Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32676524›Full record

ArticleBone reports2020

Effects of denosumab versus teriparatide in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis patients with prior bisphosphonate treatment.

Yasuaki Hirooka, Yuji Nozaki, Asuka Inoue, Jinhai Li, Toshihiko Shiga, Kazuya Kishimoto, Masafumi Sugiyama, Koji Kinoshita, Masanori Funauchi, Itaru Matsumura

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Four-Year Teriparatide Followed by DenosumabFrontiers in endocrinology · 2021
    Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yasuaki HirookaDepartment of Rheumatology, Kindai University Nara Hospital, Nara, Japan.
Yuji NozakiDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Asuka InoueDepartment of Rheumatology, Kindai University Nara Hospital, Nara, Japan.
Jinhai LiDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Toshihiko ShigaDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Kazuya KishimotoDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Masafumi SugiyamaDepartment of Rheumatology, Kindai University Nara Hospital, Nara, Japan.
Koji KinoshitaDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Masanori FunauchiDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Itaru MatsumuraDepartment of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Kindai University · JPNara Medical University Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOsteoporosis is one of the serious adverse effects associated with glucocorticoid therapy. Although bisphosphonates have been used for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO), some patients have shown an inadequate response. In such cases, denosumab or teriparatide are used. However, there is no consensus on which of these two drugs is superior. We prospectively compared denosumab's and teriparatide's effects on the bone mineral density (BMD) in GIO patients with prior bisphosphonate treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsAfter receiving oral bisphosphonates for ≥2 years, GIO patients with low T-score BMD (<-2.5) were switched from bisphosphonates to denosumab (n = 20) or daily teriparatide (n = 21). We measured the BMD (lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip) in both groups every 6 months for 24 months.

resultsAt 24 months of treatment, the lumbar spine BMD increased significantly from baseline in both the denosumab and teriparatide groups (baseline vs. denosumab and teriparatide; 5.9 ± 5.6%, P < 0.001 and 7.9 ± 5.4%, P < 0.001). A significant increase in femoral neck BMD from baseline occurred only in the teriparatide group (6.6 ± 10.8%, P < 0.05); denosumab (1.5 ± 5.0%). No significant changes occurred in the total hip BMD from baseline in either group (-0.1 ± 5.6% and 3.3 ± 7.5%, respectively). There was no significant difference between the denosumab and teriparatide groups at 24 months in lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD, but was significantly higher in the teriparatide group at 12 months (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 in the lumbar spine and femoral neck, respectively).

conclusionTeriparatide might have some advantages over denosumab and be a good alternative for treating GIO patients with prior bisphosphonate treatment.

Indexed as

BisphosphonateBone mineral densityDenosumabGlucocorticoid-induced osteoporosisTeriparatide

Identifiers

PMID32676524
PMCPMC7352055
OpenAlexW3040203104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.