唑来膦酸治疗转移性骨病患者的间期比较,4周或12周更有效?:系统回顾与元分析

I Gede Eka Wiratnaya
{"title":"唑来膦酸治疗转移性骨病患者的间期比较,4周或12周更有效?:系统回顾与元分析","authors":"I Gede Eka Wiratnaya","doi":"10.14744/ejmo.2023.34433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The aim of bisphosphonate treatment in patients with metastatic bone disease is to prevent metastatic skeletal morbidity and prevent cancer treatment-induced skeletal damage. The classical recommendation of Zoledronic acid treatment is to be given indefinitely as intravenous infusion every 3 to 4 weeks until patients' health deteriorates. Data on zoledronic acid's long-term effectiveness and safety are insufficient, and some recent literatures start to consider 12-weekly administration as a reasonable alternative in order to minimize the adverse effects. Methods: A systematic search was conducted based on PRISMA guideline to identify relevant studies through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. A total of 5 studies (2867 patients) were included, divided into outcome analysis, processed using Review Manager 5.3. Results: The search of electronic databases yielded a total of 299 entries. Five studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis following the steps of identifying, screening, determining eligibility, eliminating duplicates, and excluding studies. Out of a total of 2.867 patients, 1.427 received ZA for 12 weeks and 1.440 received ZA for 4 weeks, making up the total number of patients included in this meta-analysis. Each trial had a comparable one-year follow-up duration after ZA was given. We discovered that the incidence of adverse effects varied significantly between the two groups. In contrast, there is no statistically significant difference in the rates of SRE, ONJ, renal dysfunction, or death between the two groups. Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis reveals that 12-week intervals of zoledronic acid is as effective as the standard 4-week interval in terms of skeletal related event, jaw osteonecrosis, renal dysfunction, and mortality rate. However, the standard 4-week intervals led to higher rate of adverse effects.","PeriodicalId":11831,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interval Comparison of Zoledronic Acid Treatment in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease, Is 4-Weekly or 12-Weekly More Effective?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"I Gede Eka Wiratnaya\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/ejmo.2023.34433\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: The aim of bisphosphonate treatment in patients with metastatic bone disease is to prevent metastatic skeletal morbidity and prevent cancer treatment-induced skeletal damage. The classical recommendation of Zoledronic acid treatment is to be given indefinitely as intravenous infusion every 3 to 4 weeks until patients' health deteriorates. Data on zoledronic acid's long-term effectiveness and safety are insufficient, and some recent literatures start to consider 12-weekly administration as a reasonable alternative in order to minimize the adverse effects. Methods: A systematic search was conducted based on PRISMA guideline to identify relevant studies through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. A total of 5 studies (2867 patients) were included, divided into outcome analysis, processed using Review Manager 5.3. Results: The search of electronic databases yielded a total of 299 entries. Five studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis following the steps of identifying, screening, determining eligibility, eliminating duplicates, and excluding studies. Out of a total of 2.867 patients, 1.427 received ZA for 12 weeks and 1.440 received ZA for 4 weeks, making up the total number of patients included in this meta-analysis. Each trial had a comparable one-year follow-up duration after ZA was given. We discovered that the incidence of adverse effects varied significantly between the two groups. In contrast, there is no statistically significant difference in the rates of SRE, ONJ, renal dysfunction, or death between the two groups. Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis reveals that 12-week intervals of zoledronic acid is as effective as the standard 4-week interval in terms of skeletal related event, jaw osteonecrosis, renal dysfunction, and mortality rate. However, the standard 4-week intervals led to higher rate of adverse effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11831,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2023.34433\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Journal of Medicine and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2023.34433","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interval Comparison of Zoledronic Acid Treatment in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease, Is 4-Weekly or 12-Weekly More Effective?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Objectives: The aim of bisphosphonate treatment in patients with metastatic bone disease is to prevent metastatic skeletal morbidity and prevent cancer treatment-induced skeletal damage. The classical recommendation of Zoledronic acid treatment is to be given indefinitely as intravenous infusion every 3 to 4 weeks until patients' health deteriorates. Data on zoledronic acid's long-term effectiveness and safety are insufficient, and some recent literatures start to consider 12-weekly administration as a reasonable alternative in order to minimize the adverse effects. Methods: A systematic search was conducted based on PRISMA guideline to identify relevant studies through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. A total of 5 studies (2867 patients) were included, divided into outcome analysis, processed using Review Manager 5.3. Results: The search of electronic databases yielded a total of 299 entries. Five studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative synthesis following the steps of identifying, screening, determining eligibility, eliminating duplicates, and excluding studies. Out of a total of 2.867 patients, 1.427 received ZA for 12 weeks and 1.440 received ZA for 4 weeks, making up the total number of patients included in this meta-analysis. Each trial had a comparable one-year follow-up duration after ZA was given. We discovered that the incidence of adverse effects varied significantly between the two groups. In contrast, there is no statistically significant difference in the rates of SRE, ONJ, renal dysfunction, or death between the two groups. Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis reveals that 12-week intervals of zoledronic acid is as effective as the standard 4-week interval in terms of skeletal related event, jaw osteonecrosis, renal dysfunction, and mortality rate. However, the standard 4-week intervals led to higher rate of adverse effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信