Early adverse events after the first administration of zoledronic acid in Japanese patients with osteoporosis

Safety and effectiveness of once-yearly zoledronic acid in Japanese osteoporosis patients: three-year post-marketing surveillance

INTRODUCTION

Zoledronic acid (5 mg; ZOL), a once-yearly bisphosphonate, reduces osteoporotic fractures and increases bone mineral density (BMD). This 3-year post-marketing surveillance examined its real-world safety and effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, observational study included patients who started ZOL for osteoporosis. Data were assessed at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months for safety and effectiveness. Treatment persistence, potentially related factors, and persistence before and after the COVID-19 pandemic started were also investigated.

RESULTS

The safety analysis and effectiveness analysis sets included 1406 and 1387 patients, respectively, with mean age of 76.5 years. Adverse reactions (ARs) occurred in 19.35% of patients, with an acute-phase reaction in 10.31, 1.01, and 0.55% after the first, second, and third ZOL infusions. Renal function-related ARs, hypocalcaemia, jaw osteonecrosis, and atypical femoral fracture occurred in 1.71, 0.43, 0.43, and 0.07% of patients, respectively. Three-year cumulative fracture incidences were 4.44% for vertebral, 5.64% for non-vertebral, and 9.56% for clinical fractures. BMD increased by 6.79, 3.14, and 1.78% at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, respectively, after 3-year treatment. Bone turnover markers remained within reference ranges. Treatment persistence was 70.34% over 2 years and 51.71% over 3 years. Male, age ≥ 75 years, no previous medicines for osteoporosis, no concomitant medicines for osteoporosis, and inpatient at the first infusion were related to discontinuation. There was no significant difference in the persistence rate between before and after the COVID-19 pandemic (74.7% vs. 69.9%; p = 0.141).

CONCLUSION

This 3-year post-marketing surveillance confirmed the real-world safety and effectiveness of ZOL.

Predicting the acute-phase response fever risk in bisphosphonate-naive osteoporotic patients receiving their first dose of zoledronate

INTRODUCTION

To devise a precise and efficient tool for predicting the individualized risk of acute-phase response (APR) in bisphosphonate (BP)-naive osteoporotic (OP) patients, receiving their first intravenous dose of zoledronate (ZOL).

METHODS

The baseline clinical and laboratory data of 475 consecutive BP-naive OP patients, who received their first intravenous dose of ZOL between March 2016 and March 2021 in the Affiliated Kunshan Hospital of Jiangsu University, were chosen for analysis. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were generated to establish candidate predictors of APR fever risk, using three distinct fever thresholds, namely, 37.3 °C (model A), 38.0 °C (model B), and 38.5 °C (model C). Next, using predictor regression coefficients, three fever-threshold nomograms were developed. Discrimination, calibration, and clinical usefulness of each predicting models were then assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve (CC), and decision curve analysis (DCA). The internal and external model validations were then performed.

RESULTS

The stable predictors were age, serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D, serum total calcium, and peripheral blood erythrocytes count. These were negatively associated with the APR fever risk. The AUCs of models A, B, and C were 0.828 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.782 to 0.874), 0.825 (95% CI, 0.767 to 0.883), and 0.879 (95% CI, 0.824 to 0.934), respectively. Good agreement was observed between the predictions and observations in the CCs of all three nomograms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed and validated nomogram prediction models that can predict APR fever risk in BP-naive OP patients receiving their first infusion of ZOL.

Safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the older adults with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

Denosumab is a newly approved treatment for osteoporosis in China. However, the clinical safety and advantages of denosumab have not been much established. The current study evaluates the real-world safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in treating cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis to provide clinical settings guidelines.

PURPOSE

A head-to-head comparison of the safety profiles between denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months) and zoledronic acid (5 mg, intravenously yearly) was performed in cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for cohort studies comparing the safety of denosumab and zoledronic acid in cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis till December 2021. The outcomes included the risk of fracture and other severe adverse events. Based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.0.2, we identified the eligible studies.

RESULTS

Three cohort studies having 38,845 cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older were included in the study. The results showed that denosumab was not superior to zoledronic acid in reducing fracture risk [RR (95% CI): 1.05 (0.90, 1.23), P = 0.52]. However, denosumab had a low risk of composite cardiovascular disease [RR (95% CI): 0.82 (0.70, 0.96), P = 0.01]. There were no significant differences between the hazards of serious infection, and total adverse events (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis demonstrated that for cancer-free adults aged 50 years or older with osteoporosis, denosumab was as safe as zoledronic acid for the risk of drug-induced fractures. However, denosumab had a lower incidence of composite cardiovascular disease, and may be a better option for the population with cardiovascular disease. Nonetheless, due to limitations like a short-term follow-up, gender, and incomplete types of adverse effects, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are required to further verify this conclusion.

Tolerability of the first infusion of once-yearly zoledronic acid within one to two weeks after hip fracture surgery

OBJECTIVE

Once-yearly infusions of zoledronic acid (ZA) 5 mg may be optimal for secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture (HF), but there are crucial side effects of ZA. This study assessed the tolerability of the first infusion of once-yearly ZA within one to two weeks after HF surgery and to identify risk factors for acute-phase reactions (APRs) and the decrease in serum calcium (Ca) concentration.

METHODS

We analyzed 84 patients (average age: 83 years, 18 men and 66 women) who met the inclusion criteria. The patients underwent the first infusion of ZA one to two weeks after HF surgery and received antipyretic analgesics and active vitamin D analog.

RESULTS

APRs occurred in ten patients (11.9%) and all these patients had pyrexia (>37.5 °C) and/or other symptoms. The asymptomatic hypocalcemia (serum Ca < 8.3 mg/dL) incidence was 6.0% at 7 days after ZA infusion. Compared with female patients without APRs, female patients with APRs had significantly higher levels of serum 25-dihydroxyvitamin D at baseline and serum C-reactive protein on the day ZA was administered (day 0). Multiple linear regression analyses showed that serum level of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-5b were significantly associated with an absolute decrease in serum corrected Ca from day 0 to day 7.

CONCLUSIONS

The first infusion of ZA within one to two weeks after HF surgery was well tolerated with the combined use of antipyretic analgesics and active vitamin D analog. Higher inflammatory condition after surgery which is more likely sensitized by ZA administration may increase the risk of APRs, and high bone turnover may increase hypocalcemia risk.