SynthesisThe Clinical journal of pain2021
Relative Efficacy and Safety of Tanezumab for Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized-Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in The Clinical journal of pain, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Sensing the skeleton: sensorineural regulation in bone.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2026Review
- Antibody and aptamer-based therapies for osteoarthritis: Application of antibodies and promise of aptamers.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Review
- Various Doses of Tanezumab in the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP): A Pooled Analysis of 4,514 Patients.Cureus · 2023Review
- Role of imaging for eligibility and safety of a-NGF clinical trials.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2023Review
- Remembering Stephen McMahon, a great electrophysiologist, innovator and mentor.Nature neuroscience · 2022Article
- Targeting dorsal root ganglia and primary sensory neurons for the treatment of chronic pain: an update.Expert opinion on therapeutic targetsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tanezumab for the treatment of patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA).
methodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 2020. Randomized-controlled trials comparing tanezumab with placebo or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with OA. Two investigators identified studies and independently extracted data, and conventional meta-analyses were conducted with Review Manager 5.3. The outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and risk of adverse events (AEs).
resultsA total of 8 articles, comprising 9 randomized-controlled trials, were included. Overall, tanezumab was superior to placebo for relieving pain and improving function, as well as in the patient's global assessment. Tanezumab also had significant advantages over nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for relieving pain and improving function, as well as in the patient's global assessment. Significantly more patients discontinued treatment because of AEs after treatment with tanezumab. However, the differences in serious AEs and total joint replacement were not significant. Moreover, tanezumab-treated patients experienced significantly more rapid progression of osteoarthritis. DISCUSSION: Tanezumab can alleviate pain and improve function for patients with OA of the hip or knee. Although tanezumab does not cause serious AEs, rapid progression of OA occurred in a small number of participants, so more clinical trials are needed to explore its safety.
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.