Liu Yuxin, Liu Xin, Wu Yuefeng, Luo Tao
The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No.1 Youyi Road, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400042, China.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Feb 7;20(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-05545-1.
Through this study we aimed to present the latest and most comprehensive pooled analysis, providing an updated evaluation of the efficacy and safety of sequential therapy for primary osteoporosis, using bone formation promoters followed by bone resorption inhibitors.
PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were retrieved to identify pertinent studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the sequential therapy of primary osteoporosis with bone formation promoters followed by bone resorption inhibitors were included. Data from clinical studies that met the eligibility criteria were extracted, and quality assessment and meta-analysis were performed using RevMan v5.4 and Stata v15.0. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to find the source of heterogeneity and discover more findings.
A total of 10 eligible articles involving 14,510 patients (7171 in the intervention group versus 7339 in the comparator group) were included for the evidence synthesis. The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. Pooled analysis showed that the intervention group (bone formation promoters followed by bone resorption inhibitors) increased BMD at the spine (SMD:1.64; 95% CI: 0.97, 2.31; P < 0.00001; I = 99%), femoral neck (SMD: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.99; P = 0.007; I = 96%), and total hip (SMD: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.16, 1.48; P = 0.02; I = 97%) compared with the comparator group (monotherapy or combination therapy using two drugs)for postmenopausal osteoporosis patient; however, there was no statistically significant difference observed in the increase of BMD at the 1/3 distal radius comparing the intervention group and comparator group (SMD: -0.25; 95% CI: -1.49, 0.99; P = 0.069; I = 92%). The incidence of new fractures was reduced in the intervention group relative to the comparator group (RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.43, 0.82; P = 0.001; I = 75%). The incidence of adverse events differed statistically between the two groups (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.76, 0.95; P = 0.004; I = 97%), but the difference in adverse event incidence was not statistically significant among subgroups within the intervention and comparator groups. The intervention group had a superiority of Clinical efficacy.
Among patients with primary osteoporosis, sequential therapy with bone formation promoters followed by bone resorption inhibitors substantially increased BMD at sites such as the spine, femoral neck, and total hip while concurrently mitigating fracture risks. However, benefits regarding BMD at the 1/3 distal radius and the incidence of adverse events have not yet been established.
Registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023437188).
通过本研究,我们旨在呈现最新、最全面的汇总分析,对原发性骨质疏松症序贯治疗(先使用骨形成促进剂,随后使用骨吸收抑制剂)的疗效和安全性进行更新评估。
检索PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Web of Science和Embase数据库以识别相关研究。纳入关于原发性骨质疏松症先使用骨形成促进剂,随后使用骨吸收抑制剂的序贯治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。提取符合纳入标准的临床研究数据,并使用RevMan v5.4和Stata v15.0进行质量评估和荟萃分析。进行敏感性和亚组分析以找出异质性来源并发现更多结果。
共纳入10篇符合条件的文章,涉及14510例患者(干预组7171例,对照组7339例)进行证据合成。两组的基线特征相似。汇总分析表明,对于绝经后骨质疏松症患者,干预组(先使用骨形成促进剂,随后使用骨吸收抑制剂)与对照组(单一疗法或两种药物联合疗法)相比,脊柱骨密度增加(标准化均数差:1.64;95%置信区间:0.97,2.31;P<0.00001;I² = 99%)、股骨颈骨密度增加(标准化均数差:0.57;95%置信区间:0.16,0.99;P = 0.007;I² = 96%)以及全髋骨密度增加(标准化均数差:0.82;95%置信区间:0.16,1.48;P = 0.02;I² = 97%);然而,干预组和对照组在桡骨远端1/3处骨密度增加方面未观察到统计学显著差异(标准化均数差: -0.25;95%置信区间: -1.49,0.99;P = 0.069;I² = 92%)。干预组相对于对照组新骨折发生率降低(风险比:0.60;95%置信区间:0.43,0.82;P = 0.001;I² = 75%)。两组不良事件发生率在统计学上存在差异(风险比:0.85;95%置信区间:0.76,0.95;P = 0.004;I² = 97%),但干预组和对照组内各亚组不良事件发生率的差异无统计学意义。干预组具有临床疗效优势。
在原发性骨质疏松症患者中,先使用骨形成促进剂,随后使用骨吸收抑制剂的序贯治疗可显著增加脊柱、股骨颈和全髋等部位的骨密度,同时降低骨折风险。然而,桡骨远端1/3处骨密度及不良事件发生率方面的益处尚未明确。
在PROSPERO注册(注册号:CRD42023437188)。