ReviewOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2026
Management of bone health in cancer survivorship: a systematic review of clinical guidelines.
Review in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk factors of osteoporosis in post-gastrectomy gastric cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAccelerated bone loss is a side effect of many anticancer treatments, posing significant health challenges for cancer survivors. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and synthesize recommendations for the management of bone health, specifically fracture and osteoporosis risk, in clinical guidelines for people with cancer.
methodsSearches related to bone health clinical guidelines for cancer patients were conducted in four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus). Data extraction was performed independently by multiple authors. Quality appraisal was performed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Guidelines were categorized into three key focus areas (pharmacological interventions, screening, and lifestyle modifications) and compared across cancer types.
resultsA total of sixty-five guidelines were included in the systematic review. Two-thirds of guidelines included recommendations related to lifestyle (most commonly vitamin D and calcium supplementation), 76% related to screening (mostly bone mineral density via DXA), and 89% related to pharmacological intervention (most commonly bisphosphonates and denosumab). Fifty-four percent included recommendations in all three domains. Using the AGREE II tool, 42 guidelines were rated moderate and 23 high with strong scoring in domains of Scope and Purpose, Clarity of Presentation and Editorial Independence.
conclusionsFindings highlight variations in guideline quality, with many lacking holistic, multidisciplinary recommendations for bone health management. Further development of guidelines supporting patients impacted by multiple risk factors, and the inclusion of management strategies to mitigate compounding effects of cancer-related bone loss and age-related bone degradation among cancer patients, is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41872365What 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.