Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/27053
Title: Cardiovascular Safety of Denosumab Across Multiple Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
Authors: Abrahamsen B.;Seeto A.H.;Ebeling P.R. ;Rodriguez A.J.
Institution: (Seeto) School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia (Abrahamsen, Rodriguez) OPEN-Odense Patient Data Explorative Network, Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark (Abrahamsen) Musculoskeletal Pharmaco- and Device Epidemiology, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom (Abrahamsen) Department of Medicine, HolbaekHospital, Holbaek, Denmark (Ebeling, Rodriguez) Bone and Muscle Health Research Group, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Australia (Ebeling) Australian Institute for Musculoskeletal Science, St Albans, Australia (Rodriguez) Disorders of Mineralisation Research Group, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia
Issue Date: 9-Mar-2021
Copyright year: 2021
Publisher: John Wiley and Sons Inc
Place of publication: United States
Publication information: Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 36 (1) (pp 24-40), 2021. Date of Publication: January 2021.
Journal: Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Abstract: The cardiovascular safety of denosumab has not yet been evaluated in a systematic review. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to quantify the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of denosumab (against comparators) reporting cardiovascular adverse events (CAEs) and examine the balance of CAEs between treatment arms. MEDLINE, Embase, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to October 26, 2019, for RCTs of denosumab versus comparators for any indication. Included trials were randomized, enrolled >=100 participants, and reported bone-related outcomes. Primary outcome for analysis was all CAEs, a composite endpoint representing summation of all CAEs as reported by included trials. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Data were pooled using a fixed effects model to determine relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Of 554 records screened, 49 were included, while 36 reported CAEs. Twenty-seven included trials (12 eligible for meta-analysis) were conducted in 13,202 postmenopausal women. Compared with bisphosphonates, there was a 46% (95% CI 1.05 to 2.02) increase in CAEs (85/2136 events in denosumab-treated versus 58/2131 events in bisphosphonate-treated; seven trials). There was a similar imbalance in a five-point (stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, heart failure, atrial fibrillation) MACE endpoint (28/2053 versus 12/2050; RR = 2.33 [1.19 to 4.56]). Compared with placebo-treated women, there was no imbalance in total CAEs (439/4725 events in denosumab versus 399/4467 in placebo; RR = 0.79 [0.41 to 1.52]; seven trials). No imbalance in total AEs (versus bisphosphonates: 0.98 [0.92 to 1.04]; versus placebo: 0.99 [0.98 to 1.01]) occurred. Other indications showed no statistically significant results. The excess CAEs in postmenopausal women treated with denosumab compared with bisphosphonates, but not placebo, indirectly supports claims that bisphosphonates may suppress CAEs. Future trials should use standardized CAE reporting to better describe cardiovascular effects of bone active medications. (PROSPERO: CRD42019135414.) © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).
DOI: http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=
http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.4157
PubMed URL: 32780899 [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=32780899]
ISSN: 0884-0431
URI: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/27053
Type: Article
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Systematic review and/or meta-analysis
Appears in Collections:Articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

24
checked on Oct 26, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.