基酚或布洛芬用于退热或止痛,直至他们满一岁。剂量遵循《新西兰儿童用药指南》:

  • 对乙酰氨基酚:每6小时15 mg/kg(年龄<1个月)或每4小时15 mg/kg(年龄≥1个月)。
  • 布洛芬:每6小时5 mg/kg(年龄<3个月)或每6小时10 mg/kg(年龄≥3个月)。

随机化根据招募地点、母亲哮喘状况和多胞胎进行了分层,以确保已知的过敏风险因素在各组间平衡。

主要终点

试验关注在婴儿一岁时的两个关键结局:

  • 湿疹:根据英国诊断标准或在婴儿第一年内因湿疹住院定义。
  • 毛细支气管炎:定义为在婴儿第一年内至少一次因毛细支气管炎、病毒性喘息或哮喘住院。

主要发现:两种退热药均无优效性

意向治疗(ITT)人群包括3,908名婴儿(对乙酰氨基酚组1,985名,布洛芬组1,923名)。该队列具有多样化的人口特征,包括毛利人(15.6%)、太平洋岛民(15.5%)和亚洲人(23.7%)。

湿疹结果

对乙酰氨基酚组中有16.2%(322/1985)的婴儿被诊断为湿疹,而布洛芬组为15.4%(296/1923)。绝对风险差异仅为0.8%(95% CI -1.5至3.1;p=0.48)。调整分层变量后,比值比(OR)为1.10(95% CI 0.92至1.32;p=0.29),表明两组治疗之间没有显著差异。

毛细支气管炎和呼吸系统结果

对乙酰氨基酚组中有4.9%(98/1985)的婴儿因毛细支气管炎住院,而布洛芬组为4.3%(82/1923)。绝对风险差异为0.7%(95% CI -0.6至2.0;p=0.32),调整后的OR为1.23(95% CI 0.82至1.71;p=0.21)。这些结果表明,选择哪种退热药不会改变严重早期呼吸道感染或导致住院的喘息发作的风险。

安全性和不良事件

两种药物的安全性都非常好。共有19例严重不良事件(SAEs)报告,涉及17名参与者(对乙酰氨基酚组8名,布洛芬组9名)。重要的是,研究者认为这些SAEs均与试验药物无关。调整后的SAEs OR为0.47(95% CI 0.14-1.56;p=0.21),确认这两种药物在婴儿第一年内按需使用是安全的。

专家评论:解决指征混淆问题

PIPPTamariki试验代表了儿科药理学的一个重要里程碑。多年来,临床医生一直在探讨对乙酰氨基酚是否可能是全球过敏性疾病增加的可改变风险因素。通过使用随机设计,这项研究有效地绕过了早期观察研究中“指征混淆”的问题。如果对乙酰氨基酚确实是致病因素,我们预计对乙酰氨基酚组的湿疹和毛细支气管炎发病率会高于布洛芬组;缺乏这种差异强烈表明,先前观察到的关联很可能是因为使用这些药物治疗的潜在疾病。

研究优势与局限性

该试验的优势包括样本量大、高随访率以及使用标准化的湿疹诊断标准。此外,包括毛细支气管炎住院数据为呼吸系统疾病提供了一个具体、客观的衡量指标。一个局限性是开放标签设计,这是出于不同给药频率和剂型的实际考虑。然而,主要结局基于标准化诊断标准和医院记录,这最小化了观察者偏倚的风险。

结论:临床意义

PIPPTamariki试验为父母和医疗保健提供者提供了安慰,即在婴儿第一年内按需使用对乙酰氨基酚或布洛芬不会增加湿疹或毛细支气管炎的风险。这一证据支持继续根据个体临床需求、当地指南和患者偏好使用这两种药物来管理婴儿疼痛和发热。研究结果有效地解除了这些常用退热药与早期生活过敏和呼吸系统疾病发展的联系。

资助与试验注册

本研究由新西兰健康研究委员会、CureKids新西兰和奥克兰大学资助。该试验已在澳大利亚新西兰临床试验注册中心注册,注册号为ACTRN12618000303246。

参考文献

1. Tan E, McKinlay CJD, Riley J, et al. Paracetamol versus ibuprofen as required for fever or pain in the first year of life and the risk of eczema and bronchiolitis at age 1 year in New Zealand (PIPPA Tamariki): a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2026;10(3):156-166. doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(25)00341-4.

2. Beasley R, Clayton T, Crane J, et al. Association between paracetamol use in infancy and childhood, and risk of asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, and eczema in children aged 6-7 years: analysis from Phase Three of the ISAAC programme. Lancet. 2008;372(9643):1039-1048.

3. Henderson AJ, Shaheen SO. Acetaminophen and asthma. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2013;14(1):9-15.

Paracetamol vs. Ibuprofen in Infancy: The PIPPA Tamariki Trial Finds No Differential Risk for Eczema or Bronchiolitis

Paracetamol vs. Ibuprofen in Infancy: The PIPPA Tamariki Trial Finds No Differential Risk for Eczema or Bronchiolitis

Introduction: Challenging the Paracetamol-Atopy Hypothesis

For over two decades, a persistent debate has permeated pediatric medicine regarding the safety of early-life paracetamol (acetaminophen) exposure. Numerous observational studies, most notably the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC), have reported associations between paracetamol use in infancy and an increased prevalence of asthma, wheezing, and eczema. These findings led to the biological hypothesis that paracetamol might deplete systemic glutathione, inducing oxidative stress and shifting the immune response toward a Th2-mediated allergic profile.

However, observational data are inherently susceptible to confounding by indication—where the underlying infection or fever that necessitates the antipyretic, rather than the drug itself, is the true driver of subsequent atopic disease. To address this critical evidence gap, the PIPPA Tamariki trial was designed as a robust, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare paracetamol with ibuprofen for fever or pain in the first year of life, focusing on the development of eczema and bronchiolitis.

Highlights

1. The PIPPA Tamariki trial found no statistically significant difference in the incidence of eczema at age one between infants randomized to paracetamol versus ibuprofen.

2. Hospitalization rates for bronchiolitis, viral-induced wheeze, or asthma in the first year of life were comparable between the two treatment arms.

3. The results provide high-level evidence that clinicians can continue to recommend either paracetamol or ibuprofen for symptomatic relief in infants without concern for differential risks of atopy or lower respiratory morbidity.

Study Design and Methodology

The PIPPA Tamariki trial was a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, superiority RCT conducted across three sites in Auckland and Wellington, New Zealand. The study enrolled 3,923 infants younger than 8 weeks of age between April 2018 and July 2023.

Randomization and Intervention

Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either paracetamol alone or ibuprofen alone for the management of fever or pain until they reached one year of age. The dosing followed the New Zealand Formulary for Children:

  • Paracetamol: 15 mg/kg every 6 hours (age <1 month) or every 4 hours (age ≥1 month).
  • Ibuprofen: 5 mg/kg every 6 hours (age <3 months) or 10 mg/kg every 6 hours (age ≥3 months).

Randomization was stratified by recruitment site, maternal asthma status, and multiple births to ensure balanced groups for known risk factors of atopy.

Primary Endpoints

The trial focused on two key outcomes at age one:

  • Eczema: Defined by the UK Diagnostic Criteria or hospital admission for eczema during the first year of life.
  • Bronchiolitis: Defined by at least one hospital admission for bronchiolitis, viral-induced wheeze, or asthma in the first year of life.

Key Findings: No Superiority for Either Antipyretic

The intention-to-treat (ITT) population included 3,908 infants (1,985 in the paracetamol group and 1,923 in the ibuprofen group). The cohort was demographically diverse, including Māori (15.6%), Pacific (15.5%), and Asian (23.7%) participants.

Eczema Outcomes

Eczema was diagnosed in 16.2% (322/1985) of the paracetamol group compared to 15.4% (296/1923) of the ibuprofen group. The absolute risk difference was a negligible 0.8% (95% CI -1.5 to 3.1; p=0.48). After adjusting for stratification variables, the odds ratio (OR) was 1.10 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.32; p=0.29), indicating no significant difference between the two treatments.

Bronchiolitis and Respiratory Outcomes

Hospitalization for bronchiolitis occurred in 4.9% (98/1985) of the paracetamol group and 4.3% (82/1923) of the ibuprofen group. The absolute risk difference was 0.7% (95% CI -0.6 to 2.0; p=0.32), with an adjusted OR of 1.23 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.71; p=0.21). These results suggest that the choice of antipyretic does not modify the risk of severe early-life respiratory infections or wheezing episodes leading to hospitalization.

Safety and Adverse Events

The safety profile for both drugs was excellent. There were 19 serious adverse events (SAEs) reported in 17 participants (8 in the paracetamol group and 9 in the ibuprofen group). Crucially, none of these SAEs were attributed to the trial medications by the investigators. The adjusted OR for SAEs was 0.47 (95% CI 0.14-1.56; p=0.21), confirming that both medications are safe for use as required in the first year of life.

Expert Commentary: Resolving the Confounding by Indication

The PIPPA Tamariki trial represents a significant milestone in pediatric pharmacology. For years, clinicians have grappled with the possibility that paracetamol might be a modifiable risk factor for the global increase in allergic diseases. By using a randomized design, this study effectively bypasses the “confounding by indication” that plagued earlier observational research. If paracetamol were truly causative, we would expect to see a higher incidence of eczema and bronchiolitis in the paracetamol arm compared to the ibuprofen arm; the lack of such a difference strongly suggests that the previously observed associations were likely due to the underlying illnesses for which the drugs were administered.

Study Strengths and Limitations

The strengths of this trial include its large sample size, high follow-up rates, and the use of standardized diagnostic criteria for eczema. Furthermore, the inclusion of hospitalization data for bronchiolitis provides a concrete, objective measure of respiratory morbidity. One limitation is the open-label design, which was necessary for practical reasons regarding different dosing frequencies and formulations. However, the primary outcomes were based on standardized diagnostic criteria and hospital records, which minimizes the risk of observer bias.

Conclusion: Clinical Implications

The PIPPA Tamariki trial provides reassurance to parents and healthcare providers that neither paracetamol nor ibuprofen, when used as required during the first year of life, increases the risk of eczema or bronchiolitis. This evidence supports the continued use of both agents for managing infant pain and fever based on individual clinical needs, local guidelines, and patient preference. The findings effectively decouple the use of these common antipyretics from the development of early-life atopic and respiratory morbidity.

Funding and Trial Registration

This study was funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand, Cure Kids New Zealand, and the University of Auckland. It is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618000303246.

References

1. Tan E, McKinlay CJD, Riley J, et al. Paracetamol versus ibuprofen as required for fever or pain in the first year of life and the risk of eczema and bronchiolitis at age 1 year in New Zealand (PIPPA Tamariki): a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, superiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2026;10(3):156-166. doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(25)00341-4.

2. Beasley R, Clayton T, Crane J, et al. Association between paracetamol use in infancy and childhood, and risk of asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, and eczema in children aged 6-7 years: analysis from Phase Three of the ISAAC programme. Lancet. 2008;372(9643):1039-1048.

3. Henderson AJ, Shaheen SO. Acetaminophen and asthma. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2013;14(1):9-15.

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

发表回复