Abstract
Background
In the present study, we undertook an equivalence analysis on the effectiveness of the main anti-reabsorptive agents indicated for women with osteoporosis.
Methods
Our methodology was a combination of meta-analysis (both pair-wise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis) and equivalence testing. The end-point was the incidence on new vertebral fractures. The anti-reabsorptive agents examined included alendronate, zoledronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and denosumab.
Results
Our analysis involved nine randomized trials. Ten head-to-head indirect comparisons were examined through network meta-analysis and the respective values of RR were estimated. The 95 % confidence intervals for RR remained within the interval of a relative ±40 % variation for all comparisons that involved alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, and denosumab. In contrast, the comparisons involving zoledronate satisfied a post hoc margin up to ±67 %.
Conclusion
Our results confirm that most of these anti-reabsorptive drugs (namely, alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, and denosumab) are equivalent according to reasonable equivalence margins.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Ahn S, Park SH, Lee KH (2013) How to demonstrate similarity by using noninferiority and equivalence statistical testing in radiology research. Radiology 267(2):328–338
Messori A, Fadda V, Maratea D, Trippoli S (2014) The Italian way to evidence-based demonstration of equivalence as a prerequisite for conducting procurement tendering within the NHS (Rapid Response), thebmj. http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f4951/rr/759376. Accessed 1 July 2014
Migliore A, Broccoli S, Massafra U, Cassol M, Frediani B (2013) Ranking antireabsorptive agents to prevent vertebral fractures in postmenopausal osteoporosis by mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 17(5):658–667
Norman G, Monteiro S, Salama S (2012) Sample size calculations: should the emperor’s clothes be off the peg or made to measure? BMJ 23(345):e5278. doi:10.1136/bmj.e5278
Jones PW, Beeh KM, Chapman KR, Decramer M, Mahler DA, Wedzicha JA (2014) Minimal clinically important differences in pharmacological trials. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 189(3):250–255
Fadda V, Maratea D, Trippoli S, Messori A (2011) Network meta-analysis. Results can be summarised in a simple figure. BMJ 23(342):d1555
Messori A (2014) Comment, PubMed Commons. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23543450/#comments. Accessed 5 Apr 2014
Arruda MA (2013) No evidence of efficacy or evidence of no efficacy. JAMA Pediatr 167(3):300–302
Messori A, Fadda V, Maratea D, Trippoli S (2013) Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in heart failure: no proof of effectiveness or proof of no effectiveness? Eur J Heart Fail 15(8):944–945
Freemantle N, Cooper C, Diez-Perez A, Gitlin M, Radcliffe H, Shepherd S, Roux C (2013) Results of indirect and mixed treatment comparison of fracture efficacy for osteoporosis treatments: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 24(1):209–217
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Messori, A., Fadda, V., Maratea, D. et al. Anti-reabsorptive agents in women with osteoporosis: determining statistical equivalence according to evidence-based methods. J Endocrinol Invest 37, 769–773 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-014-0124-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-014-0124-3