Effects of intravenous zoledronic acid plus subcutaneous teriparatide [rhPTH(1-34)] in postmenopausal osteoporosis

Effects of stepwise administration of osteoprotegerin and parathyroid hormone-related peptide DNA vectors on bone formation in ovariectomized rat model

Osteoporosis is a metabolic bone disease that impairs bone mineral density, microarchitecture, and strength. It requires continuous management, and further research into new treatment options is necessary. Osteoprotegerin (OPG) inhibits bone resorption and osteoclast activity. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of stepwise administration of OPG-encoded minicircles (mcOPG) and a bone formation regulator, parathyroid hormone-related peptide (PTHrP)-encoded minicircles (mcPTHrP) in osteoporosis. The combined treatment with mcOPG and mcPTHrP significantly increased osteogenic marker expression in osteoblast differentiation compared with the single treatment groups. A model of postmenopausal osteoporosis was established in 12-week-old female rats through ovariectomy (OVX). After 8 weeks of OVX, mcOPG (80 µg/kg) was administered via intravenous injection. After 16 weeks of OVX, mcPTHrP (80 µg/kg) was injected once a week for 3 weeks. The bone microstructure in the femur was evaluated 24 weeks after OVX using micro-CT. In a proof-of-concept study, stepwise treatment with mcOPG and mcPTHrP on an OVX rat model significantly improved bone microstructure compared to treatment with mcOPG or mcPTHrP alone. These results suggest that stepwise treatment with mcOPG and mcPTHrP may be a potential treatment for osteoporosis.

Skeletal response to teriparatide in real-life setting: effects of age, baseline bone density and prior denosumab use

OBJECTIVES

Teriparatide (TPD) is an osteoanabolic agent used in patients with high osteoporotic fracture risk. Predictors of therapeutic response to TPD in real-life setting are not well characterised. This study investigated the influence of previous antiresorptive therapy, age and other patient characteristics on the skeletal response to TPD.

METHODS

Retrospective study at the metabolic bone clinic, University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Patients with osteoporosis and a high fracture burden received TPD for 9-18 months. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at baseline, 9 and 18 months at lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN) and total hip (TH).

RESULTS

BMD at LS increased at 9 months (change mean (standard error) 6.8 % (0.7) p < 0.001) and at 18 months (8.0 % (0.9) p < 0.001), while BMD at FN and TH did not change significantly. Non-response in BMD change at the LS was seen with prior denosumab use (odds ratio 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.049-0.912, p = 0.037). Changes in BMD at TH were significantly greater in younger patients and in patients with a lower baseline BMD.

CONCLUSION

TPD-induced changes in BMD at TH might depend on age and baseline BMD and at LS on prior denosumab use. The results suggest that these factors may be relevant for clinical decision making when initiating TPD treatment, although larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Prevention and Treatment of Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to update recommendations for prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) for patients with rheumatic or nonrheumatic conditions receiving >3 months treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) ≥2.5 mg daily.

METHODS

An updated systematic literature review was performed for clinical questions on nonpharmacologic, pharmacologic treatments, discontinuation of medications, and sequential therapy. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A Voting Panel achieved ≥70% consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

For adults beginning or continuing >3 months of GC treatment, we strongly recommend as soon as possible after initiation of GCs, initial assessment of fracture risks with clinical fracture assessment, bone mineral density with vertebral fracture assessment or spinal x-ray, and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool if ≥40 years old. For adults at medium, high, or very high fracture risk, we strongly recommend pharmacologic treatment. Choice of oral or intravenous bisphosphonates, denosumab, or parathyroid hormone analogs should be made by shared decision-making. Anabolic agents are conditionally recommended as initial therapy for those with high and very high fracture risk. Recommendations are made for special populations, including children, people with organ transplants, people who may become pregnant, and people receiving very high-dose GC treatment. New recommendations for both discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy and sequential therapies are included.

CONCLUSION

This guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions for management of GIOP. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

2022 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Prevention and Treatment of Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to update recommendations for prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) for patients with rheumatic or nonrheumatic conditions receiving >3 months treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) ≥2.5 mg daily.

METHODS

An updated systematic literature review was performed for clinical questions on nonpharmacologic, pharmacologic treatments, discontinuation of medications, and sequential therapy. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A Voting Panel achieved ≥70% consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.

RESULTS

For adults beginning or continuing >3 months of GC treatment, we strongly recommend as soon as possible after initiation of GCs, initial assessment of fracture risks with clinical fracture assessment, bone mineral density with vertebral fracture assessment or spinal x-ray, and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool if ≥40 years old. For adults at medium, high, or very high fracture risk, we strongly recommend pharmacologic treatment. Choice of oral or intravenous bisphosphonates, denosumab, or parathyroid hormone analogs should be made by shared decision-making. Anabolic agents are conditionally recommended as initial therapy for those with high and very high fracture risk. Recommendations are made for special populations, including children, people with organ transplants, people who may become pregnant, and people receiving very high-dose GC treatment. New recommendations for both discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy and sequential therapies are included.

CONCLUSION

This guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions for management of GIOP. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

Combination Therapy of Denosumab and Teriparatide in Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a chronic disease that often requires long-term treatment for many years. The clinician should know about all the drugs that are currently being used for treatment in osteoporosis and their mechanism of action, efficacy, safety profile, mode of administration and number of years they can be given safely without causing significant adverse effects. The categories of drugs that are currently being used for osteoporosis are antiresorptives such as oral and intravenous bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolics like teriparatide. This article will focus on the combination therapy of denosumab and teriparatide and will discuss how this combination is better than other class of drugs when given alone or in combination in osteoporosis patients especially those who are at high risk of fragility fractures.

Long-term and sequential treatment for osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder that causes impairment of bone structure and strength, leading to a progressively increased risk of fragility fractures. The global prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the ageing population. Owing to the chronic character of osteoporosis, years or even decades of preventive measures or therapy are required. The long-term use of bone-specific pharmacological treatment options, including antiresorptive and/or osteoanabolic approaches, has raised concerns around adverse effects or potential rebound phenomena after treatment discontinuation. Imaging options, risk scores and the assessment of bone turnover during initiation and monitoring of such therapies could help to inform individualized treatment strategies. Combination therapies are currently used less often than 'sequential' treatments. However, all patients with osteoporosis, including those with secondary and rare causes of osteoporosis, as well as specific patient populations (for example, young adults, men and pregnant women) require new approaches for long-term therapy and disease monitoring. New pathophysiological aspects of bone metabolism might therefore help to inform and revolutionize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis.

Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To review the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments, including the bone anabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, on reducing the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women, and to characterise the effect of antiosteoporosis drug treatments on the risk of fractures according to baseline risk factors.

DESIGN

Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify randomised controlled trials published between 1 January 1996 and 24 November 2021 that examined the effect of bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo or active comparator.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials that included non-Asian postmenopausal women with no restriction on age, when interventions looked at bone quality in a broad perspective. The primary outcome was clinical fractures. Secondary outcomes were vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and major osteoporotic fractures, all cause mortality, adverse events, and serious cardiovascular adverse events.

RESULTS

The results were based on 69 trials (>80 000 patients). For clinical fractures, synthesis of the results showed a protective effect of bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo. Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, bisphosphonates were less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.00). Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and romosozumab, denosumab was less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.85, 1.18 to 2.92 for denosumab v parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and 1.56, 1.02 to 2.39 for denosumab v romosozumab). An effect of all treatments on vertebral fractures compared with placebo was found. In the active treatment comparisons, denosumab, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab were more effective than oral bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral fractures. The effect of all treatments was unaffected by baseline risk indicators, except for antiresorptive treatments that showed a greater reduction of clinical fractures compared with placebo with increasing mean age (number of studies=17; β=0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99). No harm outcomes were seen. The certainty in the effect estimates was moderate to low for all individual outcomes, mainly because of limitations in reporting, nominally indicating a serious risk of bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicated a benefit of a range of treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women for clinical and vertebral fractures. Bone anabolic treatments were more effective than bisphosphonates in the prevention of clinical and vertebral fractures, irrespective of baseline risk indicators. Hence this analysis provided no clinical evidence for restricting the use of anabolic treatment to patients with a very high risk of fractures.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019128391.

Osteoporosis clinical practice guideline: romosozumab for treating severe osteoporosis – an update by the Egyptian Academy of Bone Health

Background

This is a Clinical Practice Guideline update released by the Egyptian Academy of Bone Health and Metabolic Bone Diseases. It does not replace the clinical practice guidelines published for the treatment of osteoporosis in 2021, but it entails specific recommendations and selective criteria for romosozumab as another pharmacological agent for treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. It has been issued, in part, due to the imminent approval of romosozumab in Egypt.

Main text

The guideline recommends the use of romosozumab, for up to 1 year, for the reduction of vertebral, hip, and non-vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis at very high risk of fracture/imminent fracture risk: defined as T-score less than − 2.5 and a prior hip or vertebral fracture in the past 24 months or a very high fracture risk, as identified by FRAX (FRAX major osteoporosis fracture > 30%, FRAX hip fracture > 4.5%). The recommended dosage of romosozumab is 210 mg monthly by subcutaneous injection for 12 months. For osteoporotic postmenopausal women who have completed a 12-month course of romosozumab, treatment with an anti-resorptive osteoporosis therapy is recommended to maintain bone mineral density gains and reduce fracture risk. The treatment is not recommended for women at high risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke, which includes those with prior myocardial infarction or stroke.

In conclusion, strategies to osteoporosis management have been highly diversified, with bone health specialists have become able to set up treatment plan tailored to the individual patient’s requirement. Patients with severe osteoporosis at very high fracture risk need stronger therapeutic regimens to start with. Romosozumab endorses bone formation and suppresses bone resorption, leading to a greater anabolic window and a superior positive impact on bone mineral density.

The why and how of sequential and combination therapy in osteoporosis. A review of the current evidence

It is now well recognized that over the lifetime of a patient with osteoporosis, more than one medication will be needed to treat the disease and to decrease fracture risk. Though current gaps in osteoporosis therapy can be potentially mitigated with sequential and combination regimens, how to move seamlessly amongst the multiple treatments currently available for osteoporosis for sustained efficacy is still unclear. Data from recent studies show that an anabolic agent such as teriparatide or romosozumab followed by an antiresorptive affords maximal gain in BMD and possibly better and earlier fracture risk reduction compared to a regimen which follows the opposite sequence. Sequentially moving to a bisphosphonate such as alendronate from an anabolic agent such as abaloparatide has also been shown to preserve the fracture reduction benefits seen with the latter. This sequence of an anabolic agent followed by an antiresorptive should especially be considered in the high-risk patient with imminent fracture risk to rapidly reduce the risk of subsequent fractures. The data surrounding optimum timing of initiation of bisphosphonate therapy following denosumab discontinuation is still unclear. Though data suggests that combining a bisphosphonate with teriparatide does not provide substantial BMD gains compared to monotherapy, the concomitant administration of denosumab with teriparatide has been shown to significantly increase areal BMD as well as to increase volumetric BMD and estimated bone strength. This narrative review explores the available evidence regarding the various sequential and combination therapy approaches and the potential role they could play in better managing osteoporosis.

EXTENSIVE EXPERTISE IN ENDOCRINOLOGY: Osteoporosis management

Fractures occur in about half of older White women, and almost a third of older White men. However, 80% of the older individuals who have fractures do not meet the bone density definition of osteoporosis, suggesting that this definition is not an appropriate threshold for offering treatment. Fracture risk can be estimated based on clinical risk factors with or without bone density. A combination of calculated risk, fracture history, and bone density is used in treatment decisions. Medications available for reducing fracture risk act either to inhibit bone resorption or to promote bone formation. Romosozumab is unique in that it has both activities. Bisphosphonates are the most widely used interventions because of their efficacy, safety, and low cost. Continuous use of oral bisphosphonates for >5 years increases the risk of atypical femoral fractures, so is usually punctuated with drug holidays of 6-24 months. Denosumab is a further potent anti-resorptive agent given as 6-monthly s.c. injections. It is comparable to the bisphosphonates in efficacy and safety but has a rapid offset of effect after discontinuation so must be followed by an alternative drug, usually a bisphosphonate. Teriparatide stimulates both bone formation and resorption, substantially increases spine density, and reduces vertebral and non-vertebral fracture rates, though data for hip fractures are scant. Treatment is usually limited to 18-24 months, followed by the transition to an anti-resorptive. Romosozumab is given as monthly s.c. injections for 1 year, followed by an anti-resorptive. This sequence prevents more fractures than anti-resorptive therapy alone. Because of cost, anabolic drugs are usually reserved for those at very high fracture risk. 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels should be maintained above 30 nmol/L, using supplements if sunlight exposure is limited. Calcium intake has little effect on bone density and fracture risk but should be maintained above 500 mg/day using dietary sources.

Dual Targeting Anti-Osteoporotic Therapy through Potential Nanotherapeutic Approaches

Osteoporosis is characterised by a major public health burden, particularly taking into account the ageing global population. Therapeutic modalities for osteoporosis are categorised on the basis of their effect on bone remodeling: antiresorptive agents and anabolic agents. Anabolic drugs are favoured as they promote the formation of new bone, whereas antiresorptive drugs terminate the further deterioration of bone. Non-specific delivery of anabolic agents results in prolonged kidney exposure causing malignant hypercalcemia, whereas antiresorptive agents and bisphosphonates may produce osteonecrosis of the jaw. Several clinical trials have been reported for combinational therapy of anabolic agents and antiresorptive agents for osteoporosis. However, none of them have proven their cumulative effectiveness in the treatment of disease. The present work emphasizes on dual-targeting drug delivery approach comprising of bone anabolic and antiresorptive agents that would deliver the therapeutic agents to both the zones of bone simultaneously. The anticipated pioneering delivery approach will intensify the explicit interaction between the therapeutic agent and bone surfaces separately without developing severe adverse effects and improve the osteoporotic therapy effectively compared to non-targeted drug delivery.

Aminobisphosphonates: Reconsideration 25 years after their approval for the treatment of osteoporosis

Aminobisphosphonates are widely used in the treatment of osteoporosis. They have a high affinity for hydroxyapatite, binding primarily to resorbing surfaces, but also to forming surfaces and to some extent to resting surfaces. They inhibit osteoclasts, thereby decreasing remodelling units. Consequently, they increase bone mass and reduce stress risers. This decreases the risk of fractures. If this decrease is sufficient, they can be temporarily withdrawn (drug holidays), which prevents serious complications (atypical femoral fracture). They probably reduce mortality. Virtually all patients with osteoporosis can benefit from them at some point in the course of their disease (at the beginning of treatment or after the administration of anabolics, selective estrogen receptor modulators or denosumab). If well tolerated orally, alendronate and risedronate are preferable. Otherwise, zoledronate is preferred. Their efficacy vs. cost-safety-convenience ratio makes aminobisphosphonates reference drugs in the field of osteoporosis.

Skeletal disorders associated with the growth hormone-insulin-like growth factor 1 axis

Growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) are important regulators of bone remodelling and metabolism and have an essential role in the achievement and maintenance of bone mass throughout life. Evidence from animal models and human diseases shows that both GH deficiency (GHD) and excess are associated with changes in bone remodelling and cause profound alterations in bone microstructure. The consequence is an increased risk of fractures in individuals with GHD or acromegaly, a condition of GH excess. In addition, functional perturbations of the GH-IGF1 axis, encountered in individuals with anorexia nervosa and during ageing, result in skeletal fragility and osteoporosis. The effect of interventions used to treat GHD and acromegaly on the skeleton is variable and dependent on the duration of the disease, the pre-existing skeletal state, coexistent hormone alterations (such as those occurring in hypogonadism) and length of therapy. This variability could also reflect the irreversibility of the skeletal structural defect occurring during alterations of the GH-IGF1 axis. Moreover, the effects of the treatment of GHD and acromegaly on locally produced IGF1 and IGF binding proteins are uncertain and in need of further study. This Review highlights the pathophysiological, clinical and therapeutic aspects of skeletal fragility associated with perturbations in the GH-IGF1 axis.

Efficacy of the Combination of Teriparatide and Denosumab in the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Meta-Analysis

Aim: Evidence on the efficacy of combination treatment of teriparatide and denosumab for osteoporosis remains controversial. We aim to compare the efficacy between the combination treatment and monotherapy among patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Methods and results: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to 26 January 2022, for relevant studies. This meta-analysis reviewed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the combination treatment of teriparatide and denosumab in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The articles were examined individually by two reviewers, and the relevant data was extracted. We combined weighted mean difference (WMD) for bone mineral density (BMD) using random- or fixed- effect models and conducted subgroup analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed, and possible publication bias was also assessed. Overall, combination treatment enhanced the mean percent change of bone mineral density in lumbar spine than monotherapy (WMD = 2.91, 95%CI: 1.983.83; p = 0.00). And, combination treatment has been beneficial for enhancing the mean percent change of BMD in hip (WMD = 3.19, 95%CI: 2.25∼4.13; p = 0.00). There was no significant difference between combination treatment and monotherapy in terms of the adverse events (RR = 0.81, 95%CI: 0.45∼1.45; p = 0.472).

Conclusion: The meta-analysis indicates that combination treatment led to greater BMD at the lumbar spine and hip in comparison to monotherapy, without an increased incidence of adverse events.

Systematic Review Registration: (https://inplasy.com/), identifier (Inplasy Protocol 2734).

Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment and a range of effective pharmacological agents. Currently, bone-forming (anabolic) agents, in many countries, are used in those patients who have continued to lose bone mineral density (BMD), patients with multiple subsequent fractures or those who have fractured despite treatment with antiresorptive agents. However, head-to-head data suggest that anabolic agents have greater rapidity and efficacy for fracture risk reduction than do antiresorptive therapies. The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) convened an expert working group to discuss the tools available to identify patients at high risk of fracture, review the evidence for the use of anabolic agents as the initial intervention in patients at highest risk of fracture and consider the sequence of therapy following their use. This position paper sets out the findings of the group and the consequent recommendations. The key conclusion is that the current evidence base supports an "anabolic first" approach in patients found to be at very high risk of fracture, followed by maintenance therapy using an antiresorptive agent, and with the subsequent need for antiosteoporosis therapy addressed over a lifetime horizon.

Drug therapy for osteoporosis in older adults

The goal of osteoporosis management is to prevent fractures. Several pharmacological agents are available to lower fracture risk, either by reducing bone resorption or by stimulating bone formation. Bisphosphonates are the most widely used anti-resorptives, reducing bone turnover markers to low premenopausal concentrations and reducing fracture rates (vertebral by 50-70%, non-vertebral by 20-30%, and hip by ~40%). Bisphosphonates bind avidly to bone mineral and have an offset of effect measured in months to years. Long term, continuous use of oral bisphosphonates is usually interspersed with drug holidays of 1-2 years, to minimise the risk of atypical femoral fractures. Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody against RANKL that potently inhibits osteoclast development and activity. Denosumab is administered by subcutaneous injection every 6 months. Anti-fracture effects of denosumab are similar to those of the bisphosphonates, but there is a pronounced loss of anti-resorptive effect from 7 months after the last injection, which can result in clusters of rebound vertebral fractures. Two classes of anabolic drugs are now available to stimulate bone formation. Teriparatide and abaloparatide both target the parathyroid hormone-1 receptor, and are given by daily subcutaneous injection for up to 2 years. Romosozumab is an anti-sclerostin monoclonal antibody that stimulates bone formation and inhibits resorption. Romosozumab is given as monthly subcutaneous injections for 1 year. Head-to-head studies suggest that anabolic agents have greater anti-fracture efficacy and produce larger increases in bone density than anti-resorptive drugs. The effects of anabolic agents are transient, so transition to anti-resorptive drugs is required. The optimal strategy for cycling anabolics, anti-resorptives, and off-treatment periods remains to be determined.

Additive Effect of Parathyroid Hormone and Zoledronate Acid on Prevention Particle Wears-Induced Implant Loosening by Promoting Periprosthetic Bone Architecture and Strength in an Ovariectomized Rat Model

Implant-generated particle wears are considered as the major cause for the induction of implant loosening, which is more susceptible to patients with osteoporosis. Monotherapy with parathyroid hormone (PTH) or zoledronate acid (ZOL) has been proven efficient for preventing early-stage periprosthetic osteolysis, while the combination therapy with PTH and ZOL has exerted beneficial effects on the treatment of posterior lumbar vertebral fusion and disuse osteopenia. However, PTH and ZOL still have not been licensed for the treatment of implant loosening to date clinically. In this study, we have explored the effect of single or combined administration with PTH and ZOL on implant loosening in a rat model of osteoporosis. After 12 weeks of ovariectomized surgery, a femoral particle-induced periprosthetic osteolysis model was established. Vehicle, PTH (5 days per week), ZOL (100 mg/kg per week), or combination therapy was utilized for another 6 weeks before sacrifice, followed by micro-CT, histology, mechanical testing, and bone turnover examination. PTH monotherapy or combined PTH with ZOL exerted a protective effect on maintaining implant stability by elevating periprosthetic bone mass and inhibiting pseudomembrane formation. Moreover, an additive effect was observed when combining PTH with ZOL, resulting in better fixation strength, higher periprosthetic bone mass, and less pseudomembrane than PTH monotherapy. Taken together, our results suggested that a combination therapy of PTH and ZOL might be a promising approach for the intervention of early-stage implant loosening in patients with osteoporosis.

Advances in bone turnover markers

Bone fragility fractures remain an important worldwide health and economic problem due to increased morbidity and mortality. The current methods for predicting fractures are largely based on the measurement of bone mineral density and the utilization of mathematical risk calculators based on clinical risk factors for bone fragility. Despite these approaches, many bone fractures remain undiagnosed. Therefore, current research is focused on the identification of new factors such as bone turnover markers (BTM) for risk calculation. BTM are a group of proteins and peptides released during bone remodeling that can be found in serum or urine. They derive from bone resorptive and formative processes mediated by osteoclasts and osteoblasts, respectively. Potential use of BTM in monitoring these phenomenon and therefore bone fracture risk is limited by physiologic and pathophysiologic factors that influence BTM. These limitations in predicting fractures explain why their inclusion in clinical guidelines remains limited despite the large number of studies examining BTM.

Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia^®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista^®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity^®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo^®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture.

DATA SOURCES

For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture^® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX^® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0-33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories.

LIMITATIONS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Comprehensive analysis of pivotal biomarkers, immune cell infiltration and therapeutic drugs for steroid-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head

Steroid-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head (SONFH) is a progressive disease that leads to an increased disability rate. This study aimed to ascertain biomarkers, infiltrating immune cells, and therapeutic drugs for SONFH. The gene expression profile of the GSE123568 dataset was downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified using the NetworkAnalyst platform. Functional enrichment, protein-protein interaction network (PPI), and module analyses were performed using Metascape tools. An immune cell abundance identifier was used to explore immune cell infiltration. Furthermore, hub genes were identified based on maximal clique centrality (MCC) evaluation using cytoHubba application and confirmed by qRT-PCR using clinical samples. Finally, the L1000 platform was used to determine potential drugs for SONFH treatment. The SONFH mouse model was used to determine the therapeutic effects of aspirin. In total, 429 DEGs were identified in SONFH samples. Functional enrichment analysis showed that these DEGs were enriched in myeloid leukocyte activation and osteoclast differentiation processes. A set of nine immune cell types was confirmed to be markedly different between the SONFH and control samples. All 10 hub genes were significantly highly expressed in the serum of SONFH patients, as shown by qRT-PCR. Finally, the therapeutic effect of aspirin on SONFH was examined in animal experiments. Taken together, our data revealed the hub genes and infiltrating immune cells in SONFH, and we also screened potential drugs for use in SONFH treatment.

Update on vertebral fractures in pituitary diseases: from research to clinical practice

Derangement of pituitary hormone axes can induce changes in bone remodeling and metabolism with possible alterations in bone microarchitectural structure and increased susceptibility to fractures. Vertebral fractures (VFs), which are a hallmark of skeletal fragility, have been described in a very large number of patients with pituitary diseases. These fractures are clinically relevant, since they predispose to further fractures and may negatively impact on patients' quality of life. However, the management of skeletal fragility and VFs in the specific setting of pituitary diseases is a challenge, since the awareness for this disease is still low, prediction of VFs is uncertain, the diagnosis of VFs cannot be solely based on a clinical approach and also needs a radiological and morphometric approach, the risk of fractures may not be decreased via treatment of pituitary hormone disorders, and the effectiveness of bone-active drugs in this setting is not always evidence-based. This review is an update on skeletal fragility in patients with pituitary diseases, with a focus on clinical and therapeutic aspects concerning the management of VFs.

Osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis in women

Therapy to activate bone formation is required to reverse and restore the damaged bone architecture found in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The osteoanabolic drugs include teriparatide, which has been available for several years, and abaloparatide and romosozumab, novel osteoanabolic drugs that have become available more recently. By stimulating bone formation, these drugs produce greater increases in bone mass and bone strength, and they do so more quickly compared to the commonly used anti-remodeling (also called antiresorptive) drugs such as bisphosphonates. In head-to-head trials, teriparatide and romosozumab reduce fracture risk more effectively than do oral bisphosphonates in women with osteoporosis and high fracture risk. Osteoanabolic drugs have little role in the prevention of bone loss during early menopause, but they have an important place in the treatment of women at very high risk of fracture or who remain at high fracture risk after a course of bisphosphonate therapy. Primarily because of the high cost of the drugs, these therapies are initiated by specialists rather than primary-care physicians in most countries. This review will present the evidence for efficacy and safety of these drugs so that clinicians may discern their appropriate use when caring for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis Remission and New Bone Formation with Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles

Nanotechnology changed the concept of treatment for a variety of diseases, producing a huge impact regarding drug and gene delivery. Among the different targeted diseases, osteoporosis has devastating clinical and economic consequences. Since current osteoporosis treatments present several side effects, new treatment approaches are needed. Recently, the application of small interfering RNA (siRNA) has become a promising alternative. Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway controls bone development and formation. This pathway is negatively regulated by sclerostin, which knock-down through siRNA application would potentially promote bone formation. However, the major bottleneck for siRNA-based treatments is the necessity of a delivery vector, bringing nanotechnology as a potential solution. Among the available nanocarriers, mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) have attracted great attention for intracellular delivery of siRNAs. The mesoporous structure of MSNs permits the delivery of siRNAs together with another biomolecule, achieving a combination therapy. Here, the effectiveness of a new potential osteoporosis treatment based on MSNs is evaluated. The proposed system is effective in delivering SOST siRNA and osteostatin through systemic injection to bone tissue. The nanoparticle administration produced an increase expression of osteogenic related genes improving the bone microarchitecture. The treated osteoporotic mice recovered values of a healthy situation approaching to osteoporosis remission.

Recent Progresses in the Treatment of Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis (OP) is a chronic bone disease characterized by aberrant microstructure and macrostructure of bone, leading to reduced bone mass and increased risk of fragile fractures. Anti-resorptive drugs, especially, bisphosphonates, are currently the treatment of choice in most developing countries. However, they do have limitations and adverse effects, which, to some extent, helped the development of anabolic drugs such as teriparatide and romosozumab. In patients with high or very high risk for fracture, sequential or combined therapies may be considered with the initial drugs being anabolic agents. Great endeavors have been made to find next generation drugs with maximal efficacy and minimal toxicity, and improved understanding of the role of different signaling pathways and their crosstalk in the pathogenesis of OP may help achieve this goal. Our review focused on recent progress with regards to the drug development by modification of Wnt pathway, while other pathways/molecules were also discussed briefly. In addition, new observations made in recent years in bone biology were summarized and discussed for the treatment of OP.

Activation, development, and attenuation of modeling- and remodeling-based bone formation in adult rats

Activation of modeling-based bone formation (MBF - bone formation without prior activation of bone resorption), has been identified as an important mechanism by which anabolic agents, such as intermittent parathyroid hormone (PTH), rapidly elicit new bone formation. Using a novel cryohistology imaging platform, coupled with sequential multicolor fluorochrome injections, we demonstrated that MBF and remodeling-based bone formation (RBF) in the adult rat tibia model have similar contributions to trabecular bone homeostasis. PTH treatment resulted in a 2.4-4.9 fold greater bone formation rate over bone surface (BFR/BS) by RBF and a 4.3-8.5 fold greater BFR/BS by MBF in male, intact female, and ovariectomized female rats. Moreover, regardless of bone formation type, once a formation site is activated by PTH, mineral deposition continues throughout the entire treatment duration. Furthermore, by tracking the sequence of multicolor fluorochrome labels, we discovered that MBF, a highly efficient but often overlooked regenerative mechanism, is activated more rapidly but attenuated faster than RBF in response to PTH. This suggests that MBF and RBF contribute differently to PTH's anabolic effect in rats: MBF has a greater contribution to the acute elevation in bone mass at the early stage of treatment while RBF contributes to the sustained treatment effect.

Meta-analysis of clinical fracture risk reduction of anti-osteoporosis drugs: direct and indirect comparisons and meta-regressions

OBJECTIVE

Anti-osteoporotic drug (AOD) trials have variabilities in duration and fracture risks. This study evaluated AOD's versus controls regarding reduction in relative rates (rr) and rate differences (rd) of vertebral and hip fractures and comparative costs.

METHODS

Primary randomized-controlled trials (RCT's) of AOD's in post-menopausal women with documentation of vertebral fracture rates (VFR) or hip fracture rates (HFR) were extracted from meta-analyses and PubMed through February 2021. Direct and indirect meta-analysis and meta-regression analyzed fracture reductions.

RESULTS

There were 24 RCT's of drug-versus-placebo (73,862 women) and 10 drug-versus-drug trials. Reduction in rr of VFR were significant for anti-resorptive (alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, denosumab, raloxifene) and anabolic (teriparatide, abaloparatide, romosozumab) drugs. Denosumab, teriparatide and abaloparatide were more effective in reducing VFR compared to oral bisphosphates (all p <0.05) but not to zoledronate. Reduction in HFR were significant for alendronate, denosumab and zoledronate (all p <0.05), without significant differences among drugs. Anabolic drugs did not show significant HFR reduction. Meta-regression of rd's allowed for calculation of costs per vertebral fracture prevented, which were estimated at >$100,000 for anabolic drugs and between $2,289-$28,947 for anti-resorptive drugs. Drug-versus-drug trials were underpowered to demonstrate changes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests goal-directed, cost-effective therapy relative to a patient's risk for vertebral and hip fractures. Anabolic drugs are better at preventing vertebral fractures compared to oral bisphosphonates. Anabolic drugs are not superior to zoledronate or denosumab, and at substantially higher cost. In comparing drugs which prevented hip fractures, there was no statistical benefit of any drug.

Update on Approved Osteoporosis Therapies Including Combination and Sequential Use of Agents

Osteoporosis is characterized by reduced bone mass leading to diminished skeletal integrity and an increased risk for fracture. Multiple agents exist that are effective for the treatment of osteoporosis. These can be broadly categorized into those that reduce the risk for additional loss of bone mass (anti-resorptive agents) and those that augment existing bone mass (anabolic agents). This article reviews the different medications within each class, and discusses more recent data regarding the combination and sequential use of these medications for optimization of skeletal health in patients at high risk for fracture.

Potential of biomarkers during pharmacological therapy setting for postmenopausal osteoporosis: a systematic review

Background

Biochemical markers of bone turnover (BTMs), such as the bone alkaline phosphatase (bALP), procollagen type I N propeptide (PINP), serum cross-linked C-telopeptides of type I collagen (bCTx), and urinary cross-linked N-telopeptides of type I collagen (NTx), are used to manage therapy monitoring in osteoporotic patients. This systematic review analyzed the potential of these BMTs in predicting the clinical outcomes in terms of BMD, t-score, rate of fractures, and adverse events during the therapy setting in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Methods

All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting data on biomarkers for postmenopausal osteoporosis were accessed. Only articles reporting quantitative data on the level of biomarkers at baseline and on the outcomes of interest at the last follow-up were eligible.

Results

A total of 36,706 patients were retrieved. Greater values of bALP were associated with a greater rate of vertebral (P = 0.001) and non-vertebral fractures (P = 0.0001). Greater values of NTx at baseline were associated with a greater rate of adverse events at the last follow-up (P = 0.02). Greater values of CTx at baseline were associated with a greater rate of adverse events leading to discontinuation (P = 0.04), gastrointestinal adverse events (P = 0.0001), musculoskeletal adverse events (P = 0.04), and mortality (P = 0.04). Greater values of PINP at baseline were associated with greater rates of gastrointestinal adverse events (P = 0.02) at the last follow-up.

Conclusion

The present analysis supports the adoption of BMTs during pharmacological therapy setting of patients suffering from osteoporosis.

Level of evidence

I, systematic review of RCTs

Review of Current Real-World Experience with Teriparatide as Treatment of Osteoporosis in Different Patient Groups

Teriparatide has proven effective in reducing both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in clinical trials of post-menopausal and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Widespread adoption of Teriparatide over the last two decades means that there is now substantial experience of its use in routine clinical practice, which is summarized in this paper. Extensive real-world experience of Teriparatide in post-menopausal osteoporosis confirms the fracture and bone density benefits seen in clinical trials, with similar outcomes identified also in male and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Conversely, very limited experience has been reported in pre-menopausal osteoporosis or in the use of Teriparatide in combination with other therapies. Surveillance studies have identified no safety signals relating to the possible association of Teriparatide with osteosarcoma. We also review the evidence for predicting response to Teriparatide in order to inform the debate on where best to use Teriparatide in an increasingly crowded therapeutic landscape.

Role of bone-forming agents in the management of osteoporosis

Recent evidence confirms the superiority of osteoanabolic therapy compared to anti-remodeling drugs for rapid improvement in bone density and fracture risk reduction, providing strong justification for the use of these anabolic agents as the initial therapy in high-risk patients, to be followed by anti-remodeling therapy. This review will highlight the results of recent studies and define the current status of osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis.

[Long-term treatment concepts for osteoporosis]

Die Notwendigkeit einer Langzeittherapie bei Osteoporose, eine teils eingeschränkte Compliance, aber auch die Möglichkeit von erheblichen Nebenwirkungen bei einer pharmakologischen Osteoporosetherapie beschäftigen sowohl die medizinischen Richtlinien als auch die Betroffenen in vielfacher Weise. In dieser Übersicht wird auf den Stand der zur Verfügung stehenden Osteoporosepharmazeutika und die aktuellen wissenschaftlich fundierten Grundlagen einer langjährigen Anwendung, das potenzielle Monitoring und mögliche Therapieänderungen mit dem spezifischen Augenmerk auf künftige Entwicklungen eingegangen.

The effects of teriparatide and bisphosphonates on new fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To systematically evaluate the efficacy of teriparatide and bisphosphonates in preventing fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide and bisphosphonates for osteoporosis treatment. Searches were performed without language restrictions and included studies from beginning of time to March 2019. Two authors independently screened and extracted the selected article. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane system evaluation method. Data were extracted and analysed using RevMan 5.2 software.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs were included for a total of 2990 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Of these, 1515 patients were treated with teriparatide and 1475 were treated with bisphosphonates. After pooling the data of 9 studies, there were significant differences between teriparatide and bisphosphonates [relative risk (RR): 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.51, 0.74)] in the prevention of fractures according to different follow-up durations (P < .05), whatever alendronate [RR: 0.51, 95% CI (0.27, 0.95)] and other bisphosphonates [RR: 0.63, 95% CI (0.51, 0.77)]. In addition, we found significant differences between teriparatide and bisphosphonates in the prevention of vertebral fractures [RR: 0.47, 95% CI (0.35, 0.64)] and non-vertebral fractures [RR: 0.76, 95% CI (0.58,0.99)]. There were no significant differences in adverse effects between teriparatide and bisphosphonates [RR: 0.89, 95% CI (0.76, 1.03)].

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of our meta-analysis, teriparatide was better than bisphosphonates in preventing fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis both in the short-term and long-term follow-up periods. Teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. These drugs did not differ in terms of their adverse effects. More high-quality studies are needed to compare other factors such as costs and adverse reactions.

Recent developments towards closing the gap in osteoporosis management

Background

A fracture that occurs in people with low bone mass in the setting of minimal trauma—such as a fall from standing height—meets the criteria for the clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis and qualifies this particular individual for being at high risk of further fractures, particularly in the first 2 years after the index fracture. Therefore, it is vital to identify those individuals at very high and high fracture risk with the potential of instantly starting osteoporosis therapy.

Main body

Currently, there are unmet needs in the management of bone fragility and fracture prevention. Therefore, re-stratification of the people according to their risk of fracture, and, also, identify what is and is not achievable using different osteoporosis therapies, represent a major step forward. In 2020, the dichotomisation of high risk into high and very high-risk categories, which represent a new concept in osteoporosis assessment, was published by the IOF and the ESCEO. This coincided with proliferation of the available therapies with different modes of action and new therapeutic targets for treating osteoporosis. Fear of complications, even though rare, associated with long-term bisphosphonates and the positive impact of osteoanabolic agents on fracture reduction and bone quality, have changed the prescribing patterns and paved the way for sequential and combined therapy.

Conclusion

The incorporation of recent concepts in osteoporosis and the development of new interventional thresholds have positive implication on strategies for osteoporotic patients’ diagnosis and management.

Combination Therapy of PTH and Antiresorptive Drugs on Osteoporosis: A Review of Treatment Alternatives

Antiresorptive drugs have been widely used for osteoporosis. Intermittent parathyroid hormone (PTH), an anabolic agent, increases osteoblast production rate and inhibits apoptosis of osteoblasts, thus increasing skeletal mass besides improving bone microarchitecture and strength. Combination therapy for osteoporosis produced great interests and controversies. Therefore, we performed a systematic literature search from PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINDHL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the search terms PTH or teriparatide combined with bisphosphonate, alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, raloxifene, denosumab, and zoledronic acid with the limit osteoporosis. At last, 36 related articles were included for further analysis. Findings from previous studies revealed that combination therapy in different conditions of naive or previous bisphosphonate treatment might have different outcomes. The use of combination therapy, however, may be an alternative option among osteoporotic patients with a history of bisphosphonate use. Combined teriparatide with denosumab appear to show the most substantial and clinically relevant skeletal benefits to osteoporotic patients. Additional research is necessary to define optimal methods of developing sequential and/or cyclical combinations of PTH and antiresorptive agents.

Pharmacological Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: a Level I Evidence Based - Expert Opinion

Objectives: Postmenopausal osteoporosis carries a high risk of fractures, which decrease quality of life and are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and economic burden. The best pharmacological treatment options to manage and prevent osteoporotic fractures remain still unclear. The present study investigated the efficacy and safety of the most commonly employed drugs in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Methods: Only RCTs comparing different drugs for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis were included. Data from 76 RCTs (205,011 patients) were collected. The mean follow-up was 27.6 ± 14.9 months. Results: Denosumab reported the lowest rate of non-vertebral fractures (LOR -1.57), Romosozumab the lowest rate of vertebral fractures (LOR 1.99), and Ibandronate the lowest rate of hip fractures (LOR0.18). Serious adverse events resulted in the lowest in the Raloxifene group (LOR 3.11), while those leading to study discontinuation were lowest in the Romosozumab cohort (LOR 2.65). Conclusions: Denosumab resulted in most effective, particularly in reducing the occurrence of non-vertebral fractures. Romosozumab and Ibandronate resulted best to prevent, respectively, vertebral fractures and hip fractures. Adverse events leading to study discontinuation were less frequent in the Romosozumab and Denosumab groups, while Raloxifene and Alendronate showed a lower incidence of serious adverse events overall. Level of evidence: I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs.

[Different Perspectives of Drug Holiday and Combination Therapies When Treating Osteoporosis]

Different Perspectives of Drug Holiday and Combination Therapies When Treating Osteoporosis Abstract. Sequential and combined therapy for osteoporosis is challenging because of the many options, and difficult because robust fracture data are not available, especially for combination therapies, mostly because the studies are too small. The principle of sequential and combined therapy for osteoporosis is that osteoanabolic therapy (teriparatide [TPTD]), whether sequential or combined, leads to an increase in bone mineral density (BMD), especially in the lumbar spine. The only exception is the sequence of TPTD after denosumab (Dmab), which leads to a loss (transient) of BMD in both the lumbar spine and the hip; for this reason, this sequence should be avoided at all costs. A second principle is that the stronger and longer the antiresorptive pretreatment was, the more delayed and reduced the effect of osteoanabolic therapy (TPTD). A third principle is the need for antiresorptive retreatment after therapies with TPTD and Dmab or their combination to prevent vertebral fractures (Dmab) and maintain bone density (TPTD). An effect of osteoanabolic therapy with TPTD on BMD of the hip is expected only in combination with antiresorptive therapy (bisphosphonates, Dmab). If the antiresorptive therapy is not continued, there is a transient loss in the first months of osteoanabolic monotherapy, the more so the stronger the antiresorptive pretreatment was.

Safety and Efficacy of Zoledronic Acid Treatment with and without Acetaminophen and Eldecalcitol for Osteoporosis

Objectives We aimed to investigate the safety of zoledronic acid (ZOL) combined with acetaminophen (APAP) regarding both the adverse events and the efficacy of ZOL combined with an eldecalcitol (ELD) in a randomized clinical trial conducted in patients with primary osteoporosis. Methods A total of 109 patients were administered ZOL 5 mg and then were randomly assigned to the following groups (3:2:1): those treated with ZOL, those treated with ZOL combined with APAP and ELD, and those treated with ZOL combined with ELD. For the analyses, the groups were classified into four treatment groups: patients treated with APAP (APAP group) and without APAP (non-APAP group), and those treated with ELD (ELD group) and without ELD (non-ELD group). The incidence rates of symptomatic adverse events were compared between the APAP and non-APAP groups, and the efficacy was compared between the ELD and non-ELD groups. Results In the APAP and non-APAP groups, the incidence rates of symptomatic adverse events were 20.6% and 44.6% (p=0.009), respectively. Age and APAP use were found to be significant factors associated with adverse events. The percent changes in the bone mineral density values from baseline (ΔBMD) in the ELD and non-ELD groups at 12 months were 8.2% and 6.2% for the lumbar spine, 4.2% and 4.0% for the total hip, and 3.9% and 2.2% for the femoral neck, respectively. The ΔBMD of all sites did not differ significantly between the ELD and non-ELD groups. Conclusion In ZOL treatment, the co-administration of APAP should thus be considered as a therapeutic option to reduce the occurrence of symptomatic adverse events stemming from ZOL treatment in Japanese patients with primary osteoporosis, particularly in younger patients.

Emerging insights into the comparative effectiveness of anabolic therapies for osteoporosis

Over the past three decades, the mainstay of treatment for osteoporosis has been antiresorptive agents (such as bisphosphonates), which have been effective with continued administration in lowering fracture risk. However, the clinical landscape has changed as adherence to these medications has declined due to perceived adverse effects. As a result, decreases in hip fracture rates that followed the introduction of bisphosphonates have now levelled off, which is coincident with a decline in the use of the antiresorptive agents. In the past two decades, two types of anabolic agents (including three new drugs), which represent a novel approach to improving bone quality by increasing bone formation, have been approved. These therapies are expected to lead to a new clinical paradigm in which anabolic agents will be used either alone or in combination with antiresorptive agents to build new bone and reduce fracture risk. This Review examines the mechanisms of action for these anabolic agents by detailing their receptor-activating properties for key cell types in the bone and marrow niches. Using these advances in bone biology as context, the comparative effectiveness of these anabolic agents is discussed in relation to other therapeutic options for osteoporosis to better guide their clinical application in the future.

Parathyroid hormone (1-34) can reverse the negative effect of valproic acid on the osseointegration of titanium rods in ovariectomized rats

Objective

The present work was aimed to evaluate the effect of valproic acid (VPA)，Parathyroid hormone (1–34) (PTH)+VPA on Ti rods osseointegration in ovariectomized rats and further investigation of the possible mechanism.

Methods

The MC3T3-E1 cells were co-cultured with VPA，PTH ​+ ​VPA and induced to osteogenesis, and the cell viability，mineralization ability were observed by MTT and ALP staining，Alizarin Red staining and Western blotting. Twelve weeks after bilateral ovariectomy, all animals were randomly divided into four groups: group OVX and VPA，PTH ​+ ​VPA, and all the rats received Ti implants and animals belong to group VPA，PTH ​+ ​VPA received valproic acid (300 ​mg/day), valproic acid (300 ​mg/day) plus Parathyroid hormone (1–34) every 3 days (60 ​μg/kg), respectively, treatment until death at 12 weeks. Micro-CT, histology, biomechanical testing, bone metabolism index and Reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) analysis were used to observe the therapeutic effect and explore the possible mechanism.

Results

Results shown that VPA decreased new bone formation around the surface of titanium rods and push-out force other than group OVX. Histology, Micro-CT and biochemical analysis results showed combined application of systemic VPA showed harmful effects than OVX group on bone formation in osteopenia rats, with the worse effects on CTX-1, P1NP and microarchitecture as well as biomechanical parameters by down-regulated gene expression of Runx2, OCN, Smad1, BMP-2 and OPG, while up-regulated RANKL. However, after PTH treatment, the above indicators were significantly improved.

Conclusions

The present study suggests that systemic use of VPA may bring harm to the stability of titanium implants in osteoporosis, PTH can reverse the negative effect of VPA on the osseointegration of titanium rods in ovariectomized rats.

Translational potential of this article

According to our research, when patients with epilepsy have osteoporotic fractures, after joint replacement or internal fixation, continue to use sodium valproate for anti-epileptic therapy, the possibility of postoperative loosening increases, again on the basis of It can be reversed with the anti-osteoporosis drug parathyroid hormone (1-34).

Risk of New Vertebral Fracture and Combination Therapy with Zoledronic Acid and Teriparatide in Diabetic Patients after Percutaneous Kyphoplasty

Study Design

This was a retrospective clinical study.

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of combination therapy with zoledronic acid and teriparatide on the risk of new vertebral fracture (NVF) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients after percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP).

Overview of Literature

Although T2DM had been associated with bone fragility and increased fracture risk, it remains unknown whether patients with T2DM could expect similar benefit from the combination therapy with zoledronic acid and teriparatide following PKP.

Methods

Total 106 diabetic patients who had undergone PKP and had received anti-osteoporosis treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture were enrolled and allocated into the following two groups: group I (n=52, zoledronic acid) and group II (n=54, zoledronic acid plus teriparatide). The operating time, bone cement volume, and complications related to anti-osteoporosis treatment or PKP, if any, were recorded. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were assessed at admission, at discharge, and at the final follow-up. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan of the hip for the measurement of the bone mineral density (BMD) was performed preoperatively and at the final follow-up for all the patients.

Results

There was no significant difference in the age, body mass index, bone cement volume, or follow-up time of the groups. The mean follow-up duration was 22.5±1.6 months. All the patients had improved VAS and ODI, and group II had significantly better clinical outcomes than group I. All the patients had increased BMD at the latest follow-up, while group II exhibited significantly more improvement. The prevalence of NVF was lower in group II (11.5% vs. 7.4%, p=0.523). Male patients had a higher prevalence of NVF although the difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Combination therapy with zoledronic acid and teriparatide could improve the clinical outcomes, and BMD and had the potential to reduce NVF in diabetic patients following PKP.

Effects of bisphosphonates on osteoporosis: Focus on zoledronate

Osteoporosis is a bone disease that mainly affects older people and postmenopausal women. Lack of proper treatment for this disease gives rise to many problems in patients and occasionally leads to death. Many drugs have been utilized to treat osteoporosis but the most effective one is the bisphosphonates (BPs) family. This family has several positive effects on bone tissue, including promoting bone healing, enhancing bone mineral density, reducing bone resorption, preventing pathologic fractures, suppressing bone turnover, and modulating bone remodeling. On the other hand, there have also been inconclusive reports that BPs might have a desirable or even adverse impact on osteoporotic patients. Therefore, we set out to examine the positive and negative effects of this family, with a focus on the most potent one that is zoledronate (Zol), in clinical usage. Zoledronate is an amino-BPs and nitrogen-containing drug which is the most powerful BPs on osteoporosis treatment or prevention. Many studies showed its effectiveness in the treatment of osteoporosis and bone healing. As Zol enjoys a considerable potential in treating and preventing osteoporosis, it can be used as one of the effective treatments in this field.

Intermittent Parathyroid Hormone Accelerates Stress Fracture Healing More Effectively Following Cessation of Bisphosphonate Treatment

Parathyroid hormone (PTH) and bisphosphonates (BPs), including alendronate (ALN), have opposing effects on bone dynamics. The extent to which PTH remains effective in the treatment of stress fracture (SFx) in the presence of an ongoing BP treatment has not been tested. SFx was induced in 150 female Wistar rats, divided into five equal groups (n = 30). All rats were pretreated with ALN (1 μg/kg^-1/day^-1) for 14 days prior to SFx induction, followed by ALN cessation or continuation for the duration of the experiment; this was combined with daily PTH (8 μg/100 g^-1/day^-1) on SFx induction for 14 days, followed by cessation or continuation of ALN after SFx induction or an equivalent vehicle as a control. Ulnas were examined 2 weeks or 6 weeks following SFx. Two toluidine blue- and two tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-stained sections were examined for histomorphometric analysis using Osteomeasure software. There was a significant interaction between the effects of time and treatment type on the woven bone width and apposition rate, as well as an improvement in the woven bone architecture. However, woven bone variables remained unaffected by the cessation or continuation of ALN. Cessation of ALN increased osteoclast number when compared with the ALN-PTH continuation group (p = 0.006), and vehicle (p = 0.024) after 2 weeks. There was a significant interaction between the effects of time and treatment type on the number of osteoclasts per unit BMU area and length. The number of osteoclasts per unit BMU area and length was significantly greater in ALN cessation groups. It was concluded that intermittent short-duration iPTH treatment effectively increased remodeling of SFx with a concurrent BP treatment, provided that BP was ceased at the time of SFx. Our results could help develop shorter iPTH treatment protocols for the clinical management of SFxs and guide clinical decision-making to cease BP treatment in cases of SFx. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis with bone-forming and antiresorptive treatments: Combined and sequential approaches

Efficient therapies are available for the treatment of osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates and denosumab are the most commonly used antiresorptive therapies. Despite differences in the increase in bone mineral density seen with these drugs, the reductions in fracture risk are similar; 50-70%, 20%, and 40% for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, respectively. The bone-forming treatments; teriparatide and abaloparatide increase bone mineral density more than the antiresorptives and the reductions in fracture risk are 85% and 40-50% for vertebral and non-vertebral fractures, respectively, compared to placebo. The VERO study demonstrated a >50% reduction in vertebral and clinical fractures in women treated with teriparatide compared to risedronate. The dual-action treatment; romosozumab leads to more pronounced increases in BMD than other treatment modalities and reduces the risk of vertebral and clinical fractures by 73% and 36% compared to placebo after 12 months and the sequential treatment regime; romosozumab for 12 months followed by alendronate reduced the risk of vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures by 48%, 20% and 38%, respectively compared to alendronate after 2-3 years. The evidence for combination therapy targeting both resorption and formation is limited as only short-term studies with BMD as the endpoint have been performed. All bone-forming and dual-action treatments increase BMD and reduce the fracture risk, however, the effect wears off with time and treatment is therefore only temporary and should be followed by antiresorptive treatment with a bisphosphonate or denosumab. The sequence of treatment matters as the BMD response to teriparatide is reduced in patients previously treated with bisphosphonates; however, based on the findings of the VERO trial, the anti-fracture efficacy of bone-forming treatment in comparison with risedronate seems to be preserved after bisphosphonate therapy. The DATA study suggested that transitioning from denosumab to teriparatide is problematic due to the increase in bone resorption occurring after stopping denosumab. Studies have shown further improvements in BMD when transitioning from oral bisphosphonates to zoledronic acid or denosumab. Management of osteoporosis will in many patients include a long-term treatment plan. This will often include sequential therapy which in severe cases preferably should start with bone-forming followed by antiresorptive treatment. The severity of osteoporosis, reaching a treatment goal, and responding to treatment failure are important factors determining the treatment sequence in the individual patient.

High fracture risk patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis should get an anabolic treatment first

Long-term glucocorticoid (GC) therapy induces glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) and its associated fractures. Most specialty organizations recommend bisphosphonates as first-line therapies based only on bone mineral density efficacy data. Effective treatment of GIOP based on head-to-head trials with fracture endpoint has not yet been established. The pathophysiologic mechanisms of GIOP that lead to the detrimental effects on bone are not yet fully elucidated. Although GCs in an early and transitory period promote osteoclastic activity, in the current paper, we outline why GIOP is in fact a disease of the bone formation and then provide the rationale for the use of bone-forming agents as first-line therapy for patients with high fracture risk in GIOP.

Bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone analogs for improving bone quality in spinal fusion: State of evidence

Spinal fusion is among the most commonly performed surgical procedures for elderly patients with spinal disorders - including degenerative disc disease with spondylolisthesis, deformities, and trauma. With the large increase in the aging population and the prevalence of osteoporosis, the number of elderly osteoporotic patients needing spinal fusion has risen dramatically. Due to reduced bone quality, postoperative complications such as implant failures, fractures, post-junctional kyphosis, and pseudarthrosis are more commonly seen after spinal fusion in osteoporotic patients. Therefore, pharmacologic treatment strategies to improve bone quality are commonly pursued in osteoporotic cases before conducting spinal fusions. The two most commonly used pharmacotherapeutics are bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone (PTH) analogs. Evidence indicates that using bisphosphonates and PTH analogs, alone or in combination, in osteoporotic patients undergoing spinal fusion, decreases complication rates and improves clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to develop guidelines for the administration of bisphosphonates and PTH analogs in osteoporotic spinal fusion patients in terms of treatment duration, potential benefits of sequential use, and the selection of either therapeutic agents based on patient characteristics.

Zoledronate

Zoledronate is the most potent and most long-acting bisphosphonate in clinical use, and is administered as an intravenous infusion. Its major uses are in osteoporosis, Paget's disease, and in myeloma and cancers to reduce adverse skeletal related events (SREs). In benign disease, it is a first- or second-line treatment for osteoporosis, achieving anti-fracture efficacy comparable to that of the RANKL blocker, denosumab, over 3 years, and it reduces fracture risk in osteopenic older women. It is the preferred treatment for Paget's disease, achieving higher rates of remissions which are much more prolonged than with any other agent. Some trials have suggested that it reduces mortality, cardiovascular disease and cancer, but these findings are not consistent across all studies. It is nephrotoxic, so should not be given to those with significant renal impairment, and, like other potent anti-resorptive agents, can cause hypocalcemia in patients with severe vitamin D deficiency, which should be corrected before administration. Its most common adverse effect is the acute phase response, seen in 30-40% of patients after their first dose, and much less commonly subsequently. Clinical trials in osteoporosis have not demonstrated increases in osteonecrosis of the jaw or in atypical femoral fractures. Observational databases are currently inadequate to determine whether these problems are increased in zoledronate users. Now available as a generic, zoledronate is a cost-effective agent for fracture prevention and for management of Paget's disease, but wider provision of infusion facilities is important to increase patient access. There is a need to further explore its potential for reducing cancer, cardiovascular disease and mortality, since these effects could be substantially more important than its skeletal actions.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS/AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF POSTMENOPAUSAL OSTEOPOROSIS-2020 UPDATE

Objective: The development of these guidelines is sponsored by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) Board of Directors and American College of Endocrinology (ACE) Board of Trustees and adheres with published AACE protocols for the standardized production of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Methods: Recommendations are based on diligent reviews of the clinical evidence with transparent incorporation of subjective factors, according to established AACE/ACE guidelines for guidelines protocols. Results: The Executive Summary of this 2020 updated guideline contains 52 recommendations: 21 Grade A (40%), 24 Grade B (46%), 7 Grade C (14%), and no Grade D (0%). These detailed, evidence-based recommendations allow for nuance-based clinical decision-making that addresses multiple aspects of real-world care of patients. The evidence base presented in the subsequent Appendix provides relevant supporting information for the Executive Summary recommendations. This update contains 368 citations: 123 (33.5%) evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 132 (36%) EL 2 (intermediate), 20 (5.5%) EL 3 (weak), and 93 (25%) EL 4 (lowest). New or updated topics in this CPG include: clarification of the diagnosis of osteoporosis, stratification of the patient according to high-risk and very-high-risk features, a new dual-action therapy option, and transitions from therapeutic options. Conclusion: This guideline is a practical tool for endocrinologists, physicians in general, regulatory bodies, health-related organizations, and interested laypersons regarding the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis. Abbreviations: 25(OH)D = 25-hydroxyvitamin D; AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; AFF = atypical femoral fracture; ASBMR = American Society for Bone and Mineral Research; BEL = best evidence level; BMD = bone mineral density; BTM = bone turnover marker; CI = confidence interval; CPG = clinical practice guideline; CTX = C-terminal telopeptide type-I collagen; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; EL = evidence level; FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration; FRAX® = Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; GI = gastrointestinal; HORIZON = Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic acid ONce yearly Pivotal Fracture Trial (zoledronic acid and zoledronate are equivalent terms); ISCD = International Society for Clinical Densitometry; IU = international units; IV = intravenous; LSC = least significant change; NOF = National Osteoporosis Foundation; ONJ = osteonecrosis of the jaw; PINP = serum amino-terminal propeptide of type-I collagen; PTH = parathyroid hormone; R = recommendation; ROI = region of interest; RR = relative risk; SD = standard deviation; TBS = trabecular bone score; VFA = vertebral fracture assessment; WHO = World Health Organization.

Comparison between teriparatide and bisphosphonates for improving bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of teriparatide and bisphosphonates in managing postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials that were published before April 2018 and compared teriparatide and bisphosphonates in treating postmenopausal osteoporosis. Stata 12.0 was used for the meta-analysis. The pooled risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed effects or random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The teriparatide group was associated with a lower total occurrence of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-0.77; P = .001) and nonvertebral fractures (RR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.46-0.90; P = .009) than the bisphosphonate group. Moreover, compared with the bisphosphonate group, the teriparatide group had improved bone mineral density at the lumbar spine and femoral neck at the final follow-up (P < .05). There was no significant difference between the teriparatide and bisphosphonate groups in terms of complications (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.90, 1.22, P = .516).

CONCLUSIONS

Teriparatide significantly reduced the occurrence of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in osteoporosis patients. More studies should focus on the quality of life of patients using these 2 drugs.