ArticleBJC reports2024
Aromatase inhibitors and fracture prevention - do 2017 guidelines work in real world?
Article in BJC reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Aromatase inhibitors therapy and major osteoporotic fracture risk in postmenopausal breast cancer patients: a nationwide real-world cohort study.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAromatase inhibitor induced bone loss (AIBL) is a recognised adverse event with resultant increase in fracture risk. We aimed to determine the real-world impact of the 2017 consensus guidelines on AIBL and see if it is effective in fracture prevention.
methodsOver a 7-year study period, 1001 women prescribed AI were split in two groups. First group were offered bone active treatment based on NOS 2008 guidelines whereas the second group followed the 2017 consensus guidelines.
results1001 women were included. First group: 361 women had a baseline DEXA with 143 (40%) women who had a normal DEXA, 174 (48%) had osteopenia and 44 (12%) had osteoporosis. Of the women with osteopenia, 44 (25%) women were offered treatment, and 22 (13%) women had a fracture. Second group: 640 women had a baseline DEXA with 216 (33%) women with a normal result, 322(50%) had osteopenia and 107 (17%) had osteoporosis. Of the women with osteopenia, 127 (39%) women were offered treatment, and 8 (2.5%) women had a fracture.
conclusionsOur study provides real world evidence of the success of 2017 consensus statement in lowering fracture risk. A significant reduction in fractures pre (13%) and post guidelines change (2.5%) was demonstrated (absolute risk reduction of 10.5%) which has implications for healthcare systems worldwide as we have demonstrated this approach can reduce morbidity. Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women with over two million women diagnosed with it annually. Early diagnosis and treatment with hormonal therapies have helped reduce mortality. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are the main drugs in this class and have demonstrated improved survival. However, whilst conveying major benefits, AIs reduce oestrogen levels leading to significant bone loss and increasing fracture risk. Several protocols have been recommended to address this concern. We compared the two guidelines published by National Osteoporosis Society UK in 2008 and consensus statement recommended by seven breast cancer and bone health groups in 2017 to see which work better in preventing fractures in women prescribed AIs for breast cancer. Our study shows that the 2017 guidelines are better at preventing fractures in the real world. Hence, we suggest that these should be adopted by specialists treating breast cancer which can help women avoid fractures and improve long term health.
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.