Trial reportScientific reports2017
Oral bisphosphonates and colorectal cancer.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2017. 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bisphosphonates and risk of cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of cancer · 2020Pooled it
- Nitrogen-Based Bisphosphonate Use and Risk of Cancer in Women Aged 50 Years and Older: A National Data Linkage Study.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Benzbromarone as a Novel Candidate for Preventing Alzheimer's Disease: Evidence From Real-World Data Screening and in Vitro Validation.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Oral Bisphosphonates for Colorectal Cancer Prevention: A Meta-Analytic Reappraisal Beyond Bone Health.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Colorectal cancer-specific microbiome in peripheral circulation and cancer tissues.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Risk of colorectal cancer in users of bisphosphonates: analysis of population-based electronic health records.European journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Use of oral bisphosphonates has been associated with a decreased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), but the association may be related to residual confounding by healthy lifestyle or body mass index (BMI). Therefore, we conducted a prospective nested case-control study within the Kaiser Permanente, Northern California health system cohort. In total, 12,505 CRC cases were individually matched to 599,534 controls. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using conditional logistic regression models with adjustment for important covariates extracted from the database. Participants who had ever used oral bisphosphonates were less likely than non-users to be diagnosed with CRC (OR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.89). Colon and rectum site-specific associations were similar to the overall association. A stronger inverse association for ever use of bisphosphonates was observed for men (OR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.85), however when stratified by previous lower endoscopy, the association was only observed in the participants who did not have a previous lower endoscopy (OR 0.73 (0.64, 0.83)). In conclusion, we found that oral bisphosphonate use was associated with a decreased odds of CRC, however this association may be due to residual confounding by BMI or another confounder.
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.