Alendronate for Fracture Prevention in Postmenopause

Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration leading to increased fracture risk. Alendronate (Fosamax) belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs, which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts. To assess the effectiveness of alend...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American family physician 2008-09, Vol.78 (5), p.579-581
Hauptverfasser: Holder, Kathryn K., COL, USAF, MC, Kerley, Sara Shelton, CAPT, USAF, MC
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration leading to increased fracture risk. Alendronate (Fosamax) belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs, which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts. To assess the effectiveness of alendronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women. The authors searched Central, Medline, and EMBASE for relevant randomized controlled trials published from 1966 to 2007. The authors undertook study selection and data abstraction in duplicate. The authors performed meta-analysis of fracture outcomes using relative risks, and a relative change greater than 15 percent was considered clinically important. The authors assessed study quality through reporting of allocation concealment, blinding, and withdrawals. Eleven trials representing 12,068 women were included in the review. Relative and absolute risk reductions for the 10-mg dose were as follows. For vertebral fractures, a 45 percent relative risk reduction was found (relative risk [RR] = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.67). This was significant for primary prevention, with a 45 percent relative risk reduction (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.80) and 2 percent absolute risk reduction; and for secondary prevention, with 45 percent relative risk reduction (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.69) and 6 percent absolute risk reduction. For nonvertebral fractures, a 16 percent relative risk reduction was found (RR = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.94). This was significant for secondary prevention, with a 23 percent relative risk reduction (RR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.92) and a 2 percent absolute risk reduction, but not for primary prevention (RR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.04). There was a 40 percent relative risk reduction in hip fractures (RR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.92), but only secondary prevention was significant, with a 53 percent relative risk reduction (RR = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.85) and a 1 percent absolute risk reduction. The only significance found for wrist fractures was in secondary prevention, with a 50 percent relative risk reduction (RR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.73) and a 2 percent absolute risk reduction. For adverse events, the authors found no statistically significant difference in any included study. However, observational data raise concerns about potential risk for upper gastrointestinal injury and, less commonly, osteonecrosis of the jaw. At 10
ISSN:0002-838X