Association of bisphosphonates with diabetes risk and glycemic control: a meta-analysis
Pooled result · Risk of diabetesResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.77 95% CI 0.65–0.90Authors' conclusion
Patients taking BPs may have a lower risk of incident diabetes than those without BPs. However, due to the high between-study heterogeneity and inconsistent findings between post hoc analyses of RCTs and observational studies, further rigorous RCTs are required to determine whether the findings are causal.
Study context
- Population
- Participants in experimental or observational studies comparing fasting blood glucose (FBG), HbA1c and diabetes risk with and without bisphosphonates; MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library to February 15, 2022
- Participants
- 1,233,844 participants7 studies
- Comparison
- Bisphosphonates vs no bisphosphonates
- Outcome
- Risk of incident diabetes
Methodological detailsrandom effects models
- Random effects models
Pooled result
Risk of diabetes
Relative risk
0.77
95% CI 0.65–0.90
P = 0.002
BPsvs Controls
RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.65–0.90); P = 0.002
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Risk of diabetes, subgroup of post hoc analyses of RCTs | 0.93 (0.74–1.18) | P = 0.576 | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
| Outcome | Estimate | P value |
|---|---|---|
| Change in FBG (3 studies, n = 4906) | WMD - 0.61 mg/dL (95% CI - 2.72 to 1.49) | P = 0.567 |
| Change in HbA1c (1 study, n = 60) | WMD - 0.11 % (95% CI - 0.23 to 0.01) | P = 0.083 |
Original publication
Association of bisphosphonates with diabetes risk and glycemic control: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int. Published 5 December 2022. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →