Prospective observational study evaluates alendronate's efficacy and safety in postmenopausal women, highlighting its benefits for osteoporosis management.
Introduction: Osteoporosis, prevalent in postmenopausal women, is commonly treated with alendronate to improve bone mineral density (BMD) and reduce fracture risk. This study evaluated patient demographics, BMD outcomes, and adverse events (AEs) following alendronate therapy, comparing results with existing literature. This study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of alendronate on postmenopausal Indian women with osteoporosis. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted as a prospective, open-label, observational study in the Department of Pharmacology at Patna Medical College, Patna. This study analyzed postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with alendronate, assessing mean age, body mass index (BMI), duration since menopause, serum calcium, phosphate, alkaline phosphatase, creatinine, albumin, and Vitamin D3 at baseline; BMD T-scores (lumbar spine, right/left femoral neck) at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year, and AEs at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: The mean age was 66.1 ± 10.1 years, BMI 26.52 ± 4.43, and postmenopausal duration 12 ± 5.76 years. At 1 year, BMD T-scores improved by 14.33% (lumbar spine), 10.23% (right femoral neck), and 10.07% (left femoral neck). AEs decreased from 22.5% (3 months) to 7.5% (12 months), lower than reported rates (14%–80.3%). Discussion: Alendronate therapy yielded significant BMD improvements and a favorable AE profile in postmenopausal women, outperforming several comparator studies. These findings highlight alendronate’s efficacy and tolerability, with implications for early intervention in osteoporosis management. Conlusion: The findings of this study support the use of alendronate as a cornerstone of osteoporosis management in postmenopausal women and highlight the importance of early diagnosis and intervention to mitigate the long term consequences of this debilitating disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smita et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: