Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32366863›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Adherence with brand versus generic bisphosphonates among osteoporosis patients: a new-user cohort study in the French National Healthcare Insurance database.

Marie Viprey, Yufeng Xue, Aurélie Rousseau, Cécile Payet, Roland Chapurlat, Pascal Caillet, Alexandra Dima, Anne-Marie Schott

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Impact and implications of national centralized drug procurement in China.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Marie VipreyHospices Civils de Lyon, Pôle de Sante Publique, Lyon, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3281-1970
Yufeng XueUniv. Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, HESPER EA 7425, Lyon, France.
Aurélie RousseauCentre Hospitalier de Bourg en Bresse, Service pharmaceutique, Bourg en Bresse, France.
Cécile PayetHospices Civils de Lyon, Pôle de Sante Publique, Lyon, France.
Roland ChapurlatUniversité de Lyon, INSERM UMR 1033, Lyon, France.
Pascal CailletCHU de Nantes, Service de Pharmacologie Clinique, Nantes, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5667-7887
Alexandra DimaUniv. Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, HESPER EA 7425, Lyon, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3106-2242
Anne-Marie SchottHospices Civils de Lyon, Pôle de Sante Publique, Lyon, France. anne-marie.schott-pethelaz@chu-lyon.fr.
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies documented declines in treatment adherence with generic forms of oral bisphosphonates in osteoporosis compared to branded forms, while others did not support this relation. Our aim was to compare medication adherence with brand versus generic forms of oral bisphosphonates. A new-user cohort study was conducted using routinely collected administrative and healthcare data linked at the individual level extracted from a nationwide representative sample of the French National Healthcare Insurance database. We included all patients aged 50 and older, new users of oral bisphosphonates for primary osteoporosis between 01/01/2009 and 31/12/2015. Two components of adherence were measured: implementation (continuous multiple-interval measure of medication availability version 7; CMA7) and persistence (time to discontinuation). The sample was composed of 1,834 in the "brand bisphosphonate" group and 1,495 patients in the "generic bisphosphonate" group. Initiating oral bisphosphonate treatment with brand was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation within 12 months (Hazard Ratio = 1.08; 95%CI = [1.02;1.14]). The risk of good implementation (CMA7 ≥ 0.90) was significantly lower in "brand bisphosphonate" group (Risk Ratio = 0.90; 95%CI = [0.85; 0.95]). We did not find any evidence to support the hypothesis of a lower adherence to generic bisphosphonates. In fact, prescribing of generic bisphosphonates led to a higher persistence rate and to better implementation at 1 year.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceAdministration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overBone Density Conservation AgentsDatabases, FactualDiphosphonatesDrugs, GenericFemaleFranceHumansInsurance, HealthMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisPropensity ScoreBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesDrugs, Generic

Identifiers

PMID32366863
PMCPMC7198539
OpenAlexW3021714056

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.