4.6 Article

Efficacy of Continued Alendronate for Fractures in Women With and Without Prevalent Vertebral Fracture: The FLEX Trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 976-982

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.11

关键词

BISPHOSPHONATES; ALENDRONATE; FRACTURE; DISCONTINUATION; CLINICAL TRIAL

资金

  1. Merck Co

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT) Long Term Extension (FLEX) Trial, 10 years of alendronate (ALN) did not significantly reduce the risk of nonvertebral fractures (NVFs) compared with 5 years of ALN. Continuing ALN reduced the risk of clinical but not morphometric vertebral fractures regardless of baseline vertebral fracture status. In previous studies, ALN efficacy for NVF prevention in women without prevalent vertebral fracture was limited to those with femoral neck (FN) T-scores of -2.5 or less. To determine whether the effect of long-term ALN on fracture differs by vertebral fracture status and femoral neck (FN) T-score, we performed a post hoc analysis using FLEX data, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial among 1099 postmenopausal women originally randomized to ALN in the FIT with mean ALN use of 5 years. In the FLEX Trial, women were randomized to placebo (40%) or ALN 5 mg/day (30%) or ALN 10 mg/day (30%) for an additional 5 years. Among women without vertebral fracture at FLEX baseline (n = 720), continuation of ALN reduced NVF in women with FLEX baseline FN T-scores of -2.5 or less [relative risk (RR) = 0.50, 95% confidence interval (Cl) 0.26-0.96] but not with T-scores of greater than -2.5 and -2 or less (RR 0.79, 95% Cl 0.37-1.66) or with T-scores of greater than -2 (RR 1.41, 95% Cl 0.75-2.66; p for interaction = .019). Continuing ALN for 10 years instead of stopping after 5 years reduces NVF risk in women without prevalent vertebral fracture whose FN T-scores, achieved after 5 years of ALN, are -2.5 or less but does not reduce risk of NVF in women whose T-scores are greater than -2. (C) 2010 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据