22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of drugs on bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporosis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Osteoporosis affects mostly postmenopausal women, leading to deterioration of the microarchitectural bone structure and low bone mass, with an increased fracture risk with associated disability, morbidity and mortality. This Bayesian network meta-analysis compared the effects of current anti-osteoporosis drugs on bone mineral density.

          Methods

          The present systematic review and network meta-analysis follows the PRISMA extension statement to report systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions. The literature search was performed in June 2021. All randomised clinical trials that have investigated the effects of two or more drug treatments on BMD for postmenopausal osteoporosis were accessed. The network comparisons were performed through the STATA Software/MP routine for Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model analysis. The inverse variance method with standardised mean difference (SMD) was used for analysis.

          Results

          Data from 64 RCTs involving 82,732 patients were retrieved. The mean follow-up was 29.7 ± 19.6 months. Denosumab resulted in a higher spine BMD (SMD −0.220; SE 3.379), followed by pamidronate (SMD −5.662; SE 2.635) and zoledronate (SMD −10.701; SE 2.871). Denosumab resulted in a higher hip BMD (SMD −0.256; SE 3.184), followed by alendronate (SMD −17.032; SE 3.191) and ibandronate (SMD −17.250; SE 2.264). Denosumab resulted in a higher femur BMD (SMD 0.097; SE 2.091), followed by alendronate (SMD −16.030; SE 1.702) and ibandronate (SMD −17.000; SE 1.679).

          Conclusion

          Denosumab results in higher spine BMD in selected women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Denosumab had the highest influence on hip and femur BMD.

          Level of evidence

          Level I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs

          Related collections

          Most cited references83

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.

          The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly, authors face novel challenges for conducting and reporting their reviews. This extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement was developed specifically to improve the reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses. A group of experts participated in a systematic review, Delphi survey, and face-to-face discussion and consensus meeting to establish new checklist items for this extension statement. Current PRISMA items were also clarified. A modified, 32-item PRISMA extension checklist was developed to address what the group considered to be immediately relevant to the reporting of network meta-analyses. This document presents the extension and provides examples of good reporting, as well as elaborations regarding the rationale for new checklist items and the modification of previously existing items from the PRISMA statement. It also highlights educational information related to key considerations in the practice of network meta-analysis. The target audience includes authors and readers of network meta-analyses, as well as journal editors and peer reviewers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of parathyroid hormone (1-34) on fractures and bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

            Once-daily injections of parathyroid hormone or its amino-terminal fragments increase bone formation and bone mass without causing hypercalcemia, but their effects on fractures are unknown. We randomly assigned 1637 postmenopausal women with prior vertebral fractures to receive 20 or 40 microg of parathyroid hormone (1-34) or placebo, administered subcutaneously by the women daily. We obtained vertebral radiographs at base line and at the end of the study (median duration of observation, 21 months) and performed serial measurements of bone mass by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. New vertebral fractures occurred in 14 percent of the women in the placebo group and in 5 percent and 4 percent, respectively, of the women in the 20-microg and 40-microg parathyroid hormone groups; the respective relative risks of fracture in the 20-microg and 40-microg groups, as compared with the placebo group, were 0.35 and 0.31 (95 percent confidence intervals, 0.22 to 0.55 and 0.19 to 0.50). New nonvertebral fragility fractures occurred in 6 percent of the women in the placebo group and in 3 percent of those in each parathyroid hormone group (relative risk, 0.47 and 0.46, respectively [95 percent confidence intervals, 0.25 to 0.88 and 0.25 to 0.861). As compared with placebo, the 20-microg and 40-microg doses of parathyroid hormone increased bone mineral density by 9 and 13 more percentage points in the lumbar spine and by 3 and 6 more percentage points in the femoral neck; the 40-microg dose decreased bone mineral density at the shaft of the radius by 2 more percentage points. Both doses increased total-body bone mineral by 2 to 4 more percentage points than did placebo. Parathyroid hormone had only minor side effects (occasional nausea and headache). Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis with parathyroid hormone (1-34) decreases the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures; increases vertebral, femoral, and total-body bone mineral density; and is well tolerated. The 40-microg dose increased bone mineral density more than the 20-microg dose but had similar effects on the risk of fracture and was more likely to have side effects.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Osteoporosis

              Fractures resulting from osteoporosis become increasingly common in women after age 55 years and men after age 65 years, resulting in substantial bone-associated morbidities, and increased mortality and health-care costs. Research advances have led to a more accurate assessment of fracture risk and have increased the range of therapeutic options available to prevent fractures. Fracture risk algorithms that combine clinical risk factors and bone mineral density are now widely used in clinical practice to target high-risk individuals for treatment. The discovery of key pathways regulating bone resorption and formation has identified new approaches to treatment with distinctive mechanisms of action. Osteoporosis is a chronic condition and long-term, sometimes lifelong, management is required. In individuals at high risk of fracture, the benefit versus risk profile is likely to be favourable for up to 10 years of treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab. In people at a very high or imminent risk of fracture, therapy with teriparatide or abaloparatide should be considered; however, since treatment duration with these drugs is restricted to 18-24 months, treatment should be continued with an antiresorptive drug. Individuals at high risk of fractures do not receive adequate treatment and strategies to address this treatment gap-eg, widespread implementation of Fracture Liaison Services and improvement of adherence to therapy-are important challenges for the future.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                migliorini.md@gmail.com
                Journal
                J Orthop Surg Res
                J Orthop Surg Res
                Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1749-799X
                27 August 2021
                27 August 2021
                2021
                : 16
                : 533
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.412301.5, ISNI 0000 0000 8653 1507, Department of Orthopaedic, Trauma, and Reconstructive Surgery, , RWTH Aachen University Hospital, ; Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany
                [2 ]GRID grid.11780.3f, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0335, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, , University of Salerno, ; Via S. Allende, 84081 Baronissi, Salerno, Italy
                [3 ]GRID grid.439227.9, ISNI 0000 0000 8880 5954, Queen Mary University of London, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Centre for Sports and Exercise Medicine, , Mile End Hospital, ; 275 Bancroft Road, London, E1 4DG England
                [4 ]GRID grid.9757.c, ISNI 0000 0004 0415 6205, School of Pharmacy and Bioengineering, , Keele University Faculty of Medicine, ; Thornburrow Drive, Stoke on Trent, England
                [5 ]GRID grid.7700.0, ISNI 0000 0001 2190 4373, Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Mannheim, , Medical Faculty of the University Heidelberg, ; Mannheim, Germany
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7220-1221
                Article
                2678
                10.1186/s13018-021-02678-x
                8393477
                34452621
                fd2ef9ad-5afa-4724-a526-e78c1563ab35
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 27 April 2021
                : 16 August 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: RWTH Aachen University (3131)
                Categories
                Systematic Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Surgery
                osteoporosis,bone mineral density,drugs,denosumab
                Surgery
                osteoporosis, bone mineral density, drugs, denosumab

                Comments

                Comment on this article