Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41993988›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026

Comparative efficacy and safety of antiresorptive and anabolic therapies for male osteoporosis: an updated Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Zhichao Li, Libao Zhang, Changhui Xue, Chengwu Lu, Linfeng Wang

Abstract readNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Zhichao LiDepartment of Orthopedics, ShaoWu Municipal Hospital of Fujian Province, Shaowu, Fujian, China.
Libao ZhangFujian Minbei Orthopedic Research Institute, Nanping, Fujian, China.
Changhui XueFujian Minbei Orthopedic Research Institute, Nanping, Fujian, China.
Chengwu LuFujian Minbei Orthopedic Research Institute, Nanping, Fujian, China.
Linfeng WangFujian Minbei Orthopedic Research Institute, Nanping, Fujian, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Osteoporosis in men is an increasingly recognized health issue associated with reduced bone mineral density (BMD) and elevated fracture risk. While both antiresorptive and anabolic therapies are recommended in clinical practice, evidence directly comparing these drug classes in male populations remains limited. Methods: We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251151177), to assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for male osteoporosis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating alendronate, risedronate, zoledronic acid, denosumab, teriparatide, or abaloparatide were identified from PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library through 2025. Primary outcomes included percent change in lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip BMD at 12 months. Safety outcomes were all adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Category-level meta-analyses were further conducted to compare pooled effects of antiresorptive versus anabolic agents. Results: Eighteen RCTs comprising 19-1199 participants each were included. At the drug level, abaloparatide and teriparatide ranked highest for lumbar spine BMD, while alendronate and abaloparatide demonstrated the most favorable effects for femoral neck and total hip BMD, respectively. Safety profiles were broadly similar, with teriparatide and alendronate showing relatively lower risks of AEs and SAEs. At the class level, anabolic therapies significantly outperformed antiresorptives in improving lumbar spine (MD 6.62, 95% CI 5.01-8.23 vs. 3.58, 95% CI 2.52-4.64) and total hip BMD (3.53, 95% CI 2.18-4.89 vs. 1.98, 95% CI -1.10-5.06), whereas antiresorptives showed modest advantages at the femoral neck (1.66, 95% CI 0.57-2.75 vs. 1.43, 95% CI -0.03-2.86). No significant differences were observed between classes in AEs or SAEs. Conclusions: This study provides the first comprehensive drug- and class-level synthesis of treatments for male osteoporosis. Anabolic agents confer greater efficacy at the lumbar spine and total hip, while antiresorptives may offer modest benefits at the femoral neck. Safety outcomes were comparable across drug classes, suggesting that treatment choice should primarily be guided by efficacy considerations. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251151177.

Indexed as

Anabolic AgentsBone Density Conservation AgentsOsteoporosisBayes TheoremBone DensityHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAnabolic AgentsBone Density Conservation Agentsanabolicantiresorptivemalenetwork meta-analysisosteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID41993988
PMCPMC13079047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.