Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26038356›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2015

Ibandronate to treat skeletal-related events and bone pain in metastatic bone disease or multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

Chun-Jing Geng, Qian Liang, Jian-Hong Zhong, Min Zhu, Fan-Ying Meng, Ning Wu, Rui Liang, Bin-Yi Yuan

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Chun-Jing GengDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Qian LiangPostgraduate School of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Jian-Hong ZhongHepatobiliary Surgery Department, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Min ZhuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Fan-Ying MengDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Chifeng University, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Ning WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Rui LiangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Bin-Yi YuanOut-patient Department, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Tumor Hospital of Guangxi Medical University · CNChifeng University · CNGuangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) have given contradictory results about the efficacy and safety of ibandronate in treating metastatic bone disease (MBD) or multiple myeloma. This review meta-analysed the literature to gain a more comprehensive picture.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis of ibandronate compared with placebo or zoledronate. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify RCTs published up to March 2015 evaluating ibandronate to treat MBD or multiple myeloma. REVIEW

method10 RCTs involving 3474 patients were included. Six RCTs were placebo-controlled and four compared ibandronate with zoledronate. The studies included in this review were mainly from European countries.

resultsIntravenous ibandronate (6 mg) or oral drug (50 mg) decreased the risk of skeletal-related events compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.90, p=0.002). It also reduced the bone pain score below baseline significantly more than did placebo at 96 weeks (weighted mean difference -0.41, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.27, p<0.001). The incidence of diarrhoea, nausea and adverse renal events was similar between the ibandronate and placebo groups, but ibandronate was associated with greater risk of abdominal pain. Ibandronate was associated with similar risk of skeletal-related events as another bisphosphonate drug, zoledronate (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26, p=0.87). The incidence of nausea, jaw osteonecrosis and fatigue was similar for the two drugs, but the incidence of adverse renal events was significantly lower in the ibandronate group.

conclusionsIbandronate significantly reduces the incidence of skeletal-related events and bone pain in patients with MBD or multiple myeloma relative to placebo. It is associated with a similar incidence of skeletal-related events as zoledronate.

Indexed as

Bone Density Conservation AgentsBone NeoplasmsBone ResorptionDiphosphonatesEuropeHumansIbandronic AcidMultiple MyelomaMusculoskeletal PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesIbandronic AcidONCOLOGY

Identifiers

PMID26038356
PMCPMC4458633
OpenAlexW2337219890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.