UNLABELLED: A meta-analysis of spine BMD dose-response relationships for alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate was performed. Data from all three oral bisphosphonates conform to a log-linear relationship between dose and change in spine BMD relative to placebo at 1 year, with an incremental gain of about 1 % for each doubling of dose. INTRODUCTION: Animal data suggesting differences in potency and differences in approved oral dosage strengths for alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate in the treatment of osteoporosis raise questions about their dose-response relationships and relative potencies in humans. METHODS: A meta-analysis of dose-response relationships for spine BMD increases for these three bisphosphonates was performed using data from 21 placebo-controlled trials that collectively included over 13,000 patients on active treatment and over 8,000 on placebo. RESULTS: For alendronate over the range of 1 to 20 mg/day, there was a strong log-linear relationship between dose and the increase in spine BMD relative to placebo at 1 year (R (2) = 0.994 using sample-weighted means). For each doubling in alendronate dose, there was an incremental gain of about 1 % in spine BMD. On the same scale, risedronate and ibandronate are approximately equipotent to alendronate on a weight-for-weight basis. The increases in BMD efficacy with each doubling of dose are parallel for all three nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates (NCBPs). CONCLUSIONS: All three NCBPs are approximately equipotent and exhibit a log-linear relationship between dose and the increase in spine BMD. Differences in efficacy between the available oral bisphosphonate regimens appear to be a function of dose rather than inherent differences in therapeutic potential.
UNLABELLED: A meta-analysis of spine BMD dose-response relationships for alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate was performed. Data from all three oral bisphosphonates conform to a log-linear relationship between dose and change in spine BMD relative to placebo at 1 year, with an incremental gain of about 1 % for each doubling of dose. INTRODUCTION: Animal data suggesting differences in potency and differences in approved oral dosage strengths for alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate in the treatment of osteoporosis raise questions about their dose-response relationships and relative potencies in humans. METHODS: A meta-analysis of dose-response relationships for spine BMD increases for these three bisphosphonates was performed using data from 21 placebo-controlled trials that collectively included over 13,000 patients on active treatment and over 8,000 on placebo. RESULTS: For alendronate over the range of 1 to 20 mg/day, there was a strong log-linear relationship between dose and the increase in spine BMD relative to placebo at 1 year (R (2) = 0.994 using sample-weighted means). For each doubling in alendronate dose, there was an incremental gain of about 1 % in spine BMD. On the same scale, risedronate and ibandronate are approximately equipotent to alendronate on a weight-for-weight basis. The increases in BMD efficacy with each doubling of dose are parallel for all three nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates (NCBPs). CONCLUSIONS: All three NCBPs are approximately equipotent and exhibit a log-linear relationship between dose and the increase in spine BMD. Differences in efficacy between the available oral bisphosphonate regimens appear to be a function of dose rather than inherent differences in therapeutic potential.
Authors: M J Hooper; P R Ebeling; A P Roberts; J J Graham; G C Nicholson; M D'Emden; T F Ernst; D Wenderoth Journal: Climacteric Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 3.005
Authors: H A Pols; D Felsenberg; D A Hanley; J Stepán; M Muñoz-Torres; T J Wilkin; G Qin-sheng; A M Galich; K Vandormael; A J Yates; B Stych Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 1999 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: R Eastell; J P Devogelaer; N F Peel; A A Chines; D E Bax; N Sacco-Gibson; C Nagant de Deuxchaisnes; R G Russell Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2000 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Marc C Hochberg; Susan Greenspan; Richard D Wasnich; Paul Miller; Desmond E Thompson; Philip D Ross Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: U A Liberman; S R Weiss; J Bröll; H W Minne; H Quan; N H Bell; J Rodriguez-Portales; R W Downs; J Dequeker; M Favus Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-11-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sydney Bonnick; Susan Broy; Fran Kaiser; Carol Teutsch; Elizabeth Rosenberg; Paul DeLucca; Mary Melton Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Charles H Chesnut; Arne Skag; Claus Christiansen; Robert Recker; Jacob A Stakkestad; Arne Hoiseth; Dieter Felsenberg; Hermann Huss; Jennifer Gilbride; Ralph C Schimmer; Pierre D Delmas Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2004-03-29 Impact factor: 6.741