MedElevator
Войти в исследования Current medical research and opinion · 2004
Putting evidence-based medicine into clinical practice: comparing anti-resorptive agents for the treatment of osteoporosis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wehren Lois E, Hosking David, Hochberg Marc C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of antiresorptive agents in reducing the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures using data from published meta-analyses and the technique of adjusted indirect comparisons.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pairs of agents were compared by adjusted indirect comparison of 0.56 [0.40, 0.78], respectively) in reducing the their effects relative to a common comparator (placebo) using meta-analyses published by The Osteoporosis Methodology Group and The Osteoporosis Research Advisory Group.
RESULTS: Adjusted indirect comparisons identified only one pair of agents that had significantly different effects on vertebral fracture incidence: alendronate was 34% more effective than calcitonin (Relative Risk: 0.66, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.48-0.90). Alendronate was significantly more effective than risedronate, calcitonin, estrogen, etidronate, and raloxifene (Relative Risks: 0.70 [0.49, 0.99], 0.64 [0.42, 0.98], 0.59 [0.41, 0.84], 0.52 [0.32, 0.82], and incidence of non-vertebral fractures. No other significant pairwise differences were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that there are differences in anti-fracture efficacy among antiresorptive agents, particularly for non-vertebral fractures. Direct head-to-head comparisons would be needed to confirm these findings but are unlikely to be conducted.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Pairs of agents were compared by adjusted indirect comparison of 0.56 [0.40, 0.78], respectively) in reducing the their effects relative to a common comparator (placebo) using meta-analyses published by The Osteoporosis Methodology Group and The Osteoporosis Research Advisory Group.
RESULTS: Adjusted indirect comparisons identified only one pair of agents that had significantly different effects on vertebral fracture incidence: alendronate was 34% more effective than calcitonin (Relative Risk: 0.66, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.48-0.90). Alendronate was significantly more effective than risedronate, calcitonin, estrogen, etidronate, and raloxifene (Relative Risks: 0.70 [0.49, 0.99], 0.64 [0.42, 0.98], 0.59 [0.41, 0.84], 0.52 [0.32, 0.82], and incidence of non-vertebral fractures. No other significant pairwise differences were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that there are differences in anti-fracture efficacy among antiresorptive agents, particularly for non-vertebral fractures. Direct head-to-head comparisons would be needed to confirm these findings but are unlikely to be conducted.