Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31028957›Full record

Trial reportBone2019

Comparison of risedronate versus placebo in preventing anastrozole-induced bone loss in women at high risk of developing breast cancer with osteopenia.

Ivana Sestak, Glen M Blake, Rajesh Patel, Robert E Coleman, Jack Cuzick, Richard Eastell

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Bone, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ivana SestakCentre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University London, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK. Electronic address: i.sestak@qmul.ac.uk.
Glen M BlakeSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Rajesh PatelImperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Robert E ColemanDepartment of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK.
Jack CuzickCentre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University London, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Richard EastellDepartment of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK.
Queen Mary University of London · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBImperial College London · GBSt Thomas' Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16893Cancer Research UK C569-A16891Medical Research Council MR/P020941/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anastrozole has been shown to prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women at high risk of the disease, but has been associated with substantial accelerated loss of bone mineral density (BMD) and increased fractures. Here, we investigate the effect of risedronate on BMD after 5 years of follow-up in the IBIS-II prevention trial. 1410 women were enrolled in the bone sub-study and stratified into three strata according to the lowest baseline T-score at spine or femoral neck. The objective was to compare the effect of oral risedronate (35 mg weekly) versus placebo in osteopenic women in stratum II who were randomised to anastrozole in the main study. 258 osteopenic, postmenopausal women at high risk of developing breast cancer for whom baseline and follow-up bone mineral density measurements were available. 5-year mean BMD change at the lumbar spine for osteopenic women randomised to anastrozole and risedronate was -0.4% compared to -4.2% for those not on risedronate (P < 0.0001) but not significantly different between risedronate users and non-users at the hip (P = 0.2). 5-year mean PINP change was -20% for those randomised to anastrozole and risedronate compared to 3% for those not on risedronate but on anastrozole (P < 0.0001). Our results confirm the bone loss associated with the use of anastrozole and show that anastrozole-induced BMD loss in the spine can be controlled with risedronate treatment. However, our results suggest that weekly oral risedronate is unable to completely prevent anastrozole induced bone loss at the hip.

Indexed as

AnastrozoleBone DensityBone Diseases, MetabolicBone ResorptionBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFractures, BoneHumansMiddle AgedPeptide FragmentsPlacebosProcollagenRisedronic AcidRisk FactorsAnastrozolePeptide FragmentsPlacebosProcollagenprocollagen Type I N-terminal peptideRisedronic AcidAnastrozoleBone markerBone mineral densityBreast cancer riskOsteopeniaRisedronate

Identifiers

PMID31028957
PMCPMC6548284
OpenAlexW2940460340

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.