SynthesisArchives of osteoporosis2022
Safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the older adults with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.
Synthesis in Archives of osteoporosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid versus denosumab in the treatment of primary osteoporosis: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular adverse events associated with denosumab versus zoledronic acid in patients with breast cancer: a propensity score overlap weighted analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Does the Use of Denosumab in Combination with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs Increase the Risk of Infection in Patients with Osteoporosis and Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of the effects of zoledronic acid versus denosumab on bone metabolism, inflammatory response, and immunoglobulins in breast cancer patients with bone metastases.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2025Article
- Clinical and biochemical efficacy zoledronic acid and denosumab combination: focus serum inflammatory factor level (serum ifcs), bone gla protein (bgp), and bone turnover markers b-collagen degradation product (b-ctx), and procollagen type 1 n-terminal propeptide (p1np).Journal of medical biochemistry · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Risk of Cardiac or Cerebrovascular Events in Romosozumab Users Focusing on Comorbidities: Analysis of the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report Database.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Denosumab is a newly approved treatment for osteoporosis in China. However, the clinical safety and advantages of denosumab have not been much established. The current study evaluates the real-world safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in treating cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis to provide clinical settings guidelines. PURPOSE: A head-to-head comparison of the safety profiles between denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months) and zoledronic acid (5 mg, intravenously yearly) was performed in cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for cohort studies comparing the safety of denosumab and zoledronic acid in cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis till December 2021. The outcomes included the risk of fracture and other severe adverse events. Based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.0.2, we identified the eligible studies.
resultsThree cohort studies having 38,845 cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older were included in the study. The results showed that denosumab was not superior to zoledronic acid in reducing fracture risk [RR (95% CI): 1.05 (0.90, 1.23), P = 0.52]. However, denosumab had a low risk of composite cardiovascular disease [RR (95% CI): 0.82 (0.70, 0.96), P = 0.01]. There were no significant differences between the hazards of serious infection, and total adverse events (P > 0.05).
conclusionThe present meta-analysis demonstrated that for cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis, denosumab was as safe as zoledronic acid for the risk of drug-induced fractures. However, denosumab had a lower incidence of composite cardiovascular disease, and may be a better option for the population with cardiovascular disease. Nonetheless, due to limitations like a short-term follow-up, gender, and incomplete types of adverse effects, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are required to further verify this conclusion.
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.