Comment on Putting evidence-based medicine into clinical practice: comparing anti-resorptive agents for the treatment of osteoporosis

References

• Wehren LE, Hosking D, Hochberg MC. Putting evidence-based medicine into clinical practice: comparing anti-resorptive agents for the treatment of osteoporosis. Curr Med Res Opin 2004;20:525–31
   Google Scholar
• Cranney A, Adachi JD, Rosen C, Guyatt GH. Comment on ‘Putting evidence-based medicine into clinical practice: comparing anti-resorptive agents for the treatment of osteoporosis’ (Letter). Curr Med Res Opinion 2004;20:1181–2
   Google Scholar
• Wehren LE, Hosking D, Hochberg MC. Author’s reply. Curr Med Res Opinion 2004;20:1182–3
   Google Scholar
• Adachi JD, Delmas PD, Seeman E, Whitehead A. The ORAG meta-analyses: interpreting studies to optimize the treatment of osteoporosis. Med Crossfire 2003;4:1–17
   Google Scholar
• Devereaux PJ, Yusuf S. The evolution of the randomized controlled trial and its role in evidence-based decision making. J Intern Med 2003;254:105–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DJ, Sackett DL, Spitzer W. Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in health care from the Potsdam consultation on meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:167–71
   Google Scholar
• Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999;354:1896–900. Available at: http://www.thelancet.com/era/LLAN.ERA.1051 [accessed 30 Sept 2004]
   Google Scholar
• Cranney A, Guyatt G, Griffith L, Wells G, Tugwell P, Rosen C. Osteoporosis Methodology Group and The Osteoporosis Research Advisory Group. IX: Summary of meta-analysis of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Rev 2002;23:570–8
   Google Scholar
• The Osteoporosis Methodology Group, The Osteoporosis Research Advisory Group: Meta-analyses of therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. I: Systematic reviews of randomized trials in osteoporosis: introduction and methodology. Endocr Rev 2002;23:496–507
   Google Scholar
• Sutton AL, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F. Meta-analysis of individual patient data. In Methods for Meta-Analysis in Medical Research. Edited by Sutton AL, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2000:191–7
   Google Scholar
• Steinberg KK, Smith SJ, Stroup DF, Olkin I, Lee NC, Williamson GD, Thacker SB. Comparison of effect estimates from a meta-analysis of summary data from published studies and from a meta-analysis using individual patient data for ovarian cancer studies. Am J Epidemiol 1997;145:917–25
   Google Scholar
• Olkin I, Sampson A. Comparison of meta-analysis versus analysis of variance of individual patient data. Biometrics 1998;54:317–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song F, Glenny AM, Altman DG. Indirect comparison in evaluating relative efficacy illustrated by antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:488–97
   Google Scholar
• Song F, Altman DG, Glenny AM, Deeks JJ. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003;326:472–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adami S, Passeri M, Ortolani S, Broggini M, Carratelli L, Caruso I, Gandolini G, Gnessi L, Laurenzi M, Lombardi A, et al. Effects of oral alendronate and intranasal salmon calcitonin on bone mass and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Bone 1995;17:383–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenspan SL, Emkey RD, Bone HG, Weiss SR, Bell NH, Downs RWJ, McKeever C, Miller SS, Davidson M, Bolognese MA, et al. Significant differential effects of alendronate, estrogen, or combination therapy on the rate of bone loss after discontinuation of treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:875–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravn P, Bidstrup M, Wasnich RD, Davis JW, McClung MR, Balske A, Coupland C, Sahota O, Kaur A, Daley M, et al. Alendronate and estrogen-progestin in the long-term prevention of bone loss: four-year results from the Early Postmenopausal Intervention Cohort Study. Ann Intern Med 1999;131:935–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosking D, Adami S, Felsenberg D, Andia JC, Valimaki M, Benhamou L, Reginster JY, Yacik C, Rybak-Feglin A, Petruschke RA, et al. Comparison of change in bone resorption and bone mineral density with once-weekly alendronate and daily risedronate: a randomised, placebo-controlled study. Curr Med Res Opin 2003;19:383–94
   Google Scholar
• Johnell O, Scheele WH, Lu Y, Reginster JY, Need AG, Seeman E. Additive effects of raloxifene and alendronate on bone density and biochemical markers of bone remodeling in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;87:985–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luckey M, Kagan R, Greenspan S, Bone H, Kiel DP, Simon J, Sackarowitz J, Palmisano J, Chen E, Petruschke RA, et al. Once-weekly alendronate 70 mg and raloxifene 60 mg daily in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Menopause 2004;11:405–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sambrook PN, Geusens P, Ribot C, Solimano JA, Ferrer-Barriendos J, Gaines K, Verbruggen N, Melton ME. Alendronate produces greater effects than raloxifene on bone density and bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone density: results of EFFECT (EFficacy of FOSAMAX versus EVISTA Comparison Trial). Int J Intern Med 2004;255: 503–11
   Google Scholar
• Rosen CJ, Hochberg M, Bonnick S, et al. Treatment with once-weekly alendronate 70 mg compared to once-weekly risedronate 35 mg in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: a randomized, double-blind study. J Bone Miner Res Web First, doi:10.1359/JBMR.040920. Available at: www.jbmr-online.com. [Accessed 30 Sept 2004]
   Google Scholar