ArticleJournal of bone and mineral metabolism2018
Real-world evidence of raloxifene versus alendronate in preventing non-vertebral fractures in Japanese women with osteoporosis: retrospective analysis of a hospital claims database.
Article in Journal of bone and mineral metabolism, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estrogen Deficiency Impairs Osseointegration in Hypertensive Rats Even Treated with Alendronate Coated on the Implant Surface.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- Comparative safety and effectiveness of alendronate versus raloxifene in women with osteoporosis.Scientific reports · 2020Observational
- Coding and prescription rates of osteoporosis are low among distal radius fracture patients in Japan.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2020Article
- Raloxifene but not alendronate can compensate the impaired osseointegration in osteoporotic rats.Clinical oral investigations · 2018Article
- Real world evidence (RWE) - a disruptive innovation or the quiet evolution of medical evidence generation?F1000Research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a de-identified hospital administrative claims database to assess the risk of non-vertebral fracture in Japanese women with osteoporosis treated with raloxifene compared with alendronate. The study included Japanese women ≥50 years of age with newly initiated alendronate or raloxifene treatment between July 2008 and March 2013 (index date was defined as the day of first prescription for alendronate or raloxifene), and had any claim with an osteoporosis definition during the study period. A total of 37,056 patients in the database initiated treatment, and there were 4802 and 1250 patients included in the alendronate and raloxifene analysis groups, respectively. The mean observation period in the alendronate group (529.2 days) was significantly longer than that for the raloxifene group (473.5 days, P < 0.001). Non-vertebral fractures accumulated linearly, at a similar rate, for both study drugs: incidence at 1 year was 2.83 and 2.64% for the alendronate and raloxifene groups, respectively. For the relative risk of non-vertebral fracture within 1 year, the adjusted hazard ratio was 0.933 for raloxifene versus alendronate, indicating that the relative risk of non-vertebral fracture was similar for the two drugs. The effectiveness of raloxifene in preventing non-vertebral fractures in Japanese women with osteoporosis was similar to that of alendronate. Therefore, raloxifene may be worthy of consideration as an alternative treatment.
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.