特立帕肽对比双膦酸盐和地诺单抗对比双膦酸盐治疗既往未用过双膦酸盐的骨质疏松症的疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Mingnian Li, Zhuoqi Ge, Benqi Zhang, Li Sun, Zhongyuan Wang, Tao Zou, Qi Chen
{"title":"特立帕肽对比双膦酸盐和地诺单抗对比双膦酸盐治疗既往未用过双膦酸盐的骨质疏松症的疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Mingnian Li,&nbsp;Zhuoqi Ge,&nbsp;Benqi Zhang,&nbsp;Li Sun,&nbsp;Zhongyuan Wang,&nbsp;Tao Zou,&nbsp;Qi Chen","doi":"10.1007/s11657-024-01447-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>\n <i>Summary</i>\n </h3><p>The study found that in osteoporosis patients who had not previously received bisphosphonate treatment and were in a treatment cycle of over 12 months, both teriparatide and denosumab significantly increased bone mineral density compared to bisphosphonates. Additionally, teriparatide was also shown to significantly decrease the risk of fractures.</p><h3>Objective</h3><p>The systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporosis who had not previously received bisphosphonates.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a search of published literature from inception to May 31, 2023, including databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP, and WanFang. The study only included head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide and denosumab with bisphosphonates to treat patients with osteoporosis. Fixed-effect model and random-effect model were used due to clinical heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was performed via Stata 17.0.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 6680 patients were enrolled across 23 eligible trials. The results of the meta-analysis showed that teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture (risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.51, 0.74), <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). Denosumab showed no benefit compared to bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of fracture in treating osteoporosis (RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.62, 1.57), <i>P</i> = 0.96). Compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide and denosumab could significantly improve femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05). Furthermore, teriparatide and denosumab did not increase the incidence of adverse events (teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.92, 95% CI (0.79, 1.08), <i>P</i> = 0.32; denosumab vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), <i>P</i> = 0.37).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Teriparatide is superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture in patients with osteoporosis. In addition, teriparatide and denosumab were more efficacious than bisphosphonates in increasing the percentage change in BMD at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11420281/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in osteoporosis not previously treated with bisphosphonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials\",\"authors\":\"Mingnian Li,&nbsp;Zhuoqi Ge,&nbsp;Benqi Zhang,&nbsp;Li Sun,&nbsp;Zhongyuan Wang,&nbsp;Tao Zou,&nbsp;Qi Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11657-024-01447-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>\\n <i>Summary</i>\\n </h3><p>The study found that in osteoporosis patients who had not previously received bisphosphonate treatment and were in a treatment cycle of over 12 months, both teriparatide and denosumab significantly increased bone mineral density compared to bisphosphonates. Additionally, teriparatide was also shown to significantly decrease the risk of fractures.</p><h3>Objective</h3><p>The systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporosis who had not previously received bisphosphonates.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a search of published literature from inception to May 31, 2023, including databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP, and WanFang. The study only included head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide and denosumab with bisphosphonates to treat patients with osteoporosis. Fixed-effect model and random-effect model were used due to clinical heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was performed via Stata 17.0.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 6680 patients were enrolled across 23 eligible trials. The results of the meta-analysis showed that teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture (risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.51, 0.74), <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001). Denosumab showed no benefit compared to bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of fracture in treating osteoporosis (RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.62, 1.57), <i>P</i> = 0.96). Compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide and denosumab could significantly improve femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05). Furthermore, teriparatide and denosumab did not increase the incidence of adverse events (teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.92, 95% CI (0.79, 1.08), <i>P</i> = 0.32; denosumab vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), <i>P</i> = 0.37).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Teriparatide is superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture in patients with osteoporosis. In addition, teriparatide and denosumab were more efficacious than bisphosphonates in increasing the percentage change in BMD at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11420281/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11657-024-01447-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11657-024-01447-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究发现,对于之前未接受过双磷酸盐治疗且治疗周期超过12个月的骨质疏松症患者,与双磷酸盐相比,特立帕肽和地诺单抗都能显著提高骨矿物质密度。此外,特立帕肽还能显著降低骨折风险:系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估和比较特立帕肽与双磷酸盐类药物、地诺单抗与双磷酸盐类药物在既往未接受过双磷酸盐类药物治疗的骨质疏松症患者中的安全性和有效性:我们检索了从开始到 2023 年 5 月 31 日发表的文献,包括 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、CNKI、SinoMed、VIP 和 WanFang 等数据库。研究只纳入了将特立帕肽和地诺单抗与双膦酸盐治疗骨质疏松症患者进行比较的头对头随机对照试验(RCT)。由于临床异质性,研究采用了固定效应模型和随机效应模型。Meta 分析通过 Stata 17.0 进行:23项符合条件的试验共招募了6680名患者。荟萃分析结果显示,在降低骨折风险方面,特立帕肽优于双磷酸盐类药物(风险比(RR)=0.61,95% 置信区间(CI)(0.51,0.74),P 结论:特立帕肽优于双磷酸盐类药物:特立帕肽在降低骨质疏松症患者骨折风险方面优于双磷酸盐类药物。此外,在增加股骨颈、全髋和腰椎 BMD 百分比变化方面,特立帕肽和地诺单抗比双磷酸盐类药物更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and safety of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in osteoporosis not previously treated with bisphosphonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Summary

The study found that in osteoporosis patients who had not previously received bisphosphonate treatment and were in a treatment cycle of over 12 months, both teriparatide and denosumab significantly increased bone mineral density compared to bisphosphonates. Additionally, teriparatide was also shown to significantly decrease the risk of fractures.

Objective

The systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporosis who had not previously received bisphosphonates.

Methods

We conducted a search of published literature from inception to May 31, 2023, including databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP, and WanFang. The study only included head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide and denosumab with bisphosphonates to treat patients with osteoporosis. Fixed-effect model and random-effect model were used due to clinical heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was performed via Stata 17.0.

Results

A total of 6680 patients were enrolled across 23 eligible trials. The results of the meta-analysis showed that teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture (risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.51, 0.74), P < 0.001). Denosumab showed no benefit compared to bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of fracture in treating osteoporosis (RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.62, 1.57), P = 0.96). Compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide and denosumab could significantly improve femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (P < 0.05). Furthermore, teriparatide and denosumab did not increase the incidence of adverse events (teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.92, 95% CI (0.79, 1.08), P = 0.32; denosumab vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), P = 0.37).

Conclusions

Teriparatide is superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture in patients with osteoporosis. In addition, teriparatide and denosumab were more efficacious than bisphosphonates in increasing the percentage change in BMD at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine.

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
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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