-
Health Technology Assessment... Jun 2020Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture.
BACKGROUND
Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture.
DATA SOURCES
For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018.
REVIEW METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty.
RESULTS
Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0-33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories.
LIMITATIONS
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Denosumab; Diphosphonates; Humans; Osteoporotic Fractures; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Teriparatide; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32588816
DOI: 10.3310/hta24290 -
Calcified Tissue International Jun 2023To assess the effectiveness and safety of denosumab (Prolia®) compared to bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, zoledronate), selective estrogen... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Clinical Effectiveness of Denosumab (Prolia®) for the Treatment of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women, Compared to Bisphosphonates, Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators (SERM), and Placebo: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of denosumab (Prolia®) compared to bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, zoledronate), selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs; bazedoxifene, raloxifene) or placebo, for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women (PMW). Systematic searches were run in PubMed, Embase & Cochrane Library on 27-April-2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included osteoporotic PMW allocated to denosumab, SERMs, bisphosphonates, or placebo were eligible for inclusion. RCTs were appraised using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Bayesian network and/or pairwise meta-analyses were conducted on predetermined outcomes (i.e. vertebral/nonvertebral fractures, bone mineral density [BMD], mortality, adverse events [AEs], serious AEs (SAEs), withdrawals due to AEs, AEs caused by denosumab discontinuation). A total of 12 RCTs (k = 22 publications; n = 25,879 participants) were included in the analyses. Denosumab, reported a statistically significant increase in lumbar spine (LS) and total hip (TH) BMD, compared to placebo. Similarly, denosumab also resulted in a statistically significant increase in TH BMD compared to the raloxifene and bazedoxifene. However, relative to denosumab, alendronate, ibandronate and risedronate resulted in significant improvements in both femoral neck (FN) and LS BMD. With regards to vertebral fractures and all safety outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between denosumab and any of the comparator. Relative to placebo, denosumab was associated with significant benefits in both LS and TH BMD. Additionally, denosumab (compared to placebo) was not associated with reductions in vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Finally, denosumab was not associated with improvement in safety outcomes, compared to placebo. These findings should be interpreted with caution as some analyses suffered from statistical imprecision.
Topics: Female; Humans; Diphosphonates; Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators; Denosumab; Alendronate; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Risedronic Acid; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Ibandronic Acid; Network Meta-Analysis; Postmenopause; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporosis; Bone Density; Spinal Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37016189
DOI: 10.1007/s00223-023-01078-z -
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... May 2020Atypical femur fractures (AFFs) are serious adverse events associated with bisphosphonates and often show poor healing.
CONTEXT
Atypical femur fractures (AFFs) are serious adverse events associated with bisphosphonates and often show poor healing.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a systematic review to evaluate effects of teriparatide, raloxifene, and denosumab on healing and occurrence of AFF.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We retrieved 910 references and reviewed 67 papers, including 31 case reports, 9 retrospective and 3 prospective studies on teriparatide. There were no RCTs. We pooled data on fracture union (n = 98 AFFs on teriparatide) and found that radiological healing occurred within 6 months of teriparatide in 13 of 30 (43%) conservatively managed incomplete AFFs, 9 of 10 (90%) incomplete AFFs with surgical intervention, and 44 of 58 (75%) complete AFFs. In 9 of 30 (30%) nonoperated incomplete AFFs, no union was achieved after 12 months and 4 (13%) fractures became complete on teriparatide. Eight patients had new AFFs during or after teriparatide. AFF on denosumab was reported in 22 patients, including 11 patients treated for bone metastases and 8 without bisphosphonate exposure. Denosumab after AFF was associated with recurrent incomplete AFFs in 1 patient and 2 patients of contralateral complete AFF. Eight patients had used raloxifene before AFF occurred, including 1 bisphosphonate-naïve patient.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no evidence-based indication in patients with AFF for teriparatide apart from reducing the risk of typical fragility fractures, although observational data suggest that teriparatide might result in faster healing of surgically treated AFFs. Awaiting further evidence, we formulate recommendations for treatment after an AFF based on expert opinion.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Denosumab; Diphosphonates; Europe; Femoral Fractures; Humans; Osteoporotic Fractures; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Societies, Medical; Teriparatide
PubMed: 31867670
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgz295 -
Current Psychiatry Reports Nov 2023Despite clear evidence that sex differences largely impact the efficacy and tolerability of antipsychotic medication, current treatment guidelines for schizophrenia... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Despite clear evidence that sex differences largely impact the efficacy and tolerability of antipsychotic medication, current treatment guidelines for schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) do not differentiate between men and women. This review summarizes the available evidence on strategies that may improve pharmacotherapy for women and provides evidence-based recommendations to optimize treatment for women with schizophrenia.
RECENT FINDINGS
We systematically searched PubMed and Embase for peer-reviewed studies on three topics: (1) sex differences in dose-adjusted antipsychotic serum concentrations, (2) hormonal augmentation therapy with estrogen and estrogen-like compounds to improve symptom severity, and (3) strategies to reduce antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia. Based on three database studies and one RCT, we found higher dose-adjusted concentrations in women compared to men for most antipsychotics. For quetiapine, higher concentrations were specifically found in older women. Based on two recent meta-analyses, both estrogen and raloxifene improved overall symptomatology. Most consistent findings were found for raloxifene augmentation in postmenopausal women. No studies evaluated the effects of estrogenic contraceptives on symptoms. Based on two meta-analyses and one RCT, adjunctive aripiprazole was the best-studied and safest strategy for lowering antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia. Evidence-based recommendations for female-specific pharmacotherapy for SSD consist of (1) female-specific dosing for antipsychotics (guided by therapeutic drug monitoring), (2) hormonal replacement with raloxifene in postmenopausal women, and (3) aripiprazole addition as best evidenced option in case of antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia. Combining these strategies could reduce side effects and improve outcome of women with SSD, which should be confirmed in future longitudinal RCTs.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Aged; Antipsychotic Agents; Schizophrenia; Aripiprazole; Hyperprolactinemia; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Estrogens
PubMed: 37864676
DOI: 10.1007/s11920-023-01460-6 -
Experimental Gerontology Mar 2022Raloxifene treatment has been reported to be associated with cardiovascular benefits if prescribed to women during the postmenopausal period. However, a final conclusion... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Raloxifene treatment has been reported to be associated with cardiovascular benefits if prescribed to women during the postmenopausal period. However, a final conclusion regarding this hypothesis has not yet been achieved. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of raloxifene on the endothelial function and inflammation in postmenopausal women.
METHODS
We systematically searched the following 4 databases from inception to 23 January 2021 without any language restrictions: Web of Science, PubMed/Medline, Embase and Scopus. The eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effects of raloxifene on the flow-mediated dilatation (FMD), C-reactive protein (CRP), carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1) and E-selectin levels, were included in the final meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 16 RCTs were included in the final analysis. Raloxifene administration had no significant effect on ICAM-1 and E-selectin levels. However, we observed a decrease of the CIMT (WMD: -0.071 mm, 95% CI: -0.09 to -0.04, P = 0.000), CRP (WMD: -0.342 mg/L, 95% CI: -0.591, -0.094, p = 0.007), and VCAM-1 (WMD: -197.90 mg/L, 95% CI: -269.58 to -126.23, P = 0.000) levels in the intervention versus control groups following the prescription of this pharmacological agent. Moreover, raloxifene treatment resulted in a significant elevation of the FMD (WMD: 1.64%, 95% CI: 0.46 to 2.81, P = 0.006), particularly if the intervention was equal to or exceeded 12 weeks.
CONCLUSION
Raloxifene might emerge as a potential therapeutic option in the management of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in postmenopausal women.
Topics: Biomarkers; Female; Humans; Inflammation; Postmenopause; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34973344
DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2021.111682 -
Clinical Therapeutics Sep 2021To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to elucidate the effects of raloxifene on the lipid profile in elderly individuals. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to elucidate the effects of raloxifene on the lipid profile in elderly individuals.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was performed following the PRISMA statement. Data on triglycerides (TGs), total cholesterol (TC), HDL-C, and LDL-C were extracted. Relevant publications up to October 2020 were detected through searches in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase databases. Changes were reported as weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% CIs using random-effects models.
FINDINGS
Nine studies were selected, with a duration of intervention ranging from 2 and 12 months and a raloxifene dose of 60 to 120 mg/d. Studies were performed in healthy individuals and in those with disorders, such as osteoporosis, type 2 diabetes, and kidney disease required long-term hemodialysis. Overall, TG (WMD, -6.50 mg/dL; 95% CI, -34.18 to 21.20 mg/eL; P = 0.646), LDL-C (WMD, -17.86 mg/dL; 95% CI, -42.44 to 6.72 mg/dL; P = 0.154), and HDL-C (WMD, 2.35 mg/dL; 95% CI, -1.14 to 5.84 mg/dL; P = 0.187) levels did not change significantly after the administration of raloxifene. In contrast, TC levels decreased after raloxifene therapy (WMD, -6.59 mg/dL; 95% CI, -13.13 to -0.05 mg/dL; P = 0.048).
IMPLICATIONS
Raloxifene therapy decreased TC levels but did not alter TG, HDL-C, and LDL-C concentrations in elderly individuals. Regarding the LDL-C levels, although the finding lacked statistical significance, we believe that there was a mean reduction that deserves further clinical attention as much as TC.
Topics: Aged; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Lipids; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triglycerides
PubMed: 34462124
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2021.07.017 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for osteoporosis and is more prevalent among people with CKD than among people who do not have CKD. Although... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for osteoporosis and is more prevalent among people with CKD than among people who do not have CKD. Although several drugs have been used to effectively treat osteoporosis in the general population, it is unclear whether they are also effective and safe for people with CKD, who have altered systemic mineral and bone metabolism.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for osteoporosis in patients with CKD stages 3-5, and those undergoing dialysis (5D).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing any anti-osteoporotic drugs with a placebo, no treatment or usual care in patients with osteoporosis and CKD stages 3 to 5D were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed their quality using the risk of bias tool, and extracted data. The main outcomes were the incidence of fracture at any sites; mean change in the bone mineral density (BMD; measured using dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry (DXA)) of the femoral neck, total hip, lumbar spine, and distal radius; death from all causes; incidence of adverse events; and quality of life (QoL). Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven studies involving 9164 randomised participants with osteoporosis and CKD stages 3 to 5D met the inclusion criteria; all participants were postmenopausal women. Five studies included patients with CKD stages 3-4, and two studies included patients with CKD stages 5 or 5D. Five pharmacological interventions were identified (abaloparatide, alendronate, denosumab, raloxifene, and teriparatide). All studies were judged to be at an overall high risk of bias. Among patients with CKD stages 3-4, anti-osteoporotic drugs may reduce the risk of vertebral fracture (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.69; low certainty evidence). Anti-osteoporotic drugs probably makes little or no difference to the risk of clinical fracture (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.05; moderate certainty evidence) and adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence). We were unable to incorporate studies into the meta-analyses for BMD at the femoral neck, lumbar spine and total hip as they only reported the percentage change in the BMD in the intervention group. Among patients with severe CKD stages 5 or 5D, it is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of clinical fracture (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug improves the BMD at the femoral neck because the certainty of this evidence is very low (MD 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.02). Anti-osteoporotic drug may slightly improve the BMD at the lumbar spine (MD 0.03, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.04, low certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in the included studies. It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of death (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.22 to 4.56; very low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with CKD stages 3-4, anti-osteoporotic drugs may reduce the risk of vertebral fracture in low certainty evidence. Anti-osteoporotic drugs make little or no difference to the risk of clinical fracture and adverse events in moderate certainty evidence. Among patients with CKD stages 5 and 5D, it is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug reduces the risk of clinical fracture and death because the certainty of this evidence is very low. Anti-osteoporotic drug may slightly improve the BMD at the lumbar spine in low certainty evidence. It is uncertain whether anti-osteoporotic drug improves the BMD at the femoral neck because the certainty of this evidence is very low. Larger studies including men, paediatric patients or individuals with unstable CKD-mineral and bone disorder are required to assess the effect of each anti-osteoporotic drug at each stage of CKD.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bias; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Denosumab; Female; Femur Neck; Fractures, Spontaneous; Hip; Humans; Indoles; Lumbar Vertebrae; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Parathyroid Hormone-Related Protein; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Spinal Fractures; Teriparatide; Thiophenes; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 34231877
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013424.pub2 -
Bone Jan 2020To determine the clinical effectiveness of denosumab (DEN), raloxifene (RLX), romosozumab (ROMO) and teriparatide (TPTD), within their licensed (or anticipated licensed)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Clinical effectiveness of denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab, and teriparatide for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the clinical effectiveness of denosumab (DEN), raloxifene (RLX), romosozumab (ROMO) and teriparatide (TPTD), within their licensed (or anticipated licensed) indications, for the treatment of osteoporosis.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted. Nine electronic databases and trial registries were searched up to the end of July 2018. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomised controlled trials (RCT) in a population at risk of osteoporotic fracture, comparing these four non-bisphosphonates DEN, RLX, ROMO, or TPTD with each other, a non-active treatment, or the bisphosphonates alendronate (ALN), risedronate (RIS), ibandronate (IBN) and zoledronic acid (ZOL). Quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Network meta-analyses (NMA) were used to determine the relative effectiveness of treatments.
RESULTS
The systematic review identified 7898 citations. Forty-six RCTs of non-bisphosphonates met the inclusion criteria for the review and provided data for analyses. Additionally 49 RCTs of bisphosphonates were used in the NMAs. Forty-six RCTs were included in the NMA of vertebral fracture data, 23 RCTs for hip fractures and 73 RCTs in the NMA of femoral neck bone mineral density (FN BMD). For vertebral fractures, all four non-bisphosphonates showed statistically significant benefit relative to placebo: TPTD HR 0.23 (95% credible internal (CrI) 0.16, 0.32); ROMO followed by ALN 0.25 (95% CrI 0.15, 0.43); DEN HR 0.30 (95% CrI 0.21, 0.43); RLX HR 0.61 (95% CrI 0.44, 0.80). The four non-bisphosphonates interventions studied also showed statistically significant benefit relative to placebo for FN BMD, and for hip fractures TPTD, ROMO followed by ALN, and DEN showed statistically significant benefit relative to placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
The four non-bisphosphonate interventions studied were all statistically significantly clinically effective for reducing vertebral fractures when compared to placebo, and were beneficial for change in FN BMD compared to placebo. All reduced hip fractures, and this was statistically significant for TPTD, ROMO followed by ALN, and DEN.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Denosumab; Diphosphonates; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Teriparatide; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31626995
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2019.115081 -
Growth Hormone & IGF Research :... 2021To ascertain the clinical magnitude of raloxifene administration on insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effects of raloxifene administration on serum levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 levels: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
To ascertain the clinical magnitude of raloxifene administration on insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) levels.
METHODS
A systematic comprehensive search was performed without language limitation up to 14 December 2020. We included only trials that assessed the effect of raloxifene on IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 in adults. Meta-analysis was performed using the Stata software (Stata Corp. College Station, Texas, USA).
RESULTS
Seven arms were included, encompassing postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus, postmenopausal women with breast cancer, healthy postmenopausal women, and healthy elderly men. Raloxifene therapy significantly reduced IGF-1 levels (WMD: -2.92 nmol/L, 95% CI: -3.49, -2.35, p < 0.001) compared to placebo. Raloxifene dosage ˃60 mg/day (WMD: -3.29 ng/mL, 95% CI: -3.50 to -3.08, I = 0.0%) decreased IGF-1 levels more than 60 mg/day (WMD: -2.29 ng/mL, 95% CI: -2.90 to -1.69, I = 16%). Moreover, intervention duration ˃26 weeks (WMD: -3.48 ng/mL, 95% CI: -5.26 to -1.69, I = 0.0%) reduced IGF-1 levels more than ˂26 weeks (WMD: -2.55 ng/mL, 95% CI: -3.31 to -1.79, I = 92%). In contrast, overall results from the random-effects model did not suggest a significant change in IGFBP-3 levels upon raloxifene therapy.
CONCLUSION
Raloxifene therapy significantly reduced serum levels of IGF-1 levels but without changes in IGFPB-3 levels.
Topics: Biomarkers; Breast Neoplasms; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Humans; Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein 3; Insulin-Like Growth Factor I; Postmenopause; Prognosis; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators
PubMed: 34384975
DOI: 10.1016/j.ghir.2021.101421 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial tissue outside the uterine cavity. This chronic and recurring condition occurs in women of reproductive age. It...
BACKGROUND
Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial tissue outside the uterine cavity. This chronic and recurring condition occurs in women of reproductive age. It is a common cause of pain or infertility and can cause non-specific symptoms such as lower back pain, dyspareunia (pain during or after intercourse), and dysmenorrhoea (menstrual pain). Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease. Medical treatment aims to relieve symptoms and shrink lesions by suppressing the normal menstrual cycle. In this review, we consider medication specifically aiming to modulate oestrogen receptors as an alternative method of treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) in the management of endometriosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for trials in the following databases (from their inception to 28 May 2020): Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Studies (CRS Online), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and registers of ongoing trials. In addition, we searched all reference lists of included trials, and we contacted experts in the field, in an attempt to locate trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) with placebo, no treatment, other medical treatment, or surgery for endometriosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data using data extraction forms. We used risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for reporting dichotomous data. Primary review outcomes were relief of pelvic pain and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, recurrence rate, and economic and fertility outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included only one RCT, which included 93 women, comparing the SERM raloxifene with placebo in biopsy-proven endometriosis. All women first underwent complete surgical excision of all lesions. Evidence was of very low quality: the main limitation was imprecision - with very sparse data from only one small study, which included only women after surgical treatment. Relief of pelvic pain The included study did not specifically measure the primary outcome of pain relief. Study authors reported that time to return of pelvic pain (defined as two months of pain equal to or more severe than pain at study entry) was more rapid in the raloxifene group (P = 0.03). Adverse events The included study reported adverse events such as pelvic pain, ovarian cyst, headache, migraine, and depression. We are uncertain whether raloxifene improves the incidence of pelvic pain (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.45), ovarian cysts (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.43), headache (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.43), migraine (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.95), depression (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.63 to 6.06), or other adverse events (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.30) (all: 1 study, n = 93; very low-quality evidence). Quality of life The study described a statistically significant difference in mental health quality of life (QoL) by 12 months, in favour of placebo treatment (mean difference 11.1, 95% CI 0.01 to 21.19). Other QoL data did not differ between groups but were not reported in detail. Recurrence rate, fertility, and economic outcomes We are uncertain whether raloxifene improves the recurrence rate of endometriosis, proven by biopsy, when compared to placebo (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.66 to 2.21; 1 study, n = 93; very low-quality evidence). This suggests that if 28% of women taking placebo have biopsy-proven recurrence of endometriosis, between 19% and 62% of those taking raloxifene will do so. These outcomes are prone to bias, as not all women had an actual second laparoscopy. Recurrence based on symptoms (non-menstrual pain, dysmenorrhoea, or dyspareunia) was described; in these cases, symptoms improved after use of raloxifene as well as after use of placebo. The included study did not report data on economic outcomes. No comparative data were available on pregnancy, as the study included only women who agreed to postpone pregnancy until after the study endpoint; the few pregnancies that did occur were uneventful but were regarded as an adverse event. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on a single, small RCT and incomplete data, we are uncertain of the effects of SERMs on pain relief in surgically treated patients with endometriosis. The included study was stopped prematurely because of higher pain scores among women who took SERMs when compared to scores among those receiving placebo. Further research is needed to fully evaluate the role of SERMs in endometriosis.
Topics: Dysmenorrhea; Dyspareunia; Endometriosis; Female; Humans; Pelvic Pain; Placebos; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators
PubMed: 33973648
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011169.pub2