Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35509636›Full record

ArticleJBMR plus2022

Assessing the Effectiveness of Bisphosphonates for the Prevention of Fragility Fractures: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analyses.

Anastasios Bastounis, Tessa Langley, Sarah Davis, Zoe Paskins, Neil Gittoes, Jo Leonardi-Bee, Opinder Sahota

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JBMR plus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Research priorities regarding the use of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis: a UK priority setting exercise.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Anastasios BastounisDivision of Epidemiology & Public Health, School of Medicine University of Nottingham, City Hospital Nottingham UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5861-9373
Tessa LangleyDivision of Epidemiology & Public Health, School of Medicine University of Nottingham, City Hospital Nottingham UK.
Sarah DavisSchool of Health and Related Research, Regent Court (ScHARR) University of Sheffield Sheffield UK.
Zoe PaskinsSchool of Medicine Keele University Keele UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7783-2986
Neil GittoesCentre for Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism (CEDAM) University of Birmingham Birmingham UK.
Jo Leonardi-BeeDivision of Epidemiology & Public Health, School of Medicine University of Nottingham, City Hospital Nottingham UK.
Opinder SahotaQueens Medical Centre (QMC), University of Nottingham Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust Nottingham UK.
University of Nottingham · GBMidlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bisphosphonates have been found to be effective in preventing fragility fractures. However, their comparative effectiveness in populations at risk has yet to be defined. In light of recent clinical trials, we aimed to compare four bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronate) and to identify which are the most effective for the prevention of fragility fractures. This is an update of a systematic review previously published as part of a NICE HTA report. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis, updating the estimates regarding the comparative effectiveness of the aforementioned bisphosphonates. Studies identified from published and unpublished sources between 2014 and 2021 were added to the studies identified in the previous review. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently undertaken by two reviewers. Outcomes were fractures, femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), mortality, and adverse events. We identified 25 additional trials, resulting in a total population of 47,007 participants. All treatments had beneficial effects on fractures versus placebo with zoledronate being the most effective treatment in preventing vertebral fractures (hazard ratio [HR] 0.38; 95% credibility interval [CrI], 0.28-0.49). Zoledronate (HR 0.71; 95% CrI, 0.61-0.81) and risedronate (HR 0.70; 95% CrI, 0.53-0.84) were found to be the most effective treatments in preventing nonvertebral fractures. All treatments were associated with increases in femoral neck BMD versus placebo with zoledronate being the most effective treatment mean difference (MD 4.02; 95% CrI, 3.2-4.84). There was a paucity of data regarding hip and wrist fractures. Depending on its cost-effectiveness, zoledronate could be considered a first-line option for people at increased risk of fragility fractures. © 2022 The Authors.

Indexed as

ANTIRESORPTIVESBISPHOSPHONATESFRACTURE PREVENTIONFRACTURESINJURY/FRACTURE HEALINGNETWORK META‐ANALYSISOSTEOPOROSISSCREENINGSYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Identifiers

PMID35509636
PMCPMC9059468
OpenAlexW4220852185

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.