Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40932301›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of rheumatology2025

Experience of the Administration of First Dose IV Zoledronate at Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

Akshat Sinha, Brandon Karamveer Sangha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Akshat SinhaUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham Medical School College of Medicine and Health, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1179-1787
Brandon Karamveer SanghaUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham Medical School College of Medicine and Health, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0009-0001-1599-0399

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Osteoporosis affects nearly 3 million people in the UK, with bisphosphonates forming the mainstay of treatment. While the side effect profile of zoledronate is well-documented, adherence to prescribing guidance and specific population outcomes warrant further investigation. Our objectives were to assess whether zoledronate was prescribed correctly in accordance with guidance and evaluate the side-effect profile with attention to demographic variables. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 68 patients receiving their first dose of zoledronate at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham (QEHB), between January and December 2021. Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Patient records were reviewed for adherence to guidance, including pre-infusion checks and indication for treatment. Side effects were documented through postinfusion questionnaires. This timeframe was selected to capture a full year of prescribing patterns and ensure consistency in available data. Results: Among 68 patients (13 males, 55 females; age range 28-92), 96% were prescribed zoledronate for appropriate indications. Vitamin D was checked in 93%, and 100% underwent dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans. However, only 16% had Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) scores calculated. One patient received the infusion despite an estimated glomerular filtration rate < 35 mL/min. Side effects were reported in 37%, primarily bone/joint pain. Statistical analysis did not find a significant correlation between age, sex, or ethnicity and side-effect frequency (P > 0.05). Age appeared to influence post-dose symptoms, with older patients experiencing fewer side effects. Ocular symptoms were reported in 2 cases, and details of these were analyzed. South Asian females reported a higher incidence of side effects, but this observation remains exploratory due to the small sample size. Conclusion: This audit has shown that zoledronate is being prescribed in accordance with guidance at QEHB. Treatment is offered after systematic checks of biochemical parameters. However, the low rate of FRAX score calculation (16%) raises concerns about the completeness of fracture risk assessment. A potential explanation is the reliance on DXA scanning or clinical judgment, and a lack of transfer of information from primary care. Side effects reported are covered in patient information leaflets. Given that side effects were assessed 16 weeks post-infusion, recall bias should be considered a limitation. Further research is needed to ascertain predictors for subsequent adverse effects following infusion. Zoledronate prescription was largely in line with guidance, though notable gaps in fracture risk assessment were observed. The side effect profile aligned with existing literature, and demographic variations in adverse events should be interpreted cautiously given the sample size constraints.

Identifiers

PMID40932301
PMCPMC12402432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.