Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18506174›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of cancer2008

Risks and benefits of bisphosphonates.

R E Coleman

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 211 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Denosumab versus bisphosphonates for the treatment of bone metastases from solid tumors: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Treatment of bone metastases before the onset of pain.International journal of clinical oncology · 2013
    Trial
  5. Osteotomy and primary wound closure in bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw: a prospective clinical study with 12 months follow-up.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2010
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Interactive Associations betweenPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

R E ColemanAcademic Unit of Clinical Oncology, Weston Park Hospital, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2SJ, UK. R.E.Coleman@sheffield.ac.uk
Weston Park Cancer Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone is the most common site for metastasis in cancer and is of particular clinical importance in breast and prostate cancers due to the prevalence of these diseases. Bone metastases result in considerable morbidity and complex demands on health care resources, affecting quality of life and independence over years rather than months. The bisphosphonates have been shown to reduce skeletal morbidity in multiple myeloma as well as a wide range of solid tumours affecting bone by 30-50%. Quite appropriately, these agents are increasingly used alongside anticancer treatments to prevent skeletal complications and relieve bone pain. The use of bisphosphonates in early cancer is also increasingly important to prevent the adverse effects of cancer treatments on bone health. These include ovarian suppression and the use of aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer patients and androgen deprivation therapy in those with prostate cancer. Bisphosphonate strategies, similar to those used to treat postmenopausal osteoporosis, have suggested that bisphosphonates are a safe and effective treatment for the prevention of treatment-induced bone loss. When compared to other cancer therapies, the frequency and severity of adverse events related to bisphosphonate therapy are generally mild and infrequent; thus, the benefits of treatment with any bisphosphonate almost always outweigh the risks. However, renal dysfunction may occasionally occur and over recent years, a new entity, bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), has been described. The incidence, clinical importance and prevention strategies to minimise the impact of this problem on patients requiring bisphosphonates is discussed.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsBone Density Conservation AgentsBone NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisDiphosphonatesHumansJaw DiseasesKidneyOsteonecrosisPainAntineoplastic AgentsBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonates

Identifiers

PMID18506174
PMCPMC2410129
OpenAlexW2068522538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.