ArticleCurrent osteoporosis reports2011
Use of strontium as a treatment method for osteoporosis.
Article in Current osteoporosis reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomineralization inspired 3D printed bioactive glass nanocomposite scaffolds orchestrate diabetic bone regeneration by remodeling micromilieu.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- Article
- DNA-Templated Strontium-Doped Calcium Phosphate Nanoparticles for Gene Delivery in Bone Cells.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given its increasing incidence and serious complications, osteoporosis requires safe and effective long-term treatment. Strontium ranelate (SR), a new anti-osteoporotic treatment with a unique mode of action, has been investigated in the SOTI (Spinal Osteoporosis Therapeutic Intervention) and the TROPOS (Treatment of Peripheral Osteoporosis) trials, two major 3-year multinational placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trials. Unlike antiresorptive agents, SR produced steady and significant bone mineral density increases that correlated directly with decreases in vertebral and hip fracture risk. The safety profile of SR was almost similar to placebo in both trials. A slight but significant increased risk of thromboembolism events was noted from the pooled phase 3 studies data. However, this increased was not found in a large retrospective observational study. Thus, SR demonstrates broad spectrum safety and efficacy in reducing the risks of both vertebral and nonvertebral (including hip) fractures in a wide variety of patients, and should be considered as a first-line option to treat women at risk of osteoporotic fractures, whatever their age, the severity of the disease, and their risk factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.