Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24287510›Full record

SynthesisOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2014

Comparative gastrointestinal safety of bisphosphonates in primary osteoporosis: a network meta-analysis.

M Tadrous, L Wong, M M Mamdani, D N Juurlink, M D Krahn, L E Lévesque, S M Cadarette

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019
    Guideline
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Tipping point analysis in network meta-analysis.Research synthesis methods · 2025
    Article
  12. Pediatric and adult osteoporosis: a contrasting mirror.Annals of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Adherence and preference of intravenous zoledronic acid for osteoporosis versus other bisphosphonates.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2019
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. The position of strontium ranelate in today's management of osteoporosis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2015
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

M TadrousLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, 144 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 3M2, Canada, mina.tadrous@utoronto.ca.
L Wong
M M Mamdani
D N Juurlink
M D Krahn
L E Lévesque
S M Cadarette
University of Toronto · CAQueen's University · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CASunnybrook Research Institute

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research GSD-11342
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledWe completed a network meta-analysis of published papers to compare bisphosphonate gastrointestinal safety. We found that zoledronic acid had the highest chance of causing gastrointestinal adverse events. Etidronate had the highest chance of discontinuation due to an adverse event. No difference was found for serious adverse events.

introductionBisphosphonates are first-line treatment for osteoporosis. Gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AE) are the primary reason for non-adherence. Little is known about the comparative GI safety of bisphosphonates. PURPOSE: Leverage published clinical trial data to examine the comparative GI safety of bisphosphonates.

methodsWe completed a systematic review of all English-language clinical trials that assessed bisphosphonate safety and/or efficacy in primary osteoporosis through to 2012. Randomized, blinded, and controlled studies were eligible. The primary outcome was any GI-related AE. Subanalyses were completed for upper GI symptoms, serious GI, nausea, esophageal-related events, and discontinuation due to AE. A Bayesian-based network meta-analysis was completed to allow for indirect comparisons. Results were reported as the probability that a specific drug had the highest number of events.

resultsWe identified 50 studies: 32 alendronate, 12 risedronate, 5 etidronate, and 7 zoledronic acid. Zoledronic acid had the highest probability of having the highest number of any GI AE (91%) and nausea (70%). Etidronate (70%) and zoledronic acid (28%) had the highest probability of having the greatest attrition due to AE. Etidronate had the highest probability (56%) of having the greatest number of upper GI symptoms among oral bisphosphonates.

conclusionZoledronic acid had the highest probability of causing the greatest number of GI AE, possibly related to nausea. These results question the assumption that annual zoledronic acid will translate into better adherence. Little difference was found between alendronate and risedronate for serious AE. More research into real-world implications of the comparative safety of bisphosphonates is needed.

Indexed as

Bone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansImidazolesNauseaOsteoporosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicZoledronic AcidBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesImidazolesZoledronic Acid

Identifiers

PMID24287510
OpenAlexW1971379347

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.