Risk of fracture with thiazolidinediones: disease or drugs?

Thiazolidinedione derivatives: emerging role in cancer therapy

Cancer remains the leading cause of death worldwide, with the Globocan 2022 study reporting an estimated 9.7 million cancer deaths. Without the selectivity built for tumour cells, chemotherapeutic agents could be toxic to non-cancerous cells. Administration of such non-selective cytotoxic compounds causes severe side effects and could lead to death. Improved cancer treatments are required to overcome the limitations of the current cancer treatment. The potential of thiazolidinedione derivatives as anticancer drugs has recently drawn attention, despite their primary use as insulin sensitizers in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The ability of thiazolidinedione derivatives to alter important molecular pathways implicated in carcinogenesis, such as cell proliferation, apoptosis, angiogenesis, Raf kinase, EGFR and HER-2 kinases, HDAC, COX-2 enzyme and metastasis, is highlighted in this review, which examines the growing relevance of these compounds in cancer treatment. Thiazolidinediones have anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and antiproliferative properties in a variety of cancer types, including breast, colon, and prostate cancers, via activating the peroxisome proliferator-activated gamma receptor (PPARγ). In addition to examining the safety profile and difficulties in clinical translation, the paper looks at preclinical and clinical research that points to these medicines potential to improve the effectiveness of immunotherapy and chemotherapy. This review highlights the encouraging therapeutic possibilities and structure-activity relationship insight of TZDs for their anticancer activity and highlights the molecular level facets of the 'glitazone' pharmacophore for its anticancer activity.

Thiazolidinedione as a Promising Medicinal Scaffold for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Thiazolidinediones, also known as glitazones, are considered as biologically active scaffold and a well-established class of anti-diabetic agents for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Thiazolidinediones act by reducing insulin resistance through elevated peripheral glucose disposal and glucose production. These molecules activate peroxisome proliferated activated receptor (PPARγ), one of the sub-types of PPARs, and a diverse group of its hybrid have also shown numerous therapeutic activities along with antidiabetic activity.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to collect and summarize the research related to the medicinal potential, structure-activity relationship and safety aspects of thiazolidinedione analogues designed and investigated in type 2 diabetes during the last two decades.

METHODS

The mentioned objective was achieved by collecting and reviewing the research manuscripts, review articles, and patents from PubMed, Science Direct, Embase, google scholar and journals related to the topic from different publishers like Wiley, Springer, Elsevier, Taylor and Francis, Indian and International government patent sites etc. Results: The thiazolidinedione scaffold has been a focus of research in the design and synthesis of novel derivatives for the management of type 2 diabetes, specifically in the case of insulin resistance. The complications like fluid retention, idiosyncratic hepatotoxicity, weight gain and congestive heart failure in the case of trosiglitazone, and pioglitazone have restricted their use. The newer analogues have been synthesized by different research groups to attain better efficacy and less side effects.

CONCLUSION

Thus, the potential of thiazolidinediones in terms of their chemical evolution, action on nuclear receptors, aldose reductase and free fatty acid receptor 1 is well established. The newer TZD analogues with better safety profiles and tolerability will soon be available in the market for common use without further delay.

Agonist-controlled competition of RAR and VDR nuclear receptors for heterodimerization with RXR is manifested in their DNA binding

We found previously that nuclear receptors (NRs) compete for heterodimerization with their common partner, retinoid X receptor (RXR), in a ligand-dependent manner. To investigate potential competition in their DNA binding, we monitored the mobility of retinoic acid receptor (RAR) and vitamin D receptor (VDR) in live cells by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy. First, specific agonist treatment and RXR coexpression additively increased RAR DNA binding, while both agonist and RXR were required for increased VDR DNA binding, indicating weaker DNA binding of the VDR/RXR dimer. Second, coexpression of RAR, VDR, and RXR resulted in competition for DNA binding. Without ligand, VDR reduced the DNA-bound fraction of RAR and vice versa, i.e., a fraction of RXR molecules was occupied by the competing partner. The DNA-bound fraction of either RAR or VDR was enhanced by its own and diminished by the competing NR's agonist. When treated with both ligands, the DNA-bound fraction of RAR increased as much as due to its own agonist, whereas that of VDR increased less. RXR agonist also increased DNA binding of RAR at the expense of VDR. In summary, competition between RAR and VDR for RXR is also manifested in their DNA binding in an agonist-dependent manner: RAR dominates over VDR in the absence of agonist or with both agonists present. Thus, side effects of NR-ligand-based (retinoids, thiazolidinediones) therapies may be ameliorated by other NR ligands and be at least partly explained by reduced DNA binding due to competition. Our results also complement the model of NR action by involving competition both for RXR and for DNA sites.

Glucose-Lowering Drugs and Fracture Risk-a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with increased fracture risk. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of different classes of glucose-lowering drugs on fracture risk in patients with type 2 DM. The heterogeneity of the included studies did not allow formal statistical analyses.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sixty studies were included in the review. Metformin, dipeptidylpeptidase-IV inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2-inhibitors do not appear to increase fracture risk. Results for insulin and sulphonylureas were more disparate, although there may be an increased fracture risk related to hypoglycemia and falls with these treatments. Glitazones were consistently associated with increased fracture risk in women, although the evidence was sparser in men. New glucose-lowering drugs are continuously being developed and better understanding of these is leading to changes in prescription patterns. Our findings warrant continued research on the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on fracture risk, elucidating the class-specific effects of these drugs.

Drugs Causing Bone Loss

Drugs may cause bone loss by lowering sex steroid levels (e.g., aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer, GnRH agonists in prostate cancer, or depot medroxyprogestone acetate - DMPA), interfere with vitamin D levels (liver inducing anti-epileptic drugs), or directly by toxic effects on bone cells (chemotherapy, phenytoin, or thiazolidinedions, which diverts mesenchymal stem cells from forming osteoblasts to forming adipocytes). However, besides effects on the mineralized matrix, interactions with collagen and other parts of the unmineralized matrix may decrease bone biomechanical competence in a manner that may not correlate with bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual energy absorptiometry (DXA).Some drugs and drug classes may decrease BMD like the thiazolidinediones and consequently increase fracture risk. Other drugs such as glucocorticoids may decrease BMD, and thus increase fracture risk. However, glucocorticoids may also interfere with the unmineralized matrix leading to an increase in fracture risk, not mirrored in BMD changes. Some drugs such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), paracetamol, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may not per se be associated with bone loss, but fracture risk may be increased, possibly stemming from an increased risk of falls stemming from effects on postural balance mediated by effects on the central nervous system or cardiovascular system.This paper performs a systematic review of drugs inducing bone loss or associated with fracture risk. The chapter is organized by the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification.

Diabetes pharmacotherapy and effects on the musculoskeletal system

Persons with type 1 or type 2 diabetes have a significantly higher fracture risk than age-matched persons without diabetes, attributed to disease-specific deficits in the microarchitecture and material properties of bone tissue. Therefore, independent effects of diabetes drugs on skeletal integrity are vitally important. Studies of incretin-based therapies have shown divergent effects of different agents on fracture risk, including detrimental, beneficial, and neutral effects. The sulfonylurea class of drugs, owing to its hypoglycemic potential, is thought to amplify the risk of fall-related fractures, particularly in the elderly. Other agents such as the biguanides may, in fact, be osteo-anabolic. In contrast, despite similarly expected anabolic properties of insulin, data suggests that insulin pharmacotherapy itself, particularly in type 2 diabetes, may be a risk factor for fracture, negatively associated with determinants of bone quality and bone strength. Finally, sodium-dependent glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors have been associated with an increased risk of atypical fractures in select populations, and possibly with an increase in lower extremity amputation with specific SGLT2I drugs. The role of skeletal muscle, as a potential mediator and determinant of bone quality, is also a relevant area of exploration. Currently, data regarding the impact of glucose lowering medications on diabetes-related muscle atrophy is more limited, although preclinical studies suggest that various hypoglycemic agents may have either aggravating (sulfonylureas, glinides) or repairing (thiazolidinediones, biguanides, incretins) effects on skeletal muscle atrophy, thereby influencing bone quality. Hence, the therapeutic efficacy of each hypoglycemic agent must also be evaluated in light of its impact, alone or in combination, on musculoskeletal health, when determining an individualized treatment approach. Moreover, the effect of newer medications (potentially seeking expanded clinical indication into the pediatric age range) on the growing skeleton is largely unknown. Herein, we review the available literature regarding effects of diabetes pharmacotherapy, by drug class and/or by clinical indication, on the musculoskeletal health of persons with diabetes.

DPP-4 inhibitor impedes lipopolysaccharide-induced osteoclast formation and bone resorption in vivo

OBJECTIVES

Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibition is a new therapeutic strategy for type 2 diabetic patients. DPP-4 has been reported to enhance inflammation. However, the effect of DPP-4 inhibition on inflammation remains unknown. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is a strong inducer of inflammation and osteoclast formation. In this study, we investigated in vivo effects of DPP-4 inhibition on LPS-induced osteoclast formation and bone resorption, as well as in vitro effects of DPP-4 inhibition on RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis and TNF-α-induced osteoclastogenesis.

METHODS

LPS with or without a DPP-4 inhibitor was subcutaneously injected into mouse calvaria for 5 days. Histological sections of calvaria were stained for tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase, and osteoclast numbers were determined. The ratio of calvaria bone resorption was evaluated via microfocal computed tomography reconstruction images.

RESULTS

Osteoclast number and bone resorption were significantly lower in mice that underwent LPS and DPP-4 inhibitor co-administration than in those that underwent LPS administration alone. Moreover, RANKL, TNF-α, and M-CSF expression was reduced in the LPS and DPP-4 inhibitor co-administration group. In vitro, there were no direct effects of DPP-4 inhibitor or DPP-4 on RANKL- and TNF-α-induced osteoclastogenesis, or on LPS-induced RANKL expression in stromal cells. Nevertheless, macrophages from LPS and DPP-4 inhibitor co-administered mice exhibited lower TNF-α expression than macrophages from LPS-only mice. Notably, TNF-α expression was not reduced in LPS and DPP-4 inhibitor co-treated macrophages in vitro, compared with macrophages treated with LPS alone.

The Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Exendin-4 Inhibits Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Osteoclast Formation and Bone Resorption via Inhibition of TNF-α Expression in Macrophages

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are an effective treatment approach for type 2 diabetes. Recently, anti-inflammatory effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists have also been reported. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induces inflammation and osteoclast formation. In this study, we investigated the effect of exendin-4, a widely used GLP-1 receptor agonist, in LPS-induced osteoclast formation and bone resorption. LPS with or without exendin-4 was administered on mouse calvariae by daily subcutaneous injection. The number of osteoclasts, the ratio of bone resorption pits, and the level of C-terminal cross-linked telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) were significantly lower in LPS- and exendin-4-coadministered mice than in mice administered with LPS alone. RANKL and TNF-α mRNA expression levels were lower in the exendin-4- and LPS-coadministered group than in the LPS-administered group. Our in vitro results showed no direct effects of exendin-4 on RANKL-induced osteoclast formation, TNF-α-induced osteoclast formation, or LPS-induced RANKL expression in stromal cells. Conversely, TNF-α mRNA expression was inhibited in the exendin-4- and LPS-cotreated macrophages compared with cells treated with LPS alone. These results indicate that the GLP-1 receptor agonist exendin-4 may inhibit LPS-induced osteoclast formation and bone resorption by inhibiting LPS-induced TNF-α production in macrophages.

Ketoacidosis associated with SGLT2 inhibitor treatment: Analysis of FAERS data

BACKGROUND

Regulatory agencies have concluded that sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors lead to ketoacidosis, but published literature on this point remains controversial.

METHODS

We searched the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) for reports of acidosis in patients treated with canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin (from the date of each drug's FDA approval until May 15, 2015). We compared the number of SGLT2 inhibitor-related reports to reports of acidosis in patients treated with the 2 most commonly used DPP4 inhibitors: sitagliptin and saxagliptin. We estimated relative risks of acidosis by relating the number of reports to cumulative drug sales (a surrogate for patient exposure).

RESULTS

FAERS contained 259 reports of acidosis (including 192 reports of ketoacidosis) for SGLT2 inhibitors compared with 477 reports of acidosis for DPP4 inhibitors (including 71 reports of ketoacidosis). Based on estimated patient exposure, the overall risk of developing acidosis was ~14-fold higher for SGLT2 inhibitors. Among 51 SGLT2 inhibitor-related reports with quantifiable metabolic information, 20 cases occurred in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), 25 in type 2 diabetes (T2D), and 6 in patients with unspecified type of diabetes. After excluding patients with T1D and focusing on patients identified as having T2D, we estimate that SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with ~7-fold increase in developing acidosis. Seventy-one percent had euglycemic ketoacidosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the FDA's warning that SGLT2 inhibitors lead to ketoacidosis, as evidenced by an increased reporting rate for acidosis above that in a comparator population treated with DPP4 inhibitors.

Thiazolidinedione drugs in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: past, present and future

Thiazolidinedione (TZD) drugs used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have proven effective in improving insulin sensitivity, hyperglycemia, and lipid metabolism. Though well tolerated by some patients, their mechanism of action as ligands of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) results in the activation of several pathways in addition to those responsible for glycemic control and lipid homeostasis. These pathways, which include those related to inflammation, bone formation, and cell proliferation, may lead to adverse health outcomes. As treatment with TZDs has been associated with adverse hepatic, cardiovascular, osteological, and carcinogenic events in some studies, the role of TZDs in the treatment of T2DM continues to be debated. At the same time, new therapeutic roles for TZDs are being investigated, with new forms and isoforms currently in the pre-clinical phase for use in the prevention and treatment of some cancers, inflammatory diseases, and other conditions. The aims of this review are to provide an overview of the mechanism(s) of action of TZDs, a review of their safety for use in the treatment of T2DM, and a perspective on their current and future therapeutic roles.

Fracture Risk Assessment in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus, both type 1 and type 2 (T2DM), is associated with decreased bone strength as well as increased fracture risk. Bone mineral density is decreased in type 1 diabetes but increased in T2DM, compared with controls. This suggests alterations in bone quality are a major player in the pathogenesis of fragility fractures in patients with diabetes. The link between diabetes and bone appears to be mediated by complex pathways, including the insulin-insulin growth factors system, accumulation of advanced glycation end-products in bone collagen, microangiopathy, and increased bone marrow fat content. Bone fragility in T2DM, which is not reflected by bone mineral density and bone mass reduction, depends on deterioration of bone quality. Also, at least in T2DM, the classical diagnosis of osteoporosis by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and the fracture risk estimation by FRAX (fracture risk assessment tool) are only partially useful in assessing fracture risk. Trabecular bone score and trabecular bone score-adjusted FRAX offer an enhanced estimation of fracture risk in these patients. Specific risk stratification criteria are needed in the future. The development of improved methods to assess the material properties of bone to better characterize fracture risk is also a priority. Adequate glycemic control is generally associated with decreased fracture risk, with the exception of specific antidiabetics (thiazolidinediones, canagliflozin) that have been shown to have a detrimental effect. Most currently used antiosteoporotic treatments seem equally effective in diabetic patients as compared with patients without diabetes, but clinical data regarding the reduction in fracture risk specifically in patients with diabetes mellitus are lacking.

The Effect of Polymorphisms in SPP1 on Risk of Fracture: A Case-Control Study

Background

The purpose of the study was to investigate the correlation between rs4754 and rs6840362 polymorphisms of secreted phosphoprotein 1 (SPP1) gene and fracture risk.

Material/Methods

rs4754 and rs6840362 were genotyped by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) in 130 patients with fracture and 107 healthy controls matched with the former by age and sex. Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) was assessed in the control group based on the genotype distributions of SSP1 poylmorphisms. The differences in genotype, allele, and haplotype frequencies between cases and controls were detected by the chi-square test, and the relative risk of fracture is expressed by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The linkage disequilibrium (LD) and haplotype analyses were conducted with HaploView software.

Results

The TT genotype in rs4754 had significant difference in patients with fracture and controls (10.77% and 4.59%, P=0.04) and the results showed that people carrying TT genotype of rs4754 were more susceptible to fractures than CC genotype carriers (OR=3.00, 95%CI=1.02–8.89). The T allele also had 1.54 times higher risk of fractures (OR=1.54, 95%CI=1.04–2.30), but this was not true for the rs6840362 polymorphism. LD between the 2 polymorphisms and haplotype C-T (rs6840362-rs4754) increased the susceptibility to fracture (OR=2.01, 95%CI=1.23–3.28).

Conclusions

SPP1 rs4754 polymorphism may be related to risk of fracture, but not rs6840362.

Oral anti-diabetic drugs and fracture risk, cut to the bone: safe or dangerous? A narrative review

Fracture risk is higher in older adults with type 2 diabetes and may be influenced by treatments for diabetes. Oral anti-diabetic drugs have different effects on bone metabolism. The purpose of this review is to describe the effects of these drugs on bone metabolism and fracture risk. Osteoporosis is a progressive skeletal disorder that is characterized by compromised bone strength and increased risk of fracture. This condition has become an important global health problem, affecting approximately 200 million people worldwide. Another chronic and highly prevalent condition is diabetes mellitus, which affects more than 380 million people; both type 1 and type 2 diabetes are risk factors for fracture. Type 2 diabetes, in particular, is associated with impaired bone strength, although it is characterized by normal or elevated bone mineral density. Several therapeutic strategies are available to achieve the best outcomes in the management of diabetes mellitus but these have different effects on bone metabolism. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the effects of oral hypoglycemic agents (metformin, sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, meglitinides, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-dependent glucose transporter 2 inhibitors) on bone metabolism and on the risk of developing fragility fractures in patients with type 2 diabetes. Both diabetes and osteoporosis represent a significant burden in terms of healthcare costs and quality of life. It is very important to choose therapies for diabetes that ensure good metabolic control whilst preserving skeletal health.

Bone fracture risk is not associated with the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a population-based cohort analysis

Glucagon-like Peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-ra) are a relatively new class of anti-hyperglycemic drugs which may positively affect bone metabolism and thereby decrease (osteoporotic) bone fracture risk. Data on the effect of GLP1-ra on fracture risk are scarce and limited to clinical trial data only. The aim of this study was to investigate, in a population-based cohort, the association between the use of GLP1-ra and bone fracture risk. We conducted a population-based cohort study, with the use of data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database (2007-2012). The study population (N = 216,816) consisted of all individuals with type 2 diabetes patients with at least one prescription for a non-insulin anti-diabetic drug and were over 18 years of age. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio of fracture in GLP1-ra users versus never-GLP1-ra users. Time-dependent adjustments were made for age, sex, lifestyle, comorbidity and the use of other drugs. There was no decreased risk of fracture with current use of GLP1-ra compared to never-GLP1-ra use (adjusted HR 0.99, 95 % CI 0.82-1.19). Osteoporotic fracture risk was also not decreased by current GLP1-ra use (adjusted HR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.72-1.32). In addition, stratification according to cumulative dose did not show a decreased bone fracture risk with increasing cumulative GLP1-ra dose. We showed in a population-based cohort study that GLP1-ra use is not associated with a decreased bone fracture risk compared to users of other anti-hyperglycemic drugs. Future research is needed to elucidate the potential working mechanisms of GLP1-ra on bone.

Comparative analysis of therapeutic efficiency and costs (experience in Bulgaria) of oral antidiabetic therapies based on glitazones and gliptins

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a serious, chronic, progressive and widespread disease. Metformin is the most commonly prescribed initial therapy, but combination with other antidiabetic agents usually becomes necessary due to the progression of the disease. Pioglitazone is recommended as a second-line therapy because of its strong antihyperglycemic effect and its ability to reduce insulin resistance. Treatment with pioglitazone is associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular complications and hypoglycemia, while simultaneously improving the lipid profile and the symptomatic and histological changes in the liver. Gliptins (sitagliptin and vildagliptin) are a new class of oral antidiabetic drugs which reduce glycated hemoglobin by a different mechanism. Although the efficacy of sitagliptin and vildagliptin is close to that of pioglitazone, the lack of long-term safety data and the higher price question their predominant use. The objective of this review is to highlight the advantages of mono- and combination therapy with pioglitazone in comparison with gliptins and to underline the inconsistencies in the medicinal and reimbursement policy in Bulgaria.

Use of metformin and survival of diabetic women with breast cancer

Objective: This study was set out to determine whether metformin use influences survival in breast cancer patients treated with antidiabetic drugs as compared to non-users.

Research Design and Methods: We used data from the Danish national registries (1996-2008) to identify adult female patients diagnosed with breast cancer who were prescribed antidiabetic medication. We performed multivariate Cox-proportional hazard regression to assess all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality risks associated with metformin exposure. In a secondary analysis, we stratified use of metformin according to the cumulative number of prescriptions.

Results: Of the 1058 breast cancer patients 349 died during follow-up, with breast cancer listed as the primary cause of death for 152 cases. Compared to non-use, current metformin treatment was associated with a significant reduction in overall mortality (adjusted HR 0.74, 95% CI, 0.58-0.96). For breast cancer-specific mortality, a non-significant risk reduction (adjusted HR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.59-1.29) was observed, which became significant after stratification according to cumulative number of prescriptions. An increased risk of both overall and breast cancer-specific mortality was observed in the first 12 months after discontinuation of metformin.

Conclusions: We observed a nonsignificant reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality associated with metformin exposure among breast cancer patients treated with antidiabetic drugs. However, our findings suggest that long-term metformin use may have a beneficial effect on survival in patients with breast cancer. Further confirmation of these findings is needed.

Contemporary risk of hip fracture in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a national registry study from Scotland

The purpose of this study was to compare contemporary risk of hip fracture in type 1 and type 2 diabetes with the nondiabetic population. Using a national diabetes database, we identified those with type 1 and type 2 diabetes who were aged 20 to 84 years and alive anytime from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2007. All hospitalized events for hip fracture in 2005 to 2007 for diabetes patients were linked and compared with general population counts. Age- and calendar-year-adjusted incidence rate ratios were calculated by diabetes type and sex. One hundred five hip fractures occurred in 21,033 people (59,585 person-years) with type 1 diabetes; 1421 in 180,841 people (462,120 person-years) with type 2 diabetes; and 11,733 hip fractures over 10,980,599 person-years in the nondiabetic population (3.66 million people). Those with type 1 diabetes had substantially elevated risks of hip fracture compared with the general population incidence risk ratio (IRR) of 3.28 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.52-4.26) in men and 3.54 (CI 2.75-4.57) in women. The IRR was greater at younger ages, but absolute risk difference was greatest at older ages. In type 2 diabetes, there was no elevation in risk among men (IRR 0.97 [CI 0.92-1.02]) and the increase in risk in women was small (IRR 1.05 [CI 1.01-1.10]). There remains a substantial elevation relative risk of hip fracture in people with type 1 diabetes, but the relative risk is much lower than in earlier studies. In contrast, there is currently little elevation in overall hip fracture risk with type 2 diabetes, but this may mask elevations in risk in particular subgroups of type 2 diabetes patients with different body mass indexes, diabetes duration, or drug exposure.

The future of thiazolidinedione therapy in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Since their approval, thiazolidinediones (TZDs) have been used extensively as insulin-sensitizers for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Activation of peroxisomal proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) nuclear receptors by TZDs leads to a vast spectrum of metabolic and antiinflammatory effects. In the past decade, clinicians and scientists across the fields of metabolism, diabetes, liver disease (NAFLD), atherosclerosis, inflammation, infertility, and even cancer have had high hopes about the potential for TZDs to treat many of these diseases. However, an increasing awareness about undesirable "off-target" effects of TZDs have made us rethink their role and be more cautious about the long-term benefits and risks related to their use. This review examines the most relevant work on the benefits and risks associated with TZD treatment, with a focus on the only PPARγ agonist currently available (pioglitazone), aiming to offer the reader a balanced overview about the current and future role of TZDs in the management of insulin-resistant states and T2DM.

Risk of fracture with thiazolidinediones: an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of thiazolidinediones (TZDs) has been associated with increased fracture risks. Our aim was to estimate the risk of fracture with TZDs in three different healthcare registries, using exactly the same study design, and to perform an individual patient data meta-analysis of these three studies.

METHODS

Population-based cohort studies were performed utilizing the British General Practice Research Database (GPRD), the Dutch PHARMO Record Linkage System (RLS), and the Danish National Health Registers. In all three databases, the exposed cohort consisted of all patients (aged 18+) with at least one prescription of antidiabetic (AD) medication. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of fracture. The total period of follow-up for each patient was divided into periods of current exposure and past exposure, with patients moving between current and past use.

RESULTS

In all three registries, the risk of fracture was increased for women who were exposed to TZDs: HR 1.48 (1.37-1.60) in GPRD, HR 1.35 (1.15-1.58) in PHARMO, and HR 1.22 (1.03-1.44) in Denmark. Combining the data in an individual patient data meta-analysis resulted, for women, in a 1.4-fold increased risk of any fracture for current TZD users versus other AD drug users [adj. HR 1.44 (1.35-1.53)]. For men, there was no increased fracture risk [adj. HR 1.05 (0.96-1.14)]. Risks were increased for fractures of the radius/ulna, humerus, tibia/fibula, ankle, and foot, but not for hip/femur or vertebral fractures. Current TZD users with more than 25 TZD prescriptions ever before had a 1.6-fold increased risk of fracture compared with other AD drug users [HR 1.59 (1.46-1.74)].

CONCLUSION

In this study, we consistently found a 1.2- to 1.5-fold increased risk of fractures for women using TZDs, but not for men, across three different healthcare registries. TZD users had an increased risk for fractures of the extremities, and risks further increased for prolonged users of TZDs.