Skip to content

Efficacy and Safety of Brand Versus Generic Alendronate for Osteoporosis Treatment

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

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02371252
Enrollment
140
Registered
2015-02-25
Start date
2014-04-30
Completion date
2016-12-31
Last updated
2021-09-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Osteoporosis

Keywords

Osteoporosis, Bisphosphonates, Alendronate, Bone mineral density, Bone markers

Brief summary

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.

Detailed description

Osteoporosis is a common disease which estimated that over 200 million people worldwide are suffered. The prevalence is continuing to escalate with the increasingly elderly population. The risk of fragility fractures in elder over age 50 is approximately 50% in women and 20% in men. 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. Generally, insurances and health care providers prefer physicians to prescribe generic instead of brand drug, due to its lower costs. However, clinical information on bone mineral density (BMD), fracture reduction and side effects with new generic alendronate is limited. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new generic alendronate (Bonmax®) comparing to brand alendronate (Fosamax®). The efficacy of generic alendronate will be determined by measuring the percent changes of bone mineral densities at lumbar spine and total hip after 1 year of treatment and then comparing to those changes in the brand alendronate group.

Interventions

DRUGGeneric alendronate

The patients will be given the generic alendronate 1 tablet per week for approximately 1 year after enrollment.

Sponsors

Mahidol University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
50 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

patients who are postmenopausal women or men who aged older than 50 years and meet the indications for osteoporosis treatment according to the Thai Osteoporosis Foundation's 2010 treatment guidelines. * History of spinal or hip fractures with low energy trauma. * BMD by Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan with T-score ≤ -2.5 at the femoral neck, total hip, or L1-L4 spine. * BMD by DXA scan with T-score between -1 and -2.5 at the femoral neck, total hip, or L1-L4 spine and a 10-year hip fracture probability ≥ 3% or a 10-year major osteoporosis-related fracture probability ≥ 20% based on Fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX)

Exclusion criteria

* Patients who have contraindications to use bisphosphonates e.g. gastroesophageal reflux disease or drug allergy to bisphosphonates * Patients with an abnormality of serum calcium levels (more than 10.2 mg/dl or less than 8.7 mg/dl) * Patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 * Patients with metabolic bone diseases such as Paget's disease, hyperparathyroidism, etc. * Patients who were received anti-osteoporotic drugs during the past 1 year. * Patients who currently taking steroids, hormone replacement therapy, or selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) within 1 year.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Lumbar Spine (L1-L4)1 year after treatmentPercent changes of bone mineral density at lumbar spine (L1-L4) from baseline to 1-year after treatment will be compared and analysed between 2 groups.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Total Hip1 year after treatmentPercent changes of bone mineral density at total hip from baseline to 1-year after treatment will be compared and analysed between 2 groups.
Bone Resorption Markers (Serum CTX)1 year after treatmentPercent changes of serum bone markers (serum CTX) from baseline to 1-year after treatment will be compared and analysed between 2 groups.
Bone Formation Marker (Serum PINP)1 year after treatment

Countries

Thailand

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Original Alendronate (Fosamax)
The patients will be given the brand alendronate (Fosamax®) (70 mg) 1 tablet once a week orally for 1 year after enrollment. In addition, calcium and vitamin D supplementation will be given to all patients.
70
Generic Alendronate (Bonmax)
The patients will be given the generic alendronate (Bonmax®) (70 mg) 1 tablet once a week orally for 1 year after enrollment. In addition, calcium and vitamin D supplementation will be given to all patients. Generic alendronate: The patients will be given the generic alendronate 1 tablet per week for approximately 1 year after enrollment.
70
Total140

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicOriginal Alendronate (Fosamax)Generic Alendronate (Bonmax)Total
Age, Continuous73.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.7
73.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.2
73.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.6
Sex: Female, Male
Female
66 Participants61 Participants127 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
4 Participants9 Participants13 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
16 / 7010 / 70
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 702 / 70

Outcome results

Primary

Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Lumbar Spine (L1-L4)

Percent changes of bone mineral density at lumbar spine (L1-L4) from baseline to 1-year after treatment will be compared and analysed between 2 groups.

Time frame: 1 year after treatment

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Original Alendronate (Fosamax)Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Lumbar Spine (L1-L4)5.54 percentStandard Deviation 6.39
Generic Alendronate (Bonmax)Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Lumbar Spine (L1-L4)5.39 percentStandard Deviation 4.83
Secondary

Bone Formation Marker (Serum PINP)

Time frame: 1 year after treatment

Secondary

Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Total Hip

Percent changes of bone mineral density at total hip from baseline to 1-year after treatment will be compared and analysed between 2 groups.

Time frame: 1 year after treatment

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Original Alendronate (Fosamax)Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Total Hip2.48 percentStandard Deviation 4.56
Generic Alendronate (Bonmax)Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at Total Hip2.52 percentStandard Deviation 3.51
Secondary

Bone Resorption Markers (Serum CTX)

Percent changes of serum bone markers (serum CTX) from baseline to 1-year after treatment will be compared and analysed between 2 groups.

Time frame: 1 year after treatment

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 26, 2026