METABOLIC DISORDERS
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of alendronate and zoledronate for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2014;2(7):13 Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013 Dec;29(12):1005-14. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2013.813468. Epub 2013 Sep 2519 randomized controlled trials were included in this systematic review which investigated the effect bisphosphonates on decreasing fracture risk and increasing bone mineral density in osteoporotic and osteopenic postmenopausal women. 17 studies were used for quantitative synthesis. The two drugs which were evaluated were alendronate and zoledronate. At a minimum of 1 year follow-up, hip and vertebral fracture risk was significantly reduced with both treatments. Alendronate was also associated with significant increases in bone mineral density at the total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine, although meta-analysis for BMD could not be performed for zoledronate.
Were the search methods used to find evidence (original research) on the primary question or questions stated?
Was the search for evidence reasonably comprehensive?
Were the criteria used for deciding which studies to include in the overview reported?
Was the bias in the selection of studies avoided?
Were the criteria used for assessing the validity of the included studies reported?
Was the validity of all of the studies referred to in the text assessed with use of appropriate criteria (either in selecting the studies for inclusion or in analyzing the studies that were cited)?
Were the methods used to combine the findings of the relevant studies (to reach a conclusion) reported?
Were the findings of the relevant studies combined appropriately relative to the primary question that the overview addresses?
Were the conclusions made by the author or authors supported by the data and or analysis reported in the overview?
How would you rate the scientific quality of this evidence?
はい = 1
不確実＝0.5
無関係 = 0
いいえ = 0
報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。
3/4
Introduction
2/4
Accessing Data
4/4
Analysing Data
3/4
Results
3/4
Discussion
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。
なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか？
Osteoporosis is a metabolic bone disease characterized by a substantial decrease in bone density, leading to an increased risk in fracture. The most severe are fractures at the hip and lumbar spine. Bisphosphonate therapy has been researched quite extensively in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. However, there are limited reviews comparing the efficacy of different bisphosphonates, particularly alendronate and zoledronate.
主な研究課題は何ですか？
Is there a difference in the efficacy and safety between alendronate and zoledronate in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis?
重要な知見は？
- 17 studies were identified for the meta-analysis. The doses studied in the intervention groups were 5 and 10 mg orally per day for alendronate (in one of the studies included in the revision the dose was 5, 10 or 20 mg) and 5mg intravenously per year for zoledronate
- Pooled hip fracture incidence compared to placebo was calculated to be 0.61 (95%CI 0.40, 0.93; p=0.02) for alendronate and 0.62 (95%CI 0.46, 0.82; p=0.001) for zoledronate, resulting in risk ratio reductions of 39% and 38%, respectively.
- For vertebral fractures, the risk ratio compared to placebo was 0.54 (95%CI 0.44, 0.66; p<0.00001) for alendronate and 0.38 (95%CI 0.22, 0.67; p<0.001) for zoledronate. Risk reduction was 46% and 62% for alendronate and zoledronate, respectively.
- Only studies which evaluated alendronate provided data on wrist fractures. The pooled risk ratio compared to placebo was 0.65 (95%CI 0.33, 1.25; p=0.19), which was not statistically significant. Heterogeneity in the analysis was assessed to be substantial (Q-test p=0.002, I-squared = 76%).
- Treatment with alendronate was associated with significant increases in bone mineral density compared to placebo when analyzed at the total hip (SMD 1.16 (95%CI 0.90, 1.42)), the femoral neck (SMD 0.97 (95%CI 0.80, 1.15)) and the lumbar spine (SMD 1.58 (95%CI 1.19, 1.96)) (all p<0.00001). Heterogeneity in each analysis was high (I-squared = 62%, 62% and 91%, respectively). Analysis with zoledronate was not possible due to inconsistent or incomplete data reporting.
- Pooling of the rates of discontinuation due to adverse effects resulted in risk ratios of 0.97 (95%CI 0.85, 1.10) for alendronate versus placebo and 1.15 (95%CI 0.88, 1.52) for zoledronate versus placebo. Neither analysis indicated a significant effect (p=0.61 and 0.35, respectively)
最も覚えておくべきことは？
Both alendronate and zoledronate were associated with significant risk reductions compared to placebo treatment concerning hip and vertebral fractures in osteopenic and osteoporotic postmenopausal women. Alendronate also demonstrated significant increases in bone mineral density. Studies which investigated zoledronate did not provide data on bone mineral density.
それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか？
This indirect comparison of alendronate and zoledronic acid suggest both are effective in reducing osteoporosis-related hip and vertebral fractures. Considering the lack of data for the effects of zoledronate on bone mineral density, future trials are needed to address this comparison. Furthermore, there has yet to be a head-to-head comparison of alendronate and zoledronate. Until these two have been directly compared to one another, comments on either treatment's efficacy in comparison to the other should be withheld.
免責事項
このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。
0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
