-
Annals of Internal Medicine Feb 2023The prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the United States. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effectiveness and Safety of Treatments to Prevent Fractures in People With Low Bone Mass or Primary Osteoporosis: A Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis for the American College of Physicians.
BACKGROUND
The prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the United States.
PURPOSE
To evaluate low bone mass and osteoporosis treatments to prevent fractures.
DATA SOURCES
Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Ovid Evidence Based Medicine Reviews: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2014 through February 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Adults receiving eligible interventions for low bone mass or osteoporosis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for fracture outcomes, and RCTs and large observational studies ( ≥1000) for harms.
DATA EXTRACTION
Abstracted by 1 reviewer and verified by a second. Independent, dual assessments of risk of bias and certainty of evidence (CoE).
DATA SYNTHESIS
We included 34 RCTs (in 100 publications) and 36 observational studies. Bisphosphonates and denosumab reduced hip, clinical and radiographic vertebral, and other clinical fractures in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis (moderate to high CoE). Bisphosphonates for 36 months or more may increase the risk for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), but the absolute risks were low. Abaloparatide and teriparatide reduced clinical and radiographic vertebral fractures but increased the risk for withdrawals due to adverse events (WAEs; moderate to high CoE). Raloxifene and bazedoxifene for 36 months or more reduced radiographic vertebral but not clinical fractures (low to moderate CoE). Abaloparatide, teriparatide, and sequential romosozumab, then alendronate, may be more effective than bisphosphonates in reducing clinical fractures for 17 to 24 months in older postmenopausal females at very high fracture risk (low to moderate CoE). Bisphosphonates may reduce clinical fractures in older females with low bone mass (low CoE) and radiographic vertebral fractures in males with osteoporosis (low to moderate CoE).
LIMITATION
Few studies examined participants with low bone mass, males, or Black-identifying persons, sequential therapy, or treatment beyond 3 years.
CONCLUSION
Bisphosphonates, denosumab, abaloparatide, teriparatide, and romosozumab, followed by alendronate, reduce clinical fractures in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis. Abaloparatide and teriparatide increased WAEs; longer duration bisphosphonate use may increase AFF and ONJ risk though these events were rare.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42021236220).
Topics: Male; Adult; Female; Humans; Aged; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Teriparatide; Alendronate; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Denosumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Fractures, Bone; Osteoporosis; Diphosphonates; Spinal Fractures; Physicians
PubMed: 36592455
DOI: 10.7326/M22-0684 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Jul 2019Optimal long-term osteoporosis drug treatment (ODT) is uncertain.
BACKGROUND
Optimal long-term osteoporosis drug treatment (ODT) is uncertain.
PURPOSE
To summarize the effects of long-term ODT and ODT discontinuation and holidays.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic bibliographic databases (January 1995 to October 2018) and systematic review bibliographies.
STUDY SELECTION
48 studies that enrolled men or postmenopausal women aged 50 years or older who were being investigated or treated for fracture prevention, compared long-term ODT (>3 years) versus control or ODT continuation versus discontinuation, reported incident fractures (for trials) or harms (for trials and observational studies), and had low or medium risk of bias (ROB).
DATA EXTRACTION
Two reviewers independently rated ROB and strength of evidence (SOE). One extracted data; another verified accuracy.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Thirty-five trials (9 unique studies) and 13 observational studies (11 unique studies) had low or medium ROB. In women with osteoporosis, 4 years of alendronate reduced clinical fractures (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.82]) and radiographic vertebral fractures (both moderate SOE), whereas 4 years of raloxifene reduced vertebral but not nonvertebral fractures. In women with osteopenia or osteoporosis, 6 years of zoledronic acid reduced clinical fractures (HR, 0.73 [CI, 0.60 to 0.90]), including nonvertebral fractures (high SOE) and clinical vertebral fractures (moderate SOE). Long-term bisphosphonates increased risk for 2 rare harms: atypical femoral fractures (low SOE) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (mostly low SOE). In women with unspecified osteoporosis status, 5 to 7 years of hormone therapy reduced clinical fractures (high SOE), including hip fractures (moderate SOE), but increased serious harms. After 3 to 5 years of treatment, bisphosphonate continuation versus discontinuation reduced radiographic vertebral fractures (zoledronic acid; low SOE) and clinical vertebral fractures (alendronate; moderate SOE) but not nonvertebral fractures (low SOE).
LIMITATION
No trials studied men, clinical fracture data were sparse, methods for estimating harms were heterogeneous, and no trials compared sequential treatments or different durations of drug holidays.
CONCLUSION
Long-term alendronate and zoledronic acid therapies reduce fracture risk in women with osteoporosis. Long-term bisphosphonate treatment may increase risk for rare adverse events, and continuing treatment beyond 3 to 5 years may reduce risk for vertebral fractures. Long-term hormone therapy reduces hip fracture risks but has serious harms.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
National Institutes of Health and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018087006).
Topics: Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Diseases, Metabolic; Diphosphonates; Drug Administration Schedule; Duration of Therapy; Female; Hip Fractures; Humans; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Spinal Fractures; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 31009947
DOI: 10.7326/M19-0533 -
Calcified Tissue International Jun 2023To assess the effectiveness and safety of denosumab (Prolia®) compared to bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, zoledronate), selective estrogen... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Clinical Effectiveness of Denosumab (Prolia®) for the Treatment of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women, Compared to Bisphosphonates, Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators (SERM), and Placebo: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of denosumab (Prolia®) compared to bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, zoledronate), selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs; bazedoxifene, raloxifene) or placebo, for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women (PMW). Systematic searches were run in PubMed, Embase & Cochrane Library on 27-April-2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included osteoporotic PMW allocated to denosumab, SERMs, bisphosphonates, or placebo were eligible for inclusion. RCTs were appraised using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Bayesian network and/or pairwise meta-analyses were conducted on predetermined outcomes (i.e. vertebral/nonvertebral fractures, bone mineral density [BMD], mortality, adverse events [AEs], serious AEs (SAEs), withdrawals due to AEs, AEs caused by denosumab discontinuation). A total of 12 RCTs (k = 22 publications; n = 25,879 participants) were included in the analyses. Denosumab, reported a statistically significant increase in lumbar spine (LS) and total hip (TH) BMD, compared to placebo. Similarly, denosumab also resulted in a statistically significant increase in TH BMD compared to the raloxifene and bazedoxifene. However, relative to denosumab, alendronate, ibandronate and risedronate resulted in significant improvements in both femoral neck (FN) and LS BMD. With regards to vertebral fractures and all safety outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between denosumab and any of the comparator. Relative to placebo, denosumab was associated with significant benefits in both LS and TH BMD. Additionally, denosumab (compared to placebo) was not associated with reductions in vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Finally, denosumab was not associated with improvement in safety outcomes, compared to placebo. These findings should be interpreted with caution as some analyses suffered from statistical imprecision.
Topics: Female; Humans; Diphosphonates; Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators; Denosumab; Alendronate; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Risedronic Acid; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Ibandronic Acid; Network Meta-Analysis; Postmenopause; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporosis; Bone Density; Spinal Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37016189
DOI: 10.1007/s00223-023-01078-z -
International Journal of Oral and... Jul 2017There is controversy regarding whether locally delivered alendronate enhances osseointegration. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the role of local... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
There is controversy regarding whether locally delivered alendronate enhances osseointegration. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the role of local alendronate delivery (topical, or as a coating on implant surfaces) in the osseointegration of implants. The focused question was, "Does the local delivery of alendronate affect osseointegration around implants?". To address this question, indexed databases were searched, without time or language restriction, up to and including January 2017. Various combinations of the following key words were used: "alendronate", "bisphosphonates", "osseointegration", and "topical administration". letters to the editor, historic reviews, commentaries, case series, and case reports were excluded. In total, 18 experimental studies were included: alendronate-coated implants were used in 13 of these studies and local delivery in five studies. The results of 11 of the studies showed that alendronate coating increased new bone formation, the bone volume fraction, or bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and biomechanical properties. Results from two studies in which alendronate was administered topically indicated impaired BIC and/or biomechanical fixation around implants. On experimental grounds, local alendronate delivery seems to promote osseointegration. From a clinical perspective, the results in animal models support phase 1 studies in healthy humans (without co-morbidities other than edentulism).
Topics: Administration, Topical; Alendronate; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Diphosphonates; Humans; Osseointegration
PubMed: 28366449
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.03.009 -
Sao Paulo Medical Journal = Revista... 2023Osteoporosis compromises bone strength and increases the risk of fractures. Zoledronate prevents loss of bone mass and reduces the risk of fractures. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Osteoporosis compromises bone strength and increases the risk of fractures. Zoledronate prevents loss of bone mass and reduces the risk of fractures.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and safety of zoledronate in postmenopausal women with osteopenia and osteoporosis.
DESIGN AND SETTINGS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted within the evidence-based health program at the Universidade Federal de São Paulo.
METHODS
An electronic search of the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases was performed until February 2022. Randomized controlled trials comparing zoledronate with placebo or other bisphosphonates were included. Standard methodological procedures were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook and the certainty of evidence for the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group. Two authors assessed the risk of bias and extracted data on fractures, adverse events, bone turnover markers (BTM), and bone mineral density (BMD).
RESULTS
Twelve trials from 6,652 records were included: nine compared zoledronate with placebo, two trials compared zoledronate with alendronate, and one trial compared zoledronate with ibandronate. Zoledronate reduced the incidence of fractures in osteoporotic [three years: morphometric vertebral fractures (relative risk, RR = 0.30 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.24-0.38))] and osteopenic women [six years: morphometric vertebral fractures (RR = 0.39 (95%CI: 0.25-0.61))], increased incidence of post-dose symptoms [RR = 2.56 (95%CI: 1.80-3.65)], but not serious adverse events [RR = 0.97 (95%CI: 0.91-1.04)]. Zoledronate reduced BTM and increased BMD in osteoporotic and osteopenic women.
CONCLUSION
This review supports the efficacy and safety of zoledronate in postmenopausal women with osteopenia for six years and osteoporosis for three years.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022309708, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=309708.
Topics: Female; Humans; Zoledronic Acid; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Postmenopause; Brazil; Osteoporosis; Fractures, Bone; Bone Density; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal
PubMed: 37255065
DOI: 10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0480.R1.27032023 -
Gynecological Endocrinology : the... Dec 2013The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two bisphosphonates (alendronate and zoledronate) in the treatment of postmenopausal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two bisphosphonates (alendronate and zoledronate) in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The incidence of fractures was considered as primary endpoint. Only randomized trials with a follow-up period of 1 year or more were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. We excluded studies that included patients with secondary osteoporosis especially in relation to therapy with corticosteroids or other drugs or diseases known to affect bone mineral density. Studies published as subgroup analysis, extension studies, economic evaluations, and comparisons with active control were excluded. The methodological quality of controlled clinical trials that met these inclusion criteria was evaluated. No studies were excluded from analysis due to lack of quality. The risk ratio of hip, vertebral and wrist fractures for alendronate were 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40-0.93], 0.54 (95% CI 0.44-0.66) and 0.65 (95% CI 0.33-1.25), respectively. Zoledronate risk ratio was 0.62 (95% CI 0.46-0.82) and 0.38 (95% CI 0.22-0.67) for hip and vertebral fractures, respectively.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Female; Fractures, Bone; Hip Fractures; Humans; Imidazoles; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fractures; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 24063695
DOI: 10.3109/09513590.2013.813468 -
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Jun 2023Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) is a common fragile fracture resulting from osteoporosis. We compared the efficacy and safety of romosozumab and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of romosozumab (evenity) for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture in postmenopausal women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (CDM-J).
PURPOSE
Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) is a common fragile fracture resulting from osteoporosis. We compared the efficacy and safety of romosozumab and commonly used osteoporosis drug treatments for the treatment of OVCF in postmenopausal women.
METHODS
Through searching and screening five databases, we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through June 18, 2021 comparing different treatments. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews statement, the main objective was to evaluate the mean difference and risk ratio of the treatment effect. The primary measures of romosozumab efficacy used in this study were vertebral, non-vertebral, and clinical fracture events, and secondary outcomes were bone mineral density (BMD) changes at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck and the incidence of adverse events (AEs), RESULTS: Nine RCTs including 12 796 participants were included in the analysis, and romosozumab was compared with placebo, alendronate, and teriparatide in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. The incidence of fractures, low BMD, and AEs was analyzed. Compared with the controls, three doses of romosozumab were linked to evident advantages in the treatment of low BMD and fractures but associated with increased hypersensitivity and injection site reaction risks. Furthermore, fewer AEs were observed in the romosozumab arms (210 mg: risk ratio = 0.96, 95% confidence interval = 0.93-0.99; 140 mg: risk ratio = 0.28, 95% confidence interval = 0.08-0.98) than in the alendronate and placebo arms.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis revealed the evident advantages of romosozumab in the treatment of osteoporosis and low BMD in postmenopausal women and increased risks of hypersensitivity and injection site reactions.
Topics: Female; Humans; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Alendronate; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Fractures, Compression; Postmenopause; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Osteoporosis; Bone Density
PubMed: 36703260
DOI: 10.1002/pds.5594 -
BMJ Open Dec 2015Concerns have been raised about a possible link between bisphosphonate use, and in particular alendronate, and upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. A number of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Concerns have been raised about a possible link between bisphosphonate use, and in particular alendronate, and upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. A number of epidemiological studies have been published with conflicting results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies, to determine the risk of esophageal and gastric cancer in users of bisphosphonates compared with non-users.
DESIGN
We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies investigating bisphosphonates and esophageal or gastric cancer. We calculated pooled ORs and 95% CIs for the risk of esophageal or gastric cancer in bisphosphonate users compared with non-users. We performed a sensitivity analysis of alendronate as this was the most common single drug studied and is also the most widely used in clinical practice.
RESULTS
11 studies (from 10 papers) examining bisphosphonate exposure and UGI cancer (gastric and esophageal), met our inclusion criteria. All studies were retrospective, 6/11 (55%) case-control and 5/11(45%) cohort, and carried out using data from 5 longitudinal clinical databases. Combining 5 studies (1 from each database), we found no increased risk, OR 1.11 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.27) of esophageal cancer in bisphosphonate users compared with non-users and no increased risk of gastric cancer in bisphosphonate users, OR 0.96 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.12).
CONCLUSION
This is the fourth and most detailed meta-analysis on this topic. We have not identified any compelling evidence for a significantly raised risk of esophageal cancer or gastric cancer in male and female patients prescribed bisphosphonates.
Topics: Alendronate; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Esophageal Neoplasms; Humans; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 26644118
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007133 -
Health Technology Assessment... Jun 2005To establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of selective oestrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone (subject to licensing)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A systematic review and economic evaluation of alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, raloxifene and teriparatide for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.
OBJECTIVES
To establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of selective oestrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone (subject to licensing) for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis and the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases.
REVIEW METHODS
Studies that met the review's entry criteria were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analyses provided that they reported fracture incidence in terms of the number of patients suffering fractures. Meta-analysis was carried out using the random-effects model. A model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis interventions. The model calculated the number of fractures that occurred and provided the costs associated with osteoporotic fractures, and the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). In addition, the conditions of breast cancer and coronary heart disease (CHD) were modelled, as some interventions have been shown to affect the risk of these conditions.
RESULTS
Ninety randomised controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. They related to the five interventions (alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, raloxifene and teriparatide) and to five comparators (calcium, calcium plus vitamin D, calcitriol, hormone replacement therapy and exercise), as well as placebo or no treatment. All five interventions have been shown to reduce the risk of vertebral fracture in women with severe osteoporosis with adequate calcium intakes. However, none of these drugs has been demonstrated, by direct comparison, to be significantly more effective than either each other or the other active interventions reviewed in this report. The intervention costs of treating all osteoporotic women, for a period of 5 years, were in the region of pound 900-1500 million for alendronate, etidronate, risedronate and raloxifene. The cost per QALY ratios fell dramatically with age. Assuming the risks of a woman with severe osteoporosis at the threshold of osteoporosis, no treatment had a cost per QALY below pound 35,000 at 50 years of age. At 60 years of age, the cost per QALY of raloxifene was pound 26,000 assuming no impact on hip fractures, and pound 31,000 assuming an adverse effect. However, these results are driven by the effect on breast cancer and the assumptions made regarding this disease state. No other intervention had a cost per QALY below pound 35,000. When analyses were conducted assuming that the fracture risk is doubled at each site, alendronate and risedronate had cost per QALY ratios below pound 30,000 at all ages. For women at the threshold of osteoporosis, without a prior fracture and aged 70 years, the cost per QALY of the three bisphosphonates ranged from pound 34,000 to pound 41,000. Raloxifene had a cost per QALY of pound 23,000, assuming no effect on hip fracture, given assumptions regarding breast cancer. At 80 years of age, the cost per QALY of alendronate and risedronate was below pound 20,000. This was true for etidronate when incorporating observational data, but the value rose to pound 69,000 when only RCT data were used. No other intervention had a cost per QALY below pound 35,000. It was assumed that doubling the risk of fracture for women without a prior fracture would give results similar to patients at the threshold of osteoporosis with a prior fracture.
CONCLUSIONS
Of the five interventions, only raloxifene appeared to reduce the risk of vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women unselected for low bone mineral density (BMD). However, as the full data have not been made public, there is some uncertainty regarding this result. None of the five interventions has been shown to reduce the risk of non-vertebral fracture in women unselected for low BMD. All of the proposed interventions provided gains in QALYs compared with no treatment in women with sufficient calcium and vitamin D intakes. The size of the QALY gain for each intervention was strongly related to the age of the patient. The estimated costs varied widely for the interventions. These net costs were markedly different by age, with some interventions becoming cost-saving at higher age ranges in patients with a prior fracture. Areas for future research include: the evidence base for the efficacy of fracture prevention in the very elderly, reanalysis of raloxifene using a dedicated breast cancer and CHD model, and more trials considering the cost-effectiveness of teriparatide.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Etidronic Acid; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risedronic Acid; Teriparatide
PubMed: 15929857
DOI: 10.3310/hta9220 -
Journal of Clinical Densitometry : the... 2022Osteoporosis is a chronic disease with an increasing prevalence. Anti-sclerostin antibodies are being investigated for the treatment of osteoporosis. The aim of this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Osteoporosis is a chronic disease with an increasing prevalence. Anti-sclerostin antibodies are being investigated for the treatment of osteoporosis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of antis-sclerostin antibodies compared to placebo and conventional therapies (alendronate and teriparatide) in the treatment of osteoporosis. Randomized controlled trials were searched from PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails (CENTRAL) from their inception up to June 2021 by using Medical Subject Headings terms "anti-sclerostin antibody", "romosozumab", "blosozumab", "AMG 785″, "LY2541546", and "osteoporosis". Two investigators independently screened eligible studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted the data from each study. The I index was used to assess heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was conducted using the Review Manager Software (RevMan, Version 5.4). The GRADE approach was used to rate the quality of evidence for all the pooled outcomes. 8 RCTs with 12,416 patients met the inclusion criteria. Anti-sclerostin antibodies significantly increased lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck bone mineral density compared to placebo, alendronate and teriparatide at both 6 and 12 mo. Adverse events were comparable between anti-sclerostin antibodies and other treatments, except for the incidence of injection-site reactions that was higher in the anti-sclerostin antibody groups. Anti-sclerostin antibodies represent a valid theurapeutic option in the treatment of osteoporosis. Further studies with longer duration and follow-up are needed to confirm the results of this meta-analysis.
Topics: Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Female; Humans; Osteoporosis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Teriparatide
PubMed: 34920938
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2021.11.005