Validation of the Surrogate Threshold Effect for Change in Bone Mineral Density as a Surrogate Endpoint for Fracture Outcomes: The FNIH-ASBMR SABRE Project

The relationship between treatment-related changes in total hip BMD measured after 12, 18, and 24 mo and fracture risk reduction in osteoporosis clinical trials: the FNIH-ASBMR-SABRE project

There is a strong association between total hip bone mineral density (THBMD) changes after 24 mo of treatment and reduced fracture risk. We examined whether changes in THBMD after 12 and 18 mo of treatment are also associated with fracture risk reduction. We used individual patient data (n = 122 235 participants) from 22 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials of osteoporosis medications. We calculated the difference in mean percent change in THBMD (active-placebo) at 12, 18, and 24 mo using data available for each trial. We determined the treatment-related fracture reductions for the entire follow-up period, using logistic regression for radiologic vertebral fractures and Cox regression for hip, non-vertebral, "all" (combination of non-vertebral, clinical vertebral, and radiologic vertebral) fractures and all clinical fractures (combination of non-vertebral and clinical vertebral). We performed meta-regression to estimate the study-level association (r2 and 95% confidence interval) between treatment-related differences in THBMD changes for each BMD measurement interval and fracture risk reduction. The meta-regression revealed that for vertebral fractures, the r2 (95% confidence interval) was 0.59 (0.19, 0.75), 0.69 (0.32, 0.82), and 0.73 (0.33, 0.84) for 12, 18, and 24 mo, respectively. Similar patterns were observed for hip: r2 = 0.27 (0.00, 0.54), 0.39 (0.02, 0.63), and 0.41 (0.02, 0.65); non-vertebral: r2 = 0.27 (0.01, 0.52), 0.49 (0.10, 0.69), and 0.53 (0.11, 0.72); all fractures: r2 = 0.44 (0.10, 0.64), 0.63 (0.24, 0.77), and 0.66 (0.25, 0.80); and all clinical fractures: r2 = 0.46 (0.11, 0.65), 0.64 (0.26, 0.78), and 0.71 (0.32, 0.83), for 12-, 18-, and 24-mo changes in THBMD, respectively. These findings demonstrate that treatment-related THBMD changes at 12, 18, and 24 mo are associated with fracture risk reductions across trials. We conclude that BMD measurement intervals as short as 12 mo could be used to assess fracture efficacy, but the association is stronger with longer BMD measurement intervals.

Goal-directed osteoporosis treatment: ASBMR/BHOF task force position statement 2024

The overarching goal of osteoporosis management is to prevent fractures. A goal-directed approach to long-term management of fracture risk helps ensure that the most appropriate initial treatment and treatment sequence is selected for individual patients. Goal-directed treatment decisions require assessment of clinical fracture history, vertebral fracture identification (using vertebral imaging as appropriate), measurement of bone mineral density (BMD), and consideration of other major clinical risk factors. Treatment targets should be tailored to each patient's individual risk profile and based on the specific indication for beginning treatment, including recency, site, number and severity of prior fractures, and BMD levels at the total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine. Instead of first-line bisphosphonate treatment for all patients, selection of initial treatment should focus on reducing fracture risk rapidly for patients at very high and imminent risk, such as in those with recent fractures. Initial treatment selection should also consider the probability that a BMD treatment target can be attained within a reasonable period of time and the differential magnitude of fracture risk reduction and BMD impact with osteoanabolic versus antiresorptive therapy. This position statement of the ASBMR/BHOF Task Force on Goal-Directed Osteoporosis Treatment provides an overall summary of the major clinical recommendations about treatment targets and strategies to achieve those targets based on the best evidence available, derived primarily from studies in older postmenopausal women of European ancestry.

The accuracy and clinical utility of spectral CT bone density measurement in the lumbar spine of unenhanced images: A narrative review

OBJECTIVES

To review and evaluate available literature on spectral computed tomography (SCT) bone mineral density (BMD) measurement in adult thoracolumbar vertebrae of unenhanced images compared to quantitative computed tomography (QCT), to understand its current clinical utility.

KEY FINDINGS

Keyword searches in four databases identified four cross-sectional studies which acquired an SCT BMD measurement in thoracolumbar vertebrae and compared this respectively to QCT, which were then critically appraised using the AXIS tool for cross-sectional studies. 862 vertebrae were measured between T10-S1 in 368 patients. Three studies demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between SCT and QCT for the measurement of Hydroxyapatite (HAP) and calcium (r = 0.86-0.96). One study demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy of 96% using a receiver operating curve.

CONCLUSIONS

SCT measurements of HAP and calcium in the lumbar vertebrae are comparable to QCT for patients with no additional pathology present. However, further research is required to evaluate diagnostic accuracy before clinical application.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

SCT BMD measurement has the potential to be developed as a screening tool for osteoporosis within the fracture liaison service (FLS). This could aid in the identification of patients with osteoporosis and address the current treatment gap. Nonetheless, many factors must be considered for this application including staff training, radiation protection and patient engagement with the screening programme.

Romosozumab followed by denosumab versus denosumab only: a post hoc analysis of FRAME and FRAME extension

Osteoanabolic-first treatment sequences are superior to oral bisphosphonates for fracture reduction and bone mineral density (BMD) gain. However, data comparing osteoanabolic medications, with the more potent antiresorptive, denosumab (DMAb), are limited. We analyzed FRAME and FRAME Extension data to assess BMD and fracture incidence in patients treated with romosozumab (Romo) followed by DMAb (Romo/DMAb) versus DMAb (DMAb/DMAb) for 24 months. In FRAME, women aged ≥55 years (total hip [TH] or femoral neck [FN] T-score: -2.5 to -3.5) were randomized to Romo or placebo for 12 months followed by DMAb for 12 months. In FRAME Extension, both cohorts received DMAb for another 12 months. This post hoc analysis compared BMD change and fracture incidence in patients on Romo/DMAb (months 0-24) versus DMAb/DMAb (months 12-36). Patient characteristics were balanced by propensity score weighting (PSW) and sensitivity analyses were conducted using PSW with multiple imputation (PSW-MI) and propensity score matching (PSM). Unmeasured confounding was addressed using E-values. After PSW, over 24 months, compared with DMAb/DMAb, treatment with Romo/DMAb produced significantly greater BMD increases at the lumbar spine [LS], TH, and FN (mean differences: 9.3%, 4.4%, and 4.1%, respectively; all p<0.001). At month 24, in women with a baseline T-score of -3.0, the probability of achieving a T-score > -2.5 was higher with Romo/DMAb versus DMAb/DMAb (LS: 92% versus 47%; TH: 50% versus 5%). In the Romo/DMAb versus DMAb/DMAb cohorts, new vertebral fractures were significantly reduced (0.62% versus 1.26% [odds ratio = 0.45; p=0.003]) and rates of clinical, nonvertebral, and hip fractures were lower (differences not significant). Similar BMD and fracture outcomes were observed with PSW-MI and PSM sensitivity analyses. The sequence of Romo/DMAb resulted in greater BMD gains and higher probability of achieving T-scores > -2.5, significantly reduced new vertebral fracture incidence, and numerically lowered the incidence (not significant) of clinical, nonvertebral, and hip fractures versus DMAb only through 24 months.

Oral daily PTH(1-34) tablets (EB613) in postmenopausal women with low BMD or osteoporosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, 6-month, phase 2 study

Anabolic treatment is indicated for high and very-high risk patients with osteoporosis, but acceptance is limited because current anabolic medications require subcutaneous injections. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a novel orally administered PTH tablet on serum markers of bone formation (PINP and osteocalcin), bone resorption (crosslinked C-telopeptide [CTX]), BMD, and safety in postmenopausal women with low BMD or osteoporosis. In this 6-mo, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 161 patients were randomized to oral PTH tablets containing 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, or 2.5 mg or placebo daily. Biochemical markers were assessed at 1, 2, 3, and 6 mo and BMD of LS, TH, and FN was measured at 6 mo. Biochemical marker changes were dose dependent with minimal or no effect at the 2 lowest doses. At the highest dose (2.5 mg once daily), serum PINP and OC levels increased 30% within 1 mo after oral PTH initiation (P < .0001), remained elevated through 3 mo, and were back to baseline at 6 mo. In contrast, serum CTX levels declined 16% and 21% below baseline at 3 and 6 mo, respectively (both P ≤ .02). At 6 mo, 2.5 mg tablets increased mean BMD vs placebo of the LS by 2.7%, TH by 1.8%, and FN by 2.8% (all P ≤ .01). There were no drug-related serious adverse events. The most common adverse events were headache, nausea, and dizziness. In contrast to subcutaneous PTH, the oral PTH tablet appears to increase BMD rapidly by the dual mechanism of stimulating formation and inhibiting bone resorption. This might be the first effective oral anabolic alternative to subcutaneous administration for the treatment of low BMD or osteoporosis.

Clinical challenges and considerations in pharmacotherapy of osteoporosis due to menopause

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is a chronic systemic skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone strength and an increased risk of fracture, with a high prevalence worldwide. It is associated with a negative quality of life and an increased morbidity and mortality. Postmenopausal women are more prone to develop osteoporosis, and many of them will suffer at least one fragility fracture along their lifetime.

AREAS COVERED

This review starts by summarizing the pathogenesis of postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO), with focus on the estrogen deficiency-associated bone loss. It continues with the current PMO diagnostic and fracture risk prediction tools, and it finally addresses management of PMO. All the efficacy and safety profiles of the current and future osteoporosis medications are reviewed. Furthermore, strategies to optimize the long-term disease management are discussed. For this review, only publications in English language were selected. References were extracted from PubMed, Embase, and Medline.

EXPERT OPINION

PMO disease management is far from being ideal. Educational and communication programs with the goal of improving disease knowledge and awareness, as well as reducing the health-care gap, should be implemented. In addition, most effective sequential prevention and treatment strategies should be initiated from the early menopause.

The effectiveness of ibandronate in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Ibandronate is effective in reducing the risk of vertebral fractures, but experimental evidence offers conflicting results regarding nonvertebral fractures. Real-world evidence has been published evaluating the anti-nonvertebral fracture effect of ibandronate.

AIM

This meta-analysis of observational studies assessed the effectiveness of ibandronate in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis.

METHOD

Pubmed/Embase databases were searched for observational studies. Risks of nonvertebral fractures and hip fractures were the outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed pooling rate ratios (RRs), using random-effects models. Data were reanalysed in sensitivity analyses considering Knapp-Hartung method and Bayesian random-effects.

RESULTS

Six cohort studies were included. Overall, once-monthly 150 mg oral ibandronate reduced the risk of nonvertebral fractures (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76-0.94). Similar results were obtained when the comparison was restricted to once-monthly 150 mg risedronate, but no differences were found when the comparator was other oral bisphosphonates (weekly alendronate/risedronate). Ibandronate didn't significantly change the risk of hip fractures (RR 1.25; 95% CI 0.89-1.76). The risk of hip fracture was comparable between once monthly, 150 mg oral ibandronate and other oral bisphosphonates. Intravenous ibandronate was not effective in reducing hip fractures comparing to intravenous zoledronate. The low number of studies diminished the robustness of sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest that once-monthly 150 mg oral ibandronate may be as effective as other oral bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures. However, uncertainty associated to the small number of included studies, which are characterized by heterogeneous demographics and methodologies, precluded definitive conclusions.

Associations of Changes in Bone Turnover Markers with Change in Bone Mineral Density in Kidney Transplant Patients

BACKGROUND

Bone loss after kidney transplantation is highly variable. We investigated whether changes in bone turnover markers associate with bone loss during the first post-transplant year.

METHODS

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at 0 and 12 months, with biointact parathyroid hormone, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BALP), intact procollagen type I N -terminal propeptide (PINP), and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase isoform 5b (TRAP5b) measured at 0, 3, and 12 months post-transplant ( N =209). Paired transiliac bone biopsies were available in a subset ( n =49). Between-group differences were evaluated by Student's t test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, or Pearson's chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Changes in BMD varied from -22% to +17%/yr. Compared with patients with no change (±2.5%/yr), patients who gained BMD had higher levels of parathyroid hormone (236 versus 136 pg/ml), BALP (31.7 versus 18.8 μ g/L), and Intact PINP (121.9 versus 70.4 μ g/L) at time of transplantation; a greater decrease in BALP (-40% versus -21%) and Intact PINP (-43% versus -13%) by 3 months; and lower levels of Intact PINP (36.3 versus 60.0 μ g/L) at 12 months post-transplant. Patients who lost BMD had a less marked decrease, or even increase, in Intact PINP (+22% versus -13%) and TRAP5b (-27% versus -43%) at 3 months and higher Intact PINP (83.7 versus 60.0 μ g/L) and TRAP5b (3.89 versus 3.16 U/L) at 12 months compared with patients with no change. If none of the biomarkers decreased by the least significant change at 3 months, an almost two-fold (69% versus 36%) higher occurrence of bone loss was seen at 12 months post-transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

Bone loss after kidney transplantation was highly variable. Resolution of high bone turnover, as reflected by decreasing bone turnover markers, associated with BMD gain, while increasing bone turnover markers associated with bone loss.

Response rates for lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck bone mineral density in men treated with abaloparatide: results from the ATOM study

Osteoporosis in men is an underappreciated public health issue, accounting for approximately 30% of the societal burden of osteoporosis. Although the prevalence of osteoporosis in men is lower, fracture-related morbidity and mortality rates exceed those of women. Abaloparatide is a synthetic, 34-amino acid peptide with homology to human parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP), which favors bone formation by selective activation of PTH receptor type 1. In the Abaloparatide for the Treatment of Men With Osteoporosis (ATOM; NCT03512262) trial, 228 men with primary or hypogonadism-associated osteoporosis were randomized to receive subcutaneous injections of abaloparatide 80 μg or placebo. Abaloparatide significantly improved LS, TH, and FN BMD when compared with placebo. In this prespecified analysis, the proportion of men with a percent change from baseline of >0%, >3%, and > 6% in BMD at the LS, TH, and FN at 3, 6, and 12 mo and/or a shift in T-score category (based on LS and TH T-scores) at 12 mo was compared between the abaloparatide and placebo groups in ATOM. There were significantly more men with a BMD gain of >3% at all 3 anatomical sites in the abaloparatide than placebo group at month 6 (18/122 [14.8%] vs 1/70 [1.4%], P = .002) and at month 12 (38/119 [31.9%] vs 1/66 [1.5%], P < .0001). At month 3, more men treated with abaloparatide than placebo had a > 3% BMD increase at the LS (82/134 [61.2%] vs 21/68 [30.9%], P < .0001). A greater proportion of men treated with abaloparatide had an improvement in T-score category from osteoporosis to low BMD or normal when compared with placebo. In conclusion, use of abaloparatide compared with placebo for 12 mo resulted in significant and rapid improvements in BMD in men with osteoporosis from the ATOM study.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: an overview with focus on its prevention and management

The widespread use of glucocorticoids (GCs) contributes to the effective management of several diseases and conditions. However, it comes at a price in the case of the bones causing glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP), the most common cause of secondary osteoporosis and fractures. Several scientific societies have issued comprehensive guidelines on the optimal management of patients receiving GCs with the aim of providing answers to three fundamental questions, namely, whom to treat, when to treat, and how to treat. Both common ground and different approaches exist among them. General preventive measures should start along with GC initiation, and the duration of GC therapy should be limited to the minimal effective range. A pre-existing fracture, age, gender, menopausal status, dose, and duration of GC treatment are key factors in the decision to initiate antiosteoporotic medication. Oral bisphosphonates are typically regarded as the first-line treatment choice for GIOP partly due to their cost-effectiveness. Denosumab is another valid option, but an "exit strategy" should be considered before its initiation due to the risk of rebound-associated vertebral fractures upon its discontinuation. Since impaired bone formation represents the main mechanism by which GCs negatively affect skeletal health, osteoanabolic therapies appear to be pathophysiologically the more appropriate and appealing option, although cost considerations currently limit their use to selected severe cases. Regardless of the agent selected to mitigate the impact of GCs on the skeleton, what is most crucial is that the treating physician correctly stratifies the risk and intervenes at the right time.

Changes in Bone Quality after Treatment with Etelcalcetide

INTRODUCTION

Secondary hyperparathyroidism is associated with osteoporosis and fractures. Etelcalcetide is an intravenous calcimimetic for the control of hyperparathyroidism in patients on hemodialysis. Effects of etelcalcetide on the skeleton are unknown.

METHODS

In a single-arm, open-label, 36-week prospective trial, we hypothesized that etelcalcetide improves bone quality and strength without damaging bone-tissue quality. Participants were 18 years or older, on hemodialysis ≥1 year, without calcimimetic exposure within 12 weeks of enrollment. We measured pretreatment and post-treatment areal bone mineral density by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, central skeleton trabecular microarchitecture by trabecular bone score, and peripheral skeleton volumetric bone density, geometry, microarchitecture, and estimated strength by high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Bone-tissue quality was assessed using quadruple-label bone biopsy in a subset of patients. Paired t tests were used in our analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two participants were enrolled; 13 completed follow-up (mean±SD age 51±14 years, 53% male, and 15% White). Five underwent bone biopsy (mean±SD age 52±16 years and 80% female). Over 36 weeks, parathyroid hormone levels declined 67%±9% ( P < 0.001); areal bone mineral density at the spine, femoral neck, and total hip increased 3%±1%, 7%±2%, and 3%±1%, respectively ( P < 0.05); spine trabecular bone score increased 10%±2% ( P < 0.001); and radius stiffness and failure load trended to a 7%±4% ( P = 0.05) and 6%±4% increase ( P = 0.06), respectively. Bone biopsy demonstrated a decreased bone formation rate (mean difference -25±4 µ m 3 / µ m 2 per year; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with etelcalcetide for 36 weeks was associated with improvements in central skeleton areal bone mineral density and trabecular quality and lowered bone turnover without affecting bone material properties.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

The Effect of Etelcalcetide on CKD-MBD (Parsabiv-MBD), NCT03960437.

The Effects of Polyphenols on Bone Metabolism in Postmenopausal Women: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials

Osteoporosis is a condition favored by the postmenopausal decline in estrogen levels and worsened by oxidative stress (OS). Polyphenols are natural compounds abundantly found in fruits and vegetables, and they exert antioxidant and hormonal effects that could be useful in osteoporosis prevention, as suggested by epidemiological studies showing a lower incidence of fractures in individuals consuming polyphenol-rich diets. The aim of our meta-analysis is to evaluate the effects of polyphenols on bone mineral density (BMD, primary endpoint) and bone turnover markers (BTMs, secondary endpoint) in postmenopausal women. Twenty-one randomized control trials (RCTs) were included in our analysis after in-depth search on PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases. We found that supplementation with polyphenols for 3-36 months exerted no statically significant effects on BMD measured at lumbar spine (sMD: 0.21, 95% CI [-0.08 to 0.51], p = 0.16), femoral neck (sMD: 0.16, 95% CI [-0.23 to 0.55], p = 0.42), total hip (sMD: 0.05, 95% CI [-0.14 to 0.24], p = 0.61), and whole body (sMD: -0.12, 95% CI [-0.42 to 0.17], p = 0.41). Subgroup analysis based on treatment duration showed no statistical significance, but a significant effect on lumbar BMD emerged when studies with duration of 24 months or greater were analyzed separately. On the other hand, we found a significantly slight increase in bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BALP) levels (sMD: 1.27, 95% CI [1.13 to 1.42], p < 0.0001) and a decrease in pyridinoline (PD) levels (sMD: -0.58, 95% CI [-0.77 to -0.39], p < 0.0001). High heterogeneity among studies and unclear risk of bias in one third of the included studies emerged. A subgroup analysis showed similar effects for different duration of treatment and models of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner. More robust evidence is needed before recommending the prescription of polyphenols in clinical practice.

Effects of an mHealth physical activity intervention to prevent osteoporosis in premenopausal women. A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

It is critical to develop prevention strategies for osteoporosis that reduce the burden fractures place on individuals and health systems. This study evaluated the effects of an mHealth intervention that delivered and monitored a non-supervised exercise program on bone mineral density (BMD).

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

60 premenopausal women aged 35-50 years were divided into an intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). The IG followed a 6-month intervention aimed at increasing osteogenic physical activity, guided by two daily goals: walking at least 10,000 steps and completing 60 impacts over 4 g of acceleration. These goals were monitored using a wearable accelerometer linked to an mHealth app. The CG maintained their regular lifestyle and wore the accelerometer without feedback. BMD was estimated using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans at baseline and after 6 months, with group-by-time analyses conducted using ANCOVA. The intervention's impact on physical fitness and activity habits was also evaluated.

RESULTS

46 participants completed the study (IG = 24; CG = 22). The IG showed significant improvements compared to the CG in femoral neck BMD (IG: +0.003 ± 0.029 g/cm2 vs CG: -0.027 ± 0.031 g/cm2), trochanter BMD (IG: +0.004 ± 0.023 g/cm2 vs CG: -0.026 ± 0.030 g/cm2), and total hip BMD (IG: +0.006 ± 0.043 g/cm2 vs CG: -0.040 ± 0.048 g/cm2). The IG also demonstrated significant improvements in physical fitness measures, including peak torque and power at various speeds and positions. No adverse events related to the intervention were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This non-supervised physical activity intervention delivered by wearable-technology and an mHealth app was effective in improving BMD, suggesting its potential for osteoporosis prevention.

Efficacy and Safety of Transdermal Abaloparatide in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis: A Randomized Study

Anabolic therapies, recommended for patients at very high fracture risk, are administered subcutaneously (SC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the abaloparatide microstructured transdermal system (abaloparatide-sMTS) as an alternative to the SC formulation. This phase 3, noninferiority study (NCT04064411) randomly assigned postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N = 511) 1:1 to open-label abaloparatide administered daily via abaloparatide-sMTS or SC injection for 12 months. The primary comparison between treatment groups was the percentage change in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) at 12 months, with a noninferiority margin of 2.0%. Secondary endpoints included percentage change in total hip and femoral neck BMD, bone turnover markers, dermatologic safety, and new clinical fracture incidence. At 12 months, percentage increase from baseline in lumbar spine BMD was 7.14% (SE: 0.46%) for abaloparatide-sMTS and 10.86% (SE: 0.48%) for abaloparatide-SC (treatment difference: -3.72% [95% confidence interval: -5.01%, -2.43%]). Percentage change in total hip BMD was 1.97% for abaloparatide-sMTS and 3.70% for abaloparatide-SC. Median changes from baseline at 12 months in serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (s-PINP) were 52.6% for abaloparatide-sMTS and 74.5% for abaloparatide-SC. Administration site reactions were the most frequently reported adverse events (abaloparatide-sMTS, 94.4%; abaloparatide-SC, 70.5%). Incidence of serious adverse events was similar between groups. Mild or moderate skin reactions occurred with abaloparatide-sMTS with no identifiable risk factors for sensitization reactions. Few new clinical fractures occurred in either group. Noninferiority of abaloparatide-sMTS to abaloparatide-SC for percentage change in spine BMD at 12 months was not demonstrated; however, clinically meaningful increases from baseline in lumbar spine and total hip BMD were observed in both treatment groups. © 2023 Radius Health, Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Efficacy of osteoporosis pharmacological treatments in men: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to systematically identify and review the efficacy of pharmacological treatments in men with osteoporosis.

METHODS

Medline (via Ovid) and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched up to May 2023 for any randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the efficacy of osteoporotic treatment on the evolution of Bone Mineral Density (BMD) and incidence of fractures of men suffering from primary osteoporosis. If at least two studies used the same pharmacological treatment and evaluated the same outcome, a random effect model meta-analysis was applied to reported pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

From the 1,061 studies identified through bibliographic search, 21 RCTs fitted the inclusion criteria. Bisphosphonates (k = 10, n = 2992 men with osteoporosis) improved all three BMD sites compared to placebo; lumbar spine: MD + 4.75% (95% CI 3.45, 6.05); total hip: MD + 2.72% (95% CI 2.06; 3.37); femoral neck: MD + 2.26% (95% CI 1.67; 2.85). Denososumab (k = 2, n = 242), Teriparatide (k = 2, n = 309) and Abaloparatide (k = 2, n = 248) also produced significant improvement of all sites BMD compared to placebo. Romosozumab was only identified in one study and was therefore not meta-analysed. In this study, Romosozumab increased significantly BMD compared to placebo. Incident fractures were reported in 16 RCTs but only four reported fractures as the primary outcome. Treatments were associated with a lower incidence of fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Medications used in the management of osteoporosis in women appear to provide similar benefits in men with osteoporosis. Therefore, the algorithm for the management of osteoporosis in men could be similar to the one previously recommended for the management of osteoporosis in women.

Contributions of Clinical and Technical Factors to Longitudinal Change in Trabecular Bone Score and Bone Density: A Registry-Based Individual-Level Analysis

Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS), a gray-level texture measure derived from spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images, is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent risk factor for fracture. An unresolved question is whether TBS is sufficiently responsive to change over time or in response to widely used osteoporosis therapy at the individual level to serve as a useful biomarker. Using the Manitoba DXA Registry, we identified 11,643 individuals age 40 years and older with two fan-beam DXA scans performed on the same instrument within 5 years (mean interval 3.2 years), of whom 6985 (60.0%) received antiresorptive osteoporosis medication (majority oral bisphosphonate) between the scans. We examined factors that were associated with a change in lumbar spine TBS, lumbar spine BMD, and total hip BMD exceeding the 95% least significant change (LSC). Change exceeding the LSC was identified in 23.0% (9.3% increase, 13.8% decrease) of lumbar spine TBS, 38.2% (22.1% increase, 16.1% decrease) lumbar spine BMD, and 42.5% (17.6% increase, 24.9% decrease) total hip BMD measurement pairs. From regression models, the variables most strongly associated with significant change in TBS (decreasing order) were tissue thickness change, acquisition mode change, weight change, and spine percent fat change. Consistent with the insensitivity of TBS to oral antiresorptive therapies, use of these agents showed very little effect on TBS change. In contrast, for both spine BMD change and total hip BMD change, osteoporosis medication use was the most significant variable, whereas tissue thickness change, acquisition mode change, and weight change had relatively weak effects. In summary, change in spine TBS using the present algorithm appears to be strongly affected by technical factors. This suggests a limited role, if any, for using TBS change in untreated individuals or for monitoring response to antiresorptive treatment in routine clinical practice with the current version of the TBS algorithm. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Ibandronate in the Prevention of Vertebral and Nonvertebral Osteoporotic Fractures: A Systematic Review of Experimental and Observational Studies

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate ibandronate clinical effectiveness in the prevention of osteoporosis-related vertebral fractures (VFs) and nonvertebral fractures (NVFs) in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination's guidance and reporting in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement 2020. A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE since their inception until February 7, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analysis, experimental, and observational studies evaluating adult patients treated with ibandronate and assessed to osteoporotic fractures prevention were included. The risk of bias was assessed according to study design. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Eight references from 4 RCTs, 7 meta-analyses, and 6 observational studies were included. In RCTs, oral ibandronate was superior to placebo in the prevention of VF. However, the doses were lower than those approved. The meta-analyses confirmed these results and showed that adequate doses of oral ibandronate reduce the risk of NVF compared with insufficient doses. In observational studies, oral ibandronate (in approved doses) reduced the risk of VF compared with no treatment or risedronate or alendronate and the risk of NVF versus risedronate or alendronate; the risk of hip fractures was similar between ibandronate and other oral bisphosphonates.

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong evidence that ibandronate reduces the risk of VF in postmenopausal osteoporosis. The available evidence further suggests that ibandronate may reduce the risk of NVF versus insufficient doses of ibandronate, as well as risedronate or alendronate.

Bone loss in chronic liver diseases: Could healthy liver be a requirement for good bone health?

Given that the liver is involved in many metabolic mechanisms, it is not surprising that chronic liver disease (CLD) could have numerous complications. Secondary osteoporosis and increased bone fragility are frequently overlooked complications in CLD patients. Previous studies implied that up to one-third of these individuals meet diagnostic criteria for osteopenia or osteoporosis. Recent publications indicated that CLD-induced bone fragility depends on the etiology, duration, and stage of liver disease. Therefore, the increased fracture risk in CLD patients puts a severe socioeconomic burden on the health system and urgently requires more effective prevention, diagnosis, and treatment measures. The pathogenesis of CLD-induced bone loss is multifactorial and still insufficiently understood, especially considering the relative impact of increased bone resorption and reduced bone formation in these individuals. It is essential to note that inconsistent findings regarding bone mineral density measurement were previously reported in these individuals. Bone mineral density is widely used as the “golden standard” in the clinical assessment of bone fragility although it is not adequate to predict individual fracture risk. Therefore, microscale bone alterations (bone microstructure, mechanical properties, and cellular indices) were analyzed in CLD individuals. These studies further support the thesis that bone strength could be compromised in CLD individuals, implying that an individualized approach to fracture risk assessment and subsequent therapy is necessary for CLD patients. However, more well-designed studies are required to solve the bone fragility puzzle in CLD patients.

The Efficacy and Safety of Abaloparatide-SC in Men With Osteoporosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Abaloparatide significantly increased bone mineral density (BMD) in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis and decreased risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, and clinical fractures compared with placebo. The Abaloparatide for the Treatment of Men with Osteoporosis (ATOM; NCT03512262) study evaluated the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide compared with placebo in men. Eligible men aged 40 to 85 years with osteoporosis were randomized 2:1 to daily subcutaneous injections of abaloparatide 80 μg or placebo for 12 months. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD. Key secondary endpoints included BMD change from baseline at the total hip and femoral neck. A total of 228 men were randomized (abaloparatide, n = 149; placebo, n = 79). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups (mean age, 68.3 years; mean lumbar spine BMD T-score, -2.1). At 12 months, BMD gains were greater with abaloparatide compared with placebo at the lumbar spine (least squares mean percentage change [standard error]: 8.48 [0.54] versus 1.17 [0.72]), total hip (2.14 [0.27] versus 0.01 [0.35]), and femoral neck (2.98 [0.34] versus 0.15 [0.45]) (all p < 0.0001). The most common (≥5%) treatment-emergent adverse events were injection site reaction, dizziness, nasopharyngitis, arthralgia, bronchitis, hypertension, and headache. During 12 months of abaloparatide treatment, men with osteoporosis exhibited rapid and significant improvements in BMD with a safety profile consistent with previous studies. These results suggest abaloparatide can be considered as an effective anabolic treatment option for men with osteoporosis. © 2022 Radius Health Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Male osteoporosis-what are the causes, diagnostic challenges, and management

Osteoporosis is underrecognized and undertreated in men, even though up to 25% of fractures in patients over the age of 50 years occur in men. Men develop osteoporosis with normal aging and accumulation of comorbidities that cause bone loss. Secondary causes of bone loss may be found in up to 60% of men with osteoporosis. Mortality in men who experience major fragility fracture is greater than in women. Diagnosis of osteoporosis in men is similar to women, based on low-trauma or fragility fractures, and/or bone mineral density dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) T-scores at or below -2.5. Because most clinical trials with osteoporosis drugs in men were based on bone density endpoints, not fracture reduction, the antifracture efficacy of approved treatments in men is not as well documented as that in women. Men at a high risk of fracture should be offered treatment to reduce future fractures.

Effects of non-supervised exercise interventions on bone mineral density in adult women: a systematic review and meta‑analysis

Osteoporosis is a major health issue worldwide. This study analyzes the effects of non-supervised osteoporosis prevention programs on bone mineral density. Non-supervised exercise increases femoral neck and lumbar spine bone mineral density in adult women. Thus, it might be effective for preventing or treating osteoporosis or osteopenia in this population.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is a major health issue worldwide. Social distancing measures due to COVID-19 have hindered the chances to take part in supervised osteoporosis prevention exercise programs. The purpose of the present study is to systematically review and meta-analyze the effects of non-supervised osteoporosis prevention exercise programs on bone mineral density (BMD) in adult women.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases (n = 7) was conducted including (a) prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing at least one exercise group vs. a control group with sedentary lifestyle or sham exercises; (b) baseline and follow-up BMD values, or BMD changes from baseline, at any skeletal site; (c) women over 30 years old; and (d) non-supervised exercise programs only. Subgroup analyses were performed for menopausal status, intervention duration, type of exercise, and osteopenia/osteoporosis status.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included (n = 668). Random effect analyses showed that unsupervised exercise had beneficial effects on lumbar spine (LS) BMD with standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.77), and femoral neck (FN) BMD with SMD = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.16-0.85). Unsupervised exercise increased LS (SMD = 0.73 (95% CI: 0.13-1.33)) and FN BMD (SMD = 0.85 (95% CI: 0.33-1.37)) in women with osteopenia/osteoporosis, but not in healthy counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Non-supervised exercise improves FN and LS BMD in adult women. Beneficial effects of exercise on FN and LS BMD might be more pronounced in those with poor bone health compared with healthy counterparts. More RCTs prescribing non-supervised, osteogenic exercise are required in this population. It is necessary to investigate the efficacy of remote/assistive technologies for delivering and monitoring non-supervised exercise interventions.

Target Values and Daytime Variation of Bone Turnover Markers in Monitoring Osteoporosis Treatment after Fractures

The serum bone turnover markers (BTM) procollagen type 1 N‐terminal propeptide (P1NP) and C‐terminal cross‐linking telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTX) are recommended for monitoring adherence and response of antiresorptive drugs (ARD). BTM are elevated about 1 year after fracture and therefore BTM target values are most convenient in ARD treatment follow‐up of fracture patients. In this prospective cohort study, we explored the cut‐off values of P1NP and CTX showing the best discriminating ability with respect to adherence and treatment effects, reflected in bone mineral density (BMD) changes. Furthermore, we explored the ability of BTM to predict subsequent fractures and BTM variation during daytime in patients using ARD or not. After a fragility fracture, 228 consenting patients (82.2% women) were evaluated for ARD indication and followed for a mean of 4.6 years (SD 0.5 years). BMD was measured at baseline and after 2 years. Serum BTM were measured after 1 or 2 years. The largest area under the curve (AUC) for discrimination of patients taking ARD or not was shown for P1NP <30 μg/L and CTX <0.25 μg/L. AUC for discrimination of patients with >2% gain in BMD (lumbar spine and total hip) was largest at cut‐off values for P1NP <30 μg/L and CTX <0.25 μg/L. Higher P1NP was associated with increased fracture risk in patients using ARD (hazard ratio [HR]_logP1NP = 15.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7–83.3), p = 0.002. P1NP and CTX were stable during daytime, except in those patients not taking ARD, where CTX decreased by 21% per hour during daytime. In conclusion, P1NP <30 μg/L and CTX <0.25 μg/L yield the best discrimination between patients taking and not taking ARD and the best prediction of BMD gains after 2 years. Furthermore, higher P1NP is associated with increased fracture risk in patients on ARD. BTM can be measured at any time during the day in patients on ARD. © 2022 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Intravenous Zoledronate 4 mg for the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis: A prospective open-labeled study

Background

Zoledronate 5 mg intravenous (IV) annually is approved for treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis. Zoledronate 4 mg which is approved for the treatment of cancer related hypercalcemia can be an alternative for Asian women who have smaller stature.

Objectives

To examine the efficacy and safety of Zoledronate 4 mg IV annually for the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis.

Method

A prospective open-labeled study was performed on 33 post-menopausal osteoporosis patients. All patients received a dose of IV Zoledronate 4 mg. Bone mineral density (DXA) was examined at baseline and 12 months after treatment. Beta-C-terminal telopeptide (β-CTX) and procollagen type-1-amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP) were obtained at baseline, 6, and 12 months after treatment. Adverse events were recorded.

Results

The mean age (SD) was 69 (11.1) years old. The lumbar spine BMD increased significantly from the mean (SD) lumbar spine BMD at baseline of 0.833 (0.132) g/cm² to 0.862 (0.132) after treatment (p = 0.001). There was no significant differences in total hip and femoral neck BMDs between baseline and 12 months after treatment. The β-CTX and P1NP decreased significantly from the mean (SD) of 0.44 (0.24) and 55.57 (38.6) ng/ml at baseline to 0.21 (0.11) and 27.26 (10.95) ng/ml after treatment (p < 0.001), respectively. Infusion reaction was observed in five patients. There were two fractures observed.

Conclusion

Zoledronate 4 mg improved lumbar BMD and decreased β-CTX and P1NP significantly after 12 months of treatment. Zoledronate 4 mg could be an alternative to Zoledronate 5 mg for the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis.

•

This study examined the effect of Zoledronate 4 mg for postmenopausal osteoporosis.

•

The lumbar spine BMD increased between baseline and 12 months after treatment.

•

Bone markers decreased significantly between baseline and 12 months after treatment.

•

Zoledronate 4 mg is an alternative to 5 mg for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment.