The effect of risedronate treatment on serum cytokines in postmenopausal osteoporosis: a 6-month randomized and controlled study

Efficacy of combination therapy of vitamin D and bisphosphonates in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

There is currently no consensus on whether the combination therapy of Vitamin D (VitD) and bisphosphonates offers superior efficacy compared to monotherapy in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The aim of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis of recent relevant research to synthesize the available evidence and further investigate whether the combined use of VitD and bisphosphonates is superior to monotherapy in treating osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Methods and results

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of monotherapy with VitD or bisphosphonates versus their combination therapy in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, up to 1 February 2024. The articles were independently screened and relevant data were extracted by two investigators. The changes in mean values and percentage changes for bone resorption markers, bone formation markers, bone mineral density, and bone mineral metabolism markers were expressed using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was quantitatively described using the I2 test. Subsequently, sensitivity analyses were performed for data with significant heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the type of monotherapy used, and potential publication bias was assessed. The analysis revealed that the combination of VitD and bisphosphonates demonstrated a more pronounced effect in increasing alkaline phosphatase (ALP), 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OH-VD), and serum calcium (sCa) levels, as well as in decreasing levels of serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (sBALP), serum C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (sCTX), and urinary N-telopeptide of type I collagen (UriNTX) compared to the monotherapy group. However, the combination of VitD and bisphosphonates did not show a significant advantage over monotherapy in terms of improving osteocalcin levels. The differences in the mean changes in osteocalcin, UriNTX, and sCa, as well as the percentage changes in parathyroid hormone (PTH) were not statistically significant (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

The meta-analysis suggests that compared to monotherapy, the combination therapy of VitD and bisphosphonates exhibits a more favorable effect on bone mineral density and bone calcium metabolism-related markers in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/PROSPERO.

Cytokine-mediated immunomodulation of osteoclastogenesis

Cytokines are an important set of proteins regulating bone homeostasis. In inflammation induced bone resorption, cytokines, such as RANKL, TNF-α, M-CSF, are indispensable for the differentiation and activation of resorption-driving osteoclasts, the process we know as osteoclastogenesis. On the other hand, immune system produces a number of regulatory cytokines, including IL-4, IL-10 and IFNs, and limits excessive activation of osteoclastogenesis and bone loss during inflammation. These unique properties make cytokines powerful targets as rheostat to maintain bone homeostasis and for potential immunotherapies of inflammatory bone diseases. In this review, we summarize recent advances in cytokine-mediated regulation of osteoclastogenesis and provide insights of potential translational impact of bench-side research into clinical treatment of bone disease.

Risedronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration leading to increased fracture risk. Risedronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts. This is an update of a Cochrane Review that was originally published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures for postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk for fractures, respectively.

SEARCH METHODS

With broader and updated strategies, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase. A grey literature search, including the online databases ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and drug approval agencies, as well as bibliography checks of relevant systematic reviews was also performed. Eligible trials published between 1966 to 24 March 2021 were identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Participants must have received at least one year of risedronate, placebo or other anti-osteoporotic drugs, with or without concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. In the interest of clinical relevance and applicability, we classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled more than one of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, low bone mineral density (BMD)T score ≤ -2.5, and age ≥ 75 years old. If none of these criteria was met, the study was considered to be primary prevention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We pooled the relative risk (RR) of fractures using a fixed-effect model based on the expectation that the clinical and methodological characteristics of the respective primary and secondary prevention studies would be homogeneous, and the experience from the previous review suggesting that there would be a small number of studies. The base case included the data available for the longest treatment period in each placebo-controlled trial and a >15% relative change was considered clinically important. The main findings of the review were presented in summary of findings tables, using the GRADE approach. In addition, we looked at benefit and harm comparisons between different dosage regimens for risedronate and between risedronate and other anti-osteoporotic drugs.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three trials fulfilled the eligibility criteria, among which 33 studies (27,348 participants) reported data that could be extracted and quantitatively synthesized. We had concerns about particular domains of risk of bias in each trial. Selection bias was the most frequent concern, with only 24% of the studies describing appropriate methods for both sequence generation and allocation concealment. Fifty per cent and 39% of the studies reporting benefit and harm outcomes, respectively, were subject to high risk. None of the studies included in the quantitative syntheses were judged to be at low risk of bias in all seven domains. The results described below pertain to the comparisons for daily risedronate 5 mg versus placebo which reported major outcomes. Other comparisons are described in the full text. For primary prevention, low- to very low-certainty evidence was collected from four studies (one to two years in length) including 989 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Risedronate 5 mg/day may make little or no difference to wrist fractures [RR 0.48 ( 95% CI 0.03 to 7.50; two studies, 243 participants); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 7% more)] and withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.18; three studies, 748 participants); ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 5% fewer to 1% more)], based on low-certainty evidence. However, its preventive effects on non-vertebral fractures and serious adverse events are not known due to the very low-certainty evidence. There were zero clinical vertebral and hip fractures reported therefore the effects of risedronate for these outcomes are not estimable.  For secondary prevention, nine studies (one to three years in length) including 14,354 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided evidence. Risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fractures [RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.90; six studies, 12,173 participants); RRR 20% (95% CI 10% to 28%) and ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 3% fewer), moderate certainty], and may reduce hip fractures [RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.94); RRR 27% (95% CI 6% to 44%) and ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 0.2% fewer to 1% fewer), low certainty]. Both of these effects are probably clinically important. However, risedronate's effects are not known for wrist fractures [RR 0.64 (95% CI 0.33 to 1.24); three studies,1746 participants); ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more), very-low certainty] and not estimable for clinical vertebral fractures due to zero events reported (low certainty). Risedronate results in little to no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; eight studies, 9529 participants); ARR 0.3% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more); 16.9% in risedronate versus 17.2% in control, high certainty] and probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events [RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.07; six studies, 9435 participants); ARR 0% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 2% more; 29.2% in both groups, moderate certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update recaps the key findings from our previous review that, for secondary prevention, risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fracture, and may reduce the risk of hip fractures. We are uncertain on whether risedronate 5mg/day reduces clinical vertebral and wrist fractures.  Compared to placebo, risedronate probably does not increase the risk of serious adverse events.  For primary prevention, the benefit and harms of risedronate were supported by limited evidence with high uncertainty.

Differentiating the causes of adynamic bone in advanced chronic kidney disease informs osteoporosis treatment

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased fracture risk because of impaired bone quality and quantity. Low bone mineral density predicts fracture risk in all CKD stages, including advanced CKD (CKD G4-5D). Pharmacological therapy improves bone mineral density and reduces fracture risk in moderate CKD. Its efficacy in advanced CKD remains to be determined, although pilot studies suggest a positive effect on bone mineral density. Currently, antiresorptive agents are the most commonly prescribed drugs for the prevention and therapy of osteoporosis. Their use in advanced CKD has been limited by the lack of large clinical trials and fear of causing kidney dysfunction and adynamic bone disease. In recent decades, adynamic bone disease has evolved as the most predominant form of renal osteodystrophy, commonly associated with poor outcomes, including premature mortality and progression of vascular calcification. Evolving evidence indicates that reduction of bone turnover by parathyroidectomy or pharmacological therapies, such as calcimimetics and antiresorptive agents, are not associated with premature mortality or accelerated vascular calcification in CKD. In contrast, chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, malnutrition, and diabetes can induce low bone turnover and associate with poor prognosis. Thus, the conditions causing suppression of bone turnover rather than the low bone turnover per se may account for the perceived association with outcomes. Anabolic treatment, in contrast, has been suggested to improve turnover and bone mass in patients with advanced CKD and low bone turnover; however, uncertainty about safety even exceeds that of antiresorptive agents. Here, we critically review the pathophysiological concept of adynamic bone disease and discuss the effect of low bone turnover on the safety and efficacy of anti-osteoporosis pharmacotherapy in advanced CKD.

The effect of bisphosphonate treatment on osteoclast precursor cells in postmenopausal osteoporosis: The TRIO study

Bisphosphonates are used to treat bone disease characterised by increased bone resorption by inhibiting the activity of mature osteoclasts, resulting in decreased bone turnover. Bisphosphonates may also reduce the population of osteoclast precursor cells. Our aims were to investigate the effect of bisphosphonates on i) osteoclast precursor cells and ii) circulating cytokine and cytokine receptor in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis compared with healthy premenopausal women. Participants were 62 postmenopausal women (mean age 66) from a 48-week parallel group trial of bisphosphonates. They received ibandronate 150mg/month (n=22), alendronate 70mg/week (n=19) or risedronate 35mg/week (n=21). Fasting blood was collected at baseline, weeks 1 and 48. At baseline, blood was also collected from 25 healthy premenopausal women (mean age 37) to constitute a control group. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were extracted and stained for CD14, M-CSFR, CD11b and TNFRII receptors. Flow cytometry was used to identify cells expressing CD14⁺ and M-CSFR⁺ or CD11b⁺ or TNFRII⁺. RANKL and OPG were measured to evaluate potential mediation of the bisphosphonate effect. After 48weeks of treatment, there was a decrease in the percentage of cells expressing M-CSFR and CD11b receptors by 53% and 49% respectively (p<0.01). Cells expressing M-CSFR and CD11b were decreased with ibandronate and risedronate after 48weeks to the lower part of the premenopausal reference interval. These effects were not significantly different between each of the treatment groups. There was no significant effect on RANKL and OPG throughout the study period. Bisphosphonates inhibit bone resorption in the short-term by direct action on mature osteoclasts. There is also a later effect mediated in part by a reduction in the population of circulating osteoclast precursors.

The role of IL-1β in the bone loss during rheumatic diseases

Several inflammatory diseases have been associated with increased bone resorption and fracture rates and different studies supported the relation between inflammatory cytokines and osteoclast activity. The main factor required for osteoclast activation is the stimulation by receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL) expressed on osteoblasts. In this context, interleukin- (IL-) 1β, one of the most powerful proinflammatory cytokines, is a strong stimulator of in vitro and in vivo bone resorption via upregulation of RANKL that stimulates the osteoclastogenesis. The resulting effects lead to an imbalance in bone metabolism favouring bone resorption and osteoporosis. In this paper, we review the available literature on the role of IL-1β in the pathogenesis of bone loss. Furthermore, we analysed the role of IL-1β in bone resorption during rheumatic diseases and, when available, we reported the efficacy of anti-IL-1β therapy in this field.

Effects of bisphosphonate treatment on circulating osteogenic endothelial progenitor cells in postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether bisphosphonates modulate vascular calcification by a modification in endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) coexpressing osteoblastic surface markers and genes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a double-blind, randomized study of 20 healthy, early postmenopausal women (from February 1, 2008, through July 31, 2008) treated with placebo or risedronate sodium (35 mg/wk) for 4 months. Peripheral blood was collected at baseline and 4 months to determine serum inflammatory markers, osteoprotegerin, and receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand levels and bone turnover markers. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were stained for EPC surface markers (CD34, CD133, and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor/kinase insert domain receptor) and osteoblast markers (osteocalcin, alkaline phosphatase, and Stro-1).

RESULTS

Risedronate treatment resulted in a significant down-regulation of gene sets for osteoblast differentiation and proliferation in EPCs with a trend of decreasing EPCs coexpressing osteocalcin.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that bisphosphonate treatment down-regulates the expression of osteogenic genes in EPCs and suggest a possible mechanism by which bisphosphonates may inhibit vascular calcification.

The effect of risedronate treatment on serum osteoprotegerin and bone marker levels in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effect of risedronate treatment on osteoprotegerin (OPG), C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTX), osteocalcin (OC), and deoxypyridinoline (DPD).

METHODS

Eighty postmenopausal osteoporotic patients were randomized into two groups. In first group, patients received 35?mg of risedronate once a week and calcium with vitamin D per day. In second group, patients received only calcium with vitamin D per day. Bone turnover markers were measured at baseline, 1st, 3rd and 6th month.

RESULTS

OPG levels were significantly reduced at 1st and 6th month of treatment in both groups, but no statistically significant difference was detected between groups. In the group treated with risedronate, difference in CTX level was observed at 3rd month of treatment, while a difference in DPD and OC levels were observed at 6th month of treatment. The baseline OPG levels correlated with age, menopause duration, and CTX levels. There was no correlation between OPG levels and the levels of the other markers during treatment.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that using risedronate in treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis causes no specific changes in OPG levels; therefore, in contrast to some of the studies in the literature OPG may not be useful marker in monitoring of bisphosphonate.

Relationship between serum RANKL and RANKL in bone

It is now well accepted that the molecule receptor activator of NFκB ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin play key roles in regulating physiological and pathological bone turnover. There are a large number of published reports of circulating RANKL levels in both health and pathology. However, interpretation of these data has been elusive, and the relationship between circulating RANKL and RANKL levels in bone is still not clear. This review explores this subject, documenting the possible origins of circulating RANKL and suggesting additional information that is required before serum RANKL levels can provide useful diagnostic or research information.

Levels of osteoprotegerin (OPG) and receptor activator for nuclear factor kappa B ligand (RANKL) in serum: are they of any help?

The coupling of bone formation and resorption is mediated through the OPG/RANK/RANKL system. OPG and RANKL are mainly produced by osteoblasts but also a variety of other tissues. The binding of RANKL to RANK, its natural receptor which is expressed by osteoclasts, accelerates bone resorption. OPG acts as decoy receptor and prevents the interaction of RANKL with RANK and therefore leads to a decrease in activity, survival and proliferation of osteoclasts. Since assays for measurements of serum OPG and RANKL have become commercially available, intense research focused on serum OPG/RANKL levels in context with underlying disease, age, co-morbidities, bone density, and fractures has derived. This review aims to provide an overview if and to which extent serum OPG and RANKL levels may reflect bone metabolism in patients with osteoporosis and metabolic bone disease.