ReviewDrug design, development and therapy2026
Managing Rebound Bone Loss After Denosumab Discontinuation: Mechanisms, Risk Stratification, and Sequential Therapy.
Review in Drug design, development and therapy, 2026. 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.
- Role of PANoptosis in cancer: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic insights.Archives of toxicology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody targets receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-Β ligand (RANKL), potently suppresses bone resorption, increases bone mineral density (BMD), and reduces vertebral, hip, and non-vertebral fracture risk. However, its pharmacokinetic reversibility renders discontinuation clinically hazardous. This narrative review synthesizes current evidence on the mechanisms, clinical consequences, and risk determinants of rebound bone loss following denosumab discontinuation and critically evaluates available preventive strategies. Upon denosumab cessation, rapid restoration of RANKL bioavailability triggers a pathological osteoclast overshoot, driven by accumulated osteoclast precursors and unopposed RANK-RANKL signaling. The resulting rebound in bone turnover produces accelerated BMD loss and markedly elevated multiple vertebral fracture risk, with real-world cohorts documenting incidences of up to 10% within 12-18 months of unmanaged cessation, and hip and vertebral fractures in this setting have been associated with substantial excess mortality in observational studies. Sequential antiresorptive therapy, principally intravenous zoledronic acid or oral alendronate, is the most widely recommended approach; risedronate consistently fails to provide adequate skeletal protection. Treatment duration critically modulates rebound severity, with longer denosumab therapy, particularly beyond approximately three years is associated with greater post-discontinuation bone loss and reduced protection from a single bisphosphonate infusion, warranting intensified monitoring and management in this group. Anabolic agents, including teriparatide, are generally not recommended as primary sequential therapy, whereas romosozumab is promising only when initiated early in carefully selected patients. Serial serum C-terminal telopeptide (CTX) monitoring provides a practical framework for guiding therapeutic transitions and identifying inadequate bone turnover suppression. Safe denosumab management requires structured, individualized planning that integrates risk stratification, biochemical monitoring, and a pre-defined sequential therapy strategy established at the time of prescription, not at the point of cessation.
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.