Skip to main content

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

Journal
Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease (Q1)
Published
17 August 2026
Study design
Prospective / inception cohort
Evidence level
Level 4, Very Low (CEBM 4)
Authors
Mengmeng Chen, Lan Lu, Yujiang Mao, Lina Ji, Jianyi Xu, Junjun Chen, et al.
PMID
42621273
DOI
10.1177/1759720X261477844

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Rheumatology (paper of the day, 24 August 2026): Denosumab vs alendronate in glucocorticoid‑treated RA

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.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.