Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21175240›Full record

ReviewDrugs2011

Antifracture efficacy of currently available therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Jean-Yves Reginster

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Mortality risk reduction differs according to bisphosphonate class: a 15-year observational study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019
    Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author.

Jean-Yves ReginsterBone and Cartilage Metabolism Research Unit, CHU Centre - Ville, Liege, Belgium. jyreginster@ulg.ac.be

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a systemic bone disease characterized by low bone mass and bone mineral density, and deterioration of the underlying structure of bone tissue. These changes lead to an increase in bone fragility and an increased risk for fracture, which are the clinical consequences of osteoporosis. The classical triad for consideration in osteoporosis is morbidity, mortality and cost. Vertebral fracture is an important source of morbidity in terms of pain and spinal deformity. On the other hand, hip fracture is associated with the worst outcomes and is widely regarded as a life-threatening event in the elderly; it is the source of the bulk of the cost of the disease in contemporary healthcare. The prevention of osteoporosis-associated fracture should include fall prevention, calcium supplementation and lifestyle advice, as well as pharmacological therapy using agents with proven antifracture efficacy. The most commonly used osteoporosis treatments in Europe are the bisphosphonates alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate and zoledronic acid; the selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) raloxifene; teriparatide; and strontium ranelate. Recent additions include the biological therapy denosumab and the SERM bazedoxifene. In this review, we explore the antifracture efficacy of these agents with the aim of simplifying treatment decisions. These treatments can be broadly divided according to their mode of action. The antiresorptive agents include the bisphosphonates, the SERMs and denosumab, while the bone-forming agents include parathyroid hormone and teriparatide. Strontium ranelate appears to combine both antiresorptive and anabolic activities. We collated data on vertebral and hip fracture efficacy from the pivotal 3-year phase III trials, all of which had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. The relative reductions in risk in the osteoporosis trials range from 30% to 70% for vertebral fracture and 30% to 51% for hip fracture. This translates into 3-year number needed to treat values of between 9 and 21 for vertebral fracture and from 48 upwards for hip fracture. International guidelines agree that agents that have been shown to decrease vertebral, nonvertebral and hip fractures should be used preferentially over agents that only demonstrate vertebral antifracture efficacy. This is the case for alendronate, risedronate, zoledronic acid, denosumab and strontium ranelate. Finally, therapeutic decisions should be based on a balance between benefits and risks of treatment, which must be carefully considered in each particular case both by the physician and the patient. Indeed, no single agent is appropriate for all patients and, therefore, treatment decisions should be made on an individual basis, taking into account all measures of treatment effect and risk before making informed judgments about the best individual treatment option.

Indexed as

Bone DensityBone Density Conservation AgentsClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDiphosphonatesFemaleFractures, BoneHumansOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelective Estrogen Receptor ModulatorsTreatment OutcomeBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesSelective Estrogen Receptor Modulators

Identifiers

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.