Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27796445›Full record

ReviewOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2017

Biologic therapies and bone loss in rheumatoid arthritis.

C A F Zerbini, P Clark, L Mendez-Sanchez, R M R Pereira, O D Messina, C R Uña, J D Adachi, W F Lems, C Cooper, N E Lane and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
12.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

102 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 182 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Effects of once-monthly minodronate versus risedronate in osteoporosis patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a 12-month randomized head-to-head comparison.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018
    Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

C A F ZerbiniCentro Paulista de Investigação Clínica, Rua Moreira e Costa, 342-Ipiranga, São Paulo, SP, 04266-010, Brazil. criszerb@uol.com.br.
P ClarkHospital Infantil Federico Gómez-Faculty of Medicine UNAM, Ciudad de México D.F, Mexico.
L Mendez-SanchezHospital Infantil Federico Gómez-Faculty of Medicine UNAM, Ciudad de México D.F, Mexico.
R M R PereiraFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
O D MessinaIRO Clinical Research Center Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
C R UñaIRO Clinical Research Center Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
J D AdachiActavis Chair for Better Bone Health in Rheumatology, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
W F LemsAmsterdam Rheumatology and Immunology Centre, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C CooperMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, Southampton, UK.
N E LaneCenter for Musculoskeletal Health, Sacramento, CA, USA.
IOF Chronic Inflammation and Bone Structure (CIBS) Working Group
Hospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez · MXUniversity of Oxford · GBAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLCentro Paulista de Investigação Clinica · BRHospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo · BRUC Davis Health · US

Funding

Medical Research Council G0400491Medical Research Council MC_U147585819Medical Research Council MC_U147585824Medical Research Council MC_U147585827Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1014Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common systemic autoimmune disease of unknown cause, characterized by a chronic, symmetric, and progressive inflammatory polyarthritis. One of the most deleterious effects induced by the chronic inflammation of RA is bone loss. During the last 15 years, the better knowledge of the cytokine network involved in RA allowed the development of potent inhibitors of the inflammatory process classified as biological DMARDs. These new drugs are very effective in the inhibition of inflammation, but there are only few studies regarding their role in bone protection. The principal aim of this review was to show the evidence of the principal biologic therapies and bone loss in RA, focusing on their effects on bone mineral density, bone turnover markers, and fragility fractures.

methodsUsing the PICOST methodology, two coauthors (PC, LM-S) conducted the search using the following MESH terms: rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, clinical trials, TNF- antagonists, infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab, golimumab, IL-6 antagonists, IL-1 antagonists, abatacept, tocilizumab, rituximab, bone mineral density, bone markers, and fractures. The search was conducted electronically and manually from the following databases: Medline and Science Direct. The search period included articles from 2003 to 2015. The selection included only original adult human research written in English. Titles were retrieved and the same two authors independently selected the relevant studies for a full text. The retrieved selected studies were also reviewed completing the search for relevant articles. The first search included 904 titles from which 253 titles were selected. The agreement on the selection among researchers resulted in a Kappa statistic of 0.95 (p < 0.000). Only 248 abstracts evaluated were included in the acronym PICOST. The final selection included only 28 studies, derived from the systematic search. Additionally, a manual search in the bibliography of the selected articles was made and included into the text and into the section of "small molecules of new agents."

conclusionTreatment with biologic drugs is associated with the decrease in bone loss. Studies with anti-TNF blocking agents show preservation or increase in spine and hip BMD and also a better profile of bone markers. Most of these studies were performed with infliximab. Only three epidemiological studies analyzed the effect on fractures after anti-TNF blocking agent's treatment. IL-6 blocking agents also showed improvement in localized bone loss not seen with anti-TNF agents. There are a few studies with rituximab and abatacept. Although several studies reported favorable actions of biologic therapies on bone protection, there are still unmet needs for studies regarding their actions on the risk of bone fractures.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidBiological ProductsBone DensityHumansOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesRheumatoid FactorTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaAntirheumatic AgentsBiological ProductsRheumatoid FactorTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaAntirheumatic agentsBone fracturesMonoclonal antibodiesOsteoporosisRheumatic diseases

Identifiers

PMID27796445
OpenAlexW2545273878

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.