A systematic review of the skeletal effects of estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women. II. An assessment of treatment effects

Dianne O'Connell, Jane Robertson, D. Henry, W. J. Gillespie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose To combine the results of randomized controlled trials to provide overall estimates of the effect of estrogen treatment on fracture rates and measures of bone mass. Data sources Articles on estrogen treatment for osteoporosis published between 1977 and 1995 were identified. Study selection Studies selected were randomized controlled trials of the efficacy of estrogens in preventing loss of bone mass or fractures in postmenopausal women. Data extraction Data extraction and quality assessment were performed in duplicate, with assistance of a manual. Raters were blinded as to authors and their affiliations and the publication details. With estimates of bone mass, the treatment effect size was defined as the difference in the mean annual change in bone mass between the treatment and control groups divided by the pooled standard deviation for change. In the case of fractures, efficacy was measured as the reduction in the numbers of individuals experiencing new fractures with treatment. Effect sizes were pooled using the random effects model. Results Thirty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review. Only one small secondary prevention trial contained evaluable data on vertebral fractures. This study found a fracture relative risk of 0.63 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.28-1.43) with estrogen treatment. There was more information on the effects of treatment on bone mass. Overall effect sizes ranged between 0.5 and 2.5 standard deviation (SD) units for change. A dose-response relationship was apparent but high doses of estrogens were not associated with effect sizes greater than those observed with recommended doses. There was no significant difference in efficacy between transdermal and oral administration of estrogens. Pooling of paired data from secondary prevention studies indicated that treatment effect sizes were smaller at the hip (0.92, 95% CI 0.3-1.5 SD units) than at the spine (2.1, 95% CI 0.9-3.3 SD units). No significant effects of co-intervention with calcium, progestogens or androgens were seen, although an additive effect of higher doses of calcium could not be ruled out.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)112-123
Number of pages12
JournalClimacteric
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Estrogens
Bone and Bones
Therapeutics
Secondary Prevention
Randomized Controlled Trials
Cutaneous Administration
Calcium
Information Storage and Retrieval
Progestins
Androgens
Osteoporosis
Oral Administration
Publications
Meta-Analysis
Hip
Spine
Confidence Intervals
Control Groups

Cite this

@article{fd9a5bbc269f44569f186332f0119c33,
title = "A systematic review of the skeletal effects of estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women. II. An assessment of treatment effects",
abstract = "Purpose To combine the results of randomized controlled trials to provide overall estimates of the effect of estrogen treatment on fracture rates and measures of bone mass. Data sources Articles on estrogen treatment for osteoporosis published between 1977 and 1995 were identified. Study selection Studies selected were randomized controlled trials of the efficacy of estrogens in preventing loss of bone mass or fractures in postmenopausal women. Data extraction Data extraction and quality assessment were performed in duplicate, with assistance of a manual. Raters were blinded as to authors and their affiliations and the publication details. With estimates of bone mass, the treatment effect size was defined as the difference in the mean annual change in bone mass between the treatment and control groups divided by the pooled standard deviation for change. In the case of fractures, efficacy was measured as the reduction in the numbers of individuals experiencing new fractures with treatment. Effect sizes were pooled using the random effects model. Results Thirty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review. Only one small secondary prevention trial contained evaluable data on vertebral fractures. This study found a fracture relative risk of 0.63 (95{\%} confidence interval, CI 0.28-1.43) with estrogen treatment. There was more information on the effects of treatment on bone mass. Overall effect sizes ranged between 0.5 and 2.5 standard deviation (SD) units for change. A dose-response relationship was apparent but high doses of estrogens were not associated with effect sizes greater than those observed with recommended doses. There was no significant difference in efficacy between transdermal and oral administration of estrogens. Pooling of paired data from secondary prevention studies indicated that treatment effect sizes were smaller at the hip (0.92, 95{\%} CI 0.3-1.5 SD units) than at the spine (2.1, 95{\%} CI 0.9-3.3 SD units). No significant effects of co-intervention with calcium, progestogens or androgens were seen, although an additive effect of higher doses of calcium could not be ruled out.",
author = "Dianne O'Connell and Jane Robertson and D. Henry and Gillespie, {W. J.}",
year = "1998",
doi = "10.3109/13697139809085526",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "112--123",
journal = "Climacteric",
issn = "1369-7137",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare USA",
number = "2",

}

A systematic review of the skeletal effects of estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women. II. An assessment of treatment effects. / O'Connell, Dianne; Robertson, Jane; Henry, D.; Gillespie, W. J.

In: Climacteric, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1998, p. 112-123.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review of the skeletal effects of estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women. II. An assessment of treatment effects

AU - O'Connell, Dianne

AU - Robertson, Jane

AU - Henry, D.

AU - Gillespie, W. J.

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - Purpose To combine the results of randomized controlled trials to provide overall estimates of the effect of estrogen treatment on fracture rates and measures of bone mass. Data sources Articles on estrogen treatment for osteoporosis published between 1977 and 1995 were identified. Study selection Studies selected were randomized controlled trials of the efficacy of estrogens in preventing loss of bone mass or fractures in postmenopausal women. Data extraction Data extraction and quality assessment were performed in duplicate, with assistance of a manual. Raters were blinded as to authors and their affiliations and the publication details. With estimates of bone mass, the treatment effect size was defined as the difference in the mean annual change in bone mass between the treatment and control groups divided by the pooled standard deviation for change. In the case of fractures, efficacy was measured as the reduction in the numbers of individuals experiencing new fractures with treatment. Effect sizes were pooled using the random effects model. Results Thirty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review. Only one small secondary prevention trial contained evaluable data on vertebral fractures. This study found a fracture relative risk of 0.63 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.28-1.43) with estrogen treatment. There was more information on the effects of treatment on bone mass. Overall effect sizes ranged between 0.5 and 2.5 standard deviation (SD) units for change. A dose-response relationship was apparent but high doses of estrogens were not associated with effect sizes greater than those observed with recommended doses. There was no significant difference in efficacy between transdermal and oral administration of estrogens. Pooling of paired data from secondary prevention studies indicated that treatment effect sizes were smaller at the hip (0.92, 95% CI 0.3-1.5 SD units) than at the spine (2.1, 95% CI 0.9-3.3 SD units). No significant effects of co-intervention with calcium, progestogens or androgens were seen, although an additive effect of higher doses of calcium could not be ruled out.

AB - Purpose To combine the results of randomized controlled trials to provide overall estimates of the effect of estrogen treatment on fracture rates and measures of bone mass. Data sources Articles on estrogen treatment for osteoporosis published between 1977 and 1995 were identified. Study selection Studies selected were randomized controlled trials of the efficacy of estrogens in preventing loss of bone mass or fractures in postmenopausal women. Data extraction Data extraction and quality assessment were performed in duplicate, with assistance of a manual. Raters were blinded as to authors and their affiliations and the publication details. With estimates of bone mass, the treatment effect size was defined as the difference in the mean annual change in bone mass between the treatment and control groups divided by the pooled standard deviation for change. In the case of fractures, efficacy was measured as the reduction in the numbers of individuals experiencing new fractures with treatment. Effect sizes were pooled using the random effects model. Results Thirty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review. Only one small secondary prevention trial contained evaluable data on vertebral fractures. This study found a fracture relative risk of 0.63 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.28-1.43) with estrogen treatment. There was more information on the effects of treatment on bone mass. Overall effect sizes ranged between 0.5 and 2.5 standard deviation (SD) units for change. A dose-response relationship was apparent but high doses of estrogens were not associated with effect sizes greater than those observed with recommended doses. There was no significant difference in efficacy between transdermal and oral administration of estrogens. Pooling of paired data from secondary prevention studies indicated that treatment effect sizes were smaller at the hip (0.92, 95% CI 0.3-1.5 SD units) than at the spine (2.1, 95% CI 0.9-3.3 SD units). No significant effects of co-intervention with calcium, progestogens or androgens were seen, although an additive effect of higher doses of calcium could not be ruled out.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032098315&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/13697139809085526

DO - 10.3109/13697139809085526

M3 - Article

VL - 1

SP - 112

EP - 123

JO - Climacteric

JF - Climacteric

SN - 1369-7137

IS - 2

ER -