SynthesisArchives of osteoporosis2024
Efficacy and safety of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in osteoporosis not previously treated with bisphosphonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Archives of osteoporosis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cost Effectiveness of Teriparatide for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Pooled it
- PTH1 receptor agonists for fracture risk: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025Pooled it
- Phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of proposed biosimilar RGB-14-P with denosumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the transition (switch) phase.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Trial
- A randomised Phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of proposed denosumab biosimilar RGB-14-P and reference denosumab in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025Trial
- Preventing Hip (Proximal Femoral) Fractures: An Evidence-Based Review for Clinicians.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Investigating the association between angina and osteoporosis: a 20-year longitudinal cohort study of ELSA.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Does Ossein-Hydroxyapatite Complex Improve the Results of Lower-Leg Lengthening Osteotomies with the Ilizarov Method?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Osteoporosis: The Renascent Impact of Vertebral Fractures-A Narrative Review of Diagnosis, Risk Stratification, and Integrated Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- Real-world effectiveness of denosumab compared to teriparatide in patients with severe osteoporosis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Nandrolone Decanoate for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.Cureus · 2025Review
- Polyphenols and Bone Health: A Comprehensive Review of Their Role in Osteoporosis Prevention and Treatment.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Beyond Bone Mineral Density: Real-World Fracture Risk Profiles and Therapeutic Gaps in Postmenopausal Osteoporosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Compliance With Parathyroid Hormone Analog Medications at a Single Osteoporosis Treatment Center.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study found that in osteoporosis patients who had not previously received bisphosphonate treatment and were in a treatment cycle of over 12 months, both teriparatide and denosumab significantly increased bone mineral density compared to bisphosphonates. Additionally, teriparatide was also shown to significantly decrease the risk of fractures.
objectiveThe systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporosis who had not previously received bisphosphonates.
methodsWe conducted a search of published literature from inception to May 31, 2023, including databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP, and WanFang. The study only included head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide and denosumab with bisphosphonates to treat patients with osteoporosis. Fixed-effect model and random-effect model were used due to clinical heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was performed via Stata 17.0.
resultsA total of 6680 patients were enrolled across 23 eligible trials. The results of the meta-analysis showed that teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture (risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.51, 0.74), P < 0.001). Denosumab showed no benefit compared to bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of fracture in treating osteoporosis (RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.62, 1.57), P = 0.96). Compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide and denosumab could significantly improve femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (P < 0.05). Furthermore, teriparatide and denosumab did not increase the incidence of adverse events (teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.92, 95% CI (0.79, 1.08), P = 0.32; denosumab vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), P = 0.37).
conclusionsTeriparatide is superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture in patients with osteoporosis. In addition, teriparatide and denosumab were more efficacious than bisphosphonates in increasing the percentage change in BMD at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine.
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.