Cardiovascular Safety of Denosumab Across Multiple Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version

Version of Record (VoR)

Author(s)
Seeto, AH
Abrahamsen, B
Ebeling, PR
Rodríguez, AJ
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2021
Size
File type(s)
Location
License
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).

Journal Title

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume

36

Issue

1

Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement

© 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Cardiovascular Safety of Denosumab Across Multiple Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials, Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2021, 36 (1), pp. 24-40, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.4157. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving (http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-828039.html)

Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Biological sciences

Engineering

Health sciences

ANTIRESORPTIVES

CANCER

CLINICAL TRIALS

MENOPAUSE

OSTEOPOROSIS

Persistent link to this record
Citation

Seeto, AH; Abrahamsen, B; Ebeling, PR; Rodríguez, AJ, Cardiovascular Safety of Denosumab Across Multiple Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials, Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2021, 36 (1), pp. 24-40

Collections