To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Denosumab increases bone mass but does not reduce fracture risk compared to alendronate

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
May 2013

Denosumab increases bone mass but does not reduce fracture risk compared to alendronate

Vol: 2| Issue: 4| Number:188| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Meta-analysis/Systematic Review
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety between denosumab and alendronate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis

Int J Clin Pract. 2012 Apr;66(4):399-408. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02806.x. Epub 2012 Feb 7

Contributing Authors:
T Lin C Wang XZ Cai X Zhao MM Shi ZM Ying FZ Yuan C Guo SG Yan

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

4 randomised control trials were included in this meta-analysis, to compare the effectiveness of 60mg Denosumab subcutaneously per 6 months (Den) to 70mg Alendronate orally per week (Aln) in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. A total of 1952 women were identified that were followed-up for one year. The primary outcomes were the incidence of clinical fractures and bone mineral d...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue