Romosozumab versus Teriparatide for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis through a Grade Analysis of Evidence

OBJECTIVE: To provide a systematic review about the efficacy and safety of romosozumab and teriparatide for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. METHOD: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched from electronic databases, including PubMed (1996 to June 2019), Embase (1980 to June 2019), Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, June 2019), Web of Science (1998 to June 2019), and others. The primary outcomes included the following: the percentage change in bone mineral density of lumbar spine and total hip from baseline at month 6 and month 12 in each group. The secondary outcomes included the following: the percentage change in bone mineral density of femoral neck from baseline at month 6 and month 12 in each group and the incidence of adverse events at month 12 in each group. RESULTS: Four studies containing 1304 patients met our selection criteria. The result of our analysis indicated that romosozumab showed better effects in improving BMD of lumbar spine (month 6: MD = 3.54, 95% CI [3.13, 3.94], P<0.001; month 12: MD = 4.93, 95% CI [4.21, 5.64], P<0.001), total hip (month 6: MD = 2.27, 95% CI [0.62, 3.91], P = 0.007; month 12: MD = 3.17, 95% CI [2.68, 3.65], P<0.001), and femoral neck (month 6: MD = 2.30, 95% CI [0.51, 4.08], P = 0.01; month 12: MD = 3.04, 95% CI [2.29, 3.78], P<0.001). Also, the injection‐site reaction was less (month 12: RR = 2.84, 95% CI [1.22, 6.59], P = 0.02), but there were no significant difference in the incidence of serious adverse events (month 12: RR = 0.78, 95% CI [0.46, 1.33], P = 0.37) and death (month 12: RR = 0.61, 95% CI [0.08, 4.62], P = 0.63). CONCLUSION: Based on the available studies, our current results demonstrate that romosozumab was better than teriparatide both in terms of efficacy and side effects.