ArticleJAMA network open2019
Comparison of Risk of Osteoporotic Fracture in Denosumab vs Alendronate Treatment Within 3 Years of Initiation.
Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment gaps in osteoporosis care following recurrent fractures: a nationwide cohort study.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- The effectiveness of bisphosphonates vs denosumab in people with dementia or frailty post hip fracture: a multi-database cohort study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Article
- Does Sagittal Spinal Alignment Predict Future Fall-Related Fractures in Community-Dwelling Women with Osteoporosis?Spine surgery and related research · 2025Article
- Attributable Risk and Consequences of Bone Mineral Density Deficits in Childhood Cancer Survivors.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Colon-targeted engineered postbiotics nanoparticles alleviate osteoporosis through the gut-bone axis.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Comparative effectiveness of denosumab vs alendronate among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024Article
- Hypocalcemia in Patients With Osteoporosis and Normal Renal Function, Treated With Denosumab, a Retrospective Analysis.Nutrition and metabolic insights · 2024Article
- Comparison of anti-fracture effectiveness of zoledronate, ibandronate and alendronate versus denosumab in a registry-based cohort study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023Article
- Time-varying exposure to anti-osteoporosis drugs and risk of first-time hip fracture: a population wide study within the Norwegian Epidemiologic Osteoporosis Studies (NOREPOS).Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Denosumab for Secondary Prevention of Osteoporotic Fractures Among Postmenopausal Women in China: An Individual-Level Simulation Analysis.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Article
- Denosumab's Therapeutic Effect for Future Osteosarcopenia Therapy : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Annals of geriatric medicine and research · 2023Article
- Association with sagittal alignment and osteoporosis-related fractures in outpatient women with osteoporosis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022Article
- Real-life short-term effectiveness of anti-osteoporotic treatments: a longitudinal cohort study.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Article
- Is the Jaw Bone Micro-Structure Altered in Response to Osteoporosis and Bisphosphonate Treatment? A Micro-CT Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- The Efficacy of Alendronate Versus Denosumab on Major Osteoporotic Fracture Risk in Elderly Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: A Danish Retrospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Article
- Postoperative Administration of the Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitor, Donepezil, Interferes with Bone Healing and Implant Osseointegration in a Rat Model.Biomolecules · 2020Article
- A Review on the Role of Denosumab in Fracture Prevention.Drug design, development and therapy · 2020Review
- The therapeutic efficacy of denosumab for the loss of bone mineral density in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: a meta-analysis.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Head-to-head randomized clinical trials showed greater efficacy of denosumab vs alendronate in improving bone mineral density. Although there is an association of changes in bone mineral density with reductions in fracture risk, the magnitude of the association is not well established. Objective: To compare the risk of hip and any fracture in patients treated with denosumab and alendronate in routine practice settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This Danish nationwide, population-based, historical cohort study of a population with universal access to health care used prospectively collected, individually linked data from Danish health registries with complete follow-up. Cohorts consisted of 92 355 individuals 50 years or older who were new users of denosumab (n = 4624) or alendronate (n = 87 731) from May 2010 to December 2017 after at least 1 year without an antiosteoporosis medication dispensing. Exposures: Initiation of denosumab or alendronate. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was hospitalization for hip fracture, and the secondary outcome was hospitalization for any fracture. Inverse probability of treatment weights and the intention-to-treat approach were used to calculate cumulative incidences and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% CIs. Results: Of the 92 355 included patients, 75 046 (81.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 71 (10) years. The denosumab cohort had a lower proportion of men than the alendronate cohort (12.7% [589] vs 19.0% [16 700]), while age distributions were similar in the 2 cohorts. Within 3 years of follow-up, initiation of denosumab or alendronate was associated with cumulative incidences of 3.7% and 3.1%, respectively, for hip fracture and 9.0% and 9.0%, respectively, for any fracture. Overall, the aHRs for denosumab vs alendronate were 1.08 (95% CI, 0.92-1.28) for hip fracture and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.83-1.02) for any fracture. The aHR of denosumab vs alendronate for hip fracture was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) among patients with a history of any fracture and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.83-1.32) among patients without history of fracture. The aHR for any fracture for denosumab vs alendronate was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.71-0.98) among patients with a history of any fracture and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.64-0.93) among patients with no history of fracture. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with denosumab and alendronate was associated with similar risks of hip or any fracture over a 3-year period, regardless of fracture history.
Indexed as
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.