Cardiovascular Safety of Romosozumab: New Insights from Postmenopausal Women with Chronic Kidney Disease

Romosozumab versus parathyroid hormone receptor agonists: which osteoanabolic to choose and when?

Osteoanabolic agents are used as a first line treatment in patients at high fracture risk. The PTH receptor 1 (PTH1R) agonists teriparatide (TPTD) and abaloparatide (ABL) increase bone formation, bone mineral density (BMD), and bone strength by activating PTH receptors on osteoblasts. Romosozumab (ROMO), a humanized monoclonal antibody against sclerostin, dramatically but transiently stimulates bone formation and persistently reduces bone resorption. Osteoanabolic agents increase BMD and bone strength while being more effective than antiresorptives in reducing fracture risk in postmenopausal women. However, direct comparisons of the antifracture benefits of osteoanabolic therapies are limited. In a direct comparison of TPTD and ABL, the latter resulted in greater BMD increases at the hip. While no differences in vertebral or non-vertebral fracture risk were observed between the two drugs, ABL led to a greater reduction of major osteoporotic fractures. Adverse event profiles were similar between the two agents except for hypercalcemia, which occurred more often with TPTD. No direct comparisons of fracture risk reduction between ROMO and the PTH1R agonists exist. Individual studies have shown greater increases in BMD and bone strength with ROMO compared with TPTD in treatment-naive women and in women previously treated with bisphosphonates. Some safety aspects, such as a history of tumor precluding the use of PTH1R agonists, and a history of major cardiovascular events precluding the use of ROMO, should also be considered when choosing between these agents. Finally, convenience of administration, reimbursement by national health systems and length of clinical experience may influence patient choice.

Cardiovascular Calcification Heterogeneity in Chronic Kidney Disease

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) exhibit tremendously elevated risk for cardiovascular disease, particularly ischemic heart disease, due to premature vascular and cardiac aging and accelerated ectopic calcification. The presence of cardiovascular calcification associates with increased risk in patients with CKD. Disturbed mineral homeostasis and diverse comorbidities in these patients drive increased systemic cardiovascular calcification in different manifestations with diverse clinical consequences, like plaque instability, vessel stiffening, and aortic stenosis. This review outlines the heterogeneity in calcification patterning, including mineral type and location and potential implications on clinical outcomes. The advent of therapeutics currently in clinical trials may reduce CKD-associated morbidity. Development of therapeutics for cardiovascular calcification begins with the premise that less mineral is better. While restoring diseased tissues to a noncalcified homeostasis remains the ultimate goal, in some cases, calcific mineral may play a protective role, such as in atherosclerotic plaques. Therefore, developing treatments for ectopic calcification may require a nuanced approach that considers individual patient risk factors. Here, we discuss the most common cardiac and vascular calcification pathologies observed in CKD, how mineral in these tissues affects function, and the potential outcomes and considerations for therapeutic strategies that seek to disrupt the nucleation and growth of mineral. Finally, we discuss future patient-specific considerations for treating cardiac and vascular calcification in patients with CKD-a population in need of anticalcification therapies.