ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2023
Adjuvant denosumab in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- The osteoporotic niche as a metabolic sanctuary for breast cancer dormancy and reactivation: A mechanistic perspective.iScience · 2026Review
- Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Plus Denosumab Compared to Chemotherapy Alone in Hormonal Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients.World journal of oncology · 2025Article
- Nutritional Challenges in Older Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review of Assessment Tools and Management Strategies.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Incidence of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw and associated antiresorptive drugs in adult Finnish population.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Bone Health Assessment and Management among Survivors of Non-metastatic Breast Cancer: A Narrative Review.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolismReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In early breast cancer (BC) the impact of denosumab on survival outcomes is still unclear. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess efficacy and safety of adjuvant denosumab in addition to standard anticancer therapy. Methods: PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, and oncological meetings websites were screened to identify potentially eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Survival outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS), bone-metastasis-free survival (BMFS), and overall survival (OS). Fracture incidence and time to first fracture were bone-health outcomes. Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), atypical femur fractures (AFF), and other adverse events were also evaluated. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios (RR) with respective 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were computed using a random-effects model. Exploratory subgroup analyses were performed. Results: Two phase III RCTs were included, the Austrian Breast & Colorectal Cancer Study Group-18 (ABCSG-18) and the D-CARE trials, for a total of 7929 patients. In the ABCSG-18 trial, denosumab was administered every 6 months during endocrine therapy (for a median of seven cycles) while the D-CARE trial used an intensive schedule for a total treatment duration of 5 years. Adjuvant denosumab showed no difference in DFS (HR: 0.932; 95% CI: 0.748-1.162), BMFS (HR: 0.9896; 95% CI: 0.751-1.070), and OS (HR: 0.917; 95% CI: 0.718-1.171) compared to placebo in the overall population. In hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative BC patients, a DFS (HR: 0.883; 95% CI: 0.782-0.996) and BMFS (HR: 0.832; 95% CI: 0.714-0.970) benefit was observed and BMFS was prolonged in all hormone receptor positive patients (HR: 0.850; 95% CI: 0.735-0.983). Fracture incidence (RR: 0.787; 95% CI: 0.696-0.890) and time to first fracture (HR: 0.760; 95% CI: 0.665-0.869) were also improved. No increase in overall toxicity was seen with denosumab and no differences were observed for ONJ and AFF between the 60-mg every 6-month schedule and placebo. Conclusion: Denosumab addition to anticancer treatment does not improve DFS, BMFS, or OS in the overall population, although a DFS improvement was observed in hormone receptor positive/HER2 negative BC patients and a BMFS improvement in all hormone receptor positive patients. Bone-health outcomes were improved with no added toxicity with the 60-mg schedule. Registration: PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022332787.
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.