A double-blind placebo-controlled study of intravenous clodronate for prevention of steroid-induced bone loss in inflammatory bowel disease

Bone loss in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: cause, detection and treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with bone loss leading to osteoporosis and increased fracture risk. Bone loss is the result of changes in the balanced process of bone remodeling. Immune cells and cytokines play an important role in the process of bone remodeling and it is therefore not surprising that cytokines as observed in IBD are involved in bone pathology. This review discusses the role of cytokines in IBD-associated bone loss, including the consequences for treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many studies have been conducted that showed the effect of a single cytokine on bone cells in vitro, including interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12/IL-23, IL-17, IL-18, IL-32 and interferon-γ. Recently new members of the IL-1 family (IL-1F) have been related to IBD but the consequences for bone health remain uncertain.

SUMMARY

Overall, patients have to deal with a cocktail of cytokines, present in their serum. The combination of cytokines can affect bone cells differently compared to the effects of a single cytokine. This implicates that treatment, focused on reducing the inflammation could work best for bone health as well. Vitamin D might also play a role in this.

Clodronate

Two early observations about the first generation bisphosphonate, clodronate, suggested that it would likely have clinical utility; specifically, it was a more potent anti-resorptive but a less potent inhibitor of mineralisation than its predecessor etidronate. The known mechanism of action differs from that of the later nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates, as clodronate is metabolised intracellularly to a toxic analog of adenosine triphosphate, AppCCl2p, which causes mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired cellular energy metabolism and osteoclast apoptosis. For pre-clinical studies in a variety of disease models, liposomal clodronate has become the agent of choice for macrophage depletion, for example in a recent study to enhance haematopoietic chimerism and donor-specific skin allograft tolerance in a mouse model. For clinical use, clodronate was developed in oral and injectable formulations; while poorly absorbed from the gastro-intestinal tract, its absorption at 1-3% of the administered dose is approximately three-fold higher than for nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. Following an early setback due to an erroneous association with toxic adverse events, a number of successful clinical studies have established clodronate, predominantly in its oral formulations, as a highly successful treatment in Paget's disease, hypercalcaemia (benign and malignant), multiple myeloma, and early or metastatic breast cancer. Novel uses in other disease areas, including veterinary use, continue to be explored.

Efficacy and safety of 18 anti-osteoporotic drugs in the treatment of patients with osteoporosis caused by glucocorticoid: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Glucocorticoids are widely used in a variety of diseases, especially autoimmune diseases and inflammatory diseases, so the incidence of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is high all over the world.

Objectives

The purpose of this paper is to use the method of network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of anti-osteoporosis drugs directly and indirectly, and to explore the advantages of various anti-osteoporosis drugs based on the current evidence.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) and compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs by NMA. The risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) are used as the influence index of discontinuous data, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% CI are used as the influence index of continuous data. The statistical heterogeneity was evaluated by the calculated estimated variance (τ²), and the efficacy and safety of drugs were ranked by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The main outcome of this study was the incidence of vertebral fracture after taking several different types of drugs, and the secondary results were the incidence of non-vertebral fracture and adverse events, mean percentage change of lumbar spine (LS) and total hip (TH)bone mineral density (BMD) from baseline to at least 12 months.

Results

Among the different types of anti-GIOP, teriparatide (SUCRA 95.9%) has the lowest incidence of vertebral fracture; ibandronate (SUCRA 75.2%) has the lowest incidence of non-vertebral fracture; raloxifene (SUCRA 98.5%) has the best effect in increasing LS BMD; denosumab (SUCRA 99.7%) is the best in increasing TH BMD; calcitonin (SUCRA 92.4%) has the lowest incidence of serious adverse events.

Conclusions

Teriparatide and ibandronate are effective drugs to reduce the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in patients with GIOP. In addition, long-term use of raloxifene and denosumab can increase the BMD of LS and TH.

Involvement of VNUT-exocytosis in transient receptor potential vanilloid 4-dependent ATP release from gastrointestinal epithelium

Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) modulates mechanosensitive vagal afferent nerves in the gastrointestinal tract. ATP is stored in secretory vesicles via the ATP transporter VNUT. Recently, the bisphosphate clodronate was reported to inhibit VNUT and was suggested to be a safe potent therapeutic option for chronic pain. Transient receptor potential vanilloid 4 (TRPV4) is activated by mechanical stimuli and some epoxyeicosatrienoic acids and becomes sensitized under inflammatory conditions. We have previously reported that TRPV4 and VNUT are expressed in mouse esophageal keratinocytes and that TRPV4 activation induces ATP release in gastric epithelial cells. Here we show the expression of TRPV4 and VNUT in normal human gastrointestinal cell derived cell lines (GES-1 and CCD 841) and in tissues from normal and VNUT-KO mice. TRPV4 agonists (GSK101 or 8,9-EET) induced an increase in cytosolic Ca²⁺ and/or current responses in mouse primary colonic epithelial cells and CCD 841 cells, but not in cells isolated from TRPV4-KO mice. TRPV4 agonists (GSK101 or 5.6-EET) also induced ATP release in GES-1 and CCD 841 cells, which could be blocked by the VNUT inhibitor, clodronate. Thus, VNUT inhibition with clodronate could represent a novel therapeutic option for visceral pain.

Bone Loss Prevention of Bisphosphonates in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of bisphosphonates in improving bone mineral density (BMD) and decreasing the occurrence rate of fractures and adverse events in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which use bisphosphonates in IBD patients were identified in PubMed, MEDLINE database, EMBASE database, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Databases between 1990 and June 2016. People received bisphosphonate or placebos with a follow-up of at least one year were also considered. STATA 12.0 software was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized clinical trials were included in the meta-analysis. The data indicated that the percentage change in the increased BMD in the bisphosphonates groups was superior to that of the control groups at the lumbar spine and total hip. At the femoral neck, there was no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of new fractures during follow-up showed significant reduction. The adverse event analysis revealed no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that bisphosphonates therapy has an effect on bone loss in patients with IBD but show no evident efficiency at increasing the incidence of adverse events.

Efficacy and safety of bisphosphonates in management of low bone density in inflammatory bowel disease: A meta-analysis

This study aims to determine whether bisphosphonates are safe, as well as effective against bone mineral loss in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A computerized search of electronic databases from 1966 to 2016 was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review to evaluate the role of bisphosphonates in the management of osteoporosis in IBD patients. A revised 7-point Jadad scale was used to evaluate the quality of each study. Overall, 13 RCTs and 923 patients met the inclusion criteria of this meta-analysis. The result showed that bisphosphonates decreased bone mass density (BMD) loss at the lumbar spine (P = 0.0002), reduced the risk of new fractures (P = 0.01), and retained the similar adverse events (P = 0.86). Bisphosphonates may provide protection and safety against bone mineral loss in IBD patients.

Bisphosphonates for steroid-induced osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1999. Corticosteroids are widely used in inflammatory conditions as an immunosuppressive agent. Bone loss is a serious side effect of this therapy. Several studies have examined the use of bisphosphonates in the prevention and treatment of glucocorticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) and have reported varying magnitudes of effect.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of GIOP in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase up to April 2016 and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) via OVID up to January 2012 for relevant articles and conference proceedings with no language restrictions. We searched two clinical trial registries for ongoing and recently completed studies (ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal). We also reviewed reference lists of relevant review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) satisfying the following criteria: 1) prevention or treatment of GIOP; 2) adults taking a mean steroid dose of 5.0 mg/day or more; 3) active treatment including bisphosphonates of any type alone or in combination with calcium or vitamin D; 4) comparator treatment including a control of calcium or vitamin D, or both, alone or with placebo; and 4) reporting relevant outcomes. We excluded trials that included people with transplant-associated steroid use.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'risk of bias' assessment and evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Major outcomes of interest were the incidence of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures after 12 to 24 months; the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and femoral neck after 12 months; serious adverse events; withdrawals due to adverse events; and quality of life. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 27 RCTs with 3075 participants in the review. Pooled analysis for incident vertebral fractures included 12 trials (1343 participants) with high-certainty evidence and low risk of bias. In this analysis 46/597 (or 77 per 1000) people experienced new vertebral fractures in the control group compared with 31/746 (or 44 per 1000; range 27 to 70) in the bisphosphonate group; relative improvement of 43% (9% to 65% better) with bisphosphonates; absolute increased benefit of 2% fewer people sustaining fractures with bisphosphonates (5% fewer to 1% more); number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) was 31 (20 to 145) meaning that approximately 31 people would need to be treated with bisphosphonates to prevent new vertebral fractures in one person.Pooled analysis for incident nonvertebral fractures included nine trials with 1245 participants with low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and serious risk of bias as a patient-reported outcome). In this analysis 30/546 (or 55 per 1000) people experienced new nonvertebral fracture in the control group compared with 29/699 (or 42 per 1000; range 25 to 69) in the bisphosphonate group; relative improvement of 21% with bisphosphonates (33% worse to 53% better); absolute increased benefit of 1% fewer people with fractures with bisphosphonates (4% fewer to 1% more).Pooled analysis on BMD change at the lumbar spine after 12 months included 23 trials with 2042 patients. Eighteen trials with 1665 participants were included in the pooled analysis on BMD at the femoral neck after 12 months. Evidence for both outcomes was moderate-certainty (downgraded for indirectness as a surrogate marker for osteoporosis) with low risk of bias. Overall, the bisphosphonate groups reported stabilisation or increase in BMD, while the control groups showed decreased BMD over the study period. At the lumbar spine, there was an absolute increase in BMD of 3.5% with bisphosphonates (2.90% to 4.10% higher) with a relative improvement of 1.10% with bisphosphonates (0.91% to 1.29%); NNTB 3 (2 to 3). At the femoral neck, the absolute difference in BMD was 2.06% higher in the bisphosphonate group compared to the control group (1.45% to 2.68% higher) with a relative improvement of 1.29% (0.91% to 1.69%); NNTB 5 (4 to 7).Pooled analysis on serious adverse events included 15 trials (1703 participants) with low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and risk of bias). In this analysis 131/811 (or 162 per 1000) people experienced serious adverse events in the control group compared to 136/892 (or 147 per 1000; range 120 to 181) in the bisphosphonate group; absolute increased harm of 0% more serious adverse events (2% fewer to 2% more); a relative per cent change with 9% improvement (12% worse to 26% better).Pooled analysis for withdrawals due to adverse events included 15 trials (1790 patients) with low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and risk of bias). In this analysis 63/866 (or 73 per 1000) people withdrew in the control group compared to 76/924 (or 77 per 1000; range 56 to 107) in the bisphosphonate group; an absolute increased harm of 1% more withdrawals with bisphosphonates (95% CI 1% fewer to 3% more); a relative per cent change 6% worse (95% CI 47% worse to 23% better).Quality of life was not assessed in any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was high-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates are beneficial in reducing the risk of vertebral fractures with data extending to 24 months of use. There was low-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates may make little or no difference in preventing nonvertebral fractures. There was moderate-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates are beneficial in preventing and treating corticosteroid-induced bone loss at both the lumbar spine and femoral neck. Regarding harm, there was low-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates may make little or no difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events. We are cautious in interpreting these data as markers for harm and tolerability due to the potential for bias.Overall, our review supports the use of bisphosphonates to reduce the risk of vertebral fractures and the prevention and treatment of steroid-induced bone loss.

Clodronate: new directions of use

Clodronate is the father of bisphosphonates. For over three decades it has been subject of study in biological and clinical areas, proving to be an extremely interesting molecule from different points of view. It has been the first drug for osteoporosis that can be administered pulsatorily (once every 15 days or once a week). This, along with good tolerability, has been the first cause of its success, when there were no solid data in literature about its antifracture efficacy. There are three published studies that prove its antifracture effect: two by McCloskey published in 2004 and 2007 on BMR, and our study about fracture prevention in corticosteroids OP. In these studies a dose of 800 mg/day orally administered or 100 mg/week I.M. was used, and they are basically the same if you consider that clodronate absorption, orally administered, is on average 1.9%. However, a series of works where higher doses were used (1600 mg orally administered) with greater effectiveness on bone mass, especially in higher risk populations, lead us to consider the use of 200 mg i.m. formulation. First of all, we proved densitometric equivalence of 200 mg i.m./14 days and 100 mg i.m./week in a first study; then, in a second study, we proved a greater densitometric efficacy of 200 mg/week compared to 100 mg/week, clearer at femoral level, where the drug had not proven to prevent femoral fracture because of inadequate bone mass increase at that level. Moreover, as for ibandronate case, monthly dose was doubled compared to pivotal trial, in order to maximize the effects on femoral bone mass and therefore prevent femoral fractures. Consequently, on the basis of the risk envelope, whether it is identified according to BMD and the presence of one risk factor at least or more correctly identified through risk chart (FRAX or DeFRA), you can put forward a differential use of 100 mg i.m. and 200 mg i.m., weekly, "off-label" or every 14 days, adjusting doses in relation to fracture risk and painful symptoms gravity, as well as improving its ease of use and therefore assist compliance. Common experience and clinical and biological works have proved that clodronate has an analgesic effect that can be increased by doubling the doses. The analgesic effect is present not only with patients with fractures, but also with patients suffering from osteoarthritis or arthritis. Therefore, the drug would fit well in the therapeutic program of rheumatic patient, also because of its symptomatic effects. Clodronate at small doses (2 mg) could also have protective effects on cartilage (introduction of intra-articular formulation is expected) and at 10-100 fold higher doses it has certainly anti-inflammatory effects and more specifically antimacrophage and anticytokine effects (IL-1, IL-6, TNFalpha, PGE). These effects are amplified by putting clodronate in monolayer liposomes. This drug, therefore, has to be considered as adjuvant in arthritis therapy, whose origin can be linked to a strong osteoclastic activation caused by an increase of cytokines and the RANKL/OPG relationship. It is clear that clodronate can work on cytokine at first and on osteoclastic effector in the end. The drug has been used "off-label" for decades intravenously in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS type 1) in relation to schemes that change according to different Authors and according to cumulative doses ranging from 3 to 5 g. The introduction on the market of the 200 mg i.m. formulation could allow to get more practical but equally effective schemes. For example, we used this scheme: 200 mg/day for 10 days and then 200 mg every other day for 20 days (cumulative dose of 4 g in a month). Said scheme can be repeated in the following months in particular cases. Results, as for efficacy and lack of relapses, show that clodronate is the leader drug for this syndrome. In recent years, relationship between costs and benefits has started to matter, especially after the creation of some algorithms, such as FRAX, that let us choose patients with a higher fracture risk in 10 years, and after pharmaceutic-economic models that let us calculate FRAX intervention threshold, on the basis of drug price and monitoring, antifracture efficacy, quality of life and how much a community can or wants to spend. In this respect, a sub-analysis of McCloskey's study on people over the age of 75, conducted on 3974 subjects, shows that clodronate is more efficient with patients with a higher fracture risk, calculated according to FRAX. Furthermore, another study by McCloskey revealed that, for a 100-pound/year drug (very similar to clodronate), 'cost effective' intervention threshold is about 7-10%. In conclusion, clodronate prevents fractures, decrease osteo-articular pain, is easy to handle, tolerable and had a great cost/benefit relationship.

Treatment of bone loss in osteopenic patients with Crohn's disease: a double-blind, randomised trial of oral risedronate 35 mg once weekly or placebo, concomitant with calcium and vitamin D supplementation

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis and fractures are frequently encountered in patients with Crohn's disease. In order to prevent fractures, treatment with bone protecting drugs appears warranted early in the course of bone disease when bone loss is not yet prominent. We therefore aimed to demonstrate a beneficial effect on bone density of the bisphosphonate risedronate in osteopenic Crohn's disease patients.

METHODS

This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial of risedronate with calcium and vitamin D supplementation was performed in osteopenic Crohn's disease patients. Patients were treated for 2 years with follow-up after 3 and after every 6 months. Disease characteristics and activity and bone turnover markers were assessed at all visits; dual x-ray absorptiometry was performed at baseline, 12 and 24 months; radiographs of the spine at baseline and 24 months.

RESULTS

Of 132 consenting patients, 131 were randomised (67 placebo and 64 risedronate). Patient characteristics were similar in both groups, although the risedronate group was slightly heavier (body mass index 24.3 vs 23.0 kg/m(2)). Bone mineral density at lumbar spine increased 0.04 g/cm(2) on average in the risedronate group versus 0.01 g/cm(2) in the placebo group (p=0.007). The mean increase in total hip bone mineral density was 0.03 versus 0.01 g/cm(2), respectively (p=0.071). Fracture prevalence and incidence were similar. Change of T-scores and concentrations of bone turnover markers were consistent with a beneficial effect of risedronate when compared with placebo. The effect of risedronate was primarily demonstrated in the first 12 months of treatment. No serious unexpected suspected adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

A 24-month treatment course with risedronate 35 mg once weekly, concomitant with calcium and vitamin D supplementation, in osteopenic Crohn's disease patients improved bone density at lumbar spine. NTR 163 Dutch Trial Register.

Efficacy and safety of medical therapy for low bone mineral density in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at risk for osteoporosis and fracture. However, the efficacy of medical treatments for osteoporosis in increasing bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with IBD has not been well characterized.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review of controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of medical therapies used for low BMD in patients with IBD (Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or indeterminate colitis). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google scholar, the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies that assessed the efficacy of medical treatment for low BMD in patients with IBD. We also manually searched abstracts from scientific meetings and bibliographies of identified articles for additional references. The primary outcome assessed was changes in BMD at the lumbar spine. We also collected data on hip BMD, numbers of new fractures, and adverse effects. Data were pooled by using random-effects models and by mixed-effects analysis for primary aims, when subgroup analysis by individual drug was possible.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 19 randomized controlled studies; 2 used calcium and vitamin D as therapies, 13 used bisphosphonates, 4 used fluoride, 1 used calcitonin, and 1 used low-impact exercise. The pooled effect of bisphosphonates was greater than that of controls in increasing BMD at the lumbar spine (standard difference in means, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.72) and hip (standard difference in means, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.49) with comparable tolerability, and the risk of vertebral fractures was reduced. Fluoride increased lumbar spine BMD, but its ability to reduce risk of fracture was unclear. There was no evidence that the other interventions increased BMD.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of a meta-analysis, bisphosphonate is effective and well tolerated for the treatment of low BMD in patients with IBD and reduces the risk of vertebral fractures. There are insufficient data to support the efficacy of calcium and vitamin D, fluoride, calcitonin, or low-impact exercise. However, the small number of randomized controlled trials limited our meta-analysis.

Inflammatory bowel disease and the risk of osteoporosis and fracture

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is commonly believed to increase the risk of bone mineral loss, leading to osteoporosis and an increased risk of disabling fractures. In this narrative review, we will presenting a summary of the published medical literature in regards to the relationship between IBD and the development of osteoporosis, bone mineral loss, and fractures. We will explore the epidemiology of metabolic bone disease in IBD, focusing on the prevalence and both the general and IBD-specific risk factors for the development of osteoporosis and of fracture in persons with IBD. We will also examine the role of the inflammatory process in IBD promoting excessive bone mineral loss, as well as the role that low body mass, corticosteroid use, diet, and nutrient malabsorption play in contributing to bone disease. Last, we will discuss our recommendation for: screening for osteoporosis in IBD patients, the use of preventative strategies, and therapeutic interventions for treating osteoporosis in persons with IBD.

Increased fracture risk and osteoporosis not associated with vitamin D levels in Malaysian patients with inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis and osteopenia are well-recognized complications of inflammatory bowel disease. Previous studies have suggested that vitamin D deficiency is an important risk factor for the development of osteoporosis. We hypothesized that low vitamin D levels is the main reason for reduced bone mineral density in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. We aimed to study its potential role in Malaysia, which is a tropical country with 3 large ethnic groups. We also sought to examine the relationship between fracture risk and bone mineral density in this group.

METHODOLOGY

Relevant history as well as 25-hydroxycholecalciferol (vitamin D) levels and bone mineral density were obtained. Normal, inadequate, and low vitamin D levels were defined as 61-160 nmol/L (24-64 ng/mL), 30-60 nmol/L (12-24 ng/mL), and less than 30 nmol/L (<12 ng/mL), respectively.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were recruited. The prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis, respectively, were 58% and 17% in the spine and 51% and 14% in the hip. Mean vitamin D level in the group was low at 45.12 ± 17.4 nmol/L (18.05 ± 6.96 ng/mL), but there was no significant association between bone mineral density and vitamin D level. Twelve patients (16.7%) had a fragility fracture after the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease. The cumulative fracture incidence was 10% at 5 years and 35% at 10 years. There was a statistically significant association between osteoporosis of hip and a history of fracture (odds ratio 5.889; 95% confidence interval 1.41-24.53, P = .009).

CONCLUSION

Osteoporosis is prevalent among Malaysian patients with inflammatory bowel disease and is associated with a 6-fold increased risk of fractures. Most inflammatory bowel disease patients had inadequate or low vitamin D levels, but there was no association between vitamin D levels and BMD.

The efficacy and safety of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis or osteopenia in Crohn's disease: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease impacts the bone health of patients and results in a high prevalence of low bone mineral density (BMD) disease such as osteoporosis and osteopenia. Bisphosphonates can reduce bone loss by inhibiting bone resorption.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness and safety of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis or osteopenia in Crohn's disease.

METHODS

A literature search included PubMed, EMBASE, the Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies up to March, 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bisphosphonates with placebo or no intervention for osteoporosis or osteopenia in adult patients with Crohn's disease were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five RCTs involving 423 participants were included. All patients received daily calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Overall, bisphosphonates improved hip BMD at 12 months (n = 193, MD = 0.99, 95 % CI: 0.14-1.84) compared with placebos or no intervention. No significant differences of spine BMD at both 12 months (n = 193, MD = 1.78, 95 % CI: -0.99 to 4.55) and 24 months (n = 231, MD = 0.70 %, 95 % CI: -0.48 to 1.88), hip BMD at 24 months (n = 231, MD = 0.25 %, 95 % CI: -0.65 to 1.15), new vertebral fractures (n = 117, RD = -0.01, 95 % CI: -0.08 to 0.05) or adverse events (n = 422, RR = 1.03, 95 % CI: 0.71-1.49) between bisphosphonates groups and control groups were noted. Subgroup analyses of participants treated with corticosteroid in the preceding year found no difference between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence to support the use of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis or osteopenia in Crohn's disease. More randomized controlled clinical trials assessing the effects of bisphosphonates are needed.

Risedronate improves bone mineral density in Crohn's disease: a two year randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with Crohn's disease have an increased frequency of osteopenia and osteoporosis. This randomized, controlled, double-blind study assessed the efficacy of risedronate versus placebo in treating low bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with Crohn's disease.

METHODS

88 Crohn's disease outpatients with BMD T-score<-1.0 by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups for the two year study duration: one group received risedronate 35 mg weekly while another received placebo. Both groups received daily calcium (Ca; 500 mg) and vitamin D (D; 400 IU) supplementation. Percent change in BMD relative to baseline was compared between the two therapies at 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

Using intent-to-treat analysis, at 12 months, risedronate+Ca+D increased BMD, relative to baseline, more than placebo+Ca+D in the femoral trochanter (1.4±3.4% vs -0.1±3.1%; p=0.03) and total hip (1.1±2.7% vs -0.1±2.5%;p=0.04). This trend in greater BMD continued for the 24 month duration of the study. There was no difference between the two treatment groups for changes in spine BMD. Subgroup analysis revealed that risedronate+Ca+D resulted in significantly better improvement in femoral trochanter BMD in non-smokers (p=0.01), males (p=0.01), those with a history of corticosteroid use in the preceding year (p=0.01), and current users of immunosuppressants (p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Risedronate, in addition to daily calcium and vitamin D supplementation, is superior to calcium and vitamin D alone in improving femoral trochanter and total hip BMD in patients with Crohn's disease.

Parenteral bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis

We aimed to describe the effects of parenteral bisphosphonates on bone mineral density (BMD) changes in primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) patients with osteoporosis. Seventeen PBC patients with osteoporosis diagnosed between 1996 and 2005 were enrolled retrospectively. All patients received one of the following parenteral bisphosphonates: zoledronic acid, pamidronate disodium, or ibandronate sodium. The median (interquartile range) age of patients at osteoporosis diagnosis was 62.2 (56.4-67.9) and 94% were women. After treatment, percent change of lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS-BMD) and proximal femur BMD (PF-BMD) of patients with PBC was 2.9% and 0.4%, respectively. Eight patients (47%) showed a greater LS-BMD and/or PF-BMD with percent change of LS-BMD and PF-BMD of 8.7% and 0.8%, respectively. No serious adverse events were found. In PBC patients with osteoporosis, parenteral bisphosphonates can stabilize BMD for 47% of patients. More prospective studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of specific parenteral bisphosphonates in patients with PBC and osteoporosis.

A single dose of intravenous zoledronate prevents glucocorticoid therapy-associated bone loss in acute flare of Crohn's disease, a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of zoledronate (ZOL) in preventing glucocorticoid therapy-associated bone loss in patients with acute flare of Crohn's disease (CD) in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS

Forty CD patients starting a glucocorticoid therapy (60 mg prednisolone per day) for acute flare (CD activity index (CDAI) >220) were randomized to compare the effect of ZOL (4 mg intravenous, n=20) or placebo (n=20) on change in lumbar bone mineral density (BMD). All patients received calcium citrate (800 mg) and colecalciferol (1,000 IU) daily. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the lumbar spine (L1-L4) was performed at baseline and day 90. Follow-up examinations at day 1/7/14/30 and 90 included laboratory tests and adverse event/serious adverse events reports.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were available for per-protocol analysis. With placebo (n=18), a decrease in BMD was seen (T-score: -0.98 ± 0.8, day 0 and -1.25 ± 0.77, day 90, P=0.06), with ZOL (n=18) BMD increased (-1.15 ± 1.02, day 0 and -0.74 ± 1.09, day 90, P=0.03). The change in BMD under placebo (-0.26 ± 0.21) vs. ZOL (+0.41 ± 0.19) was highly significant (P=0.006). In all, 14 out of 18 patients with ZOL had an increase in BMD (+0.64 ± 0.48), 12 of 18 with placebo a decrease (-0.50 ± 0.39). Changes of clinical findings and laboratory results of inflammation (leukocytes, platelets, and C-reactive protein) were the same in- and between-groups throughout the study. With ZOL, serum bone degradation marker β-Cross-Laps decreased. Study medication was safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

ZOL is effective in preventing glucocorticoid therapy-induced bone loss in patients with acute flare of CD and should be considered whenever a glucocorticoid therapy is started in CD patients.

Bone health in a tertiary-care gastroenterology and hepatology population

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoid use is a major risk factor for osteoporosis. Overall rates of glucocorticoid use and bone health preventive measures in gastroenterology and hepatology populations are unknown.

AIMS

We aimed to determine the rates of glucocorticoid use and bone health preventive measures, to evaluate an education-based quality improvement initiative on bone health and to assess improvement in health-care practices of providers in regard to bone health recommendations.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was offered to all patients visiting a tertiary care gastroenterology and hepatology clinic. A bone health education intervention was performed, followed by a repeat cross-sectional survey. Pearson's Chi-square test statistic was used to evaluate interval improvement in bone health recommendations with the intervention. Predictive multiple logistic regression modeling was used to determine factors that influenced bone health recommendations by providers.

RESULTS

A total of 552 patients and 725 patients completed the pre and post-intervention questionnaires, respectively. The prevalence of glucocorticoid use was 12.9%. Bone health recommendations to patients on glucocorticoids did not improve with the intervention (63.0% vs. 55.4%, p = 0.42). The strongest predictor of bone health recommendations was autoimmune hepatitis (OR 6.60 95%CI 3.13, 13.90), followed by inflammatory bowel disease (OR 6.06 95%CI 3.92, 9.38), liver disease (OR 3.70 95%CI 2.45, 5.59), current smoking (OR 3.31 95%CI 2.32, 4.73) and history of osteoporosis/osteopenia (OR 2.72 95%CI 1.83, 4.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of risk factors for osteoporosis in patients with digestive diseases, health-care practices by providers in regard to bone health recommendations warrant further improvement.

Ulcerative colitis practice guidelines in adults: American College Of Gastroenterology, Practice Parameters Committee

Guidelines for clinical practice are aimed to indicate preferred approaches to medical problems as established by scientifically valid research. Double-blind placebo controlled studies are preferable, but compassionate-use reports and expert review articles are used in a thorough review of the literature conducted through Medline with the National Library of Medicine. When only data that will not withstand objective scrutiny are available, a recommendation is identified as a consensus of experts. Guidelines are applicable to all physicians who address the subject regardless of specialty training or interests and are aimed to indicate the preferable but not necessarily the only acceptable approach to a specific problem. Guidelines are intended to be flexible and must be distinguished from standards of care, which are inflexible and rarely violated. Given the wide range of specifics in any health-care problem, the physician must always choose the course best suited to the individual patient and the variables in existence at the moment of decision. Guidelines are developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology and its Practice Parameters Committee and approved by the board of trustees. Each has been intensely reviewed and revised by the Committee, other experts in the field, physicians who will use them, and specialists in the science of decision analysis. The recommendations of each guideline are therefore considered valid at the time of composition based on the data available. New developments in medical research and practice pertinent to each guideline will be reviewed at a time established and indicated at publication to assure continued validity. The recommendations made are based on the level of evidence found. Grade A recommendations imply that there is consistent level 1 evidence (randomized controlled trials), grade B indicates that the evidence would be level 2 or 3, which are cohort studies or case-control studies. Grade C recommendations are based on level 4 studies, meaning case series or poor-quality cohort studies, and grade D recommendations are based on level 5 evidence, meaning expert opinion.

Use of risedronate to prevent bone loss following a single course of glucocorticoids: findings from a proof-of-concept study in inflammatory bowel disease

SUMMARY

We performed a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine whether risedronate 35 mg once weekly prevents bone loss following an 8-week reducing course of prednisolone given for an exacerbation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The greatest change in bone mineral density (BMD) was at Ward's triangle (WT), which fell by 2.2% in the placebo group, compared with a reduction of 0.8% in the risedronate group.

INTRODUCTION

Whether bisphosphonates can prevent bone loss associated with intermittent glucocorticoid (GC) therapy is unknown, reflecting the difficulty in performing RCTs in this context.

METHOD

To explore the feasibility of RCTs to examine this question, lumbar spine (LS; L2-4) and hip dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans were performed in 78 patients commencing a GC therapy course for a relapse of IBD. They were then randomised to receive placebo or risedronate 35 mg weekly for 8 weeks, after which the DXA scan was repeated.

RESULTS

For LS BMD, there was no change in the placebo group (0.1 +/- 0.4, p = 0.9), but there was an increase after risedronate (0.8 +/- 0.4, p = 0.04; mean% +/- SEM by paired Student's t test). There were small decreases in both groups at the total hip (-0.5 +/- 0.3, p = 0.04; -0.5 +/- 0.3, p < 0.05, placebo and risedronate, respectively). At WT, BMD fell after placebo (-2.2 +/- 0.5, p = 0.001) but not risedronate (-0.8 +/- 0.5, p = 0.09; p = 0.05 for between-group comparison).

CONCLUSION

RCTs can be used to examine whether bisphosphonates prevent bone loss associated with intermittent GC therapy, providing metabolically active sites such as WT are employed as the primary outcome.

Clodronic acid formulations available in Europe and their use in osteoporosis: a review

Clodronic acid (Cl(2)-MBP [dichloromethylene bisphosphonic acid], clodronate) is a halogenated non-nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate with antiresorptive efficacy in a variety of diseases associated with excessive bone resorption. The drug is believed to inhibit bone resorption through induction of osteoclast apoptosis, but appears also to possess anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties that contrast with the acute-phase and inflammatory effects seen with nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. Clodronic acid has been shown to be effective in the maintenance or improvement of bone mineral density when given orally, intramuscularly or intravenously in patients with osteoporosis. Use of the drug is also associated with reductions in fracture risk. The intramuscular formulation, which is given at a dose of 100 mg weekly or biweekly, is at least as effective as daily oral therapy and appears more effective than intermittent intravenous treatment. Intramuscular clodronic acid in particular has also been associated with improvements in back pain. The drug is well tolerated, with no deleterious effects on bone mineralization, and use of parenteral therapy eliminates the risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects that may be seen in patients receiving bisphosphonate therapy.

Chronic pediatric inflammatory diseases: effects on bone

In children, chronic inflammatory diseases present a significant challenge to long-term skeletal health. These conditions are often associated with poor appetite and suboptimal overall nutrition, altered nutrient utilization, delayed puberty, inactivity, and reduced muscle mass, all of which can alter bone metabolism. In addition, bone cell activity is susceptible to the effects of the immune response that characterizes these diseases. Moreover, drugs used to treat these maladies, notably glucocorticoids, may have negative effects on bone formation and on linear growth in developing children. As a result, predicted peak bone mass may not be achieved, and fracture risk may be increased in the short term or in the future. Studies using primarily dual energy X-ray absorptiometry have documented that deficits in bone mass are common in these diseases. However, there are wide variations in the prevalence of low bone mass, largely due to differences in the characteristics of each study population. Recent studies provide insight into the pathogenesis of decreased bone mass in these conditions. In this paper we will provide an overview of the effects of chronic inflammatory conditions on bone mass in children. We will also present relevant data from adult patients, when pediatric data are scant or not available.