双膦酸盐治疗中年人骨质流失的比较疗效和安全性:一项系统综述和网络荟萃分析

Qin Hu , Xun Pan , Yaxian Liang , Hongdan Xu , Jinning Gu , Wenting She , Huixu Xie
{"title":"双膦酸盐治疗中年人骨质流失的比较疗效和安全性:一项系统综述和网络荟萃分析","authors":"Qin Hu ,&nbsp;Xun Pan ,&nbsp;Yaxian Liang ,&nbsp;Hongdan Xu ,&nbsp;Jinning Gu ,&nbsp;Wenting She ,&nbsp;Huixu Xie","doi":"10.26599/NTM.2022.9130003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div><strong>PURPOSE:</strong> The purpose of this study was to estimate the benefits and drawbacks of bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis and osteopenia in middle-aged and elderly individuals.</div><div><strong>METHODS:</strong> We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of bisphosphonates and performed a network meta-analysis to summarize the direct and indirect evidence on the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonate therapy in middle-aged and elderly individuals with osteoporosis or osteopenia.</div><div><strong>RESULTS:</strong> A total of 14 RCTs (7,769 patients with osteoporosis or osteopenia, median age, 67 years, median follow-up, 27 months) were included in this network meta-analysis. Of these, 8, 10, 9, and 6 RCTs provided outcomes on bone mineral density changes, clinical fracture rates, vertebral fracture rates, and nonvertebral fracture rates, respectively. Regarding the primary efficacy outcome, there was a 97% probability for alendronate to be the most effective treatment approach for increasing bone mineral density and an 84% probability for zoledronate to be the most effective treatment approach for clinical fractures. Regarding vertebral fractures and safety outcomes, zoledronate showed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.45 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.30-0.69) relative to placebo. For nonvertebral fractures, the OR of zoledronate relative to placebo was 0.51 (95% CI 0.29-0.90).</div><div><strong>CONCLUSIONS:</strong> This study revealed that alendronate was effective in increasing bone mineral density in middle-aged individuals and that zoledronate was a safe treatment option for osteoporosis and osteopenia, conferring a low incidence of fracture. However, further clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100941,"journal":{"name":"Nano TransMed","volume":"1 1","pages":"Article e9130003"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative efficacy and safety of bisphosphonate therapy for bone loss in individuals after middle age: A systematic review and network meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Qin Hu ,&nbsp;Xun Pan ,&nbsp;Yaxian Liang ,&nbsp;Hongdan Xu ,&nbsp;Jinning Gu ,&nbsp;Wenting She ,&nbsp;Huixu Xie\",\"doi\":\"10.26599/NTM.2022.9130003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div><strong>PURPOSE:</strong> The purpose of this study was to estimate the benefits and drawbacks of bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis and osteopenia in middle-aged and elderly individuals.</div><div><strong>METHODS:</strong> We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of bisphosphonates and performed a network meta-analysis to summarize the direct and indirect evidence on the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonate therapy in middle-aged and elderly individuals with osteoporosis or osteopenia.</div><div><strong>RESULTS:</strong> A total of 14 RCTs (7,769 patients with osteoporosis or osteopenia, median age, 67 years, median follow-up, 27 months) were included in this network meta-analysis. Of these, 8, 10, 9, and 6 RCTs provided outcomes on bone mineral density changes, clinical fracture rates, vertebral fracture rates, and nonvertebral fracture rates, respectively. Regarding the primary efficacy outcome, there was a 97% probability for alendronate to be the most effective treatment approach for increasing bone mineral density and an 84% probability for zoledronate to be the most effective treatment approach for clinical fractures. Regarding vertebral fractures and safety outcomes, zoledronate showed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.45 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.30-0.69) relative to placebo. For nonvertebral fractures, the OR of zoledronate relative to placebo was 0.51 (95% CI 0.29-0.90).</div><div><strong>CONCLUSIONS:</strong> This study revealed that alendronate was effective in increasing bone mineral density in middle-aged individuals and that zoledronate was a safe treatment option for osteoporosis and osteopenia, conferring a low incidence of fracture. However, further clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nano TransMed\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"Article e9130003\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nano TransMed\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2790676023000419\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nano TransMed","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2790676023000419","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。
Comparative efficacy and safety of bisphosphonate therapy for bone loss in individuals after middle age: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the benefits and drawbacks of bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis and osteopenia in middle-aged and elderly individuals.
METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of bisphosphonates and performed a network meta-analysis to summarize the direct and indirect evidence on the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonate therapy in middle-aged and elderly individuals with osteoporosis or osteopenia.
RESULTS: A total of 14 RCTs (7,769 patients with osteoporosis or osteopenia, median age, 67 years, median follow-up, 27 months) were included in this network meta-analysis. Of these, 8, 10, 9, and 6 RCTs provided outcomes on bone mineral density changes, clinical fracture rates, vertebral fracture rates, and nonvertebral fracture rates, respectively. Regarding the primary efficacy outcome, there was a 97% probability for alendronate to be the most effective treatment approach for increasing bone mineral density and an 84% probability for zoledronate to be the most effective treatment approach for clinical fractures. Regarding vertebral fractures and safety outcomes, zoledronate showed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.45 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.30-0.69) relative to placebo. For nonvertebral fractures, the OR of zoledronate relative to placebo was 0.51 (95% CI 0.29-0.90).
CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that alendronate was effective in increasing bone mineral density in middle-aged individuals and that zoledronate was a safe treatment option for osteoporosis and osteopenia, conferring a low incidence of fracture. However, further clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.
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
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