ArticleTherapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease2026
Comparison of the effects of denosumab and alendronate on fracture risk and bone metabolism in postmenopausal rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with oral glucocorticoids: A propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postmenopausal rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving oral glucocorticoids (GCs) are at markedly increased risk for osteoporosis and fractures. Direct comparisons between denosumab and alendronate in this high-risk subgroup remain limited. Objectives: To evaluate denosumab versus alendronate regarding one-year incidence of fragility fractures, bone mineral density (BMD) changes, bone turnover markers, and disease activity in postmenopausal RA patients on long-term oral GCs. Design: Retrospective multi-center propensity score-matched cohort study. Methods: From January 2018 to December 2023, 295 patients (122 denosumab, 173 alendronate) were enrolled. Propensity score matching (1:1) balanced 22 baseline covariates, yielding 124 patients (62 per arm). Outcomes included new fragility fractures, BMD alterations (including areal BMD (aBMD)), serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (P1NP) and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTx) levels, and disease activity scores over one year. Results: Denosumab produced a significantly greater lumbar spine aBMD gain than alendronate (between-group difference: 0.444%, P=0.025). The absolute risk difference for fragility fracture with denosumab versus alendronate was 3.2% (95% CI: -2.2% to 8.6%), corresponding to fracture rates of 8.1% vs. 1.6% (OR=5.35, 95% CI: 0.59-48.68, P=0.135). Sensitivity analyses suggested a potential trend of elevated risk, but the very low number of fracture events (n=6) precludes definitive conclusions. No significant differences were observed for other BMD sites, bone turnover markers, or disease activity. Conclusion: In postmenopausal RA patients on GCs, denosumab was superior to alendronate for lumbar spine BMD gains. The absolute risk difference for fragility fracture with denosumab versus alendronate was 3.2% (95% CI: -2.2% to 8.6%), but this finding remains inconclusive due to insufficient power and rare events. Larger prospective studies are needed to clarify fracture outcomes.
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.