Evidence Hub

Alendronate sodium/vitamin D3 combination tablet versus calcitriol for osteoporosis in Chinese postmenopausal women: a 6-month, randomized, open-label, active-comparator-controlled study with a 6-month extension

Zhang ZL, Liao EY, Xia WB, Lin H, Cheng Q, Wang L, Hao YQ, Chen DC et al.

Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2015

219 participants

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This study compares efficacy of ALN/D5600 versus that of calcitriol in osteoporotic Chinese postmenopausal women. ALN/D5600 produced greater bone mineral density (BMD) increases, greater bone turnover marker decreases, and less vitamin D insufficiency. This study provided detailed clinical information regarding ALN/D5600 treatment versus calcitriol 0.25 μg/day. The study did not evaluate fracture risk.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to investigate efficacy of alendronate 70 mg/vitamin D3 5600 IU combination tablets (ALN/D5600) versus calcitriol in osteoporotic Chinese postmenopausal women.

METHODS: This study is a 6-month, randomized, open-label, active-comparator study with 6-month extension (clinicaltrials.gov number NCT01350934) in postmenopausal women aged >55 years with osteoporosis (low bone mineral density (BMD) with/without prior fragility fracture). Patients were randomized to ALN/D5600 once weekly or calcitriol 0.25 μg daily. The primary efficacy end point of the base study was percent change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD (month 6). Hypercalcemia and hypercalciuria were safety events of special interest.

RESULTS: A total of 219 patients (ALN/D5600 n = 111, calcitriol n = 108) were randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar, 30.3 % baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) ≤15 ng/mL. At months 6 and 12, changes in lumbar spine BMD from baseline were 3.5 versus 1.6 % and 5.2 versus 2.3 % for ALN/D5600 versus calcitriol (between-group…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 219 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free