Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30650219›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2019

Pharmacology of bisphosphonates.

Serge Cremers, Matthew T Drake, F Hal Ebetino, John P Bilezikian, R Graham G Russell

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 221 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in people with cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. [Antiresorptive therapies in osteoporosis].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Rethinking Osteoporosis Drugs: Can We Simultaneously Address Sarcopenia?International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

36 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Serge CremersDivision of Laboratory Medicine, Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6800-5532
Matthew T DrakeDepartment of Endocrinology and Kogod Center of Aging, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3662-7345
F Hal EbetinoDepartment of Chemistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
John P BilezikianDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
R Graham G RussellMellanby Centre for Bone Research, Medical School, University of Sheffield, UK.
Columbia University Irving Medical Center · USMayo Clinic · USNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversity of Rochester · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The biological effects of the bisphosphonates (BPs) as inhibitors of calcification and bone resorption were first described in the late 1960s. In the 50 years that have elapsed since then, the BPs have become the leading drugs for the treatment of skeletal disorders characterized by increased bone resorption, including Paget's disease of bone, bone metastases, multiple myeloma, osteoporosis and several childhood inherited disorders. The discovery and development of the BPs as a major class of drugs for the treatment of bone diseases is a paradigm for the successful journey from "bench to bedside and back again". Several of the leading BPs achieved "blockbuster" status as branded drugs. However, these BPs have now come to the end of their patent life, making them highly affordable. The opportunity for new clinical applications for BPs also exists in other areas of medicine such as ageing, cardiovascular disease and radiation protection. Their use as inexpensive generic medicines is therefore likely to continue for many years to come. Fifty years of research into the pharmacology of bisphosphonates have led to a fairly good understanding about how these drugs work and how they can be used safely in patients with metabolic bone diseases. However, while we seemingly know much about these drugs, a number of key aspects related to BP distribution and action remain incompletely understood. This review summarizes the existing knowledge of the (pre)clinical and translational pharmacology of BPs, and highlights areas in which understanding is lacking.

Indexed as

AnimalsBone Density Conservation AgentsBone Diseases, MetabolicBone RemodelingDiphosphonatesHumansRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesBisphosphonatesboneosteoporosispharmacology

Identifiers

PMID30650219
PMCPMC6533426
OpenAlexW2910266122

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.