Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis with delayed-release risedronate 35 mg weekly for 2 years

Geriatric trauma: there is more to it than just the implant!

Geriatric trauma continues to rise, corresponding with the continuing growth of the older population. These fractures continue to expand, demonstrated by the incidence of hip fractures having grown to 1.5 million adults worldwide per year. This patient population and their associated fracture patterns present unique challenges to the surgeon, as well as having a profound economic impact on the health care system. Pharmacologic treatment has focused on prevention, with aging adults having impaired fracture healing in addition to diminished bone mineral density. Intraoperatively, novel ideas to assess fracture reduction to facilitate decreased fracture collapse have recently been explored. Postoperatively, pharmacologic avenues have focused on future fracture prevention, while shared care models between geriatrics and orthopaedics have shown promise regarding decreasing mortality and length of stay. As geriatric trauma continues to grow, it is imperative that we look to optimize all phases of care, from preoperative to postoperative.

Sequential management of postmenopausal health and osteoporosis: An update

Increased life expectancy means that women are now in a hypoestrogenic state for approximately one-third of their lives. Overall health and specifically bone health during this period evolves in accordance with aging and successive exposure to various risk factors. In this review, we provide a summary of the approaches to the sequential management of osteoporosis within an integrative model of care to offer physicians a useful tool to facilitate therapeutic decision-making. Current evidence suggests that pharmacologic agents should be selected based on the risk of fractures, which does not always correlate with age. Due to their effect on bone turnover and on other hormone-regulated phenomena, such as hot flushes or breast cancer risk, we position hormone therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators as an early postmenopause intervention for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. When the use of these agents is not possible, compelling evidence supports antiresorptive agents as first-line treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in many clinical scenarios, with digestive conditions, kidney function, readiness for compliance, or patient preferences playing a role in choosing between bisphosphonates or denosumab during this period. For patients at high risk of osteoporotic fracture, the "anabolic first" approach reduces that risk. The effect on bone health with these bone-forming agents or with denosumab should be consolidated with the subsequent use of antiresorptive agents. Regardless of the strategy, follow-up and treatment should be maintained indefinitely to help prevent fractures.

Cost-effectiveness of weekly gastro-resistant risedronate 35 mg, compared with weekly alendronate 70 mg tablets, in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in Spain

Aim: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of treating postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) with weekly gastro-resistant risedronate 35 mg gastro-resistant tablets (RIS-GR), compared with weekly alendronate 70 mg tablets (ALN) in Spain. Methods: A probabilistic analysis (second-order Monte Carlo simulation) was performed with a time horizon of 5 years, from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. The bone fracture probabilities were obtained from a cohort study of 3614 women from USA with PMO treated with RIS-GR (1807) or ALN (1807) (Thomasius, 2022). The pharmacological cost and the cost of fractures were obtained from Spanish sources (€ 2022). The utilities of patients with and without fracture (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) were obtained from the medical literature. Results: Compared with ALN, treatment with RIS-GR can avoid 79 fractures (between 75 and 82) every 1000 patients treated, and 0.0119 QALYs would be gained (between 0.0098 and 0.0140) per patient. Additionally, GR-RIS would generate a cost saving per patient of €1994 (€1437-2904) with a probability of 99.7%. The scenario analyses confirmed the stability of the base case results. Conclusion: According to this study, RIS-GR would be the dominant treatment (lower costs with QALY gain) compared with ALN.

Long-term and sequential treatment for osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder that causes impairment of bone structure and strength, leading to a progressively increased risk of fragility fractures. The global prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the ageing population. Owing to the chronic character of osteoporosis, years or even decades of preventive measures or therapy are required. The long-term use of bone-specific pharmacological treatment options, including antiresorptive and/or osteoanabolic approaches, has raised concerns around adverse effects or potential rebound phenomena after treatment discontinuation. Imaging options, risk scores and the assessment of bone turnover during initiation and monitoring of such therapies could help to inform individualized treatment strategies. Combination therapies are currently used less often than 'sequential' treatments. However, all patients with osteoporosis, including those with secondary and rare causes of osteoporosis, as well as specific patient populations (for example, young adults, men and pregnant women) require new approaches for long-term therapy and disease monitoring. New pathophysiological aspects of bone metabolism might therefore help to inform and revolutionize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis.

Fracture risk in women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant risedronate versus immediate release risedronate or alendronate: a claims data analysis in the USA

The study results indicate that women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant risedronate have a lower risk of fracture than those initiated on immediate release risedronate or alendronate. A large proportion of women discontinued all oral bisphosphonate therapies within 1 year of treatment start.

PURPOSE

Using a US claims database (2009-2019), we compared risk of fractures between women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant (GR) risedronate and those initiated on (a) immediate release (IR) risedronate or (b) immediate release alendronate.

METHODS

Women aged ≥ 60 years with osteoporosis who had ≥ 2 oral bisphosphonate prescription fills were followed for ≥ 1 year after the first observed bisphosphonates dispensing (index date). Fracture risk was compared between the GR risedronate and IR risedronate/alendronate cohorts using adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs), both overall and in subgroups with high fracture risk due to older age or comorbidity/medications. Site-specific fractures were identified based on diagnosis codes recorded on medical claims using a claims-based algorithm. Persistence on bisphosphonate therapy was evaluated for all groups.

RESULTS

aIRRs generally indicated lower fracture risk for GR risedronate than IR risedronate and alendronate. When comparing GR risedronate to IR risedronate, statistically significant aIRRs (p < 0.05) were observed for pelvic fractures in the full cohorts (aIRRs = 0.37), for any fracture and pelvic fractures among women aged ≥ 65 years (aIRRs = 0.63 and 0.41), for any fracture and pelvic fractures among women aged ≥ 70 years (aIRRs = 0.69 and 0.24), and for pelvic fracture among high-risk women due to comorbidity/medications (aIRR = 0.34). When comparing GR risedronate to alendronate, statistically significant aIRRs were observed for pelvic fractures in the full cohorts (aIRR = 0.54), for any fracture and wrist/arm fractures among women aged ≥ 65 years (aIRRs = 0.73 and 0.63), and for any fracture, pelvic, and wrist/arm fractures among women aged ≥ 70 years (aIRRs = 0.72, 0.36, and 0.58). In all cohorts, ~ 40% completely discontinued oral bisphosphonates within 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Discontinuation rates of oral bisphosphonate therapy were high. However, women initiated on GR risedronate had a significantly lower risk of fracture for several skeletal sites than women initiated on IR risedronate/alendronate, particularly those aged ≥ 70 years.

Novel formulations of oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis

Oral bisphosphonates are a key intervention in the treatment of osteoporosis and in reducing the risk of fragility fractures. Their use is supported by over 3 decades of evidence; however, patient adherence to oral bisphosphonates remains poor in part due to complex dosing instructions and adverse events, including upper gastrointestinal symptoms. This problem has led to the development of novel oral bisphosphonate formulations. Buffered, effervescent alendronate is dissolved in water and so seeks to reduce upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, and gastro-resistant risedronate aims to reduce the complexity of dosing procedure (e.g. fasting prior to consumption) whilst still maintaining the efficacy of fracture risk reduction. Clinical trials and real-world data have been employed to demonstrate some benefits in terms of reduced upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, adherence, persistence and health economic outcomes. This report describes the result of an ESCEO (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis) expert working group, which explores where oral bisphosphonates sit in current clinical practice guidelines, review their risk-benefit profile and the consequences of poor adherence before exploring novel oral bisphosphonate formulations and their potential clinical and health economic impact. Further research is required but there are signs that these novel, oral bisphosphonate formulations may lead to improved tolerance of oral bisphosphonates and thus, improved adherence and fracture outcomes.

Osteoporosis and Fragility Fractures: currently available pharmacological options and future directions

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue, with a consequent increase in bone fragility and susceptibility to fracture. The average lifetime risk of a 50-year-old woman to suffer a fracture of the spine, hip, proximal humerus, or distal forearm has been estimated at close to 50%. In general, pharmacological treatment is recommended in patients who suffered a fragility fracture because their risk of suffering a subsequent fracture is increased dramatically. Therefore, many guidelines recommend pharmacological treatment in patients without a prevalent fracture if their fracture probability is comparable to or higher than that of a person of the same age with a prevalent fracture. The present review aims to highlight currently available pharmacological treatment options and their antifracture efficacy including safety aspects. Drug classes discussed comprise bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone peptides and derivatives, humanized monoclonal antibodies, and estrogens and gestagens and their combinations. Furthermore, a brief glimpse is provided into a potentially promising treatment option that involves mesenchymal stem cells.

An open-label randomized study of the relative absorption of gastro-resistant risedronate taken fasted or with food versus immediate-release risedronate

Patients with osteoporosis often take oral bisphosphonates with food, rendering these medications ineffective. This study compared the relative absorption of four formulations of gastro‐resistant (GR; formulations 1–4) risedronate 35 mg versus immediate‐release (IR) risedronate 35 mg taken fasted. Secondarily, it compared the relative absorption of GR formulations administered fed and fasted, and determined the site of disintegration. Healthy participants (N = 160) were randomized to one of nine treatment groups: IR risedronate taken fasted (group A) or formulations 1–4 taken fasted or fed (groups B–I). Fasted groups fasted for 8 h pre‐dose and 4 h post‐dose. Fed groups fasted for 7.5 h, then took risedronate with breakfast. Urine was collected until 72 h post‐dose and analyzed using liquid chromatography. From each group, up to seven participants underwent scintigraphic monitoring to assess tablet disintegration. The percentage of total dose recovered in urine (A’_e) was ~0.5% for group A. The A’_e of formulations 1–4 taken fasted was 0.220% (90% confidence interval 0.124–0.389), 0.298% (0.122–0.730), 0.154% (0.090–0.264), and 0.108% (0.051–0.231), respectively. With food, the A’_e of formulation 1 decreased least versus fasted (−27%) compared with the A’_e of formulations 2, 3, and 4 (−73%, −80%, and −65%, respectively). Formulations 1–3 disintegrated in the small intestine, formulation 4 closer to the large intestine. All GR formulations were well tolerated and in line with the known safety profile for IR risedronate. Formulation 2 had the highest absorption when taken fasted, whereas the absorption of formulation 1 was least affected by food.

Risedronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration leading to increased fracture risk. Risedronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts. This is an update of a Cochrane Review that was originally published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures for postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk for fractures, respectively.

SEARCH METHODS

With broader and updated strategies, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase. A grey literature search, including the online databases ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and drug approval agencies, as well as bibliography checks of relevant systematic reviews was also performed. Eligible trials published between 1966 to 24 March 2021 were identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Participants must have received at least one year of risedronate, placebo or other anti-osteoporotic drugs, with or without concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. In the interest of clinical relevance and applicability, we classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled more than one of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, low bone mineral density (BMD)T score ≤ -2.5, and age ≥ 75 years old. If none of these criteria was met, the study was considered to be primary prevention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We pooled the relative risk (RR) of fractures using a fixed-effect model based on the expectation that the clinical and methodological characteristics of the respective primary and secondary prevention studies would be homogeneous, and the experience from the previous review suggesting that there would be a small number of studies. The base case included the data available for the longest treatment period in each placebo-controlled trial and a >15% relative change was considered clinically important. The main findings of the review were presented in summary of findings tables, using the GRADE approach. In addition, we looked at benefit and harm comparisons between different dosage regimens for risedronate and between risedronate and other anti-osteoporotic drugs.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three trials fulfilled the eligibility criteria, among which 33 studies (27,348 participants) reported data that could be extracted and quantitatively synthesized. We had concerns about particular domains of risk of bias in each trial. Selection bias was the most frequent concern, with only 24% of the studies describing appropriate methods for both sequence generation and allocation concealment. Fifty per cent and 39% of the studies reporting benefit and harm outcomes, respectively, were subject to high risk. None of the studies included in the quantitative syntheses were judged to be at low risk of bias in all seven domains. The results described below pertain to the comparisons for daily risedronate 5 mg versus placebo which reported major outcomes. Other comparisons are described in the full text. For primary prevention, low- to very low-certainty evidence was collected from four studies (one to two years in length) including 989 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Risedronate 5 mg/day may make little or no difference to wrist fractures [RR 0.48 ( 95% CI 0.03 to 7.50; two studies, 243 participants); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 7% more)] and withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.18; three studies, 748 participants); ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 5% fewer to 1% more)], based on low-certainty evidence. However, its preventive effects on non-vertebral fractures and serious adverse events are not known due to the very low-certainty evidence. There were zero clinical vertebral and hip fractures reported therefore the effects of risedronate for these outcomes are not estimable.  For secondary prevention, nine studies (one to three years in length) including 14,354 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided evidence. Risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fractures [RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.90; six studies, 12,173 participants); RRR 20% (95% CI 10% to 28%) and ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 3% fewer), moderate certainty], and may reduce hip fractures [RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.94); RRR 27% (95% CI 6% to 44%) and ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 0.2% fewer to 1% fewer), low certainty]. Both of these effects are probably clinically important. However, risedronate's effects are not known for wrist fractures [RR 0.64 (95% CI 0.33 to 1.24); three studies,1746 participants); ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more), very-low certainty] and not estimable for clinical vertebral fractures due to zero events reported (low certainty). Risedronate results in little to no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; eight studies, 9529 participants); ARR 0.3% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more); 16.9% in risedronate versus 17.2% in control, high certainty] and probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events [RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.07; six studies, 9435 participants); ARR 0% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 2% more; 29.2% in both groups, moderate certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update recaps the key findings from our previous review that, for secondary prevention, risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fracture, and may reduce the risk of hip fractures. We are uncertain on whether risedronate 5mg/day reduces clinical vertebral and wrist fractures.  Compared to placebo, risedronate probably does not increase the risk of serious adverse events.  For primary prevention, the benefit and harms of risedronate were supported by limited evidence with high uncertainty.

Fracture rates and economic outcomes in patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant versus other oral bisphosphonates: a claims data analysis

Patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant had a lower incidence of fractures versus those prescribed other oral bisphosphonates. Administration of risedronate gastric-resistant does not require fasting, and this more convenient dosing administration may explain its improved efficacy.

PURPOSE

Up to half of patients do not follow complex dosing instructions of immediate-release bisphosphonates used for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures, which can result in suboptimal effectiveness. Risedronate gastro-resistant (GR) offers a more convenient dosing option by eliminating the need for fasting. This study compares fracture rates and outcomes between osteoporosis women treated with risedronate GR (GR cohort) versus other oral bisphosphonates (other cohort).

METHODS

Claims from women with osteoporosis in the USA were analyzed. Patients were classified into the two cohorts based on the first oral bisphosphonate observed (index date) and matched 1:1 based on patient characteristics. Patients were observed for ≥ 2 years following the index date. Fracture rates, health care resource utilization and costs, and treatment persistence were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 2,726 patients were selected in each cohort (median age: 60.0 years). The incidence of fractures was lower in the GR versus the other cohort for any fracture sites (incidence rate ratio, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.70-0.97) and spine fractures (0.71, 0.54-0.95), although the respective rate of medication discontinuation at 2 years was 80.5% and 74.4%. Time to first fracture was delayed for the GR cohort, reaching statistical significance after 36 months. The GR cohort incurred fewer hospitalizations (incidence rate per 1,000 patient-years: GR = 106.74; other = 124.20, p < 0.05) translating into lower hospitalization costs per patient per year (GR = $3,611; other = $4,603, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients prescribed risedronate GR versus other bisphosphonates had a lower incidence of fractures, which may be explained by the fact that the GR formulation is absorbed even when taken with food.

Uterine Metabolomic Analysis for the Regulation of Eggshell Calcification in Chickens

Eggshell quality is economically important for table eggs and functionally indispensable for hatching eggs. During the formation of eggshell in the uterus, organic matrixes in uterine fluid can control and modify the formation of calcified eggshell. At present, there are limited studies focusing on the effect of uterine organic metabolites on eggshell quality. In this study, an LC-MS-based metabolomic technology was performed to identify the crucial uterine metabolites that differently presented in hens producing eggs with divergent eggshell quality (eggshell strength, thickness, and weight). More than 1000 metabolites were identified in uterine fluid, and six putative metabolites, including phosphatidylcholine, diacylglycerol, verapamil, risedronate, coproporphyrinogen III, and biliverdin, were screened to play crucial roles in eggshell calcification. Then, two trials for oral administration and in vitro calcite crystal growth were conducted to verify the effect of potential different metabolites on the eggshell quality. Verapamil has a temporary effect on decreasing eggshell strength and eggshell thickness. Coproporphyrinogen III could induce smaller calcite crystals to improve eggshell strength while biliverdin could modify crystal morphology by forming rougher faces and rounder edges to strengthen the eggshell. The present study gives us new insight to understand the role of uterine fluid matrixes in eggshell calcification.

Medical treatment of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a common chronic condition that markedly increases the risk of fractures. Osteoporotic-related fractures increase morbidity and mortality and impair quality of life. Therefore, a correct approach for fracture prevention seems mandatory. Lifestyle changes should be recommended to all patients, including weight reduction if patients are obese/overweight, increasing physical activity and avoiding alcohol consumption and smoking. Additionally, calcium and vitamin D3 should be prescribed until the vitamin D deficit is resolved. Osteoporosis treatment options mainly include antiresorptives (i.e. estrogens, selective estrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates, denosumab) and anabolic agents (i.e. teriparatide, abaloparatide, romosozumab). Although presenting differences in efficacy and side effects, they have all been shown to increase bone mineral density (BMD) and to reduce osteoporotic-related fractures. Monotherapy with antiresorptive agents, particularly oral bisphosphonates, should be considered routinely as the first option for treatment of postmenopausal women. However, in the case of side effects, therapeutic failure or the need for long-term use, anabolic agents may be considered. In high-risk patients, anabolic agents may be considered as an initial therapeutic option. The combination of antiresorptive and anabolic agents may be useful to increase BMD compared with monotherapy, but more information is warranted to determine the effects on fracture risk.

Optimal Dosing Regimen of Osteoporosis Drugs in Relation to Food Intake as the Key for the Enhancement of the Treatment Effectiveness-A Concise Literature Review

Bisphosphonates and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) represent the two most important groups of medications taken orally and employed in osteoporosis treatment. Effectiveness of the therapy may be affected by poor patient adherence, in particular, due to the inconvenient dosing regimen of oral bisphosphonates. With this review we aimed to assess the effects that food, beverages, and dietary supplements consumed during treatment, along with the dosing regimens, may have on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral drugs employed in treating osteoporosis; we also aimed to shape the recommendations valuable for professional patients’ counseling and education, to provide appropriate dosing regimens in order to improve adherence to the therapy. Food, beverages such as coffee, juices, and mineral water, as well as dietary supplements containing multivalent cations, e.g., calcium, magnesium, aluminium, iron, showed to have a deleterious effect on the bioavailability of all the investigated oral bisphosphonates, specifically alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, minodronate, and etidronate. For risedronate, a delayed-release (DR) tablet was designed to solve the malabsorption problem in the presence of food, hence DR risedronate can be ingested following breakfast. For other oral bisphosphonates, the proper interval between drug and food, beverages, and dietary supplements intake should be maintained to minimize the risk of interactions. The effect of food on pharmacokinetic parameters of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) was found to be clinically irrelevant.

Pathways linking activity, adiposity, and inflammation to bone mineral density in women and men from NHANES 2007 to 2010

OBJECTIVES

Age, sedentary activity, central adiposity, and inflammation have all been independently associated with bone mineral density (BMD). We assessed how the effects of sedentary activity and central adiposity on BMD of the lumbar spine and femoral neck change across early to late adulthood and whether these relationships are mediated by inflammation.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 7135 women and men 20 years of age and older from NHANES 2007 to 2010. Anthropometrics, sedentary activity (min/day), serum CRP (mg/dl), and BMD (gm/cm² measured by DXA scans) at the femoral neck and lumbar spine. Data were compared by age and sex groups and through causal mediation analysis.

RESULTS

The effect of waist circumference on BMD was significantly mediated by serum CRP at both skeletal sites in men and at the femoral neck in women. Sedentary activity did not have a direct relationship to BMD but was mediated by waist circumference in men. Least square means differed significantly by sex and age groups with a general age-related decline in BMD at both skeletal sites.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that central adiposity, independent of overall body size and composition as measured through BMI, has an inverse relationship with BMD that is mediated by serum CRP. In addition, the negative impact of increased sedentism acted through changes in central adiposity (waist circumference) but only in men. Although low bone density and osteoporosis are often considered degenerative diseases that primarily impact postmenopausal women, our findings show that sedentary activity and central adiposity impact bone density beginning in early adulthood in both women and men.

The treatment gap: The missed opportunities for osteoporosis therapy

Despite substantial advances in delineation of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk assessment and treatment of osteoporosis over the last three decades, a substantial proportion of men and women at high risk of fracture remain untreated - the so-called "treatment gap". This review summarises the important patient-, physician- and policyrelated causes of this treatment gap, before discussing in greater detail: (a) the evidence base for the efficacy of bisphosphonates in osteoporosis; (b) recent evidence relating to the adverse effects of this widely used therapeutic class, most notably atypical femoral fracture and osteonecrosis of the jaw; (c) available strategies to improve both secondary and primary prevention pathways for the management of this disorder.

Lactobacillus plantarum GKM3 and Lactobacillus paracasei GKS6 Supplementation Ameliorates Bone Loss in Ovariectomized Mice by Promoting Osteoblast Differentiation and Inhibiting Osteoclast Formation

Osteoporosis, an imbalance in the bone-forming process mediated by osteoblasts and the bone-resorbing function mediated by osteoclasts, is a bone degenerative disease prevalent among the aged population. Due to deleterious side effects of currently available medications, probiotics as a potential treatment of osteoporosis is an appealing approach. Hence, this study aims to evaluate the beneficial effects of two novel Lactobacilli strain probiotics on bone health in ovariectomized (OVX) induced osteoporotic mice model and its underlying mechanisms. Forty-five 9-week-old Institute of Cancer Research (ICR) mice underwent either a sham-operation (n = 9) or OVX (n = 36). Four days after the operation, OVX mice were further divided into four groups and received either saline alone, Lactobacillus plantarum GKM3, Lactobacillus paracasei GKS6 or alendronate per day for 28 days. After sacrifice by decapitation, right distal femur diaphysis was imaged via micro-computed tomography (MCT) and parameters including bone volume/tissue volume ratio (BV/TV), trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), trabecular number (Tb.N), trabecular separation (Tb.Sp), and bone mineral density (BMD) were measured. Moreover, GKM3 and GKS6 on RANKL-induced osteoclast formation and osteoblast differentiation using in vitro cultures were also investigated. The results showed that both probiotics strains inhibited osteoporosis in the OVX mice model, with L. paracasei GKS6 outperforming L. plantarum GKM3. Besides this, both GKS6 and GKM3 promoted osteoblast differentiation and inhibited RANKL-induced osteoclast differentiation via the Bone Morphogenetic Proteins (BMP) and RANKL pathways, respectively. These findings suggested that both strains of Lactobacilli may be pursued as potential candidates for the treatment and management of osteoporosis, particularly in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Anti-fracture Efficacy of Monthly Risedronate Compared with That of Weekly Risedronate in Postmenopausal Korean Women with Osteoporosis: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Background

Intermittent dosing regimens for oral risedronate (once-monthly and once-weekly) were developed for patient convenience. While several studies have reported the anti-fracture efficacy of weekly dosing, few have assessed monthly dosing. The lower efficacy of monthly dosing has been previously suggested. The aim of this study was to compare the anti-fracture efficacy of monthly and weekly dosing.

Methods

We obtained information from the Korea National Health Insurance Service database from 2012 to 2017 of Korean women of ≥50 years of age who used weekly or monthly risedronate. We compared the time of occurrence of the first osteoporotic fracture after the first prescription of risedronate. Using a Cox proportional model, we assessed incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for fractures at any site, and the hip, vertebral, and non-vertebral sites between both regimens. Propensity score weighting was used to balance the treatment groups.

Results

The study populations were distributed according to dosing frequency (monthly, 27,329; weekly, 47,652). There was no significant difference in the incidence rate of new fractures in any site (IRR, 1.008; 95% CI,0.963–1.055; P=0.737), hip (IRR, 0.999; 95% CI, 0.769–1.298; P=0.996), vertebral (IRR, 0.962; 95% CI, 0.890–1.040; P=0.330), or non-vertebral (1.022; 95% CI, 0.968–1.078; P=0.439) sites between monthly and weekly risedronate.

Conclusion

The anti-fracture efficacy at any site and the examined individual sites was similar for the monthly and weekly risedronate regimens. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are required for confirmation.

Phase II/III, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study of monthly delayed-release versus daily immediate-release risedronate tablets in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis

Absorption of oral immediate-release (IR) risedronate tablets is reduced by food intake, thus a delayed-release (DR) tablet has been developed to overcome the necessity of taking IR tablets under fasting conditions. This randomized, double-blind, phase II/III study compared efficacy and safety of risedronate IR once-daily (QD) and DR once-monthly (QM) tablets in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis. Patients received 2.5 mg IR on awakening QD, or 25 or 37.5 mg DR on awakening, following breakfast, or 30 min after breakfast, QM for 12 months. Primary endpoint was non-inferiority in mean percent change from baseline to end of study (month 12, last observation carried forward [M12, LOCF]) in mean lumbar spine (L₂-L₄) bone mineral density (BMD) between risedronate IR on awakening and DR following breakfast. Mean percent changes in (L₂-L₄) BMD at M12, LOCF were 5.07% (IR at awakening, n = 190), 3.36% (25 mg DR following breakfast, n = 194), and 4.11% (37.5 mg DR following breakfast, n = 181). Mean percent change in (L₂-L₄) BMD was numerically lower in the DR following breakfast groups versus the respective on awakening and 30 min after breakfast DR groups. Overall incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were comparable between groups. In the DR groups, 1.5-4.0% of patients reported TEAEs potentially associated with acute-phase reactions versus 0% in the IR group. In this study, non-inferiority could not be declared for 37.5 or 25 mg DR following breakfast QM (p = 0.1346 or p = 0.6711, respectively) versus 2.5 mg IR on awakening QD.

Dental students' knowledge of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to evaluate and assess knowledge and attitude of dental students about medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), to optimize future training programs in this field.

Materials and Methods:

A cross-sectional study was administrated. Ninety-eight participants agreed to complete an anonymous questionnaire. It was divided into two sections: the first section was about general information such as interviewer's gender and date of birth; the second section included questions about bisphosphonates (BPs), others medication associated to osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), risk factors, and prevention of osteonecrosis. Descriptive statistics were computed and the odds ratio was used to compare the odds for the groups.

Results:

Ninety-nine percent of participants declared to know BPs, but only 26.9% of 4^th year and 34.8% of 6^th year students knew the correct definition of MRONJ. Almost all of students identified the importance to report, in anamnesis, the use of BPs, as well as to check-up patients before the beginning of treatment; on the other hand, the knowledge about how invasive dental treatment might be carried out in patients under therapy was not adequate. In addition, half of the students did not recognize any active principle or commercial name of BPs. The situation was even worse regarding alternative drugs involved in ONJ.

Conclusions:

These findings are alarming and the lack of knowledge about MRONJ suggests that greater educational efforts should be performed about this pathology at undergraduate level.

Effect of Preoperative Bisphosphonate Treatment on Fracture Healing after Internal Fixation Treatment of Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures

Purpose

There are concerns that administration of bisphosphonate (BP) can substantially suppress bone turnover, potentially interfering with fracture healing. We investigated the effects of preoperative BP administration before internal fixation of intertrochanteric femoral fractures using fracture healing and clinical outcomes.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data from 130 patients who underwent internal fixation for osteoporotic intertrochanteric femoral fractures between March 2012 and July 2016. Patients previously treated with BPs for at least 3 months (BP group; n=29) were compared with the remaining patients (BP-naïve group; n=101). Radiographs were used to assess and compare fracture healing 3 months and 1 year postsurgery. The primary clinical outcome measure assessed was change in Koval score.

Results

Fracture union at 3 months after surgery was verified in 72.4% of patients (21/29) in the BP group and 90.1% of patients (91/101) in the BP-naïve group (P=0.027). Fracture union at 1 year postsurgery (BP group, 93.1% [27/29] vs. BP-naïve group, 97.0% [98/101], P=0.310) and change in Koval score (1.1 vs. 1.0, P=0.694) were not significantly different between the groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that a history of BP administration was associated with an increased risk of delayed union at 3 months postsurgery (P=0.014).

Conclusion

Preoperative administration of BP was associated with a decreased fracture healing rate 3 months after internal fixation, compared with BP-naïve patients. Therefore, patients previously treated with a BP should be carefully allowed to wean off walking aids and transition to full weight-bearing in the early postoperative period.

Cost-effectiveness of gastro-resistant risedronate tablets for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France

The use of gastro-resistant risedronate, a convenient dosing regimen for oral bisphosphonate therapy, seems a cost-effective strategy compared with weekly alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.

INTRODUCTION

Gastro-resistant (GR) risedronate tablets are associated with improved persistence compared to common oral bisphosphonates but are slightly more expensive. This study assessed its cost-effectiveness compared to weekly alendronate and generic risedronate for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.

METHODS

A previously validated Markov microsimulation model was used to estimate the lifetime costs (expressed in €2017) per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of GR risedronate compared with weekly alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment. Pooled efficacy data for bisphosphonates derived from a previous meta-analysis were used for all treatment options, and persistence data (up to 3 years) were obtained from a large Australian longitudinal study. Evaluation was done for high-risk women 60-80 years of age, with a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score ≤ - 2.5 and/or prevalent vertebral fractures.

RESULTS

In all of the simulated populations, GR risedronate was cost-effective compared to alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment at a threshold of €60,000 per QALY gained. In women with a BMD T-score ≤ - 2.5 and prevalent vertebral fractures, the cost per QALY gained of GR risedronate compared to alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment falls below €20,000 per QALY gained. In women aged 75 years and older, GR risedronate was even shown to be dominant (more QALYs, less costs) compared to alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first economic results about GR risedronate, suggesting that it represents a cost-effective strategy compared with weekly alendronate and generic risedronate for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.

European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

Guidance is provided in a European setting on the assessment and treatment of postmenopausal women at risk from fractures due to osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION

The International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2013. This manuscript updates these in a European setting.

METHODS

Systematic reviews were updated.

RESULTS

The following areas are reviewed: the role of bone mineral density measurement for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk; general and pharmacological management of osteoporosis; monitoring of treatment; assessment of fracture risk; case-finding strategies; investigation of patients; health economics of treatment. The update includes new information on the evaluation of bone microstructure evaluation in facture risk assessment, the role of FRAX® and Fracture Liaison Services in secondary fracture prevention, long-term effects on fracture risk of dietary intakes, and increased fracture risk on stopping drug treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use.

Postmenopausal osteoporosis: Assessment and management

Osteoporosis increases the risk of fractures, which are associated with increased mortality and lower quality of life. Patients with prevalent fracture are at high risk to of sustaining another one. Optimal protein and calcium intakes, and vitamin D supplies, together with regular weight bearing physical exercise are the corner stones of fracture prevention. Evidence for anti-fracture efficacy of pharmacological interventions relies on results from randomised controlled trials in postmenopausal women with fractures as the primary outcome. Treatments with bone resorption inhibitors, like bisphosphonates or denosumab, and bone formation stimulator like teriparatide, reduce vertebral and non-vertebral fracture risk. A reduction in vertebral fracture risk can already be detected within a year after starting therapy.

Osteoporosis: A Review of Treatment Options

Approximately 10 million men and women in the U.S. have osteoporosis,1 a metabolic bone disease characterized by low bone density and deterioration of bone architecture that increase the risk of fractures.2 Osteoporosis-related fractures can increase pain, disability, nursing home placement, total health care costs, and mortality.3 The diagnosis of osteoporosis is primarily determined by measuring bone mineral density (BMD) using noninvasive dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Osteoporosis medications include bisphosphonates, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand inhibitors, estrogen agonists/antagonists, parathyroid hormone analogues, and calcitonin.3-6 Emerging therapies utilizing novel mechanisms include a cathepsin K inhibitor and a monoclonal antibody against sclerostin.7,8 While professional organizations have compiled recommendations for the management of osteoporosis in various populations, a consensus has yet to develop as to which is the gold standard; therefore, economic evaluations have been increasingly important to help guide decision-makers. A review of cost-effectiveness literature on the efficacy of oral bisphosphonates has shown alendronate and risedronate to be most cost-effective in women with low BMD without previous fractures.9 Guidelines are inconsistent as to the place in therapy of denosumab (Prolia, Amgen). In economic analyses evaluating treatment of postmenopausal women, denosumab outperformed risedronate and ibandronate; its efficacy was comparable to generic alendronate, but it cost more.10 With regard to older men with osteoporosis, denosumab was also found to be cost-effective when compared with bisphosphonates and teriparatide (Forteo, Lilly).11.

The safety and tolerability profile of therapies for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

At a time when the prevalence of osteoporosis and related fractures is increasing, initiation and continuation of pharmacologic therapies for prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis have declined. This decline has been at least in part attributable to concerns about safety of these agents, such as atypical fractures with bisphosphonates and breast cancer with estrogen/progestin therapy, particularly when they are used long term by older women. However, in many cases, absolute risk of serious adverse effects is small and should be balanced against the larger potential for fracture reduction. Here, we review the safety and tolerability of available therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Taking into consideration their relative efficacy, we also provide strategies for optimization of the risk:benefit ratio.

Gender- and body-site-specific factors associated with bone mineral density in a non-institutionalized Korean population aged ≥50 years

The aim of this study was to investigate the gender- and body-site-specific factors associated with bone mineral density (BMD) at the femoral neck and lumbar spine in a non-institutionalized population aged ≥50 years characterized by low average calcium intake. The comprehensive data utilized were from the 2010 Fifth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which included health behavior questionnaire, blood and urine tests, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and nutrition intake. The factors associated with BMD at the femoral neck and lumbar spine in both genders were analyzed separately using multiple regression analysis with a stepwise selection. The average daily calcium intake in the male subjects was 565.8 mg and in the female subjects was 443.7 mg. In multiple regression analysis, age, body mass index (BMI), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), lead, daily calcium intake, and cadmium were the significant factors associated with femoral neck BMD in male subjects. BMI, creatinine (Cr), total body fat percentile, lead, ALP, and hypertension were found to be the significant factors associated with lumbar spine BMD in male subjects. In the female subjects, the significant factors associated with femoral neck BMD were age, BMI, ALP, house income, and total body fat percentile, while menopause, Cr, mercury, house income, BMI, and ALP were found to be the significant factors associated with lumbar spine BMD. In conclusion, different factors were associated with BMD depending on gender and the body site tested (femoral neck or lumbar spine). These gender- and body-site-specific factors need to be considered for the prevention and management of osteoporosis.

Histomorphometric analysis of the femoral neck in patients with and without femoral neck fracture

OBJECTIVE:

To determine, through bone histomorphometry in femoral neck, whether there are differences in the cancellous bone of the proximal femur from female patients over 60 years old who had femoral neck fracture and similar patients who did not have such fracture.

METHODS:

We analyzed the trabecular part of the femur of 13 female patients, aged over 60 years old, by the bone histomorphometry method. Seven of these patients had femoral neck fracture. All of them were subjected to hip arthroplasty.

RESULTS:

Bone densitometry showed no significant difference. There was no significant difference on the average thickness of the trabecular bone (124.38µm versus 147.09µm). The number of bone trabeculae was lower (1.52, versus 1.88) and the separation between them was larger (541,19µm versus 391,14µm) in the fracture group.

CONCLUSION:

A difference in histomorphometric parameters of cancellous bone of the femur neck was observed among patients who had fractures as compared to patients who had not.

Level of Evidence II, Diagnostic Studies.

Influence of patient perceptions and preferences for osteoporosis medication on adherence behavior in the Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction study

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate patient perceptions of subcutaneous denosumab or oral alendronate in postmenopausal women with or at risk for osteoporosis and how these perceptions influence adherence.

METHODS

Postmenopausal women with low bone mass were randomized to denosumab 60 mg every 6 months for 1 year (treatment period 1 [TP1]) followed by alendronate 70 mg once weekly for 1 year (treatment period 2 [TP2]), or vice versa. Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire data were collected at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months; a necessity-concerns differential (NCD) was calculated for each time point. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the influences of baseline characteristics on nonadherence.

RESULTS

Participants included 250 women (alendronate/denosumab, n = 124; denosumab/alendronate, n = 126). During TP1, the NCD at month 6 was higher with denosumab than with alendronate (P = 0.0076). In TP2, the NCD was higher for women switched to denosumab than for women switched to alendronate at 6 months (P = 0.0126) and 12 months (P = 0.4605). Denosumab was preferred to alendronate regardless of treatment sequence (P < 0.0001). Covariate analysis revealed that higher TP2 baseline necessity scores were associated with lower odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0055), whereas higher concerns about medication scores were associated with higher odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0247). Higher NCD scores were also associated with lower odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0015).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants preferred denosumab to alendronate while on treatment and had more positive perceptions of denosumab than alendronate. These perceptions were associated with better adherence.

Prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

In the beginning, that is from the 1960's, when a link between menopause and osteoporosis was first identified; estrogen treatment was the standard for preventing bone loss, however there was no fracture data, even though it was thought to be effective. This continued until the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study in 2001 that published data on 6 years of treatment with hormone therapy that showed an increase in heart attacks and breast cancer. Even though the risks were small, 1 per 1500 users annually, patients were worried and there was a large drop off in estrogen use. In later analyses the WHI study showed that estrogen reduced fractures and actually prevented heart attacks in the 50-60 year age group. Estrogen alone appeared to be safer to use than estrogen+the progestin medroxyprogesterone acetate and actually reduced breast cancer. At the same time other drugs were being developed for bone that belong to the bisphosphonate group and the first generation of compounds showed moderate potency on bone resorption. The second and third generation compounds were much more potent and in a series of large trials were shown to reduce fractures. For the last 15 years the treatment of osteoporosis belonged to the bisphosphonate compounds, most of which reduce fracture rates by 50 percent. With the exception of gastrointestinal irritation the drugs are well tolerated and highly effective. The sophistication of the delivery systems now allow treatment that can be given daily, weekly, monthly and annually either orally or intravenously. Bone remodeling is a dynamic process that repairs microfractures and replaces old bone with new bone. In the last 10 years there has been a remarkable understanding of bone biology so that new therapies can be specifically designed on a biological basis. The realization that RANKL was the final cytokine involved in the resorption process and that marrow cells produced a natural antagonist called Osteoprotegerin (OPG) quickly led to two lines of therapy. First OPG was used as a therapy to block RANKL was initially successful but later antibodies against OPG developed and this line of treatment had to be discontinued. The next step was to develop a monoclonal antibody against RANKL and this proved to be highly effective in blocking bone resorption. It led to development of a drug Denosumab that successfully reduces fractures and is now one of the therapeutic options for osteoporosis treatment. On the anabolic side bone biology research showed that osteocytes produces sclerostin an inhibitor of the anabolic WNT signaling pathway. Recent development of a monoclonal antibody against sclerostin has shown remarkable anabolic activity in bone showing large increases in bone density and fracture trials are now underway. The newer treatments for osteoporosis are likely to be based on our understanding of bone biology and the design of new highly specific compounds with fewer side effects. This review summarizes the diagnosis of postmenopausal osteoporosis and various available non-pharmacological and pharmacological therapies available for its management. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'Menopause'.

Eliminating the need for fasting with oral administration of bisphosphonates

Bisphosphonates are the major treatment of choice for osteoporosis, given that they are attached preferentially by bone and significantly reduce the risk of fractures. Oral bisphosphonates are poorly absorbed (usually less than 1% for nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates) and when taken with food or beverages create complexes that cannot be absorbed. For this reason, they must be taken on an empty stomach, and a period of up to 2 hours must elapse before the consumption of any food or drink other than plain water. This routine is not only inconvenient but can lead to discontinuation of treatment, and when mistakenly taken with food, may result in misdiagnosis of resistance to or failure of treatment. The development of an enteric-coated delayed-release formulation of risedronate with the addition of the calcium chelator, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), a widely used food stabilizer, eliminates the need for fasting without affecting the bioavailability of risedronate or its efficacy.