-
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 -
Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine... Feb 2020The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicines for invigorating the kidney (CHMIK) on senile osteoporosis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicines for invigorating the kidney (CHMIK) on senile osteoporosis.
METHODS
We searched for studies in English-language databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) and Chinese-language databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang Data, VIP Chinese periodical service platform, and China Biology Medicine disc from their inception to September 2017. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of Traditional Chinese Medicine therapies (alone or in combination) and conventional clinical medicine therapies among older adult patients with osteoporosis were identified. We conducted a network Meta-analysis with a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model using RStudio software, Version 3.4.1.
RESULTS
Forty-three randomized controlled trials assessing the differences between Traditional Chinese Medicine and conventional clinical medicine were identified, including 15 treatments and involving 3316 patients. The results of the network Meta-analysis indicated that alendronate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.047-0.73) and calcium (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.11-0.30) are significantly more effective if combined with oral CHMIK. CHMIK alone is significantly more effective than both alendronate (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.10-1.0) and calcium (OR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.056-0.28). Moreover, CHMIK + tuina + calcium is more effective than CHMIK + calcium + vitamin D + alendronate (OR = 18.0, 95% CI: 1.1-2.7e + 02).
CONCLUSION
The present network Meta-analysis found that alendronate and calcium are more effective if combined with oral CHMIK and that oral CHMIK alone may be more effective than alendronate or calcium. Tuina may have an advantage over oral medicines. Oral CHMIK and calcitonin show the most potential for treating senile osteoporosis.
Topics: Humans; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Osteoporosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32227762
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences Jul 2023The chief aim in managing periodontal diseases is the elimination of causative factors that may vary from pathogens to physical parameters. In the current systematic...
INTRODUCTION
The chief aim in managing periodontal diseases is the elimination of causative factors that may vary from pathogens to physical parameters. In the current systematic review, the effectiveness of "" as a supplement to ")" in the management of periodontitis is calibrated from the previous studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An extensive online search in the various databanks of EMBASE, Medline, Pubmed, and Scopus was conducted. The keywords searched were "Probing depth (PD)" which was the main endpoint, and variations in " (CAL)" and/or " (BD) fill" were the secondary variants that were searched for in the current study. The data collected were tabulated and compared using the means and the standard deviations. Using the random effect method the mean variations and the confidence intervals (95%) of the parameters were assessed.
RESULTS
Eight studies were finalized. Alendronate was utilized as a supplement to SRP in seven studies, four of which employed topical administration and three of which used oral alendronate. A substantial grade of heterogeneity for Probing depth ( < 0.0001), Clinical Attachment Level ( = 0.007), and Bone Defect fill ( < 0.0001) was observed amongst groups when comparing the properties of adjunctive BT to SRP alone. In comparison to SRP alone, SRP with bisphosphonate treatment significantly reduced PD ( = 0.002), increased CAL ( = 0.008), and filled BD ( < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Although BT as an adjunct appears to be successful in treating periodontitis, its practical applicability is questionable due to the possibility of developing jaw osteonecrosis and the short-range follow-up of the research.
PubMed: 37654331
DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_504_22 -
PloS One 2022Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is the most common secondary osteoporosis, alendronate (ALE) and teriparatide (TPTD) are widely used in the treatment of GIOP.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The efficiency and safety of alendronate versus teriparatide for treatment glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is the most common secondary osteoporosis, alendronate (ALE) and teriparatide (TPTD) are widely used in the treatment of GIOP. However, which of these two drugs has a better curative effect needs the support of evidence-based medicine.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials of ALE and TPTD in the treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis until February 2022. These patients included in the study took glucocorticoid doses greater than 7.5 mg/d for more than 3 months before treatment with ALE and TPTD. The risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) are used as the influence index of discontinuous data, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% CI are used as the influence index of continuous data.
RESULTS
A total of 4102 patients were enrolled in all 5 studies that met the admission criteria. We found that compared with ALE, TPTD could reduce the rate of new vertebral fracture (RR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.05-0.34, P<0.00001). TPTD increased LS bone mineral density (BMD) (0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.64, P<0.00001), TH BMD (0.17, 95% CI 0.05-0.28, P = 0.004) and FN BMD (0.17, 95% CI 0.05-0.29, P = 0.006) compared to ALE. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of non-vertebral fracture and adverse events between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with ALE, TPTD is an effective drug to reduce vertebral fracture risk in patients with GIOP. Furthermore, long-term use of TPTD can increase the bone mineral density of LS, FN, and TH.
Topics: Alendronate; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Osteoporosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fractures; Teriparatide
PubMed: 35639783
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267706 -
Journal of the American Dental... Aug 2019The authors' aim in this systematic review was to evaluate the validity of using preoperative serum C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide (CTX) levels as a predictive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Serum C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide level as a predictive biomarker of osteonecrosis after dentoalveolar surgery in patients receiving bisphosphonate therapy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The authors' aim in this systematic review was to evaluate the validity of using preoperative serum C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide (CTX) levels as a predictive factor of increased risk of developing medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients receiving bisphosphonate (BP) therapy who underwent invasive dental procedures.
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED
The authors searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The authors conducted a meta-analysis on the risk ratio. The authors used the methodological index for nonrandomized studies and Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies checklist to assess quality.
RESULTS
The authors included 18 clinical trials involving 2,301 patients. Most patients received alendronate or risedronate for an average of 62.14 months. The average serum CTX level in patients who received BP before surgery was 198.25 picograms per milliliter. Meta-analysis results showed that the cutoff in CTX level (150 pg/mL) was not predictive of MRONJ risk. The sensitivity of CTX values lower than 150 pg/mL was 34.26%, and the specificity was 77.08%.
CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
The use of CTX levels to diagnose MRONJ risk after dental procedures in patients receiving BP is not justified. The cutoff of 150 pg/mL in serum CTX levels is not predictive of MRONJ. Further studies are needed to develop other reliable biomarkers.
Topics: Biomarkers; Bisphosphonate-Associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Collagen Type I; Diphosphonates; Humans; Osteonecrosis; Peptides; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 31256803
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.03.006 -
Neurospine May 2024We investigated the clinical efficacy of anabolic agents compared with bisphosphonates (BPs) for the incidence of new osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) and fracture...
Comparison of the Clinical Efficacy of Anabolic Agents and Bisphosphonates in the Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
OBJECTIVE
We investigated the clinical efficacy of anabolic agents compared with bisphosphonates (BPs) for the incidence of new osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) and fracture healing of OVF in the patients with OVF via meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
Electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for published RCTs till December 2022. The RCTs that recruited participants with osteoporosis at high-/very high-risk of fracture (a history of osteoporotic vertebral or hip fracture) or fresh OVF were included in this study. We assessed the risk of bias on every included RCTs, estimated relative risk (RR) for the incidence of new OVF and fracture healing of OVF, and overall certainty of evidence. Meta-analyses were performed by Cochrane review manager (RevMan) version 5.3. Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 and GRADEpro/GDT were applied for evaluating methodological quality and overall certainty of evidence, respectively.
RESULTS
Five hundred eighteen studies were screened, and finally 6 eligible RCTs were included in the analysis. In the patients with prevalent OVF, anabolic agents significantly reduced the incidence of new OVF (teriparatide and romosozumab vs alendronate and risedronate [RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 - 0.71; p < 0.00001; high-certainty of evidence]; teriparatide vs risedronate [RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 - 0.68; p < 0.0001; high-certainty of evidence]. However, there was no evidence of teriparatide compared to alendronate in fracture healing of OVF (RR = 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 - 1.60; p = 0.12; low-certainty of evidence).
CONCLUSION
In the patients with prevalent OVF, anabolic agents showed a significant superiority for preventing new OVF than BPs, with no significant evidence for promoting fracture healing of OVF. However, considering small number of RCTs in this study, additional studies with large-scale data are required to obtain more robust evidences.
PubMed: 38697911
DOI: 10.14245/ns.2347256.628 -
Journal of Bone Metabolism Aug 2020The present study performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials using bisphosphonates for bone demineralization in human immunodeficiency virus...
Use of Bisphosphonates, Calcium and Vitamin D for Bone Demineralization in Patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials.
BACKGROUND
The present study performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials using bisphosphonates for bone demineralization in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed from January 2004 to January 2020 considering the bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine (LS) as the main outcome. Out of 214 titles that met criteria, 9 studies fulfilled the selection criteria.
RESULTS
A total of 394 patients were identified, and they were allocated into 2 groups: the intervention group (200 patients), to whom a combination of alendronate or zoledronate with calcium and vitamin D was administered; and control group (194 patients), to whom only calcium and vitamin D was administered. Clinical profile and indicators of bone metabolism of the participants were evaluated regarding effect size, homogeneity, and consistency. No substantial heterogeneity between the groups was found for the baseline variables, and there was high consistency to the main outcome. The meta-analysis shows a significant difference in post-treatment BMD, favoring the intervention over the control treatment. The intervention improved LS density up to 0.227 g/cm², raising the average to the levels of general population. Adverse effects related to intervention were fever immediately after zoledronate administration and gastrointestinal complaints during alendronate usage. Other adverse effects were barely reported and poorly connected to intervention by studies' authors, despite all of them have been successfully resolved.
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides evidence that BMD post-treatment is better in HIV patients who used bisphosphonates combined with calcium and vitamin D.
PubMed: 32911582
DOI: 10.11005/jbm.2020.27.3.175 -
Clinical Therapeutics Jan 2022The efficacy comparison of osteoporosis treatments can be hindered by the absence of head-to-head trials; instead, network meta-analyses (NMAs) have been used to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The efficacy comparison of osteoporosis treatments can be hindered by the absence of head-to-head trials; instead, network meta-analyses (NMAs) have been used to determine comparative effectiveness. This study was the first to investigate the impact of time point-specific NMAs of osteoporosis treatments on variability in treatments' onset of action caused by their different mechanisms of actions and trial designs.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, including romosozumab (ROMO), teriparatide (TPTD), abaloparatide (ABL), alendronate (ALN), risedronate (RIS), ibandronate (IB), zoledronic acid/zoledronate (ZOL), denosumab (DEN), and raloxifene (RLX), on at least 1 fracture or bone mineral density (BMD) outcome. Of 100 RCTs identified in 5 databases, 27 RCTs were included for NMAs of new vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fracture outcomes at 12, 24, and 36 months, and 47 RCTs were included for NMAs of BMD outcomes at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck to compare the relative efficacy of osteoporosis treatments. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
FINDINGS
For vertebral fractures, TPTD (83.63%), ABL (69.11%), and ROMO/ALN (78.70%) had the highest probability to be the most effective treatment at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. ROMO/ALN had the highest probability (54.4%, 64.69%, and 90.29%, respectively) to be the most effective treatment for nonvertebral fractures at 12, 24, and 36 months. For hip fractures, ROMO/ALN (46.31%), ABL (61.1%), and DEN (55.21%) had the highest probability to be the most effective treatment at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. ROMO had the highest probability (76.06%, 44.19%, and 51.78%, respectively) to be the most effective treatment for BMD outcomes at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck.
IMPLICATIONS
The importance of indirectly comparing available osteoporosis treatments using time point-specific NMAs was confirmed because indirect comparison results differed substantially across time points.
Topics: Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Female; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Osteoporosis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Teriparatide; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 35058055
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2021.11.015 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Jun 2022Bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures; however, high rates of adherence are needed to preserve clinical benefits. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures; however, high rates of adherence are needed to preserve clinical benefits.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate persistence and compliance to oral and intravenous bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronate).
METHODS
Searches of 12 databases, unpublished sources, and trial registries were conducted, covering the period from 2000 to April 2021. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool 1.0 & ROBINS-I) were independently undertaken by two study authors. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that used prescription claim databases or hospital medical records to examine patients' adherence were included. Network meta-analyses (NMA) embedded within a Bayesian framework were conducted, investigating users' likelihood in discontinuing bisphosphonate treatment. Where meta-analysis was not possible, data were synthesised using the vote-counting synthesis method.
RESULTS
Fifty-nine RCTs and 43 observational studies were identified, resulting in a total population of 2,656,659 participants. Data from 59 RCTs and 24 observational studies were used to populate NMAs. Zoledronate users were the least likely to discontinue their treatment HR = 0.73 (95%CrI: 0.61, 0.88). Higher rates of compliance were observed in those receiving intravenous treatments. The paucity of data and the heterogeneity in the reported medication possession ratio thresholds precluded a NMA of compliance data.
CONCLUSIONS
Users of intravenously administered bisphosphonates were found to be the most adherent to treatment among bisphosphonates' users. Patterns of adherence will permit the more precise estimation of clinical and cost-effectiveness of bisphosphonates.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020177166.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Medication Adherence; Network Meta-Analysis; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 35188591
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-022-06350-w -
JBMR Plus May 2022Bisphosphonates have been found to be effective in preventing fragility fractures. However, their comparative effectiveness in populations at risk has yet to be defined....
Bisphosphonates have been found to be effective in preventing fragility fractures. However, their comparative effectiveness in populations at risk has yet to be defined. In light of recent clinical trials, we aimed to compare four bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronate) and to identify which are the most effective for the prevention of fragility fractures. This is an update of a systematic review previously published as part of a NICE HTA report. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis, updating the estimates regarding the comparative effectiveness of the aforementioned bisphosphonates. Studies identified from published and unpublished sources between 2014 and 2021 were added to the studies identified in the previous review. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently undertaken by two reviewers. Outcomes were fractures, femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), mortality, and adverse events. We identified 25 additional trials, resulting in a total population of 47,007 participants. All treatments had beneficial effects on fractures versus placebo with zoledronate being the most effective treatment in preventing vertebral fractures (hazard ratio [HR] 0.38; 95% credibility interval [CrI], 0.28-0.49). Zoledronate (HR 0.71; 95% CrI, 0.61-0.81) and risedronate (HR 0.70; 95% CrI, 0.53-0.84) were found to be the most effective treatments in preventing nonvertebral fractures. All treatments were associated with increases in femoral neck BMD versus placebo with zoledronate being the most effective treatment mean difference (MD 4.02; 95% CrI, 3.2-4.84). There was a paucity of data regarding hip and wrist fractures. Depending on its cost-effectiveness, zoledronate could be considered a first-line option for people at increased risk of fragility fractures. © 2022 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
PubMed: 35509636
DOI: 10.1002/jbm4.10620