Three-year effectiveness of intravenous pamidronate versus pamidronate plus slow-release sodium fluoride for postmenopausal osteoporosis

Micromolar sodium fluoride promotes osteo/odontogenic differentiation in dental pulp stem cells by inhibiting PI3K/AKT pathway

OBJECTIVE

Sodium fluoride (NaF) plays an important role in preventing dental caries. However, the regulatory effect of NaF on the committed differentiation of DPSCs is not fully understood. In this study, we characterized the impact of micromolar levels of NaF on the osteo/odontogenic differentiation of DPSCs.

DESIGN

DPSCs were isolated from healthy human third molars and were cultured in conditioned media with different concentrations of NaF. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) combined with Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathway enrichment analysis was used to assess the pathways regulated by NaF. Alkaline phosphatase activity, Alizarin red staining, Western blotting, and real-time qRT-PCR were used to determine the osteo/odontogenic differentiation in DPSCs treated with NaF.

RESULTS

NaF significantly promoted the osteo/odontogenic differentiation of DPSCs at micromolar levels. Furthermore, RNA-seq and KEGG pathway enrichment analysis indicated that the PI3K/AKT pathway was involved in the pro-osteoclastogenesis effect of NaF. Western blotting analysis exhibited that the phosphorylation of AKT was decreased in NaF-treated DPSCs. Chemical inhibition of the PI3K/AKT pathway abrogated the NaF-promoted DPSCs osteo/odontogenic differentiation.

CONCLUSION

Micromolar NaF can promote the osteo/odontogenic differentiation of DPSCs by inhibiting the PI3K/AKT pathway.

DATA AVAILABILITY

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Sodium fluoride regulates the osteo/odontogenic differentiation of stem cells from apical papilla by modulating autophagy

Fluoride (sodium fluoride) is thought to be essential in the development of tooth, and research shows that fluoride can modulate the differentiation of dental stem cells. However, the effects of fluoride on the committed differentiation of stem cells from apical papilla (SCAPs) and the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Here, SCAPs were isolated from healthy extracted human third molars with immature roots and then were cultured with NaF conditioned media. Cell Counting Kit-8, EdU staining, and flow cytometry were performed to detected the proliferation activity. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, Alizarin Red staining, Western blot assay, and real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction were applied to assess the osteo/odontogenic differentiation NaF-treated SCAPs. Western blot assay and transmission electron microscope were used to evaluate the autophagy involved in the differentiation of SCAPs. ALP activity, ALP protein, and messenger RNA (mRNA) expression showed that 0.5 mM was the optimal concentration for the induction of SCAPs by NaF. 0.5 mM NaF-treated SCAPs induced more mineralized nodules as compared with untreated cells. Moreover, the osteo/odontogenic markers (RUNX2, OSX, DSP, and OCN) in mRNA levels were upregulated while the protein levels of these markers increased considerably in 0.5 mM NaF-treated SCAPs. Furthermore, the autophagy-related proteins (LC3, ATG5, and Beclin1) increased in NaF-treated SCAPs, and the osteo/odontogenic makers significantly decreased while silencing ATG5 to block autophagy. In all, sodium fluoride can regulate the osteo/odontogenic differentiation of SCAPs by modulating autophagy.

[Austrian guidance for the pharmacological treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women--update 2009]

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease characterized by diminished bone mass and deterioration of bone microarchitecture, leading to increased fragility and subsequent increased fracture risk. Therapeutic measures therefore aim at reducing individual fracture risk. In Austria, the following drugs, all of which have been proven to reduce fracture risk, are currently registered for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: alendronate, risedronate, etidronate, ibandronate, raloxifene, teriparatide (1-34 PTH), 1-84 PTH, strontium ranelate and salmon calcitonin. Fluorides are still available, but their role in daily practice has become negligible. Currently, there is no evidence that a combination of two or more of these drugs could improve anti-fracture potency. However, treatment with PTH should be followed by the treatment with an anticatabolic drug such as bisphosphonates. Calcium and vitamin D constitute an important adjunct to any osteoporosis treatment.

Potential of alfacalcidol for reducing increased risk of falls and fractures

There are no general accepted strategies for combined drug treatments in osteoporosis, while in other important chronic diseases combinations of different medications are used as a rule to improve therapeutic results and reduce the risk of adverse events. It is suggested that the success of combined treatments is related to the different modes of action of the respective single therapies. On the other hand it was shown that a strong antiresorptive bisphosphonate is able to blunt at least in part the effects of anabolic parathyroid hormone peptides Calcitriol, the active vitamin D-hormone and its prodrug alfacalcidol lead to pleiotropic effects on bone remodelling (antiresorptive, anabolic and enhancing mineralization) and in addition to effects on other important target tissues (e.g. gut, parathyroid glands, muscle). With active D-analogs significant improvements in the therapeutic outcome of osteoporosis can be achieved by the resulting improvements of bone quality, calcium absorption and risk reduction of falling. The same beneficial effects cannot be achieved with plain vitamin D due to feedback controlled, limited renal activation or insufficient conversion in the elderly with impairment of renal function. Accordingly alfacalcidol, approved as a treatment for different forms of osteoporosis, is besides adoption as a mono-therapy an interesting candidate for combined therapies. There are interesting preclinical trials and clinical pilote studies in the literature proving that a parallel therapy with selectively anti-osteoclastic bisphophonates and pleiotropically acting D-analogs is able to optimize therapeutic results in osteoporosis. In the AAC-Trial (Alfacalcidol-Alendronate-Combined) we studied 90 patients with established osteoporosis (57 women, 33 men) over two years after alternate allocation to three treatment arms (alfacalcidol plus calcium, alendronate plus plain vitamin D and Ca, and alendronate plus alfacalcidol and Ca). During the 2-year-study we observed the significantly highest lumbar spine and hip BMD increases in the combined treatment group (p < 0.001). The number of patients with new vertebral and non-vertebral fractures after 2 years was 9 with alfacalcidol alone, 10 with alfacalcidol and plain vitamin D and 2 in the group receiving alendronate plus alfacalidol (p < 0.02). Furthermore there was a lower rate of falls and an earlier reduction in back pain in the patients treated with the active combination. This trial confirms the demonstrated highly significant advantages of this combined treatment regimen used in the pilote studies. Especially in patients with severe osteoporosis this interesting combination of two substances with complete different mechanisms of action should be taken into consideration.

Renal safety of intravenous bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis

Oral bisphosphonates are the mainstay of treatment for osteoporosis but cannot be used in some patients due to gastrointestinal contraindications, gastrointestinal intolerance, malabsorption or the inability to comply with dosing requirements. In such patients, intravenous bisphosphonates are a useful alternative. This review summarises the renal safety issues associated with the use of intravenous bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. Intravenous bisphosphonates are generally well tolerated, which may be a reflection of their selective activity in bone and metabolic stability. Adverse effects on renal function are primarily related to infusion rate and dose. Due to lack of data, no conclusions can be made regarding bisphosphonate safety in patients with intrinsic renal disease or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of < 30 ml/min.

Improving the outcome of established therapies for osteoporosis by adding the active D-hormone analog alfacalcidol

While in other chronic diseases combined treatment regimens are the rule there is a lack of reported experience or study data on combining different specific drugs to treat osteoporosis. Significant differences in the mode of action (MOA) of the substances to be combined may be important for achieving optimal therapeutic results. Recognising that today bisphosphonates are the leading therapy for osteoporosis we suggest that the active D-hormone analog alfacalcidol with its completely different mechanisms of action could be an interesting combination to improve the therapeutic outcome of the pure antiresoptive action of bisphosphonates. Alfacalcidol is activated by the enzyme 25-hydroxylase in the liver for systemic and in osteoblasts for local D-hormone actions. It possesses a unique pattern of pleiotropic effects on, e.g. gut, bone, pararthyroids, muscle and brain. Alfacalcidol is superior to plain vitamin D (cholecalciferol) because the final kidney activation of the latter is regulated by a negative feedback mechanism. In vitamin D replete patients or patients with impaired kidney function no increased D-hormone action at the target tissues can be achieved. Animal studies and several trials in humans with alendronate plus calcitriol or alfacalcidol proved that the combination induced significantly higher increases of bone mineral density (BMD) than the respective mono-therapies. The results of the 2-year AAC-trial from our group indicate that the combination alendronate and alfacalcidol is also superior in terms of falls, fractures and back pain. From the review of the literature and the own new results we conclude that this combined therapeutic regimen is a very promising option for treating established osteoporosis and propose a differentiated use of alfacalcidol alone or the combination with alendronate in different stages and clinical situations of osteoporosis.

Superiority of a combined treatment of Alendronate and Alfacalcidol compared to the combination of Alendronate and plain vitamin D or Alfacalcidol alone in established postmenopausal or male osteoporosis (AAC-Trial)

A combined therapy with the strongly antiresorptive Alendronate and the pleiotropically acting D-hormone analogue Alfacalcidol may have additive effects on bone quality, falls and fracture risk in established osteoporosis. The aim of this study (Alfacalcidol Alendronate Combined-AAC) was to compare the efficacy and safety of a combined parallel therapy with Alendronate and Alfacalcidol to the treatment with either Alendronate in combination with plain vitamin D or Alfacalcidol alone in patients with established postmenopausal or male osteoporosis. Ninety patients were included as matched triplets to receive randomly either 1 microg Alfacalcidol daily + 500 mg calcium (group A, n = 30) or 70 mg Alendronate weekly + 1,000 mg calcium + 1,000 IU vitamin D daily (group B, n = 30) or 1 microg Alfacalcidol daily + 70 mg Alendronate weekly + 500 mg calcium daily (group C, n = 30). Patients were recruited in one centre and were followed up for 24 months. Analysis was intention-to-treat and the primary outcome was lumbar spine and total hip bone mineral density (measured observer blind). BMD was measured at the lumbar spine and at the proximal femur with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (LUNAR Prodigy, GE, USA) at the beginning and after 12 and 24 months. During the 2-year-study we observed descriptively significant increases at the lumbar spine of 3.0% in group A compared to baseline, of 5.4% in group B and of 9.6% in group C, respectively. The superiority of the Alendronate + Alfacalcidol treatment group over Alfacalcidol alone and over Alendronate + vitamin D was of more than large rele-vance (both tests: MW > 0.71; CI-LB > 0.64; P < 0.001). We also observed median increases of the BMD at the total hip of 1.5% in group A, of 2.4% in group B and of 3.8% in group C, respectively. The superiority of group C over group A and over group B again was relevant and statistically significant in a descriptive sense. After 2 years there was a tendency towards higher rates of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in group A and B as compared to C. Taking both fracture types together we observed 9, 10 and 2 "osteoporotic fractures" in groups A, B and C, respectively. The comparison of group C with pooled groups A and B and with each single group gave a relevantly lower fracture rate for the combination of Alendronate and Alfacalcidol. Furthermore a lower rate of falls was observed for the combination Alendronate plus Alfacalcidol versus Alendronate + vitamin D, but not versus Alfacalcidol alone. We found 80% of the patients in the Alendronate + Alfacalcidol group free from back pain at month 24, compared to 30% in the Alendronate + vitamin D and 43% in the Alfacalcidol monotherapy group. The superiority is relevant (both tests: MW > 0.64; CI-LB > 0.56; P < 0.003). Pain decrease also occurred more rapidly in the Alendronate + Alfacalcidol group than in the other groups. In general side effects in all groups were mild, and only four cases of moderate hypercalcuria in group A and one in group C were reported, but no case of hypercalcemia was documented. In conclusion, the combination therapy with Alendronate and Alfacalcidol exhibited superiority in terms of BMD, overall fractures, rate of falls and back pain over either Alendronate in combination with plain vitamin D or Alfacalcidol alone. The overall safety profiles of the three treatment regimens were found to be not different in this study.

Cancer-treatment-induced bone loss, part 2

PURPOSE

The pathophysiology, frequency, sequelae, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer-treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) are discussed.

SUMMARY

CTIBL is a long-term complication associated with cancer therapies that can directly or indirectly affect bone metabolism. Although CTIBL can occur in any patient receiving a cancer therapy known to cause bone loss, CTIBL is most common in patients with breast or prostate cancer who receive chemotherapy, hormone therapy, or surgical castration, as these can cause hypogonadism and induce bone loss. CTIBL causes bone fragility and an increased susceptibility to fractures; therefore, prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment of CTIBL are essential to decrease the risk of fracture. Bone loss occurs more rapidly and tends to be more severe in patients with CTIBL compared with those with normal age-related bone loss. Fractures of the hip, vertebra, and wrist are the fractures most commonly associated with bone loss. CTIBL is diagnosed by measuring bone mass using bone densitometry. Treatment of CTIBL consists of changing diet and lifestyle such as optimizing calcium and vitamin D intake, exercising, modifying behaviors known to increase the risk of CTIBL and pharmacologic therapy with hormone replacement therapy (HRT), selective estrogen-receptor modifiers (SERMs), calcitonin, or a bisphosphonate.

CONCLUSION

Early identification and treatment of CTIBL are essential to prevent fractures. Patients should be instructed to optimize calcium and vitamin D intake, exercise regularly, and modify lifestyle behaviors known to cause bone loss. Patients with CTIBL should be treated with an oral or i.v. bisphosphonate; SERMs or HRT may be an option in some patients if contraindications do not exist.

Postmenopausal osteoporosis. What have we learned since the introduction of bisphosphonates?

Over the past 12 years bisphosphonates have become a mainstay of treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis. As a class, bisphosphonates significantly suppress bone turnover and increase BMD at the lumbar spine and other site through their direct inhibitory effects on osteoclasts. Alendronate and risedronate reduce the incidence of clinical vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. Etidronate and both oral and intravenous ibandronate reduce the incidence of clinical vertebral fractures, but data from primary analyses for reduction in non-vertebral fractures are currently less robust. Intravenous administration of zoledronate is under late-stage investigation for use in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Combinations of alendronate with estrogen or raloxifene provide a greater reduction in bone turnover markers and greater increases in BMD, but fracture risk reduction has not been determined. Overall, bisphosphonates are well tolerated. The most common side effects of oral bisphosphonates are upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Newer safety concerns about the use of bisphosphonates include osteonecrosis of the jaw and oversuppression of bone turnover. The optimal duration of bisphosphonate treatment has not been clearly established.

Combination therapy for osteoporosis: considerations and controversy

Combination therapy, the simultaneous use of two pharmaceutical agents with the goal being reduction of fracture risk, is an area of substantial clinical interest. This paper summarizes the rationale, existing clinical trials data, and other considerations relevant to combination therapy for osteoporosis. Combinations of antiresorbers (eg, estrogen plus bisphosphonates) produce greater increases in bone mass than either treatment alone. Conversely, combining anabolic agents (parathyroid hormone) with bisphosphonates does not produce additive effects. None of the existing studies are large enough to determine whether combination treatment reduces fracture risk to a greater extent than use of a single agent. However, it is certain that combination treatment will increase cost and likely that it will increase side effects and reduce therapy adherence. Given the absence of demonstrated fracture reduction benefit, increased cost and likely increase in adverse events, combination therapy is not currently recommended.

Oral ibandronate: a less frequently administered therapeutic option for postmenopausal osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a severe condition, associated with significant disability as a result of fragility fractures and increased mortality. Oral bisphosphonates effectively reduce the risk of osteoporotic fracture and are generally well tolerated. Unfortunately, patient outcomes are often compromised by suboptimal therapeutic adherence. In other disease areas, reduced dosing frequency has been shown to improve therapeutic adherence. A positive impact for adherence has been observed with a reduction in the bisphosphonate dosing frequency from daily to weekly. However, overall adherence remains suboptimal. Ibandronate is a potent nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate specifically designed for less frequent than weekly administration, without compromise for efficacy or tolerability. This article reviews the pharmacology, efficacy and tolerability of oral ibandronate when administered with extended dosing intervals in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

[Cyclic intravenous pamidronate in treatment of osteoporosis]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of cyclic intravenous pamidronate therapy in women with severe osteoporosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Bone mineral density (BMD) measurement was performed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry using LUNAR DPX-L device. Slow intravenous infusion regimens of pamidronate (30 mg) every three months were used in treatment of 240 women, in addition to supplemental Ca and vitamin D. Bone mineral density was measured from lumbar spine 1 year later (120 mg of pamidronate) in 195 women and 2 years later (240 mg of pamidronate) in 29 women. The placebo group included 63 women treated only with calcium and vitamin D.

RESULTS

The average age of 240 women with severe osteoporosis was 61.2 +/- 9.5. All were postmenopausal, except for two of them. Their mean age at the onset of menopause was 46.2 +/- 5.6. Mean duration of menopause was 15.7 +/- 8.1. After 1 year of therapy, bone mineral density increased from 0.781 g/cm2 to 0.83 7 g/cm2 (p < 0.001), the mean increase bone mass was 7.2% (p < 0.0001). After 2 years, bone mineral density increased to 0.844 g/cm2, the improvement was 8.1% from baseline (p < 0.001). Bone mineral density in the placebo group, after one year, significantly increased (p = 0.046) from 0.966 g/cm2 to 1.004 g/cm2, the improvement was 3.9%. However, after two years, bone mineral density decreased to 0.973 g/cm2, and compared with baseline this change was 0.7% and not significant (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Pamidronate prevented further decrease of BMD in our patients with severe osteoporosis and also increased BMD in these patients. This safe and efficient drug is well tolerated.

Combination therapy for osteoporosis: considerations and controversy

Combination therapy, the simultaneous use of two pharmaceutical agents with the goal being reduction of fracture risk, is an area of substantial clinical interest. This paper summarizes the rationale, existing clinical trials data, and other considerations relevant to combination therapy for osteoporosis. Combinations of antiresorbers (eg, estrogen plus bisphosphonates) produce greater increases in bone mass than either treatment alone. Conversely, combining anabolic agents (parathyroid hormone) with bisphosphonates does not produce additive effects. None of the existing studies are large enough to determine whether combination treatment reduces fracture risk to a greater extent than use of a single agent. However, it is certain that combination treatment will increase cost and likely that it will increase side effects and reduce therapy adherence. Given the absence of demonstrated fracture reduction benefit, increased cost and likely increase in adverse events, combination therapy is not currently recommended.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss in patients with breast or prostate cancer

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To review the prevalence, consequences, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in patients with breast or prostate cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Published articles, abstracts, book chapters, electronic resources, and manufacturer information.

DATA SYNTHESIS

CTIBL is a long-term complication associated with cancer therapies that cause hypogonadism in patients with breast or prostate cancer. Early diagnosis and treatment of CTIBL is essential to prevent bone fractures. CTIBL treatment includes modification of lifestyles that increase the risk of developing bone loss and fractures and includes the use of bone loss therapies (e.g., bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modifiers, calcitonin).

CONCLUSIONS

CTIBL is becoming more common as patients with breast or prostate cancer survive longer. Identifying and treating CTIBL early are important because once bone is lost, damaged bone becomes more difficult to repair; early diagnosis and treatment also may prevent fractures.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Nurses must be knowledgeable about CTIBL to identify high-risk patients and educate patients and their families about CTIBL, bone loss therapies, and lifestyle modifications.

Efficacy of etidronate and sequential monofluorophosphate in severe postmenopausal osteoporosis: a pilot study

In a three-year pilot study on 52 women with severe postmenopausal osteoporosis, treatment with etidronate followed by calcium and vitamin D (ECaD) was compared to etidronate followed by monofluorophosphate, calcium and vitamin D (EFCaD). BMD in lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck increased significantly more with EFCaD than with ECaD. Pain-mobility score decreased significantly more with EFCaD than with ECaD (p=0.006). New vertebral fractures occurred in three patients under EFCaD (12%) and in nine under ECaD (35%), (p=0.048). Three patients under EFCaD (12%) and 15 under ECaD (58%) did not respond to therapy (p of difference=0.001). Mild or moderate adverse reactions were reported by 25 patients, with no significant difference between the two groups. The pilot study suggests that etidronate, sequentially followed by monofluorophosphate, could be a safe, effective and relatively inexpensive therapy in severe postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Bisfosfonatos intravenosos

Bisphosphonates possess a fundamental role in the treatment of bone metabolic diseases. Yet their main limitations are poor oral absorption and gastrointestinal side effects, mainly esophageal irritation. Indeed, oral administration is unpleasant for many patients, and it is difficult in bed-confined subjects. Therefore, intravenous administration of these agents can be very useful in several clinical scenarios, especially to improve the compliance. Recently, it has been showed that intravenous bisphosphonates are very useful to control hypercalcemia of malignancy, and to prevent bone complications related to metastases. Their use has also been analyzed in the prevention of bone disease after organ transplantation. Thus, their application to control Paget's disease of bone is well-known, and probably they could have an important role as antiresorptive agents in postmenopausal and steroidal osteoporosis. We present here a state of the art of the use of intravenous bisphosphonates for the aforementioned disorders.

Combination/sequential therapy in osteoporosis

Combination therapy includes the concomitant or sequential use of compounds sharing the same mode of action (eg, two or more inhibitors of bone resorption) or with distinct pathways of activity (eg, an inhibitor of resorption plus an anabolic agent). Combination use of antiresorptive agents may generate concerns, because of the risk of inducing oversuppression of bone turnover. However, if low doses of estrogen, used for the management of climacteric symptoms, are insufficient to normalize bone turnover, the addition of a bisphosphonate to hormone therapy may prove to be useful to achieve this objective. Patients pretreated with inhibitors of resorption, who have not achieved a full therapeutic response, are good candidates for treatment with anabolic agents. The increase in bone turnover that comes after the introduction of parathyroid hormone (PTH) in patients treated with an antiresorptive agent is similar to that observed in treatment-naïve patients and the pattern of bone mineral density (BMD) increase is also identical, with the exception of a 6 month delay in the spine and hip BMD changes observed in prior alendronate-treated subjects. Current data discourage the concomitant use of alendronate and PTH since the bisphosphonate appears to blunt (in men and women) the anabolic action of PTH. Whether this applies to other bisphosphonates or inhibitors of resorption, remains unknown. The use of an inhibitor of bone resorption after completion of PTH treatment seems an appropriate way to maintain the skeletal benefits gained during therapy. Long-term clinical studies, using fractures as an endpoint should be initiated to better understand the clinical and pharmaco-economic interest of combination therapies in the management of osteoporosis.