Higher response with bone mineral density increase with monthly injectable ibandronate 1 mg compared with oral risedronate in the MOVER study

Risk factors for nonresponse to 2 years of denosumab administration in patients with osteoporosis: A retrospective single-center cohorts study

Background and Aims

To investigate the factors associated with changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and the incidence of fractures in osteoporotic patients treated with denosumab.

Methods

This retrospective study included 162 osteoporotic patients treated with denosumab for 24 months between 2013 and 2019. Patients were divided according to the changes in BMD as nonresponders (NL group: <3% increase in lumbar spine BMD [LBMD], NH group: <0% increase in femoral neck BMD [FNBMD]) or responders (RL group: ≥3% increase in LBMD, RH group: ≥0% increase in FNBMD).

Results

The respective changes in the LBMD and FNBMD after 24 months of denosumab treatment were 9.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.1-10.6) and 3.3% (95% CI: 2.1-4.5). Twenty-eight (17.3%) patients were in the NL group, and 134 (82.7%) were in the RL group. A history of bisphosphonate treatment was a risk factor for being in the NL group (odds ratio [OR]: 3.84, 95% CI: 1.38-10.71, p = 0.007; adjusted OR: 3.21, 95% CI: 1.01-10.19, p = 0.048). Although the NH (n = 48; 30.8%) and RH (n = 108; 69.2%) groups had similar baseline characteristics, the NH group had a significantly higher baseline FNBMD than the RH group (p = 0.003). The change in FNBMD was negatively associated with the FNBMD at baseline (r = -0.34, p < 0.001). No new osteoporotic fractures occurred in either group during follow-up.

Conclusion

In osteoporotic patients receiving denosumab treatment, a history of bisphosphonate treatment was a risk factor for a lack of increase in LBMD, and a higher FNBMD at baseline was negatively associated with the change in FNBMD.

Bone Mineral Density After Transitioning From Denosumab to Alendronate

CONTEXT

There are few studies on patients transitioning from denosumab to bisphosphonates.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate patient characteristics and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) after transitioning from denosumab to alendronate.

DESIGN

Randomized, open-label, 2-year crossover Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction (DAPS) study (NCT00518531).

SETTING

25 study centers in the US and Canada.

PATIENTS

Treatment-naïve postmenopausal women with BMD T-scores from -2.0 to -4.0.

INTERVENTIONS

This post hoc analysis evaluated women randomized to subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg every 6 months in year 1 followed by once-weekly oral alendronate 70 mg in year 2.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

A 3% BMD threshold identified participants who lost, maintained, or gained BMD in year 2 on alendronate.

RESULTS

Of 126 participants randomized to denosumab, 115 (91%) transitioned to alendronate in year 2. BMD increased by 3% to 6% with denosumab in year 1 and by 0% to 1% with alendronate in year 2. After transitioning to alendronate, most participants maintained or increased BMD; 15.9%, 7.6%, and 21.7% lost BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck, respectively. Few participants fell below their pretreatment baseline BMD value; this occurred most often in those who lost BMD in year 2. Women who lost BMD with alendronate in year 2 also showed a greater percent change in BMD with denosumab in year 1. The BMD change in year 2 was similar regardless of baseline characteristics or adherence to oral alendronate.

CONCLUSION

Alendronate can effectively maintain the BMD gains accrued after 1 year of denosumab in most patients, regardless of baseline characteristics.

Effectiveness of monthly intravenous ibandronate on the low responders to oral bisphosphonate: the MOVEMENT study

The MOVEMENT study was designed to assess the effectiveness of monthly intravenous ibandronate on bone mineral density (BMD) in daily clinical practice in Japanese patients with primary osteoporosis whose lumbar spine BMD did not increase despite oral bisphosphonate therapy. This study was a multicenter, prospective, interventional study (52 sites; August 2015 to March 2018). Patients aged ≥ 50 years with primary osteoporosis, evaluated as low responders to oral bisphosphonate treatment for 1-3 years, continued on their existing oral bisphosphonate or switched to monthly intravenous ibandronate (1 mg) for 12 months. The primary endpoint was change in lumbar spine BMD from baseline to 12 months in the intravenous ibandronate group (IV IBN). A total of 240 and 141 patients were enrolled in the IV IBN and oral bisphosphonate groups (OBP), respectively. At 12 months, a significant increase in mean percent change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD was observed in the IV IBN (2.70%). This change was also significant at 6 months (1.92%). Similarly, the change in total hip BMD showed a significant increase at 12 months (0.78%). In the IV IBN, the responder rate, percentage of patient whose change from baseline of lumbar spine BMD has greater than 0%, for lumbar spine BMD was high at both 6 (72.3%, 141/195 patients) and 12 (78.0%, 145/186 patients) months. No new safety concerns were observed in either treatment group. Treatment with intravenous ibandronate significantly increased lumbar spine BMD without any new safety concerns in Japanese patients with osteoporosis who showed low response to existing oral bisphosphonates.

A prospective comparative study of intravenous alendronate and ibandronate for the treatment of osteoporosis

RATIONALE

Few comparative studies have evaluated the differences between intravenous alendronate (ALN) and ibandronate (IBN) in patients with osteoporosis. This study was to compare the effects of these 2 drugs on bone mineral density (BMD), bone metabolic markers, and adverse events in patients with osteoporosis.

PATIENT CONCERNS

Seventy-eight subjects were assigned to the ALN group and 66 to the IBN group.

DIAGNOSES

The diagnosis of osteoporosis was based on BMD values of the femoral neck or lumbar spine less than -2.5 SD below the reference values.

INTERVENTIONS

This study was designed as a 52-weeks, prospective, non-randomized study involving a parallel-group comparison between intravenous ALN and intravenous IBN in elderly women with osteoporosis.

OUTCOMES

The non-switched-IBN subgroup showed significant decrease in serum collagen type I cross-linked telopeptide (NTX) at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline, and the decrease in NTX were significantly greater in the non-switched-IBN subgroup than in the non-swithed-ALN subgroup. BMD in the lumbar spine in the non-switched-IBN subgroup showed a significant increase at 12 months and the increase in BMD were significantly larger than in the non-switched-ALN subgroup.

LESSONS

Intravenou IBN might result in a significantly greater increase of BMD and decrease in NTX, but it had a higher incidence of adverse drug reactions than ALN.

Monthly oral ibandronate 100 mg is as effective as monthly intravenous ibandronate 1 mg in patients with various pathologies in the MOVEST study

The non-inferiority of oral ibandronate 100 mg to intravenous (i.v.) ibandronate 1 mg in increasing lumbar spine (LS) bone mineral density (BMD) after 12 months of treatment was demonstrated in the randomized, phase III MOVEST study. We conducted subgroup analyses in the per-protocol set of the study (n = 183 oral ibandronate; n = 189 i.v. ibandronate). In patients with LS BMD T score ≥ -3.0 or < -3.0 at screening, LS BMD gains from baseline were 4.42 and 5.79%, respectively, with oral ibandronate, and 4.60 and 5.83%, respectively, with i.v. ibandronate. LS BMD gains in patients with or without prevalent vertebral fractures were 5.21 and 5.23%, respectively, with oral ibandronate, and 5.01 and 5.49%, respectively, with i.v. ibandronate. In patients aged <75 or ≥75 years, LS BMD gains were 5.46 and 4.51%, respectively, with oral ibandronate, and 5.25 and 5.77%, respectively, with i.v. ibandronate. LS BMD gains in patients with baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels ≥20 or <20 ng/mL were 5.35 and 4.76%, respectively, with oral ibandronate, and 5.05 and 6.57%, respectively, with i.v. ibandronate. Similar results were obtained in patients with or without prior bisphosphonate (BP) treatment, and in those receiving osteoporosis drug treatment other than BPs. In conclusion, oral ibandronate 100 mg demonstrated comparable BMD gains with monthly i.v. ibandronate, and thus shows high utility in the lifestyle and disease conditions associated with osteoporosis in Japanese patients.

Zoledronate treatment has different effects in mouse strains with contrasting baseline bone mechanical phenotypes

Two strains of mice with distinct bone morphologies and mechanical properties were treated with zoledronate. Our results show a different response to drug treatment in the two strains providing evidence that baseline properties of structure/material may influence response to zoledronate.

INTRODUCTION

Bisphosphonates are highly effective in reducing fracture risk, yet some individuals treated with these agents still experience fracture. The goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that genotype influences the effect of zoledronate on bone mechanical properties.

METHODS

Skeletally mature male mice from genetic backgrounds known to have distinct baseline post-yield properties (C57/B6, high post-yield displacement; A/J, low post-yield displacement) were treated for 8 weeks with saline (VEH) or zoledronate (ZOL, 0.06 mg/kg subcutaneously once every 4 weeks) in a 2 × 2 study design. Ex vivo μCT and mechanical testing (4-pt bending) were conducted on the femur to assess morphological and mechanical differences.

RESULTS

Significant drug and/or genotype effects were found for several mechanical properties and significant drug × genotype interactions were found for measures of strength (ultimate force) and brittleness (total displacement, strain to failure). Treatment with ZOL affected bone biomechanical measures of brittleness (total displacement (-25 %) and strain to failure (-23 %)) in B6 mice significantly differently than in A/J mice. This was driven by unique drug × genotype effects on bone geometry in B6 animals yet likely also reflected changes to the tissue properties.

CONCLUSION

These data may support the concept that properties of the bone geometry and/or tissue at the time of treatment initiation play a role in determining the bone's mechanical response to zoledronate treatment.