SynthesisCurrent osteoporosis reports2025
Efficacy of Osteoanabolic Agents in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Meta-analysis and Review of the Literature.
Synthesis in Current osteoporosis reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Romosozumab Efficacy in Osteoporosis: Influence of Diabetes and Previous Antiresorptive Therapy: A Single Centre Experience.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo synthesize evidence on the efficacy of osteoanabolic therapies (teriparatide, abaloparatide, romosozumab) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D), focusing on changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and fractures, and to explore whether responses differ between people with and without diabetes.
findingsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus databases till April 30, 2025 (PROSPERO: CRD420251044760). Five studies met criteria (n = 1,469 with T2D; n = 12,052 without diabetes): two post hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (ACTIVE and ARCH trials) and three observational studies. Using random-effects model, osteoanabolic therapy in T2D increased lumbar spine BMD by a mean difference (MD) of 5.06% (95% CI: 1.62, 8.50; I²=93.3%). Sensitivity analysis restricted to RCTs demonstrated a larger, highly consistent effect at lumbar spine (MD 7.49%, 95% CI: 6.56, 8.41; I²=0%). Femoral neck BMD increased by 2.61% (95% CI: 1.84, 3.38; I²=0%). Evidence for fracture outcomes in T2D was limited to a single RCT (ACTIVE), in which non-vertebral fractures were reduced with abaloparatide versus placebo (p = 0.04), whereas new vertebral fractures were not different between groups. Two observational studies showed that in people with T2D, osteoanabolic agents improved BMD as much as, or more than, in non-diabetic individuals, while fracture rates were mostly similar between the groups. Osteoanabolic agents yield meaningful BMD gains in T2D, particularly at lumbar spine, with modest improvements at femoral neck. Limited fracture data suggest possible benefit but remain underpowered, underscoring the need for diabetes-specific RCTs with fracture endpoints.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41125862What 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.