Antiresorptive Therapy: Treatments, Uses, and Side Effects

Antiresorptive therapy is a class of medications that slows or stops the breakdown of bone, and it remains the most commonly prescribed approach for osteoporosis, bone metastases from cancer, and several other conditions involving excessive bone loss. The drugs in this category include bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective estrogen receptor modulators, and calcitonin, each working through a different mechanism but all converging on the same goal: keeping osteoclasts, the cells that dissolve bone, from doing too much of their job. The benefits of these drugs are well established across large trials, but they come with a distinctive set of side effects and management considerations that make the practical details worth understanding.

How Bone Breaks Down and Why That Matters

Your skeleton is not a static structure. Bone is continuously being torn down and rebuilt in a process called remodeling. Osteoclasts break down old or damaged bone, and osteoblasts lay down fresh bone in its place. In a healthy younger adult, these two processes stay roughly in balance. Problems start when breakdown outpaces rebuilding, whether from aging, hormone changes, medications, or disease.

A signaling molecule called RANKL is the key driver of bone breakdown. Produced by bone-forming cells, RANKL binds to a receptor called RANK on the surface of osteoclast precursors, triggering them to mature into active bone-dissolving cells and keeping those cells alive longer. A natural counterbalance called OPG acts as a decoy, binding to RANKL before it can reach RANK and thereby protecting bone from excessive resorption.¹ Every antiresorptive drug, in one way or another, tips the balance back toward preservation by interfering with osteoclast formation, activity, or survival.²

The Major Drug Classes

Bisphosphonates

Bisphosphonates are the oldest and most widely used antiresorptive drugs, and they remain the recommended first-line therapy for most people with osteoporosis or a high fracture risk.³ Common names you might recognize include alendronate (Fosamax), risedronate (Actonel), ibandronate (Boniva), and zoledronate (Reclast or Zometa). They are available as daily or weekly oral tablets, monthly tablets, or intravenous infusions given every few months to once a year, depending on the specific drug and the condition being treated.

These drugs are chemically stable relatives of pyrophosphate, a molecule your body naturally uses to regulate mineral deposits. They bind tightly to the mineral surface of bone, especially at sites where osteoclasts are actively dissolving tissue. Once an osteoclast ingests bisphosphonate-laden bone, the drug inhibits a key enzyme inside the cell, disrupting its ability to function and ultimately triggering cell death.⁴ Because bisphosphonates embed themselves into bone mineral, they can persist in the skeleton for years after you stop taking them. That long residence time has practical consequences, both good and bad, that show up later in treatment planning.

Denosumab

Denosumab (sold as Prolia for osteoporosis and Xgeva for cancer-related bone problems) takes a completely different approach. It is a lab-made antibody that binds directly to RANKL in the bloodstream before RANKL ever reaches osteoclasts.⁵ By intercepting RANKL, denosumab reduces osteoclast formation, activation, and survival all at once.⁶ It is given as a subcutaneous injection, typically every six months for osteoporosis.

A major practical difference between denosumab and bisphosphonates is what happens when you stop. Bisphosphonates linger in bone and continue offering some protection for years after discontinuation. Denosumab washes out of the body within months, and stopping it can trigger a dramatic surge in bone breakdown, an issue discussed in detail below.

Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators

Raloxifene is the most commonly prescribed selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) for bone health. It mimics estrogen’s protective effects on bone without stimulating breast or uterine tissue the way estrogen itself does.⁷ In clinical trials, women taking raloxifene showed gains in bone mineral density at the spine, hip, and total body compared to those on placebo, with no increase in uterine lining thickness.⁸ SERMs are primarily used in postmenopausal women who also want the added benefit of breast cancer risk reduction, though they are generally less effective at preventing hip fractures than bisphosphonates or denosumab.

What Conditions Are Treated

Osteoporosis and Fracture Prevention

Osteoporosis is the most common reason these drugs are prescribed. In the landmark trial of denosumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis, the drug cut the risk of new spine fractures by roughly two-thirds, hip fractures by about 40%, and fractures at other sites by about 20% compared to placebo.⁹ Among bisphosphonates, alendronate and risedronate have the strongest evidence for reducing fractures at both the spine and other skeletal sites.¹⁰

Cancer-Related Bone Disease

Many solid tumors, including breast, prostate, and lung cancers, spread to bone, where they hijack the normal remodeling process to dissolve skeletal tissue and create space for tumor growth. Antiresorptive drugs, particularly zoledronate and denosumab, are standard parts of treatment in this setting. They reduce the risk of fractures, spinal cord compression, and other skeletal complications while also helping with bone pain.¹¹ Bisphosphonates and denosumab are also used to manage bone destruction in multiple myeloma.¹²

Paget’s Disease and Tumor-Induced Hypercalcemia

Paget’s disease is a condition in which bone remodeling is dramatically accelerated in patches, producing enlarged, weakened bone. Bisphosphonates are the standard treatment. Intravenous pamidronate, for example, typically reduces the bone-breakdown marker alkaline phosphatase by 50 to 70% within a few months, along with a meaningful reduction in bone pain.¹³ Bisphosphonates also remain a go-to treatment for hypercalcemia caused by cancer, where tumor-driven bone destruction floods the blood with calcium. Pamidronate restores normal calcium levels in roughly 70 to 100% of these patients, usually within three to five days.¹³

Side Effects Worth Knowing About

Jaw Osteonecrosis

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is the side effect that tends to worry people the most. It involves an area of jawbone becoming exposed through the gum tissue, failing to heal, and sometimes becoming infected. Symptoms can include local pain, swelling, loose teeth, numbness, and ulceration, though exposed bone can remain painless for a long time before inflammation develops.¹⁴

The risk of MRONJ depends heavily on context. For people taking standard osteoporosis doses of oral bisphosphonates, the risk is very low. It is substantially higher in cancer patients receiving high-dose intravenous bisphosphonates or denosumab, where both the dosing frequency and the doses themselves are much greater. Dental procedures, especially extractions, are the most common trigger. Preventive measures make a real difference: in one study, use of antibiotics and platelet-rich fibrin membranes at extraction sites cut MRONJ risk by roughly 85%.¹⁵ Ongoing dental care also matters: a multi-center study found that patients who received continuous preventive dental follow-up had a MRONJ rate of about 2%, compared with about 14% in those who only had a single dental check before starting the drug.¹⁶

Atypical Femur Fractures

Atypical femur fractures are unusual breaks that occur in the shaft of the thighbone, often with little or no trauma. They are associated with long-term bisphosphonate use, and the risk rises steeply with treatment duration. In a large study, the risk of atypical fracture after eight or more years of bisphosphonate use was over 40 times higher than in people who had used the drug for only a few months.¹⁷ These fractures sometimes announce themselves with a dull ache in the thigh or groin for weeks before the bone actually breaks, which is worth knowing because catching them early, through imaging and stopping the drug, can prevent a complete fracture.

An analysis of the FDA’s adverse event database found disproportionate signals for atypical femur fractures with alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, pamidronate, ibandronate, and denosumab. Alendronate showed the strongest signal among the bisphosphonates.¹⁸ It is important to keep perspective: these fractures are rare, and for most people the fractures prevented by bisphosphonates far outnumber the atypical fractures caused by them. The concern is mainly with very prolonged use, which is why drug holidays exist.

Kidney and Calcium Problems

Intravenous bisphosphonates, especially zoledronate at the higher doses used in cancer treatment, can impair kidney function and cause low blood calcium. In a study of oncology patients receiving zoledronic acid, average serum creatinine (a marker of kidney function) roughly doubled after treatment, and about 29% of patients developed levels indicating kidney impairment. Blood calcium also dropped meaningfully, with about 2% of patients developing severely low levels.¹⁹ For this reason, kidney function and calcium levels are checked before and after infusions. Oral bisphosphonates at osteoporosis doses carry a much lower risk of kidney injury, though they are still generally avoided in people with severely reduced kidney function. Oral bisphosphonates can cause gastrointestinal side effects including heartburn and esophageal irritation, which is why they come with specific instructions to take them on an empty stomach and stay upright for at least 30 minutes afterward.

The Denosumab Rebound Problem

One of the most distinctive issues in antiresorptive therapy is what happens when denosumab is stopped. Unlike bisphosphonates, which physically embed in bone and continue suppressing resorption for years after discontinuation, denosumab leaves the system within months. When it clears, osteoclast numbers and activity surge above pretreatment levels in what researchers call a rebound phenomenon. The result is rapid, profound bone loss, and in some patients, multiple vertebral fractures.²⁰ A systematic review by the European Calcified Tissue Society confirmed that stopping denosumab leads to bone turnover that overshoots pretreatment status, rapid bone loss in most patients, and vertebral fractures in some.²¹

This means denosumab should not be stopped without a plan. The standard approach is to transition patients to a bisphosphonate, usually zoledronate, after stopping denosumab, so that the bisphosphonate locks into the bone and prevents the rebound. If you are on denosumab and thinking about stopping for any reason, this is a conversation to have with your prescriber well in advance rather than simply letting the next injection lapse.

Drug Holidays for Bisphosphonates

Because bisphosphonates accumulate in bone and continue providing some fracture protection after discontinuation, clinicians often recommend a planned drug holiday after several years of treatment. This break reduces exposure to the rare long-term risks, mainly atypical femur fractures and jaw osteonecrosis, without immediately giving up the protective effects.²² A typical holiday lasts two to three years, though the right duration depends on fracture risk, which bisphosphonate was used, and how long the patient was on it.²³ Patients at very high fracture risk, such as those with a recent fracture or very low bone density, are usually kept on therapy rather than given a break.

When Denosumab Outperforms Bisphosphonates

Head-to-head comparisons show that denosumab produces greater gains in bone mineral density than bisphosphonates. A meta-analysis of randomized trials found that denosumab increased bone density about 1.4% more than bisphosphonates at the lumbar spine and about 1% more at the hip and femoral neck at 12 months, with the gap widening slightly by 24 months.²⁴ A more recent systematic review specifically comparing denosumab with alendronate confirmed the advantage at multiple skeletal sites, with particularly strong gains in postmenopausal women.²⁵

Greater bone density gains do not automatically translate to fewer fractures, but the meta-analysis did find that denosumab had a lower fracture rate than alendronate at 24 months.²⁴ That said, bisphosphonates still have advantages in terms of cost, the ability to take a drug holiday, and a much longer track record of real-world safety data. The choice often depends on the individual patient’s risk profile, preference for injection versus pill, kidney function, and tolerance for the commitment that denosumab requires once started.

Sequencing With Bone-Building Drugs

Antiresorptive drugs slow bone breakdown, but they don’t actively build new bone. A separate class of medications, anabolic agents like teriparatide and romosozumab, stimulate bone formation. Increasingly, clinicians think about osteoporosis treatment as a sequence rather than a single drug choice, and the order of the sequence matters.

Starting with an anabolic drug and then switching to an antiresorptive tends to produce the best gains in bone mass. Going the other direction, from a bisphosphonate to an anabolic, blunts the anabolic drug’s effect, especially at the hip. The blunting appears to be worse with bisphosphonates that have longer skeletal half-lives.²⁶ The worst transition appears to be from denosumab to teriparatide, which causes accelerated bone turnover and progressive bone loss at the hip, on top of the rebound concerns already associated with stopping denosumab. Expert guidance is to avoid that specific switch.²⁷

Monitoring Whether the Drug Is Working

Bone density scans are the most familiar way to track treatment response, but they change slowly, so it can take one to two years to see a meaningful shift on a scan. Blood and urine tests for bone turnover markers fill that gap. Two markers in particular, CTX (a breakdown marker) and P1NP (a formation marker), are endorsed by expert consensus as short-term monitoring tools that let clinicians see whether a drug is doing its job months before a density scan would show changes.²⁸ A clear drop in CTX after starting an antiresorptive drug is a reassuring sign that osteoclasts are being suppressed. These markers also help detect non-adherence, a real problem with drugs that people take for years for a condition they can’t feel.²⁹

Men on Prostate Cancer Treatment

Although osteoporosis treatment is often framed in terms of postmenopausal women, men on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer face a rapid and significant loss of bone density. ADT suppresses testosterone, which normally helps maintain bone, and the resulting bone loss can rival or exceed what women experience after menopause. Bisphosphonates and denosumab both increase bone density at the hip and spine in men on ADT, with density gains ranging from about 1.5 to nearly 4% at the hip and 4 to nearly 7% at the spine over 12 months.³⁰

Fracture data are thinner. A meta-analysis of bisphosphonate trials in this population found a modest fracture reduction overall, but individual trials have been too small to show a clear effect. The exception is denosumab, which in one trial reduced the risk of new vertebral fractures substantially at one, two, and three years.³⁰ The common side effects in these men are largely the same as in postmenopausal women: gastrointestinal complaints with oral bisphosphonates, flu-like reactions with intravenous bisphosphonates, and rare jaw osteonecrosis. Expert guidance recommends measuring bone density when ADT begins and monitoring it periodically.³¹

Bisphosphonates in Children With Brittle Bone Disease

Outside of aging adults and cancer patients, one of the most established uses of antiresorptive therapy is in children with osteogenesis imperfecta, the genetic condition commonly known as brittle bone disease. Intravenous pamidronate is the most widely studied bisphosphonate in this population. A Cochrane review concluded that both oral and intravenous bisphosphonates increase bone mineral density in children and adults with osteogenesis imperfecta, though the overall evidence base remains limited and the effect on fracture rates is less clear-cut than clinicians would like.³² In practice, many pediatric specialists treat moderate and severe cases with cyclic intravenous pamidronate, monitoring bone markers like osteocalcin to gauge the drug’s effect on bone metabolism.³³ Long-term data on bisphosphonate use in growing skeletons remain an active area of study, and treatment decisions are highly individualized.

How Bisphosphonates Went From Industrial Chemistry to Medicine

Bisphosphonates were first synthesized in the late 1800s, but they spent decades as industrial chemicals used to prevent scale buildup in pipes and water systems. Their affinity for mineral surfaces caught the attention of researchers at Procter & Gamble, who initially explored them for dental applications. That work led to the first medical use of a bisphosphonate, etidronate, in 1968 to treat a young patient with a rare condition of progressive soft-tissue calcification.³⁴ The realization that bisphosphonates could inhibit the dissolution of bone mineral, not just its formation, opened the door to treating conditions of excessive bone breakdown.³⁵ From that single patient, the class has expanded into one of the most prescribed drug categories in the world, with indications spanning osteoporosis, Paget’s disease, cancer-related bone disease, and beyond. Denosumab arrived decades later, in 2010, as the understanding of RANKL biology matured enough to design a targeted antibody.³⁶ The two classes now account for the vast majority of antiresorptive prescriptions worldwide, and with newer agents in various stages of development, the field continues to evolve.

1
PubMed Central. Functions of RANKL/RANK/OPG in bone modeling and remodeling
2
PubMed. Role of RANKL in physiological and pathological bone resorption and therapeutics targeting the RANKL-RANK signaling system
3
Nature Reviews Endocrinology. Antiresorptive therapies for osteoporosis: a clinical overview
4
PubMed Central. The inhibition of human farnesyl pyrophosphate synthase by nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. Elucidating the role of active site threonine 201 and tyrosine 204 residues using enzyme mutants
5
PubMed. The RANKL pathway and denosumab
6
PubMed. Denosumab: anti-RANKL antibody
7
PubMed Central. Raloxifene: mechanism of action, effects on bone tissue, and applicability in clinical traumatology practice
8
PubMed. Effects of raloxifene on bone mineral density, serum cholesterol concentrations, and uterine endometrium in postmenopausal women
9
PubMed. Denosumab for prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis
10
PubMed. Preventing fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. A review of recent controlled trials of antiresorptive agents
11
PubMed Central. Importance of antiresorptive therapies for patients with bone metastases from solid tumors
12
PubMed Central. Bone antiresorptive agents in the treatment of bone metastases associated with solid tumours or multiple myeloma
13
PubMed. Pamidronate. A review of its use in the management of osteolytic bone metastases, tumour-induced hypercalcaemia and Paget’s disease of bone
14
PubMed Central. Osteonecrosis of the Jaw and Antiresorptive Agents in Benign and Malignant Diseases: A Critical Review Organized by the ECTS
15
Bone. Risk of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw after dental extractions in patients receiving antiresorptive agents — A retrospective study of 240 patients
16
PubMed Central. Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw primary prevention: multidomain long-term intervention versus pre-bisphosphonate treatment standalone dental intervention. A retrospective multi-center comparative cohort study
17
PubMed Central. Atypical Femur Fracture Risk versus Fragility Fracture Prevention with Bisphosphonates
18
Scientific Reports. Atypical femur fracture associated with common anti-osteoporosis drugs in FDA adverse event reporting system
19
PubMed Central. Zoledronic Acid-Related Hypocalcemia and Renal Dysfunction in Oncology Patients: A Tertiary Care Experience
20
PubMed Central. Denosumab Discontinuation and the Rebound Phenomenon: A Narrative Review
21
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. Fracture Risk and Management of Discontinuation of Denosumab Therapy: A Systematic Review and Position Statement by ECTS
22
PubMed Central. Duration of Bisphosphonate Drug Holidays in Osteoporosis Patients: A Narrative Review of the Evidence and Considerations for Decision-Making
23
PubMed Central. Bisphosphonate drug holiday: who, when and how long
24
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. Comparison of Denosumab and Bisphosphonates in Patients With Osteoporosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
25
PubMed. Comparison of the Efficacy of Denosumab and Alendronate in Improving Bone Mineral Density in Osteoporosis Patients and High-Risk Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
26
JBMR Plus. Optimizing Sequential and Combined Anabolic and Antiresorptive Osteoporosis Therapy – Section: Anabolic Agents After Antiresorptive Agents
27
PubMed Central. The Sequential Therapy in Osteoporosis
28
Journal of Clinical Densitometry. Consensus Statement on the Use of Bone Turnover Markers for Short-Term Monitoring of Osteoporosis Treatment in the Asia-Pacific Region
29
PubMed Central. Bone turnover markers: Emerging tool in the management of osteoporosis
30
PubMed. Benefits and harms of antiresorptive therapy in men with non-metastatic prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
31
PubMed Central. Guidance for the assessment and management of prostate cancer treatment-induced bone loss. A consensus position statement from an expert group
32
PubMed Central. Bisphosphonate therapy for osteogenesis imperfecta
33
PubMed Central. Serum Osteocalcin in Pediatric Osteogenesis Imperfecta: Impact of Disease Type and Bisphosphonate Therapy
34
PubMed. Historical perspectives on the clinical development of bisphosphonates in the treatment of bone diseases
35
PubMed. Bisphosphonates: the first 40 years
36
Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. Bench to bedside: elucidation of the OPG–RANK–RANKL pathway and the development of denosumab