Evidence Hub

Randomized Trial Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Brand Versus Generic Alendronate for Osteoporosis Treatment

ClinicalTrials.gov · COMPLETED, 2016

140 participants

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a common disease defined as a decrease in bone mass and strength which increases risk of fragility fractures. This disorder may affecting health in many adults which causing disability, morbidity, and mortality. Current first-line medical therapy is bisphosphonates which alendronate is one of the most widely used. However, expenditure on medicines is one of the major problem of inadequate access to treatment.

The investigators hypothesized that generic alendronate will have the same clinical efficacy as the brand formulation. Therefore, the result of this study is extremely crucial. If adequate efficacy of generic alendronate could be established and if it affords the same safety profile as those of brand alendronate, the use of generic alendronate could then be recommended.

Conditions: Osteoporosis.

Primary outcome: Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Lumbar Spine (L1-L4).

Enrollment: 140 participants.

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: 140 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