ReviewInternational journal of endocrinology2014
Alendronate versus Raloxifene for Postmenopausal Women: A Meta-Analysis of Seven Head-to-Head Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in International journal of endocrinology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Targeting estrogen receptor alpha in breast cancer for novel therapies resistance mechanisms and future directions.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Comparative safety and effectiveness of alendronate versus raloxifene in women with osteoporosis.Scientific reports · 2020Observational
- Comparison of Osteoporosis Pharmacotherapy Fracture Rates: Analysis of a MarketScanInternational journal of endocrinology and metabolism · 2018Article
- Real-world evidence of raloxifene versus alendronate in preventing non-vertebral fractures in Japanese women with osteoporosis: retrospective analysis of a hospital claims database.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2018Article
- Comparison of Calipers for Matching on the Disease Risk Score.American journal of epidemiology · 2016Article
- Treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis: beyond bisphosphonates.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose. The aim of this study was to directly compare the efficacy and the safety of the two agents for postmenopausal women. Methods/Principal Findings. Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles that met our predefined inclusion criteria. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 4054 women were identified and included. Although Aln was more effective than Rlx in increasing bone mineral density (BMD), no statistical differences were observed in reducing the risk of neither vertebral fractures (P = 0.45) nor nonvertebral fractures (P = 0.87) up to two-year followup. Aln reduced the risk of vasomotor (P = 0.006) but increased the risk of diarrhea compared to Rlx (P = 0.01). Our subgroup analysis further indicated the difference between Aln and Rlx in fracture risk and was not materially altered by the administration pattern, the age. The weekly strategy of Aln would further reduce the upper gastrointestinal (GI) disorders and might gain more bone mass increment at lumbar spine compared to its daily treatment. Conclusion. There was no evidence of difference of fracture risk reduction between Aln and Rlx. In addition, age did not obviously influence their relative antifracture efficacy. For Aln the weekly strategy would further reduce the upper GI disorders and gain more bone mass increment compared to the daily treatment. During clinical decision making, the patients' adherence and the related side-effects associated with both drugs should also be taken into account.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.