SynthesisThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2019
Denosumab versus bisphosphonates for the treatment of bone metastases from solid tumors: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2019. 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.
- Comparison of the Efficacy of Denosumab and Alendronate in Improving Bone Mineral Density in Osteoporosis Patients and High-Risk Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Pooled it
- Paroxetine as a Therapeutic Agent in Inflammatory Osteolysis: Mechanistic Insights and Efficacy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Denosumab versus pamidronate in the treatment of osteolytic bone metastases secondary to breast cancer: a multi-institutional analysis.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2024Article
- Research on the Economics of Cancer-Related Health Care: An Overview of the Review Literature.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2022Review
- Drug Delivery to the Bone Microenvironment Mediated by Exosomes: An Axiom or Enigma.International journal of nanomedicine · 2021Review
- A Novel Sulforaphane-Regulated Gene Network in Suppression of Breast Cancer-Induced Osteolytic Bone Resorption.Molecular cancer therapeutics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBone metastases are highly prevalent in breast, prostate, lung and colon cancers. Their symptoms negatively affect quality of life and functionality and optimal management can mitigate these problems. There are two different targeted agents to treat them: bisphosphonates (pamidronate and zoledronic acid) and the monoclonal antibody denosumab. Estimates of cost-effectiveness are still mixed.
objectiveTo conduct a systematic review of economic studies that compares these two options.
methodLiterature search comprised eight databases and keywords for bone metastases, bisphosphonates, denosumab, and economic studies were used. Data were extracted regarding their methodologic characteristics and cost-effectiveness analyses. All studies were evaluated regarding to its methodological quality.
resultsA total of 263 unique studies were retrieved and six met inclusion criteria. All studies were based on clinical trials and other existing literature data, and they had high methodological quality. Most found unfavorable cost-effectiveness for denosumab compared with zoledronic acid, with adjusted ICERS that ranged from $4638-87,354 per SRE avoided and from US$57,274-4.81 M. per QALY gained, which varied widely according to type of tumor, time horizon, among others. Results were sensitive to drug costs, time to first skeletal-related event (SRE), time horizon, and utility.
conclusionsDenosumab had unfavorable cost-effectiveness compared with zoledronic acid in most of the included studies. New economic studies based on real-world data and longer time horizons comparing these therapeutic options are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30382484What 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.