| Literature DB >> 36199692 |
Bolin Ren1,2, Xiaolei Ren1,2, Lu Wang1, Chao Tu1,2, Wenchao Zhang1,2, Zhongyue Liu1,2, Lin Qi1,2, Lu Wan1,2, Ke Pang1,2, Cheng Tao1, Zhihong Li1,2.
Abstract
Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets and inhibits the osteoclast activating factor receptor activator for nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL). It has been widely used in the treatment of osteoporosis, giant cell tumors of bone, and in the prevention of malignant skeletal-related events (SREs). We collected the research results and related MeSH terms of denosumab from 2011 to 2021 through the Web of Science and PubMed, respectively. The literature was visualized and analyzed by CiteSpace and bibliometric online analysis platforms. The MeSH terms were biclustered using the Bibliographic Co-Occurrence Analysis System (BICOMB) and graph clustering toolkit (gCLUTO). The results show that the number of denosumab-related annual publications had increased from 51 to 215, with the United States leading and Amgen Inc. being the most influential in the past 10 years. Articles published in the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research had the highest total citations. Three scholars from Shinshu University in Matsumoto, Yukio Nakamura, Takako Suzuki, and Hiroyuki Kato, joined the field relatively late but produced the most. The clinical comparison and combination of denosumab with other drugs in the treatment of osteoporosis was the most significant focus of research. Drug withdrawal rebound and management strategies have gained more attention and controversy recently. MeSH analysis revealed eight major categories of research hotspots. Among them, exploring the multiple roles of the RANK-RANKL-OPG system in tumor progression, metastasis, and other diseases is the potential direction of future mechanism research. It is a valuable surgical topic to optimize the perioperative drug administration strategy for internal spinal fixation and orthopedic prosthesis implantation. Taken together, the advantages of denosumab were broad and cost-effective. However, there were still problems such as osteonecrosis of the jaw, severe hypocalcemia, a high recurrence rate of giant cells in the treatment of bone and individual sarcoidosis, and atypical femoral fractures, which need to be adequately solved.Entities:
Keywords: RANKL; bibliometric and network analysis; biclustering analysis; denosumab; osteoporosis
Year: 2022 PMID: 36199692 PMCID: PMC9527327 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.929223
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.988
FIGURE 1Flow chart of literature screening. (A) CiteSpace analysis flow chart. (B) MeSH themes biclustering analysis flow chart.
FIGURE 2Visual diagram of annual publication changes. (A) Overview of annual publication changes of denosumab-related articles from 2011 to 2021. (B) Overview of annual publication changes in the top 10 countries in the field of denosumab from 2011 to 2021.
FIGURE 4Visual network diagram of authors and cited authors. (A) Authors’ collaboration network map in denosumab from 2011 to 2021. The nodes represent authors. The lines represent cooperation. The different colors represent different years. (B) Co-citation network of cited authors in the denosumab field from 2011 to 2021. The nodes represent co-cited authors, and the lines represent co-citation relationships. Different colors in the nodes represent different years. The circle area represents the publication volume, and the purple outer circle represents higher centrality.
FIGURE 3Visual network diagram of country and institution. (A) Country map of the denosumab study in 2011–2021. Nodes represent countries or regions, and lines represent cooperation. The colored rings in the nodes represent different years, and the purple outer circle represents higher centrality. (B) Network map of institutional cooperation in denosumab from 2011 to 2021. Nodes represent institutions, and lines represent cooperation. Colors in the nodes represent different years. The circle area represents the publication volume, and the purple outer circle represents higher centrality.
Top 10 countries and regions in terms of publication volume and centrality.
| Rank | Country | Publications | % of 1395 | Average citations | H-index | Rank | Country | Centrality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States | 453 | 32.9 | 49.97 | 71 | 1 | Portugal | 0.46 |
| 2 | Japan | 185 | 13.26 | 19.4 | 25 | 2 | Wales | 0.4 |
| 3 | Canada | 144 | 10.32 | 60.4 | 49 | 3 | Czech Republic | 0.32 |
| 4 | England | 132 | 9.46 | 60.88 | 49 | 4 | Israel | 0.32 |
| 5 | Italy | 130 | 9.32 | 44.48 | 49 | 5 | Australia | 0.29 |
| 6 | Germany | 120 | 8.60 | 65.06 | 28 | 6 | Sweden | 0.29 |
| 7 | Switzerland | 114 | 8.17 | 53.09 | 35 | 7 | Saudi Arabia | 0.27 |
| 8 | Belgium | 94 | 6.74 | 75.64 | 38 | 8 | Austria | 0.23 |
| 9 | Spain | 90 | 6.45 | 54.92 | 28 | 9 | South Africa | 0.22 |
| 10 | People’s Republic of China | 77 | 5.52 | 19.4 | 16 | 10 | Estonia | 0.21 |
Top 10 institutions in terms of publishing volume and centrality.
| Rank | Institution | Publications | Original country | Institution | Centrality | Original country |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Amgen Inc | 158 | United States | Australian Catholic | 0.13 | Australia |
| 2 | Columbia Univ | 43 | United States | Merk & Co Inc | 0.13 | United States |
| 3 | Univ Sheffield | 38 | England | Stony Brook Canc Ctr | 0.13 | United States |
| 4 | Univ British Columbia | 34 | Canada | Univ Libre Bruxelles | 0.12 | BELGIUM |
| 5 | Massachusetts Gen Hosp | 29 | United States | Altoona Ctr Clin Res | 0.12 | United States |
| 6 | Oregon Osteoporosis Ctr | 27 | United States | Oregon Osteoporosis Ctr | 0.11 | United States |
| 7 | Harvard Med Sch | 27 | United States | New Mexico Clin Res & Osteoporosis Ctr | 0.11 | United States |
| 8 | Aarhus Univ Hosp | 26 | Denmark | Univ Lyon | 0.11 | France |
| 9 | Amgen Europe GmbH | 26 | Switzerland | Univ Auckland | 0.1 | New Zealand |
| 10 | Shinshu Univ | 25 | Japan | Ctr Clin & Basic Res | 0.1 | Denmark |
Top 10 authors in terms of publication volume and the top 10 most-cited authors.
| Rank | Author | Publications | Total number of citations | Corresponding author | Cited author | Citation counts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Yukio Nakamura | 24 | 124 | 7 | Cummings SR | 521 |
| 2 | Takako Suzuki | 23 | 123 | 7 | Bone HG | 310 |
| 3 | Hiroyuki Kato | 22 | 124 | 2 | Black DM | 310 |
| 4 | Cesar Libanati | 19 | 1,156 | 17 | Miller PD | 258 |
| 5 | Jacques P Brown | 19 | 1,773 | 7 | Fizazi K | 241 |
| 6 | Rachel B Wagman | 18 | 1,066 | 16 | Brown JP | 208 |
| 7 | Athansios D Anastasilakis | 17 | 384 | 5 | Kanis JA | 204 |
| 8 | Polyzois Makras | 16 | 381 | 4 | Stopeck AT | 179 |
| 9 | Benjamin Z Leder | 16 | 481 | 9 | Smith MR | 177 |
| 10 | Andrea Wang | 16 | 1,122 | 13 | Lipton A | 174 |
FIGURE 5Visual network diagram of co-citation. (A) Co-citation network of cited journals in denosumab from 2011 to 2021. The nodes represent cited journals, and the lines represent co-citation relationships. Different colors in the nodes represent different years. The purple outer circle represents higher centrality. (B) Co-citation network of references in denosumab from 2011 to 2021. The nodes represent references, and the lines represent co-citation relationships. Different colors in the nodes represent different years. The purple outer circle represents higher centrality. (C) Timeline view based on the abstracts of the references in the denosumab field from 2011 to 2021. The nodes represent references, and the position on the horizontal line represents the year the reference was published. The lines represent co-citation relationships. Different colors in the nodes represent different years. The purple outer circle represents higher centrality.
Top 10 cited journals in terms of citation frequency and centrality.
| Rank | Cited journal | Total citations | Average citations | IF (JCR 2021) | Centrality | Cited journal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | J BONE MINER RES | 944 | 97 | 6.741/(Q1) | 0.43 | EXP MOL MED |
| 2 | NEW ENGL J MED | 904 | 12 | 91.2/(Q1) | 0.32 | Circulation |
| 3 | OSTEOPOROSIS INT | 816 | 145 | 4.507/(Q2) | 0.32 | CELL MOL LIFE SCI |
| 4 | BONE | 756 | 81 | 4.398/(Q1) | 0.29 | EUR UROL |
| 5 | J CLIN ENDOCRINOL METAB | 680 | 78 | 5.958/(Q1) | 0.23 | AM J CLIN NUTR |
| 6 | Lancet | 594 | 14 | 79.321/(Q1) | 0.22 | ARTHRITIS RHEUM-ARTH |
| 7 | J CLIN ONCOL | 402 | 26 | 44.544/(Q1) | 0.19 | ARTHRITIS RES THER |
| 8 | JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC | 338 | 7 | 56.272/(Q1) | 0.18 | KIDNEY INT |
| 9 | CALCIFIED TISSUE INT | 329 | 33 | 4.333/(Q2) | 0.17 | INT J CLIN ONCOL |
| 10 | ANN ONCOL | 253 | 13 | 32.976/(Q1) | 0.16 | Menopause |
Top 5 references in terms of citation frequency and centrality.
| Rank | Frequency | References | Author and publication year | Centrality | References | Author and publication year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 127 | Denosumab for prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis |
| 0.23 | Denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis does not interfere with fracture healing: results from the FREEDOM trial | Adami S(2012) |
| 2 | 114 | Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomized, double-blind study | Fizazi K (2011) | 0.22 | Cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid for prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States | Stopeck Alison(2012) |
| 3 | 98 | 10 years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase 3 randomized FREEDOM trial and open-label extension | Bone HG(2017) | 0.21 | Discontinuation of denosumab and associated fracture incidence: analysis from the fracture reduction evaluation of denosumab in osteoporosis every 6 months (FREEDOM) trial | Brown JP(2013) |
| 4 | 85 | Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind study | Stopeck AT (2010) | 0.17 | Safety of long-term denosumab therapy: results from the open-label extension phase of two phase 3 studies in patients with metastatic breast and prostate cancer | Stopeck AT(2016) |
| 5 | 79 | Randomized, double-blind study of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced cancer (excluding breast and prostate cancer) or multiple myeloma | Henry DH(2011) | 0.16 | Severe spontaneous vertebral fractures after denosumab discontinuation: three case reports | Aubry-Rozier B(2016) |
FIGURE 6Visual diagram of keywords. (A) Keywords co-occurrence graph in denosumab from 2011 to 2021. The nodes represent keywords, and the lines represent co-occurrence. The red circle indicates that the keyword has a citation burst. The area represents the frequency of keyword occurrence. The purple outer circle represents higher centrality. (B) Top 25 keywords with the strongest citation bursts. The red bars are the years of burst duration.
Top 15 keywords in terms of frequency and centrality.
| Rank | Keyword | Frequency | Keyword | Centrality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Denosumab | 828 | Open-label | 0.17 |
| 2 | Osteoporosis | 604 | Safety | 0.16 |
| 3 | Postmenopausal women | 567 | Exposure | 0.14 |
| 4 | Fracture risk | 406 | Androgen deprivation therapy | 0.13 |
| 5 | Bone mineral density | 347 | Follow-up | 0.12 |
| 6 | Zoledronic acid | 313 | Biochemical marker | 0.11 |
| 7 | Bisphosphonate | 298 | Clinical trial | 0.11 |
| 8 | Alendronate | 213 | Bone histomorphometry | 0.11 |
| 9 | Prevention | 172 | Osteoporotic fracture | 0.09 |
| 10 | Breast cancer | 161 | Combination therapy | 0.09 |
| 11 | Bone metastases | 160 | Solid tumor | 0.08 |
| 12 | Double blind | 156 | Atypical femoral fracture | 0.08 |
| 13 | Vertebral fracture | 153 | Hip | 0.08 |
| 14 | Teriparatide | 148 | Cathepsin k inhibitor | 0.08 |
| 15 | Prostate cancer | 130 | Chemotherapy | 0.08 |
FIGURE 7Visualization of biclustering analysis. (A) Matrix visualization of biclustering high-frequency major MeSH terms in denosumab from 2011 to 2021. (B) Mountain visualization of biclustering high-frequency major MeSH terms in denosumab from 2011 to 2021.