Cardiovascular Safety and Fracture Prevention Effectiveness of Denosumab Versus Oral Bisphosphonates in Patients Receiving Dialysis : A Target Trial Emulation.

IF 15.2 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Annals of Internal Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-07 DOI:10.7326/ANNALS-24-03237
Soichiro Masuda, Toshiki Fukasawa, Shuichi Matsuda, Koji Kawakami
{"title":"Cardiovascular Safety and Fracture Prevention Effectiveness of Denosumab Versus Oral Bisphosphonates in Patients Receiving Dialysis : A Target Trial Emulation.","authors":"Soichiro Masuda, Toshiki Fukasawa, Shuichi Matsuda, Koji Kawakami","doi":"10.7326/ANNALS-24-03237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dialysis patients have high rates of fracture morbidity, but evidence on optimal management strategies for osteoporosis is scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the risk for cardiovascular events and fracture prevention effects with denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates in dialysis-dependent patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>An observational study that attempts to emulate a target trial.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A Japanese administrative claims database (April 2014 to October 2022).</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults aged 50 years or older who have initiated denosumab or oral bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in dialysis-dependent patients.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The safety outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The effectiveness outcome was a composite of all fractures. Follow-up was 3 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1032 patients were identified (658 denosumab users and 374 oral bisphosphonate users). Overall average age was 74.5 years, and 62.9% were women. The weighted 3-year risk difference for MACE was 8.2% (95% CI, -0.2% to 16.7%), with a weighted 3-year risk ratio of 1.36 (CI, 0.99 to 1.87). The weighted 3-year risk difference for composite fractures was -5.3% (CI, -11.3% to -0.6%), and the weighted 3-year risk ratio was 0.55 (CI, 0.28 to 0.93).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Lack of clinical data on kidney or osteoporosis disease severity and cardiovascular or other metabolic risk with residual confounding. Safety outcomes did not include kidney end points.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It was estimated that, compared with oral bisphosphonates, denosumab lowered the risk for fractures by 45% and increased the risk for MACE by 36%. The estimates, however, are imprecise and need to be confirmed in future studies.</p><p><strong>Primary funding source: </strong>None.</p>","PeriodicalId":7932,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Internal Medicine","volume":"178 2","pages":"167-176"},"PeriodicalIF":15.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-03237","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dialysis patients have high rates of fracture morbidity, but evidence on optimal management strategies for osteoporosis is scarce.

Objective: To determine the risk for cardiovascular events and fracture prevention effects with denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates in dialysis-dependent patients.

Design: An observational study that attempts to emulate a target trial.

Setting: A Japanese administrative claims database (April 2014 to October 2022).

Patients: Adults aged 50 years or older who have initiated denosumab or oral bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in dialysis-dependent patients.

Measurements: The safety outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The effectiveness outcome was a composite of all fractures. Follow-up was 3 years.

Results: A total of 1032 patients were identified (658 denosumab users and 374 oral bisphosphonate users). Overall average age was 74.5 years, and 62.9% were women. The weighted 3-year risk difference for MACE was 8.2% (95% CI, -0.2% to 16.7%), with a weighted 3-year risk ratio of 1.36 (CI, 0.99 to 1.87). The weighted 3-year risk difference for composite fractures was -5.3% (CI, -11.3% to -0.6%), and the weighted 3-year risk ratio was 0.55 (CI, 0.28 to 0.93).

Limitations: Lack of clinical data on kidney or osteoporosis disease severity and cardiovascular or other metabolic risk with residual confounding. Safety outcomes did not include kidney end points.

Conclusion: It was estimated that, compared with oral bisphosphonates, denosumab lowered the risk for fractures by 45% and increased the risk for MACE by 36%. The estimates, however, are imprecise and need to be confirmed in future studies.

Primary funding source: None.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Denosumab与口服双膦酸盐在透析患者中的心血管安全性和骨折预防效果:一项目标试验模拟。
背景:透析患者骨折发病率高,但骨质疏松症的最佳管理策略缺乏证据。目的:比较denosumab与口服双膦酸盐治疗透析依赖患者的心血管事件风险和骨折预防效果。设计:试图模仿目标试验的观察性研究。设置:日本行政索赔数据库(2014年4月至2022年10月)。患者:50岁或以上的成人,在透析依赖的骨质疏松患者中开始使用denosumab或口服双膦酸盐。测量:安全性指标为主要心脏不良事件(MACE)。疗效结果是所有骨折的综合结果。随访3年。结果:共确定1032例患者(658例denosumab使用者和374例口服双膦酸盐使用者)。总体平均年龄为74.5岁,其中62.9%为女性。MACE的加权3年风险差为8.2% (95% CI, -0.2%至16.7%),加权3年风险比为1.36 (CI, 0.99至1.87)。复合骨折的加权3年风险差为-5.3% (CI, -11.3% ~ -0.6%),加权3年风险比为0.55 (CI, 0.28 ~ 0.93)。局限性:缺乏肾脏或骨质疏松症严重程度和心血管或其他代谢风险的临床数据,存在残留混淆。安全性结果不包括肾脏终点。结论:据估计,与口服双膦酸盐相比,denosumab使骨折风险降低45%,使MACE风险增加36%。然而,这些估计是不精确的,需要在未来的研究中加以证实。主要资金来源:无。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Internal Medicine
Annals of Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
23.90
自引率
1.80%
发文量
1136
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians (ACP), Annals of Internal Medicine is the premier internal medicine journal. Annals of Internal Medicine’s mission is to promote excellence in medicine, enable physicians and other health care professionals to be well informed members of the medical community and society, advance standards in the conduct and reporting of medical research, and contribute to improving the health of people worldwide. To achieve this mission, the journal publishes a wide variety of original research, review articles, practice guidelines, and commentary relevant to clinical practice, health care delivery, public health, health care policy, medical education, ethics, and research methodology. In addition, the journal publishes personal narratives that convey the feeling and the art of medicine.
期刊最新文献
Stable Supportive Footwear for Self-managing Hip Osteoarthritis Pain : A Randomized Clinical Trial. Death at Home or Hospice Among Physicians. Q&A: Choosing shoes for osteoarthritis pain. Effectiveness, Comparative Effectiveness, and Harms of COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Who Are Not Pregnant or Immunocompromised: A Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians. The Risk for Bleeding in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation From Concomitant Use of Apixaban or Rivaroxaban With Diltiazem Compared With Metoprolol.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1