ArticleHealth science reports2019
Treatment with once-weekly alendronate oral jelly compared with once-weekly alendronate oral tablet for Japanese patients with primary osteoporosis: An open-label, prospective, observational study.
Article in Health science reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of weekly liquid alendronate in Korean postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a 12-month, multi-center, randomized trial.Archives of osteoporosis · 2024Trial
- Comparison of once-weekly teriparatide and alendronate against new osteoporotic vertebral fractures at week 12.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2020Trial
- Effects of monthly minodronate with or without eldecalcitol addition in osteoporosis patients with rheumatoid arthritis: An 18-month prospective study.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2019Article
- Treatment with once-weekly alendronate oral jelly compared with once-weekly alendronate oral tablet for Japanese patients with primary osteoporosis: An open-label, prospective, observational study.Health science reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 15 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsClinical data regarding alendronate jelly are limited. We compared the efficacy and safety of once-weekly alendronate oral jelly with once-weekly alendronate tablet formulations in the context of primary osteoporosis.
methodsIn this 6-month, open-label, prospective, observational study, Japanese patients aged ≥60 years with primary osteoporosis were included from 14 primary care centres in Japan. The effects of once-weekly alendronate oral jelly and tablet formulations on bone mineral density (BMD), bone turnover markers, and quality of life related to gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed at baseline and 6 months. Treatment was allocated by patient preference. This potentially confounding factor was adjusted for statistically.
resultsIn total, 170 patients were enrolled (jelly, n = 97; tablet, n = 73). Mean percent changes in radius, lumbar spine, femoral neck, and hip BMD were similar in both treatment groups at 6 months. Both formulations decreased tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (TRACP-5b) and procollagen 1 N-terminal peptide (P1NP) between baseline and 6 months (by about 50% and 60%, respectively); no significant differences in mean changes were noted in these markers between groups. At 6 months, no significant differences were noted in visual analogue scale or EuroQOL five-dimension questionnaire scores between groups. The jelly group had significantly lower scores than the tablet group in the Izumo scale domains of heartburn (-0.81,
conclusionsOnce-weekly alendronate oral jelly 35 mg may be a suitable alternative therapeutic agent for primary osteoporosis in Japan.
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.