| Title |
Treatment of osteoporosis with eldecalcitol, a new vitamin D analog: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s84264 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhixing Xu, Changchun Fan, Xuechun Zhao, Hairong Tao |
| Abstract |
Eldecalcitol (ELD) is an active form of vitamin D analog that has been approved for the treatment of osteoporosis in Japan. Over recent years, a number of multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trials have been conducted. Our goal is to comprehensively summarize the results from these studies. We searched the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to February 28, 2015. Each database was searched using search terms "Eldecalcitol" and "ED-71" and the results were combined. The retrieved data from three independent clinical trials included a total of 1,332 patients with osteoporosis. After the data were pooled from three trials, RevMan software was used to conduct meta-analyses to determine the effects of ELD on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover marker (BTM) type I collagen amino-terminal telopeptide (NTX). Effects of ELD on some of the bone formation and bone resorption parameters, incidence of vertebral fractures at the lower spine, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with osteoporosis were also summarized. With a test for overall effectZ=6.35, ELD could increase lumbar BMD (P<0.00001). In comparison with alphacalcidol, ELD suppressed the NTX level to a greater degree (test for overall effectZ=3.82,P<0.0001). ELD was also found to suppress bone alkaline phosphatase (BALP) by 19% (P<0.01) and osteocalcin by 19% (P<0.01) at the dose of 0.75 μg/day. Compared to alfacalcidol, ELD showed higher potency in suppressing serum BALP (26±9 vs 32±11 U/L,P<0.05) and amino-terminal propeptide of procollagen I (PINP) (42±15 vs 59±23 ng/mL,P<0.05). In addition, ELD was found to be more effective in reducing the incidence of vertebral fractures at the lower spine (P=0.029). Our meta-analysis showed that ELD was more potent than alphacalcidol in reducing BTM (NTX). Clinical data together suggest that ELD is efficient in treating osteoporosis by increasing lumbar BMD; suppressing BTMs, including NTX, BALP, osteocalcin, and PINP; resulting in the reduction in the incidence of vertebral fractures at the lower spine; and increasing the HRQOL in patients with osteoporosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,740,505
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#872
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,129
of 399,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#35
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 399,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.