ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2026
Comparative efficacy of biosimilar denosumab and reference denosumab in treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis addressed limited comparative evidence between reference and biosimilar denosumab. Across seven RCTs, both showed equivalent lumbar spine BMD, with a small hip BMD advantage for reference denosumab, supporting biosimilars as effective, safe, and cost-efficient alternatives.
backgroundOsteoporosis is the most prevalent metabolic bone disorder in postmenopausal women. Addressing the gap in literature, our study compares efficacy of reference and biosimilar denosumab in treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. METHODOLOGY: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library. Only randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing original denosumab with biosimilar denosumab conducted in postmenopausal women diagnosed with osteoporosis aged ≥ 45 years were included with Lumbar Spine-Bone Mineral Density (LS BMD) as primary outcome. Analysis was conducted using a random effects model on RevMan 5.4.1.
resultsSeven RCTs (n = 2251) were included. Both groups showed comparable LS BMD (MD = 0.02; 95% CI -0.30, 0.34; P = 0.92), while Total Hip BMD (TH BMD) was significantly improved with reference denosumab use (MD = 0.24; 95% CI 0.01, 0.47; P = 0.04). Bone turnover markers, fractures, TAEs, and ADA positivity showed no significant differences.
conclusionBiosimilar denosumab demonstrates comparable efficacy, safety and immunogenicity to reference denosumab. Although, studies are necessary to monitor the efficacy and safety of biosimilar denosumab in long term use and different populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42521873What 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.