Evidence Hub

Risk of bone fractures associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists' treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Su B, Sheng H, Zhang M, Bu L, Yang P, Li L, Li F, Sheng C et al.

Endocrine, 2015

11,206 participants · 199 citations

Abstract

Traditional anti-diabetic drugs may have negative or positive effects on risk of bone fractures. Yet the relationship between the new class glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and risk of bone fractures has not been established. We performed a meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCT) to study the risk of bone fractures associated with liraglutide or exenatide, compared to placebo or other active drugs. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and clinical trial registration websites for published or unpublished RCTs comparing the effects of liraglutide or exenatide with comparators. Only studies with disclosed bone fracture data were included. Separate pooled analysis was performed for liraglutide or exenatide, respectively, by calculating Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR). 16 RCTs were identified including a total of 11,206 patients. Liraglutide treatment was associated with a significant reduced risk of incident bone fractures (MH-OR=0.38, 95% CI 0.17-0.87); however, exenatide treatment was associated with an elevated risk of incident bone fractures (MH-OR=2.09, 95% CI 1.03-4.21). Publication bias and heterogeneity between studies were not observed. Our study demonstrated a divergent risk of bone fractures associated with different GLP-1 RA treatments. The current findings need to be confirmed by future well-designed prospective or RCT studies.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 11,206 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