Dataset Information

The carcinogenicity of alendronate in patients with osteoporosis: evidence from cohort studies.

ABSTRACT:

Context

Alendronate may relate to the incidence of cancers, especially esophageal and colon cancer. But the results are inconsistent in different studies.

Objective

To quantify the association between the use of alendronate and the occurrence of different types of cancer.

Data sources

We searched Embase, Pubmed, CENTRAL, SIGLE and clinicaltrials.gov, up to 2014 June.

Study selection

Cohort studies reporting association between alendronate or bisphosphonate therapy including alendronate in patients with osteoporosis and risk of cancer were selected by two authors.

Data extraction

Two authors independently extracted the data. The Chi-square test and the I-square test were used for testing heterogeneity between studies.

Data synthesis

Eight cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis result manifested that alendronate significantly increased the incidence of lung cancer (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.47, P value = 0.03), nevertheless, there was no significant difference after we excluded either Lee's 2012 study (HR 1.17, 95%CI 0.95 to 1.44, P value = 0.13) or Chiang's 2012 study (HR 1.47, 95%CI 1 to 2.17, P value = 0.05). For the incidence of colorectal cancer, no significant difference occurred (HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.74 to 1.13, P value = 0.39), but there was a positive relationship when we used fixed model (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.78 to 0.93, P value = 0.004). For the incidence of liver cancer, there was no significant difference (HR 1.36, 95%CI 0.9 to 2.04, P value = 0.14), however, the result changed after we excluded Chiang's 2012 study (HR 1.69, 95%CI 1.03 to 2.77, P value = 0.04). There was no significant difference in other types of cancer.

Conclusion

Based on current evidences, alendronate therapy may be associated with a high risk of lung cancer, may with an excess risk of liver cancer, a low risk of colorectal and no related risk of other cancers.

SUBMITTER: Chen LX

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4399980 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is a serious problem for patients with rheumatic diseases requiring long-term glucocorticoid treatment. Alendronate, a bisphosphonate, has been recommended in the prevention of GIOP. However, the efficacy and safety of alendronate in preventing GIOP remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of alendronate in preventing GIOP in patients with rheumatic diseases.We retrieved randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Two reviewers extracted the data and evaluated the risk of bias and quality of the evidence. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI for continuous outcomes using Review Manager, version 5.3.A total of 339 studies were found, and 9 studies (1134 patients) were included. Alendronate was not able to reduce the incidence of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.10-4.04, P = 0.62) and nonvertebral fractures (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.15-1.12, P?=?0.08). Alendronate significantly increased the percent change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (MD?=?3.66, 95% CI: 2.58-4.74, P?<?0.05), total hip (MD?=?2.08, 95% CI: 0.41-3.74, P?<?0.05), and trochanter (MD?=?1.68, 95% CI: 0.75-2.61, P?<?0.05). Significant differences were not observed in the percent change in BMD at the femoral neck (MD?=?-0.33, 95% CI: -2.79 to 2.13, P?=?0.79) and total body (MD?=?0.64, 95% CI: -0.06 to 1.34, P?=?0.07). No significant differences in the adverse events were observed in patients treated with alendronate versus the controls (RR?=?1.00, 95% CI: 0.94-1.07, P?=?0.89). The odds of gastrointestinal adverse events were significantly reduced (RR?=?0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.97, P?<?0.05).Our analysis suggests that alendronate can increase the percent change in BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, and trochanter, and is not associated with an increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events; however, the vertebral and nonvertebral fractures cannot be reduced. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the poor statistical power.

Project description:The clinical utility of denosumab for the treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) has yet to be established. This study aimed to compare the effects of denosumab on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers to those of alendronate in patients with GIOP.A prospective, single-center study of 32 patients (18 men; median age, 66.0 years) with glomerular disease receiving prednisolone (PSL) who were diagnosed as having GIOP and had not received bisphosphonates before was conducted. Participants were randomized to either alendronate (35 mg orally once a week) or denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously once every 6 months), and all subjects received calcitriol. The primary endpoint was the percent change in lumbar spine (LS) BMD at 12 months of treatment.The demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline were not significantly different between the groups. Denosumab treatment markedly decreased serum levels of t-PINP, BAP, and TRACP-5b at 12 months compared to baseline (-57.4%, p<0.001; -30.9%, p<0.01; -57.7%, p<0.001, respectively). After 12 months of alendronate treatment, serum levels of t-PINP, BAP, and TRACP-5b were also significantly decreased compared to pretreatment (-38.9%, p<0.01; -16.3%, p<0.05; -43.5%, p<0.01, respectively). However, no significant differences in the changes of bone turnover markers were found between the two groups. As for the effects on BMD, denosumab treatment markedly increased LS BMD from 6 months compared to baseline, whereas no significant difference compared to pretreatment was found in the alendronate group during the study period. In the comparison of the two groups, a large increase of LS BMD was found in the denosumab treatment group compared to the alendronate treatment group at 12 months (p<0.05).In patients with GIOP, denosumab treatment markedly suppressed bone turnover, which led to a significantly greater increase in LS BMD than with alendronate treatment. These results suggest that denosumab is a therapeutic option for the treatment of GIOP.

Project description:Since alendronate became available in generic form in the Unites States in 2008, its price has been decreasing. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of alendronate cost on the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and treatment in postmenopausal women.Microsimulation cost-effectiveness model of osteoporosis screening and treatment for U.S. women age 65 and older. We assumed screening initiation at age 65 with central dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and alendronate treatment for individuals with osteoporosis; with a comparator of "no screening" and treatment only after fracture occurrence. We evaluated annual alendronate costs of $20 through $800; outcome measures included fractures; nursing home admission; medication adverse events; death; costs; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2010 U.S. dollars per QALY gained. A lifetime time horizon was used, and direct costs were included. Base-case and sensitivity analyses were performed.Base-case analysis results showed that at annual alendronate costs of $200 or less, osteoporosis screening followed by treatment was cost-saving, resulting in lower total costs than no screening as well as more QALYs (10.6 additional quality-adjusted life-days). When assuming alendronate costs of $400 through $800, screening and treatment resulted in greater lifetime costs than no screening but was highly cost-effective, with ICERs ranging from $714 per QALY gained through $13,902 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening followed by alendronate treatment was robust to joint input parameter estimate variation at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY at all alendronate costs evaluated.Osteoporosis screening followed by alendronate treatment is effective and highly cost-effective for postmenopausal women across a range of alendronate costs, and may be cost-saving at annual alendronate costs of $200 or less.

Project description:In this randomized, controlled trial, sequential therapy with once-weekly subcutaneous injection of teriparatide for 72 weeks, followed by alendronate for 48 weeks resulted in a significantly lower incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture than monotherapy with alendronate for 120 weeks in women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture.PurposeTo determine whether the anti-fracture efficacy of sequential therapy with teriparatide, followed by alendronate is superior to that of monotherapy with alendronate, a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial was performed.MethodsJapanese women aged at least 75 years were eligible for the study, if they had primary osteoporosis and if they were at high risk of fracture. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive the sequential therapy (once-weekly subcutaneous injection of teriparatide 56.5 μg for 72 weeks, followed by alendronate for 48 weeks) or monotherapy with alendronate for 120 weeks. The primary endpoint in the final analysis was the incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture during the 120-week follow-up period.ResultsBetween October 2014 and June 2020, 505 patients in the sequential therapy group and 506 in the monotherapy group were enrolled. Of these, 489 and 496, respectively, were included in the main analysis. The incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture during the 120-week follow-up period in the sequential therapy group (64 per 627.5 person-years, annual incidence rate 0.1020) was significantly lower than that in the monotherapy group (126 per 844.2 person-years, annual incidence rate 0.1492), with a rate ratio of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.88, P < 0.01). After 72 weeks, no patient had a severe adverse event that was considered related to the study drug.ConclusionOnce-weekly injection of teriparatide, followed by alendronate resulted in a significantly lower incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture than alendronate monotherapy in women with osteoporosis who were at high risk of fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER, DATE OF REGISTRATION: jRCTs031180235 and UMIN000015573, March 12, 2019.

Project description:The efficacy of generic teriparatide in improving BMD at lumbar spine in patients with osteoporosis was similar to that of alendronate. It provided a new choice for osteoporosis treatment in Chinese population.IntroductionTo determine whether the efficacy of generic teriparatide is noninferior to alendronate for Chinese postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.MethodsEligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) in a 48-week, open-label design to receive 20 µg sc daily teriparatide or 70 mg oral weekly alendronate. Primary outcome was percentage change in BMD at the lumbar spine from baseline to 48 weeks and was assessed for non-inferiority. The same outcome was further assessed for superiority as a secondary endpoint.ResultsThree hundred ninety-one and 196 participants were randomly assigned to the teriparatide or alendronate group, of whom 379 and 194 receiving at least one dose of teriparatide and alendronate treatment were eligible for the efficacy analysis. Teriparatide was non-inferior to alendronate for BMD change at lumbar spine (treatment difference: 0.7%, 95% CI: - 0.3 to 1.7%), which excluded the predefined non-inferiority margin of - 1.5%. However, teriparatide was not statistically superior to alendronate in improving BMD at lumbar spine (P = 0.169). At 48 weeks, changes in BMD at total hip were - 1.0% and 2.2% in teriparatide and alendronate group, respectively (P < 0.001). The incidence of new fracture showed no statistical difference between groups (P = 0.128). Serum P1NP and β-CTX levels significantly increased in the teriparatide group and markedly decreased in alendronate group (all P < 0.001 vs baseline). The adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were more common in the teriparatide group than in the alendronate group, which were mainly teriparatide-related hypercalcemia, elevated alkaline phosphatase or parathyroid hormone, dizziness, and arthralgia.ConclusionsTeriparatide was not inferior to alendronate in increasing BMD at lumbar spine in Chinese postmenopausal women, and they achieved these effects through different mechanisms.