Literature DB >> 22313934

Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety between denosumab and alendronate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis.

T Lin1, C Wang, X-Z Cai, X Zhao, M-M Shi, Z-M Ying, F-Z Yuan, C Guo, S-G Yan.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to perform a head-to-head comparison of efficacy and safety profile between 60 mg denosumab (Den) subcutaneously (SC) per 6 months (Q6M) and 70 mg alendronate (Aln) orally per week (QW) for postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density. We searched electronic databases comparing efficacy and safety of Den SC Q6M and Aln QW in postmenopausal women. The primary outcomes of efficacy evaluation in included trials were incidence of clinical fracture in both groups and bone mineral density (BMD) at different skeletal sites. And adverse events (AEs), including incidence of neoplasms and infections, were considered as secondary outcomes. Following the instructions of 'Cochrane Handbook for systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.0.2', we identified eligible studies, evaluated the methodological quality and abstracted relevant data. Four heterogeneous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1942 women were identified. The results of review showed low evidence quality that supported the hypothesis the denosumab vs. alendronate could reduce risk of fracture [OR (95% CI) 1.42 (0.84 to 2.40), 11 more women per 1000 (from 4 fewer to 36 more), p = 0.19] but the moderate to high quality evidence suggesting treatment with 60 mg Den SC Q6M was more effective for postmenopausal women in increasing BMD [at distal radius (DR), total hip (TH), lumbar spine (LS), and femoral neck (FN)]. Hazards of neoplasms [OR (95% CI) 1.10 (0.65 to 1.86), 3 more per 1000 (from 10 fewer to 24 more), p = 0.62] or infections [OR (95% CI) 0.95 (0.79 to 1.15), 12 fewer per 1000 (from 53 fewer to 33 more,), p = 0.62] were appeared to be similar.Our review suggested within 1 year 60 mg Den SC Q6M treatment was more effective in increasing bone mass but could not reduce the fracture risk to a greater extent than 70 mg Aln QW therapy. Also the Den SC Q6M therapy did not increase the risks of neoplasms and infections compared with Aln QW.
© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22313934     DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02806.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Pract        ISSN: 1368-5031            Impact factor:   2.503


  21 in total

1.  Comparison of Denosumab and Bisphosphonates in Patients With Osteoporosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Houchen Lyu; Bakr Jundi; Chang Xu; Sara K Tedeschi; Kazuki Yoshida; Sizheng Zhao; Sagar U Nigwekar; Benjamin Z Leder; Daniel H Solomon
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 2.  Brain to bone: What is the contribution of the brain to skeletal homeostasis?

Authors:  Anna Idelevich; Roland Baron
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 4.398

3.  Efficacy and safety of denosumab compared to bisphosphonates in improving bone strength in postmenopausal osteoporosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Thulasi Chandran; Indumathi Venkatachalam
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 1.858

Review 4.  Denosumab: A Review in Postmenopausal Osteoporosis.

Authors:  Emma D Deeks
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 5.  Potential increased risk of cancer from commonly used medications: an umbrella review of meta-analyses.

Authors:  J P A Ioannidis; Y Zhou; C Q Chang; S D Schully; M J Khoury; A N Freedman
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 32.976

6.  Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Authors:  Sarah Davis; Emma Simpson; Jean Hamilton; Marrissa Martyn-St James; Andrew Rawdin; Ruth Wong; Edward Goka; Neil Gittoes; Peter Selby
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 4.014

Review 7.  Denosumab compared to other treatments to prevent or treat osteoporosis in individuals at risk of fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  C Beaudoin; S Jean; L Bessette; L-G Ste-Marie; L Moore; J P Brown
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw in cancer patients receiving denosumab: a meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Wei-Xiang Qi; Li-Na Tang; Ai-Na He; Yang Yao; Zan Shen
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-04-20       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Treating osteoporosis by targeting parathyroid hormone to bone.

Authors:  T Ponnapakkam; R Katikaneni; J Sakon; R Stratford; R C Gensure
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 7.851

Review 10.  Denosumab is not associated with risk of malignancy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  D Rosenberg; T Avni; G Tsvetov; A Gafter-Gvili; T Diker-Cohen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.