Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20151162›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2010

Bone pain reduction in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with ibandronate-results from a post-marketing surveillance study.

Ingo J Diel, Andreas H A Kurth, Hans-Bernd Sittig, Harald Meden, Michael Maasberg, Andreas Sandermann, Raoul Bergner

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ingo J DielInstitute for Gynaecological Oncology, CGG-Clinic, Mannheim, Germany. diel@cgg-mannheim.de
Andreas H A Kurth
Hans-Bernd Sittig
Harald Meden
Michael Maasberg
Andreas Sandermann
Raoul Bergner
Hochschule für Gesundheitsorientierte Wissenschaften Rhein-Neckar · DEKlinikum Ludwigshafen · DEReha Rheinfelden · CHUniversity Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain relief is an important treatment goal for breast cancer patients with metastatic bone disease and treatment should be associated with a low rate of side effects. This interim analysis of a prospective non-interventional study documents the efficacy and safety of the amino-bisphosphonate ibandronate in the treatment of metastatic bone disease under real-life conditions. PATIENTS AND

methodsFor up to 24 weeks 913 breast cancer patients received IV infusions of 6 mg ibandronate every 3-4 weeks or 50 mg of oral ibandronate once daily. Efficacy variables included pain severity, analgesic use, and skeletal-related events; the major safety parameter was renal function, assessed by serum creatinine levels. Subgroup analyses were performed according to pretreatment with bisphosphonates (none, ibandronate, or other bisphosphonates).

resultsAt baseline, patients with ibandronate pretreatment tended to have lower mean pain scores and lower serum creatinine levels than those pre-treated with other bisphosphonates. Over the observation period, analgesic use did not increase. Among the 712 patients reporting pain at baseline, 70% achieved an improvement in pain severity during treatment with ibandronate, and there was no evidence to suggest relevant differences in mean pain reductions with IV or oral administration of ibandronate or according to prior bisphosphonate treatment. Skeletal-related events were rare (7%). Changes in serum creatinine levels during ibandronate treatment were small and both formulations of ibandronate were rated as well tolerated by physicians and patients.

conclusionsData from this non-interventional study confirm the analgesic efficacy and safety profile of IV and oral ibandronate under real-life conditions.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAgedBone Density Conservation AgentsBone NeoplasmsBreast NeoplasmsCreatinineDiphosphonatesFemaleHumansIbandronic AcidInfusions, IntravenousMiddle AgedPainProspective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexBone Density Conservation AgentsCreatinineDiphosphonatesIbandronic Acid

Identifiers

PMID20151162
OpenAlexW2097526428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.