Abaloparatide effect on forearm bone mineral density and wrist fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

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.

A comprehensive review and advanced biomolecule-based therapies for osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of osteoporosis (OP) on a global scale is significantly elevated that causes life threatening issues. The potential of groundbreaking biomolecular therapeutics in the field of OP is highly encouraging. The administration of biomolecular agents has the potential to mitigate the process of bone demineralization while concurrently augmenting the regenerative capacity of bone tissue, thereby facilitating a personalized therapeutic approach. Biomolecules-based therapies showed promising results in term of bone mass protection and restoration in OP.

AIM OF REVIEW

We summarized the recent biomolecular therapies with notable progress in clinical, demonstrating the potential to transform illness management. These treatments frequently utilize different biomolecule based strategies. Biomolecular therapeutics has a targeted character, which results in heightened specificity and less off-target effects, ultimately leading to increased patient outcomes. These aspects have the capacity to greatly enhance the management of OP, thus resulting in a major enhancement in the quality of life encountered by individuals affected by this condition.

The Safety and Efficacy of Abaloparatide on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aging of the population increases the incidence of postmenopausal osteoporosis, which threatens the health of elderly women. Abaloparatide is a synthetic peptide analogue of the human parathyroid hormone-related protein that has recently been approved for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Its efficacy and safety have not been systematically evaluated. Therefore, studies on the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide could be of assistance in the clinical medication of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of abaloparatide in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were electronically searched from inception to July 6, 2023, for relevant randomized controlled trials. Two review authors independently conducted the study screening, quality assessment (based on the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool recommended in the Cochrane handbook), and data extraction. Outcome measures included bone mineral density (BMD), bone turnover and metabolic markers, incidence of fractures, and adverse events. Data analyses were processed by using Stata SE15.

FINDINGS

Ultimately, 8 randomized controlled trials, involving a total of 3705 postmenopausal women, were included. Meta-analysis showed that abaloparatide administration significantly increased the BMD of the lumbar vertebrae (standardized mean difference [SMD], 1.28 [95% CI, 0.81-1.76); I2 = 78.5%]), femoral neck (SMD, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.17-1.23; I2 = 75.7%]), and hip bone (SMD, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.53-1.20; I2 = 60.4%]) in postmenopausal women compared with the control group. Type I procollagen N-terminal propeptide, a bone formation marker, was also elevated after abaloparatide administration. The incidence of vertebral fracture was lower in the abaloparatide group than in the control group (risk ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06-0.26; I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the abaloparatide and the placebo groups (risk ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06; I2 = 0%).

IMPLICATIONS

Abaloparatide has a protective effect on women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. It could reduce their risk for vertebral fracture; increase their BMD of the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and hip; and alleviate symptoms and complications of postmenopausal osteoporosis with considerable safety. Limitations of this study include not searching the gray literature and not performing a subgroup analysis. PROSPERO Registration No.: CRD42022370944.

The Sequential Therapy in Osteoporosis

Background

Osteoporosis management often involves a sequential treatment approach to optimize patient outcomes and minimize fracture risks. This strategy is tailored to individual patient characteristics, treatment responses, and fracture risk profiles.

Methods

A thorough literature review was systematically executed using prominent databases, including PubMed and EMBASE. The primary aim was to identify original articles and clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of sequential therapy with anti-osteoporosis drugs, focusing on the period from 1995 to 2023. The analysis encompassed an in-depth examination of osteoporosis drugs, delineating their mechanisms of action, side effects, and current trends as elucidated in the literature.

Results and Discussion

Our study yielded noteworthy insights into the optimal sequencing of pharmacologic agents for the long-term treatment of patients necessitating multiple drugs. Notably, the achievement of optimal improvements in bone mass is observed when commencing treatment with an anabolic medication, followed by the subsequent utilization of an antiresorptive drug. This stands in contrast to initiating therapy with a bisphosphonate, which may potentially diminish outcomes in the post-anabolic intervention period. Furthermore, it has been discerned that caution should be exercised against transitioning from denosumab to PTH homologs due to the adverse effects of heightened bone turnover and sustained weakening of bone structure. Despite the absence of fracture data substantiating the implementation of integrated anabolic/antiresorptive pharmacotherapy, the incorporation of denosumab and teriparatide presents a potential avenue worthy of consideration for individuals at a heightened vulnerability to fragility fractures.

Conclusions

A judiciously implemented sequential treatment strategy in osteoporosis offers a flexible and tailored approach to address diverse clinical scenarios, optimizing fracture prevention and patient outcomes.

Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To review the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments, including the bone anabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, on reducing the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women, and to characterise the effect of antiosteoporosis drug treatments on the risk of fractures according to baseline risk factors.

DESIGN

Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify randomised controlled trials published between 1 January 1996 and 24 November 2021 that examined the effect of bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo or active comparator.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials that included non-Asian postmenopausal women with no restriction on age, when interventions looked at bone quality in a broad perspective. The primary outcome was clinical fractures. Secondary outcomes were vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and major osteoporotic fractures, all cause mortality, adverse events, and serious cardiovascular adverse events.

RESULTS

The results were based on 69 trials (>80 000 patients). For clinical fractures, synthesis of the results showed a protective effect of bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo. Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, bisphosphonates were less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.00). Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and romosozumab, denosumab was less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.85, 1.18 to 2.92 for denosumab v parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and 1.56, 1.02 to 2.39 for denosumab v romosozumab). An effect of all treatments on vertebral fractures compared with placebo was found. In the active treatment comparisons, denosumab, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab were more effective than oral bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral fractures. The effect of all treatments was unaffected by baseline risk indicators, except for antiresorptive treatments that showed a greater reduction of clinical fractures compared with placebo with increasing mean age (number of studies=17; β=0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99). No harm outcomes were seen. The certainty in the effect estimates was moderate to low for all individual outcomes, mainly because of limitations in reporting, nominally indicating a serious risk of bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicated a benefit of a range of treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women for clinical and vertebral fractures. Bone anabolic treatments were more effective than bisphosphonates in the prevention of clinical and vertebral fractures, irrespective of baseline risk indicators. Hence this analysis provided no clinical evidence for restricting the use of anabolic treatment to patients with a very high risk of fractures.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019128391.

Is abaloparatide more efficacious on increasing bone mineral density than teriparatide for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis? An updated meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis poses a challenge to public health, causing fragility fractures, especially in postmenopausal women. Abaloparatide (ABL) is an effective anabolic agent to improve bone formation and resorption among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Our meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of ABL versus teriparatide (TPTD) in improving bone mineral density (BMD).

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane databases and Clinicaltrial.gov until September 2, 2022. We included data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and post hoc analyses of RCTs. Outcomes included BMD change from baseline and risks of adverse events. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the quality of outcomes.

RESULTS

Four studies including 16 subgroups were included in this study. In particular, RCTs with head-to-head comparisons of ABL and TPTD were used in the meta-analysis, and all were from manufacturer-sponsored trials. All parameters in 24 weeks except lumbar spine (versus TPTD) showed significant advantages in the ABL group. Only the results of two subgroups in ABL versus TPTD demonstrated High GRADE quality (femoral neck: weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.58 [0.52, 2.63]; Total hip: WMD = 1.46 [0.59, 2.32]). However, our fracture data were insufficient. Besides, we found no evident difference in serious adverse events or deaths in either group and the incidence of hypercalcemia in the ABL group lessened by 51% compared with the TPTD group. Nevertheless, compared with placebo, ABL demonstrated higher risks of nausea and palpitations.

CONCLUSION

ABL demonstrated a beneficial effect on BMD compared to both placebo and TPTD for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. ABL also had insignificantly lowered adverse event risk than TPTD. ABL is an alternative for patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Bone mineral density of the ultra-distal radius: are we ignoring valuable information?

The current study explored the possible utilization in dual-X-ray-absorptiometry scanning (DXA) of the ultra-distal radius (UDR). This region of interest is currently unused and mostly unstudied in this context. The study findings suggest UDR as potential useful region of interest in DXA scanning and warrant further study of the site.

PURPOSE

Bone mineral density (BMD) measurement of a non-dominant arm is not routinely performed during dual-X-ray-absorptiometry (DXA) test, and the possible utility of ultra-distal (UDR) radius BMD is not well-studied. We evaluated in women, correlations of UDR BMD with fracture prevalence, fracture risk prediction by the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), and osteoporosis diagnosed by traditional sites.

METHODS

Women who underwent a routine DXA (including their non-dominant forearm and including UDR BMD) in a tertiary medical center were included. Risk factors relevant to FRAX calculation were assessed via a self-administered questionnaire. Spearman correlations of UDR BMD to 10-year risks of major osteoporotic and hip fractures (assessed by FRAX) were explored. The possible added value of UDR BMD in explaining prevalent osteoporotic fractures was assessed using a multivariable regression model incorporating age and traditional osteoporosis diagnosis.

RESULTS

The study included 1245 women with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range: 59-73), of whom 298 (24%) had UDR T-score ≤  - 2.5 and 154 (12%) reported prior fractures. UDR BMD was significantly negatively correlated with FRAX risk score for hip and major osteoporotic fractures (R =  - 0.5 and R =  - 0.41, respectively; P < 0.001). UDR T-score ≤  - 2.5 was associated with higher fracture prevalence (19% vs 10%; P < 0.001) and remained significant after adjusting for traditional BMD and age (OR 1.49, 1.01-2.19; P = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

UDR BMD correlates both with prior fractures and with predicted fracture risks and might pose added value over traditional DXA sites.

Executive summary: Italian guidelines for diagnosis, risk stratification, and care continuity of fragility fractures 2021

Background

Fragility fractures are a major public health concern owing to their worrying and growing burden and their onerous burden upon health systems. There is now a substantial body of evidence that individuals who have already suffered a fragility fracture are at a greater risk for further fractures, thus suggesting the potential for secondary prevention in this field.

Purpose

This guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for recognizing, stratifying the risk, treating, and managing patients with fragility fracture. This is a summary version of the full Italian guideline.

Methods

The Italian Fragility Fracture Team appointed by the Italian National Health Institute was employed from January 2020 to February 2021 to (i) identify previously published systematic reviews and guidelines on the field, (ii) formulate relevant clinical questions, (iii) systematically review literature and summarize evidence, (iv) draft the Evidence to Decision Framework, and (v) formulate recommendations.

Results

Overall, 351 original papers were included in our systematic review to answer six clinical questions. Recommendations were categorized into issues concerning (i) frailty recognition as the cause of bone fracture, (ii) (re)fracture risk assessment, for prioritizing interventions, and (iii) treatment and management of patients experiencing fragility fractures. Six recommendations were overall developed, of which one, four, and one were of high, moderate, and low quality, respectively.

Conclusions

The current guidelines provide guidance to support individualized management of patients experiencing non-traumatic bone fracture to benefit from secondary prevention of (re)fracture. Although our recommendations are based on the best available evidence, questionable quality evidence is still available for some relevant clinical questions, so future research has the potential to reduce uncertainty about the effects of intervention and the reasons for doing so at a reasonable cost.

Advancement in the Treatment of Osteoporosis and the Effects on Bone Healing

Osteoporosis (OP) is a major global health concern, with aging being one of the most important risk factors. Osteoarthritis (OA) is also an age-related disorder. Patients with OP and/or OA may be treated surgically for fractures or when their quality of life is impaired. Poor bone quality due to OP can seriously complicate the stability of a bone fixation construct and/or surgical fracture treatment. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the pathophysiology of normal and osteoporotic bone healing, the effect of a bone fracture on bone turnover markers, the diagnosis of a low bone mineral density (BMD) before surgical intervention, and the effect of available anti-osteoporosis treatment. Interventions that improve bone health may enhance the probability of favorable surgical outcomes. Fracture healing and the treatment of atypical femoral fractures are also discussed.

The why and how of sequential and combination therapy in osteoporosis. A review of the current evidence

It is now well recognized that over the lifetime of a patient with osteoporosis, more than one medication will be needed to treat the disease and to decrease fracture risk. Though current gaps in osteoporosis therapy can be potentially mitigated with sequential and combination regimens, how to move seamlessly amongst the multiple treatments currently available for osteoporosis for sustained efficacy is still unclear. Data from recent studies show that an anabolic agent such as teriparatide or romosozumab followed by an antiresorptive affords maximal gain in BMD and possibly better and earlier fracture risk reduction compared to a regimen which follows the opposite sequence. Sequentially moving to a bisphosphonate such as alendronate from an anabolic agent such as abaloparatide has also been shown to preserve the fracture reduction benefits seen with the latter. This sequence of an anabolic agent followed by an antiresorptive should especially be considered in the high-risk patient with imminent fracture risk to rapidly reduce the risk of subsequent fractures. The data surrounding optimum timing of initiation of bisphosphonate therapy following denosumab discontinuation is still unclear. Though data suggests that combining a bisphosphonate with teriparatide does not provide substantial BMD gains compared to monotherapy, the concomitant administration of denosumab with teriparatide has been shown to significantly increase areal BMD as well as to increase volumetric BMD and estimated bone strength. This narrative review explores the available evidence regarding the various sequential and combination therapy approaches and the potential role they could play in better managing osteoporosis.

Abaloparatide Effects on Cortical Volumetric BMD and Estimated Strength Indices of Hip Subregions by 3D-DXA in Women With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

In ACTIVE, abaloparatide increased areal BMD (aBMD) of the hip and femoral neck vs teriparatide and placebo in women with osteoporosis. Previously, 3D-processing of dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans of a subgroup of ACTIVE subjects showed similar increases in trabecular volumetric BMD (Tb.vBMD) and greater increases in cortical vBMD (Ct.vBMD) of the total hip with abaloparatide vs teriparatide. The current analyses from this subgroup describe 2D- and 3D-DXA data for hip subregions. Randomly selected subjects from ACTIVE (n = 250/treatment group) who received 18 mo of placebo, abaloparatide 80 µg, or open-label teriparatide 20 µg by daily subcutaneous injection underwent hip DXA at baseline, and mo 6 and 18 of treatment. Areal BMD of the femoral neck, trochanter, and femoral shaft was determined using standard 2D-DXA and 3D-SHAPER software to retrospectively evaluate changes from baseline in volumetric parameters of these 3 hip subregions, including trabecular and cortical segmentation. Changes in biomechanical parameters cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI), section modulus (Z), and buckling ratio were also evaluated. Femoral neck, trochanter, and shaft aBMD increased in the abaloparatide and teriparatide groups at mo 6 and 18 vs placebo, with greater increases for abaloparatide vs teriparatide at the femoral neck at mo 6 and the shaft at mo 6 and 18. All 3 subregions showed similar significant increases in Tb.vBMD with abaloparatide and teriparatide vs placebo, whereas Ct.vBMD of all 3 subregions showed greater increases after 18 mo of abaloparatide vs teriparatide. Biomechanical parameters improved in all subregions with abaloparatide and teriparatide vs placebo, with greater improvements in CSMI and Z of the femoral neck and lower shaft after 6 and 18 mo of abaloparatide vs teriparatide. Differential femoral neck and shaft Ct.vBMD responses may explain the greater increases in CSMI and Z of those subregions with abaloparatide vs teriparatide.

Actions of Parathyroid Hormone Ligand Analogues in Humanized PTH1R Knockin Mice

Rodent models are commonly used to evaluate parathyroid hormone (PTH) and PTH-related protein (PTHrP) ligands and analogues for their pharmacologic activities and potential therapeutic utility toward diseases of bone and mineral ion metabolism. Divergence, however, in the amino acid sequences of rodent and human PTH receptors (rat and mouse PTH1Rs are 91% identical to the human PTH1R) can lead to differences in receptor-binding and signaling potencies for such ligands when assessed on rodent vs human PTH1Rs, as shown by cell-based assays in vitro. This introduces an element of uncertainty in the accuracy of rodent models for performing such preclinical evaluations. To overcome this potential uncertainty, we used a homologous recombination-based knockin (KI) approach to generate a mouse (in-host strain C57Bl/6N) in which complementary DNA encoding the human PTH1R replaces a segment (exon 4) of the murine PTH1R gene so that the human and not the mouse PTH1R protein is expressed. Expression is directed by the endogenous mouse promoter and hence occurs in all biologically relevant cells and tissues and at appropriate levels. The resulting homozygous hPTH1R-KI (humanized) mice were healthy over at least 10 generations and showed functional responses to injected PTH analog peptides that are consistent with a fully functional human PTH1R in target bone and kidney cells. The initial evaluation of these mice and their potential utility for predicting behavior of PTH analogues in humans is reported here.

Abaloparatide: A review of preclinical and clinical studies

Osteoporosis is a debilitating disease characterized by reduced bone mineral density and an increased risk of fractures. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of, and map current knowledge, obtained from preclinical and clinical studies of the osteoanabolic agent abaloparatide. PubMed and Embase were meticulously searched from inception to May 4, 2021.178 titles and abstracts were screened, and 57 full-text articles were assessed for inclusion. A total of 55 articles were included; 5 (9%) in vitro studies, 21 (38%) in vivo studies, and 29 (53%) clinical studies. Preclinical in vitro studies have demonstrated receptor conformation preferability, structural insights into the receptor-agonist complex, and proliferative effects of abaloparatide on osteoblasts. Preclinical studies have shown abaloparatide to be similarly effective to teriparatide using comparable doses in both ambulating mice and rats challenged by disuse. Other animal studies have reported that abaloparatide effectively mitigates or prevents bone loss from ovariectomy, orchiectomy, and glucocorticoids and improves fracture healing. The pivotal clinical study ACTIVE demonstrated 18 months of treatment with abaloparatide substantially increase bone mineral density and reduce fracture risk in post-menopausal women compared with placebo. The extension study ACTIVExtend highlighted that subsequent treatment with alendronate sustained the bone gained by abaloparatide treatment and the reduced fracture risk for up to two years. Post-hoc sub-group analyses have also supported the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide treatment independent of various baseline risk factors. In conclusion, mounting evidence from preclinical and clinical studies has uniformly reported that abaloparatide increases bone mineral density and reduces fracture risk.

The Male Athlete Triad-A Consensus Statement From the Female and Male Athlete Triad Coalition Part II: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Return-To-Play

ABSTRACT

The Male Athlete Triad is a medical syndrome most common in adolescent and young adult male athletes in sports that emphasize a lean physique, especially endurance and weight-class athletes. The 3 interrelated conditions of the Male Athlete Triad occur on spectrums of energy deficiency/low energy availability (EA), suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis, and impaired bone health, ranging from optimal health to clinically relevant outcomes of energy deficiency/low EA with or without disordered eating or eating disorder, functional hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, and osteoporosis or low bone mineral density with or without bone stress injury (BSI). Because of the importance of bone mass acquisition and health concerns in adolescence, screening is recommended during this time period in the at-risk male athlete. Diagnosis of the Male Athlete Triad is best accomplished by a multidisciplinary medical team. Clearance and return-to-play guidelines are recommended to optimize prevention and treatment. Evidence-based risk assessment protocols for the male athlete at risk for the Male Athlete Triad have been shown to be predictive for BSI and impaired bone health and should be encouraged. Improving energetic status through optimal fueling is the mainstay of treatment. A Roundtable on the Male Athlete Triad was convened by the Female and Male Athlete Triad Coalition in conjunction with the 64th Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine in Denver, Colorado, in May of 2017. In this second article, the latest clinical research to support current models of screening, diagnosis, and management for at-risk male athlete is reviewed with evidence-based recommendations.

Comparative effect of eldecalcitol and alfacalcidol on bone microstructure: A preliminary report of secondary analysis of a prospective trial

Objectives

To compare the effect of eldecalcitol and alfacalcidol on skeletal microstructure by high-resolution peripheral QCT (HR-pQCT).

Methods

This was a substudy of a randomized, double-blind, active comparator trial. Five female osteoporotic patients with 1-year 0.75 μg/day eldecalcitol and 5 with 1-year 1.0 μg/day alfacalcidol completed HR-pQCT scans before and after treatment were enrolled.

Results

Total vBMD [1.67 ± 1.06% (mean ± SD), P = 0.043 versus baseline] and trabecular vBMD (2.91 ± 1.72%, P = 0.043) at the radius increased in eldecalcitol group, while total, trabecular, and cortical vBMD tended to decrease in alfacalcidol group, with a significant reduction in cortical vBMD at the tibia (0.88 ± 0.62%, P = 0.043). Cortical area (1.82 ± 1.92%, P = 0.043) at the radius and thickness (0.87 ± 1.12%, P = 0.043) at the tibia increased in eldecalcitol group, while these parameters decreased with alfacalcidol at the tibia (1.77 ± 1.72%, P = 0.043 for cortical area; 1.40 ± 2.14%, P = 0.042 for cortical thickness). Trabecular thickness at the radius (1.97 ± 1.93%, P = 0.042) and number at the tibia (3.09 ± 3.04%, P = 0.043) increased by eldecalcitol but did not increase by alfacalcidol. Trabecular separation decreased by eldecalcitol (2.22 ± 2.43%, P = 0.043) but tended to increase by alfacalcidol at the tibia.

Conclusions

Eldecalcitol has the greater potential to improve cortical and trabecular microstructure at the peripheral bone than alfacalcidol which needs further more studies.

Role of bone-forming agents in the management of osteoporosis

Recent evidence confirms the superiority of osteoanabolic therapy compared to anti-remodeling drugs for rapid improvement in bone density and fracture risk reduction, providing strong justification for the use of these anabolic agents as the initial therapy in high-risk patients, to be followed by anti-remodeling therapy. This review will highlight the results of recent studies and define the current status of osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis.

Anabolic Agents for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: How Do You Choose?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are now three anabolic agents available for the treatment of postmenopausal women at high risk for fracture. The purpose of this review is to supply a rationale to aid in determining which agent should be used in which clinical settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies over the last decade have shown that anabolic agents produce faster and larger effects against fracture than antiresorptive agents. Furthermore, trials evaluating anabolic antiresorptive treatment sequences have shown that anabolic first treatment strategies produce the greatest benefits to bone density, particularly in the hip region. However, there are no head-to-head evaluations of the three anabolic therapies with fracture outcomes or bone density, and these studies are not likely to occur. How to decide which agent to use at which time in a woman's life is unknown. We review the most significant clinical trials of anabolic agents which have assessed fracture, areal or volumetric bone density, microarchitecture, and/or bone strength, as well as information gleaned from histomorphometry studies to provide a rationale for consideration of one agent vs another in various clinical settings. There is no definitive answer to this question; all three agents increase bone strength and reduce fracture risk rapidly. Since the postmenopausal lifespan could be as long as 40-50 years, it is likely that very high-risk women will utilize different anabolic agents at different points in their lives.

Differential effects of abaloparatide and teriparatide on hip cortical volumetric BMD by DXA-based 3D modeling

In postmenopausal osteoporotic women in ACTIVE, abaloparatide reduced fracture risk and increased areal bone mineral density (BMD) more than teriparatide at the hip and wrist. DXA-based 3D modeling showed significantly greater increases in hip cortical volumetric BMD with abaloparatide versus teriparatide. This may explain differences reported in aBMD by DXA.

INTRODUCTION

In ACTIVE, abaloparatide (ABL) increased bone mineral density (BMD) shown by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) while reducing fracture incidence in postmenopausal osteoporotic women. Changes in DXA BMD with ABL, 80 μg, were significantly greater than with open-label teriparatide (TPTD), 20 μg, at cortical sites including total hip, femoral neck, and 1/3 distal radius. The purpose of this study was to better understand the relative effects of ABL and TPTD on cortical and cancellous compartments in the proximal femur.

METHODS

Hip DXA images from a subset of randomly selected patients in the ACTIVE trial (n = 250/arm) were retrospectively analyzed using three-dimensional modeling methods (3D-SHAPER software) to evaluate changes from baseline at months 6 and 18.

RESULTS

Similar significant increases in trabecular volumetric BMD (vBMD, + 9%) and cortical thickness (+ 1.5%) were observed with ABL and TPTD by 3D-DXA at 18 months. In contrast, only ABL significantly increased cortical vBMD versus baseline (+ 1.3%), and changes in both cortical vBMD and cortical surface BMD were significantly greater with ABL versus TPTD. In the TPTD group, changes in cortical vBMD were inversely correlated with changes in serum CTX (carboxy-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen) and PINP (procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide), suggesting that higher bone turnover may have attenuated cortical gains.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest previously reported differences in areal BMD increases between ABL and TPTD may be due to differential effects on cortical vBMD. Further studies are warranted to investigate how these differences affect therapeutic impact on hip strength in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Forearm bone mineral density and fracture incidence in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the ACTIVExtend phase 3 trial

Abaloparatide increased ultradistal radius bone mineral density (BMD) in the Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints (ACTIVE) trial. Over the subsequent 24 months in ACTIVExtend, ultradistal radius BMD gains were maintained with alendronate. Conversely, 1/3 radius BMD remained stable during ALN treatment in ACTIVExtend after decreasing during ACTIVE.

INTRODUCTION

Abaloparatide (ABL) increased femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and decreased the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in ACTIVE. Effects on fracture risk and BMD were maintained subsequently with alendronate (ALN) in ACTIVExtend. In a prespecified subanalysis of ACTIVE, ABL also increased BMD at the ultradistal radius. Our objective was to determine the efficacy of ABL followed by ALN vs placebo (PBO) followed by ALN on forearm BMD and fracture risk over 43 months in ACTIVExtend.

METHODS

Ultradistal and 1/3 radius BMD (ACTIVE baseline to month 43) were measured (ABL/ALN, n = 213; PBO/ALN, n = 233). Wrist fracture rates were estimated for the ACTIVExtend intent-to-treat population (ABL/ALN, n = 558; PBO/ALN, n = 581) by Kaplan-Meier (KM) method.

RESULTS

At cumulative month 25, mean increase from ACTIVE baseline in ultradistal radius BMD was 1.1% (standard error, 0.49%) with ABL/ALN vs - 0.8% (0.43%) with PBO/ALN (P < 0.01). BMD increases with ABL were maintained with ALN through month 43 in ACTIVExtend. BMD decreases at the 1/3 radius in ACTIVE (similar with ABL and PBO) were maintained through 24 months of ALN treatment in ACTIVExtend. Wrist fractures over 43 months occurred in 15 women with ABL/ALN (KM estimate, 2.8%) and 20 with PBO/ALN (KM estimate, 3.6%) (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.39, 1.50; P = not significant).

CONCLUSION

Ultradistal radius BMD gains following treatment with ABL in ACTIVE were maintained over 24 months of ALN treatment in ACTIVExtend. Conversely, 1/3 radius BMD remained stable during ALN treatment in ACTIVExtend after decreasing during ACTIVE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01657162 submitted July 31, 2012.

The CKD-MBD Syndrome: Hysteresis in PTH Involvement and PTH Administration for Its Management

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) disturbs mineral homeostasis, leading to mineral and bone disorders (MBD). CKD-MBD is a significant problem and currently available treatment options have important limitations. Phosphate retention is thought to be the initial cause of CKD-MBD but serum phosphate remains normal until the late stages of CKD, due to elevated levels of the phosphaturic hormone fibroblast growth factor-23 (FGF-23), and parathyroid hormone (PTH). Reduction of 1,25-dihydroxy-vitamin D (1,25[OH]₂ D) concentration is the next event in the adaptive response of the homeostatic system. We argue, and provide the rationale, that calcium retention which takes place concurrently with phosphate retention, could be the reason behind the hysteresis in the response of PTH. If indeed this is the case, intermittent administration of PTH in early CKD could prevent the hysteresis, which arguably leads to the development of secondary hyperparathyroidism, and provide the platform for an effective management of CKD-MBD. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Abaloparatide: an anabolic treatment to reduce fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE

Fractures due to osteoporosis represent a serious burden on patients and healthcare systems. The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the anabolic agent abaloparatide (ABL) for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using PubMed to identify articles focused on ABL published prior to February 10, 2020, using the search term "abaloparatide".

RESULTS

ABL, a synthetic analog of human parathyroid hormone-related protein, increased bone mineral density (BMD), improved bone microarchitecture, and increased bone strength in preclinical and clinical studies. The pivotal phase 3 trial ACTIVE and its extension (ACTIVExtend) demonstrated the efficacy of initial treatment with ABL for 18 months followed by sequential treatment with alendronate (ALN) for an additional 24 months to reduce the risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, clinical, and major osteoporotic fractures and to increase BMD in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Discontinuations from ACTIVE were slightly more common in ABL-treated patients due to dizziness, palpitations, nausea, and headache. Post hoc analyses of ACTIVE and ACTIVExtend support the efficacy and safety of ABL in relevant subpopulations including postmenopausal women with various baseline risk factors, women ≥80 years, women with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and women with renal impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

ABL is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis at high risk for fracture. Its therapeutic effects are sustained with subsequent ALN therapy.

Anabolic Therapy and Optimal Treatment Sequences for Patients With Osteoporosis at High Risk for Fracture

OBJECTIVE

Provide an update regarding anabolic medications for osteoporosis, which are often considered to be the last resort for patients with osteoporosis, after multiple fractures have already occurred and other medications have already been administered.

METHODS

Literature review and discussion.

RESULTS

Recent pivotal trial data for anabolic agents and randomized trials comparing anabolic and antiresorptive medications suggest that three anabolic agents (teriparatide, abaloparatide, and romosozumab) reduce nonvertebral and vertebral fractures faster and to a greater extent than potent antiresorptive treatments. Furthermore, bone density accrual is maximized when patients are given anabolic agents first, followed by potent antiresorptive therapy. Since total hip bone density during or after osteoporosis treatment has emerged as an excellent surrogate for future fracture risk, attaining a greater hip bone mineral density is a treatment goal for high-risk osteoporosis patients.

CONCLUSION

This review defines the highest-risk patients and summarizes the rationale for the evolving role of anabolic therapy in the management of postmenopausal women at high risk for fracture.

ABBREVIATIONS

ACTIVE = Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints; ARCH = Active Controlled Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis at High Risk; BMD = bone mineral density; FRAME = Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis; FRAX = Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; PTH = parathyroid hormone; TBS = trabecular bone score.

Comparison between teriparatide and bisphosphonates for improving bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of teriparatide and bisphosphonates in managing postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials that were published before April 2018 and compared teriparatide and bisphosphonates in treating postmenopausal osteoporosis. Stata 12.0 was used for the meta-analysis. The pooled risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed effects or random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The teriparatide group was associated with a lower total occurrence of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-0.77; P = .001) and nonvertebral fractures (RR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.46-0.90; P = .009) than the bisphosphonate group. Moreover, compared with the bisphosphonate group, the teriparatide group had improved bone mineral density at the lumbar spine and femoral neck at the final follow-up (P < .05). There was no significant difference between the teriparatide and bisphosphonate groups in terms of complications (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.90, 1.22, P = .516).

CONCLUSIONS

Teriparatide significantly reduced the occurrence of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in osteoporosis patients. More studies should focus on the quality of life of patients using these 2 drugs.

Current Understanding of Mineral and Bone Disorders of Chronic Kidney Disease and the Scientific Grounds on the Use of Exogenous Parathyroid Hormone in Its Management

Chronic Kidney disease (CKD) disturbs mineral homeostasis leading to mineral and bone disorders (MBD). Serum calcium and phosphate (Pi) remain normal until the late stages of CKD at the expense of elevate fibroblast growth factor-23 (FGF-23), a phosphaturic hormone, followed by reduced 1,25-dihydroxy-vitamin D (1,25[OH]₂D) and finally elevated parathyroid hormone (PTH). Pi retention is thought to be the initial cause of CKD-MBD. The management of MBD is a huge clinical challenge because the effectiveness of current therapeutic regimens to prevent and treat MBD is limited. An intermittent regimen of PTH, when administered at the early stages of CKD, through its phosphaturic action, could prevent FGF-23 increases, the drop of 1,25(OH)₂D, and the development of renal osteodystrophy, including secondary hyperparathyroidism (HPT) and its catabolic effects on the skeleton. Even in more advanced stages of CKD that have not progressed to tertiary HPT, could be beneficial. Therapeutic effects could be achieved in vascular calcification as well. Limited experimental/clinical data support the effectiveness of PTH in CKD-MBD. Its safety, has been established only when it is used for the treatment of osteoporosis, including patients with CKD. The proposed intermittent PTH administration is biologically plausible but its effectiveness and safety has to be critically assessed in long term prospective studies in patients with CKD-MBD.