A meta-analysis of etidronate for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

Etidronate 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. Etidronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts - bone cells that break down bone tissue. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2008. For clinical relevance, we investigated etidronate's effects on postmenopausal women stratified by fracture risk (low versus high).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of intermittent/cyclic etidronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk of fracture, respectively.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, two clinical trial registers, the websites of drug approval agencies, and the bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews. We identified eligible trials published between 1966 and February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of etidronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Women in the experimental arms must have received at least one year of etidronate, with or without other anti-osteoporotic drugs and concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Eligible comparators were placebo (i.e. no treatment; or calcium, vitamin D, or both) or another anti-osteoporotic drug. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. We classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled one or more of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, a low bone mineral density T-score (≤ -2.5), or aged 75 years or older. If none of these criteria were met, we considered the study to be primary prevention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The review has three main comparisons: (1) etidronate 400 mg/day versus placebo; (2) etidronate 200 mg/day versus placebo; (3) etidronate at any dosage versus another anti-osteoporotic agent. We stratified the analyses for each comparison into primary and secondary prevention studies. For major outcomes in the placebo-controlled studies of etidronate 400 mg/day, we followed our original review by defining a greater than 15% relative change as clinically important. For all outcomes of interest, we extracted outcome measurements at the longest time point in the study.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty studies met the review's eligibility criteria. Of these, 26 studies, with a total of 2770 women, reported data that we could extract and quantitatively synthesize. There were nine primary and 17 secondary prevention studies. We had concerns about at least one risk of bias domain in each study. None of the studies described appropriate methods for allocation concealment, although 27% described adequate methods of random sequence generation. We judged that only 8% of the studies avoided performance bias, and provided adequate descriptions of appropriate blinding methods. One-quarter of studies that reported efficacy outcomes were at high risk of attrition bias, whilst 23% of studies reporting safety outcomes were at high risk in this domain. The 30 included studies compared (1) etidronate 400 mg/day to placebo (13 studies: nine primary and four secondary prevention); (2) etidronate 200 mg/day to placebo (three studies, all secondary prevention); or (3) etidronate (both dosing regimens) to another anti-osteoporotic agent (14 studies: one primary and 13 secondary prevention). We discuss only the etidronate 400 mg/day versus placebo comparison here. For primary prevention, we collected moderate- to very low-certainty evidence from nine studies (one to four years in length) including 740 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Compared to placebo, etidronate 400 mg/day probably results in little to no difference in non-vertebral fractures (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 1.61); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 4.8% fewer, 95% CI 8.9% fewer to 6.1% more) and serious adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.54; ARR 1.1% fewer, 95% CI 4.9% fewer to 5.3% more), based on moderate-certainty evidence. Etidronate 400 mg/day may result in little to no difference in clinical vertebral fractures (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.32 to 28.44; ARR 0.02% more, 95% CI 0% fewer to 0% more) and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.47; ARR 2.3% more, 95% CI 1.1% fewer to 8.4% more), based on low-certainty evidence. We do not know the effect of etidronate on hip fractures because the evidence is very uncertain (RR not estimable based on very low-certainty evidence). Wrist fractures were not reported in the included studies. For secondary prevention, four studies (two to four years in length) including 667 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided the evidence. Compared to placebo, etidronate 400 mg/day may make little or no difference to non-vertebral fractures (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.58; ARR 0.9% more, 95% CI 3.8% fewer to 8.1% more), based on low-certainty evidence. The evidence is very uncertain about etidronate's effects on hip fractures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.17 to 5.19; ARR 0.0% fewer, 95% CI 1.2% fewer to 6.3% more), wrist fractures (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.04; ARR 0.0% fewer, 95% CI 2.5% fewer to 15.9% more), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.18; ARR 0.4% more, 95% CI 1.9% fewer to 4.9% more), and serious adverse events (RR not estimable), compared to placebo. Clinical vertebral fractures were not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update echoes the key findings of our previous review that etidronate probably makes or may make little to no difference to vertebral and non-vertebral fractures for both primary and secondary prevention.

Pharmacological Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: a Level I Evidence Based - Expert Opinion

Objectives: Postmenopausal osteoporosis carries a high risk of fractures, which decrease quality of life and are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and economic burden. The best pharmacological treatment options to manage and prevent osteoporotic fractures remain still unclear. The present study investigated the efficacy and safety of the most commonly employed drugs in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Methods: Only RCTs comparing different drugs for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis were included. Data from 76 RCTs (205,011 patients) were collected. The mean follow-up was 27.6 ± 14.9 months. Results: Denosumab reported the lowest rate of non-vertebral fractures (LOR -1.57), Romosozumab the lowest rate of vertebral fractures (LOR 1.99), and Ibandronate the lowest rate of hip fractures (LOR0.18). Serious adverse events resulted in the lowest in the Raloxifene group (LOR 3.11), while those leading to study discontinuation were lowest in the Romosozumab cohort (LOR 2.65). Conclusions: Denosumab resulted in most effective, particularly in reducing the occurrence of non-vertebral fractures. Romosozumab and Ibandronate resulted best to prevent, respectively, vertebral fractures and hip fractures. Adverse events leading to study discontinuation were less frequent in the Romosozumab and Denosumab groups, while Raloxifene and Alendronate showed a lower incidence of serious adverse events overall. Level of evidence: I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs.

The Pharmacologic Management of Osteoporosis in Primary Biliary Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is a common complication of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) yet evidence for effective therapy is lacking. We sought to review all randomized controlled trials evaluating pharmacotherapy against placebo or no intervention for treatment of osteoporosis in PBC.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive database search was conducted from inception through 29 March 2017. The primary outcome was incidence of fractures; secondary outcomes were change in bone mineral density (BMD) and adverse events. We assessed studies for risk of bias, graded quality of evidence, and used meta-analysis to obtain overall effect by pooling studies of the same drug class.

RESULTS

We identified 11 randomized controlled trials evaluating bisphosphonates (3), hormone replacement therapy (2), ursodeoxycholic acid (1), obeticholic acid (1), cyclosporin A (1), vitamin K (1), calcitriol (1), and sodium fluoride (1). No intervention significantly reduced fractures compared to control. Although significant improvement in BMD was seen in one study with alendronate, a third-generation bisphosphonate, no significant improvement was seen on pooled analysis of all bisphosphonates including first-generation bisphosphonates (standard mean difference 0.41, p = 0.68). On pooled analysis, hormone replacement therapy modestly improved lumbar BMD (standard mean difference 0.69, p = 0.02), but with significantly increased adverse events (odds ratio 8.82, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of high-quality evidence supporting the efficacy of any treatment of osteoporosis in PBC. This may be explained by lack of power in the included studies. However, our current understanding of PBC-related osteoporosis indicates that it results from decreased bone formation, which may explain the attenuated effect of traditional antiresorptive agents. Future studies should investigate newer anabolic bone agents.

Progesterone for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in women

Estradiol (E2) is women's dominant 'bone hormone' since it is essential for development of adolescent peak bone mineral density (BMD) and physiological levels prevent the rapid (3-week) bone resorption that causes most adult BMD loss. However, deceasing E2 levels trigger bone resorption/loss. Progesterone (P4) is E2's physiological partner, collaborating with E2 in every cell/tissue; its bone 'job' is to increase P4-receptor-mediated, slow (3-4 months) osteoblastic new bone formation. When menstrual cycles are normal length and normally ovulatory, E2 and P4 are balanced and BMD is stable. However, clinically normal cycles commonly have ovulatory disturbances (anovulation, short luteal phases) and low P4 levels; these are more frequent in teen and perimenopausal women and increased by everyday stressors: energy insufficiency, emotional/social/economic threats and illness. Meta-analysis shows that almost 1%/year spinal BMD loss occurs in those with greater than median (∼31%) of ovulatory disturbed cycles. Prevention of osteoporosis and fragility fractures requires the reversal of stressors, detection and treatment of teen-to-perimenopausal recurrent cycle/ovulatory disturbances with cyclic oral micronized progesterone. Low 'Peak Perimenopausal BMD' is likely the primary risk for fragility fractures in later life. Progesterone plus estradiol or other antiresorptive therapies adds 0.68%/year and may be a highly effective osteoporosis treatment. Randomized controlled trials are still needed to confirm progesterone's important role in women's bone formation.

The efficacy and safety of vertebral fracture prevention therapies in post-menopausal osteoporosis treatment: Which therapies work best? a network meta-analysis

Objectives

Osteoporosis has become an increasing concern for older people as it may potentially lead to osteoporotic fractures. This study is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ten therapies for post-menopausal women using network meta-analysis.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search in several databases, including PubMed and Embase. A random-effects model was employed and results were assessed by the odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Furthermore, with respect to each outcome, each intervention was ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value.

Results

With respect to preventing new vertebral fractures (NVF), all ten drugs outperformed placebo, and etidronate proved to be the most effective treatment (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.39). In addition, zoledronic acid and parathyroid hormone ranked higher compared with the other drugs. With respect to preventing clinical vertebral fractures (CVF), zoledronic acid proved to be the most effective drug (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.92), with denosumab as a desirable second option (OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96), when both were compared with placebo. As for adverse events (AE) and severe adverse events (SAE), no significant difference was observed. According to SUCRA, etidronate ranked first in preventing CVF; parathyroid hormone and zoledronic acid ranked highly in preventing NVF and CVF. Raloxifene was safe with a high rank in preventing AEs and SAEs though performed unsatisfactorily in efficacy.

Conclusions

This study suggests that, taking efficacy and safety into account, parathyroid hormone and zoledronic acid had the highest probability of satisfactory performance in preventing osteoporotic fractures.

Cite this article: G. Wang, L. Sui, P. Gai, G. Li, X. Qi, X. Jiang. The efficacy and safety of vertebral fracture prevention therapies in post-menopausal osteoporosis treatment: Which therapies work best? a network meta-analysis. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:452–463. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.67.BJR-2016-0292.R1.

Risk of hip fracture following a wrist fracture-A meta-analysis

AIMS

This purpose of this meta analysis was to investigate and quantify the relative risk of hip fracture in patients who have sustained a wrist fracture.

METHOD

Studies were identified by searching Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL database and CINAHL from their inception to August 2015. Studies reporting confirmed hip fracture following wrist fracture were included. Data extraction was carried out using a modified Cochrane data collection form by two reviewers independently. Quality assessment was carried out using a modified Coleman score and the Newcastle Ottawa scale for cohort studies. An assessment of bias was performed for each study using a modified Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A pooled relative risk(RR) was estimated with 95% CI from the RR/HRs and CIs reported in the studies.

RESULTS

12 studies were included in the final meta-analysis (4 male, 8 female only). Relative risk of hip fracture following wrist fracture for women was 1.43 (CI 1.27 to 1.60). In men it was not significantly increased (RR 2.11, 95% CI: 0.93-4.85). Heterogeneity was low (I squared 0%) for both groups so a fixed effects model was used.

CONCLUSION

Risk of a subsequent hip fracture is increased for women who suffer a wrist fracture (RR 1.43). Resources and preventative measures should be targeted towards these high risk patients to prevent the catastrophic event of a hip fracture. This meta analysis confirms and quantifies the increased relative risk of hip fracture after wrist fracture in women.

Long-Term Use of Bisphosphonates in Osteoporosis

The rate of bone turnover increases around the time of menopause, and new bone may be remodeled before it is has been completely mineralized. If this is left untreated, osteoporosis often develops, leading to fractures, particularly of the spine and hip, which represent an enormous burden in terms of suffering, healthcare expenditure, disabilities and death. Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of bone resorption, which slow or arrest progressive bone loss. Continuous treatment with bisphosphonates reduces bone turnover, improves bone microarchitecture and increases bone mass, leading to greater mechanical strength and reduced fracture risk. Since osteoporosis is a chronic, progressive condition, treatment has to continue for many years. Therefore, the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonates, particularly alendronate and risedronate, have been evaluated in many thousands of patients for up to 10 years of continuous use. These drugs remain the cornerstone of osteoporosis treatment and appear to have favorable safety and efficacy profiles throughout long-term usage.

Should we prescribe calcium or vitamin D supplements to treat or prevent osteoporosis?

Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the highest level of evidence to inform clinical practice. Meta-analyses of large RCTs of calcium and/or vitamin D supplements completed in the last 15 years provide strong evidence for clinical recommendations. These meta-analyses with data for > 50,000 older adults reported that calcium with or without vitamin D has only weak, inconsistent effects on fracture, and that vitamin D without calcium has no effect on fracture. Only one RCT of co-administered calcium and vitamin D in frail, institutionalized, elderly women with low dietary calcium intake and vitamin D levels showed significant reductions in fracture risk. These RCTs have also reported previously unrecognized adverse events of calcium supplements including kidney stones, myocardial infarction, hypercalcemia, and hospitalization with acute gastrointestinal symptoms. The small risk of these important adverse effects, together with the moderate risk of minor side-effects such as constipation, probably outweighs any benefits of calcium supplements on fracture. These data suggest the role for calcium and vitamin D supplements in osteoporosis management is very limited. Neither calcium nor vitamin D supplements should be recommended for fracture prevention in community-dwelling adults, although vitamin D should be considered for prevention of osteomalacia in at-risk individuals.

Calcium intake and bone mineral density: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether increasing calcium intake from dietary sources affects bone mineral density (BMD) and, if so, whether the effects are similar to those of calcium supplements.

DESIGN

Random effects meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid Medline, Embase, Pubmed, and references from relevant systematic reviews. Initial searches were undertaken in July 2013 and updated in September 2014.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials of dietary sources of calcium or calcium supplements (with or without vitamin D) in participants aged over 50 with BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, total body, or forearm as an outcome.

RESULTS

We identified 59 eligible randomised controlled trials: 15 studied dietary sources of calcium (n=1533) and 51 studied calcium supplements (n=12,257). Increasing calcium intake from dietary sources increased BMD by 0.6-1.0% at the total hip and total body at one year and by 0.7-1.8% at these sites and the lumbar spine and femoral neck at two years. There was no effect on BMD in the forearm. Calcium supplements increased BMD by 0.7-1.8% at all five skeletal sites at one, two, and over two and a half years, but the size of the increase in BMD at later time points was similar to the increase at one year. Increases in BMD were similar in trials of dietary sources of calcium and calcium supplements (except at the forearm), in trials of calcium monotherapy versus co-administered calcium and vitamin D, in trials with calcium doses of ≥ 1000 versus <1000 mg/day and ≤ 500 versus >500 mg/day, and in trials where the baseline dietary calcium intake was <800 versus ≥ 800 mg/day.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing calcium intake from dietary sources or by taking calcium supplements produces small non-progressive increases in BMD, which are unlikely to lead to a clinically significant reduction in risk of fracture.

Effects of increasing age, dosage, and duration of PTH treatment on BMD increase--a meta-analysis

We studied the effects of increasing age, dosage, and duration of parathyroid hormone (PTH) treatment on changes in bone mineral density (BMD). Randomized placebo controlled trials on PTH treatment in men or women were retrieved from PubMed (1951 to present), Web of Science (1945 to present), or Embase (1974 to present). The search date was November 16, 2010. All studies comparing PTH treatment to either placebo or antiresorptive drugs--for example, bisphosphonates or hormone replacement therapy--were included. A total of 214 studies were identified in the initial search, and 15 of these trials were included. By metaregression analysis, we found that the increase in spine BMD (Z-score) after PTH treatment was blunted by increasing age (R(2) = 0.27; 2p = 0.01, slope -0.023 Z-scores per year, 11 studies). By increasing PTH dosage (μg/d), spine BMD increased significantly (2p = 0.002) with a slope of +0.011 Z-scores/μg/d of teriparatide. Furthermore, the duration of treatment was positively correlated to spine BMD (P < 0.001) with a slope of +0.043 Z-score for each extra month of treatment. We evaluated the BMD effect in hips and found no age dependency (R(2) = 0.04; P = 0.66; 8 studies). However, for the spine, we found a significant relation to daily dosage (P = 0.011), Z-score coefficient 0.0051 ± 0.0020 (2p < 0.01). The treatment duration also correlated positively by a Z-score coefficient of 0.0170 ± 0.0053, 2p < 0.01 per extra month of treatment. PTH treatment alone seems to be able to improve BMD significantly. However, the BMD increase was significantly lower with increasing age in the spine. No age dependency was observed in the hips. In general the effect of treatment was improved with increasing dosage and duration of treatment from 6 to 36 months.

The evidence for efficacy of osteoporosis treatment in men with primary osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of antiresorptive and anabolic treatment in men

Purpose. Fragility fractures in men constitute a major worldwide public health problem with a life-time risk of 13%. It cannot be directly inferred that antiosteoporotic drugs effective in women have the same effect in men. Our aim was to appraise the existing evidence for efficacy of osteoporosis treatment in men. Methods. This study was a systematic review of the published literature on the clinical efficacy of medical osteoporosis therapy in the reduction of fracture risk in men (age > 50 years). Studies included were randomised, placebo-controlled trials of men. Results. Five BMD studies of antiresorptive treatment were included. All studies showed an increase in BMD, but there was only a nonsignificant trend in the reduction of clinical fractures. Three BMD studies of anabolic treatment with teriparatide were also included. These showed a significant mean increase in spine BMD and for vertebral fractures a non-significant trend towards a reduction was seen. Conclusion. The evidence of medical osteoporosis treatment in men is scant and inconclusive due to the lack of prospective RCT studies with fracture prevention as primary end point. So far, all evidence is based on BMD increases in small RCT studies showing BMD increases comparable to those reported in postmenopausal women.

Risk of femoral shaft and subtrochanteric fractures among users of bisphosphonates and raloxifene

Prior studies have suggested an association between bisphosphonate use and subtrochanteric fractures. This cohort study showed an increased risk of subtrochanteric and femoral shaft fractures both before and after the start of drugs against osteoporosis including bisphosphonates. This may suggest an effect of the underlying disease rather than the drugs used.

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to determine the association between drugs against osteoporosis and the risk of femoral shaft and subtrochanteric fractures. No separation was made between atypical and typical fractures.

METHODS

Nationwide cohort study from Denmark with all users of bisphosphonates and other drugs against osteoporosis between 1996 and 2006 (n = 103,562) as exposed group and three age- and gender-matched controls from the general population (n = 310,683). Adjustments were made for prior fracture, use of systemic hormone therapy, and use of systemic corticosteroids.

RESULTS

After initiation of therapy, an increased risk of subtrochanteric fractures was seen for alendronate (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.78-3.27), etidronate (HR = 1.96, 95% CI 1.62-2.36), and clodronate (HR = 20.0, 95% CI 1.94-205), but not for raloxifene (HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.34-3.32). However, an increased risk of subtrochanteric fractures was also present before the start of alendronate (OR = 2.36, 95% CI 2.05-2.72), etidronate (OR = 3.05, 95% CI 2.59-3.58), clodronate (OR = 10.8, 95% CI 1.14-103), raloxifene (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.07-3.40), and strontium ranelate (OR = 2.97, 95% CI 1.07-8.27). Similar trends were seen for femoral shaft fractures and overall fracture risk. After the start of etidronate, no dose-response relationship was present (p for trend, 0.54). For alendronate, a decreasing risk was present with increasing average daily dose (p for trend, <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Although an increased risk of femoral shaft and subtrochanteric fractures are seen with the use of several types of bisphosphonates, the increased risk before the start of the drugs may point at an effect of the underlying disease being treated. The increased risk may, thus, perhaps be due to confounding by indication.

Progesterone and bone: actions promoting bone health in women

Estradiol (E(2)) and progesterone (P(4)) collaborate within bone remodelling on resorption (E(2)) and formation (P(4)). We integrate evidence that P(4) may prevent and, with antiresorptives, treat women's osteoporosis. P(4) stimulates osteoblast differentiation in vitro. Menarche (E(2)) and onset of ovulation (P(4)) both contribute to peak BMD. Meta-analysis of 5 studies confirms that regularly cycling premenopausal women lose bone mineral density (BMD) related to subclinical ovulatory disturbances (SODs). Cyclic progestin prevents bone loss in healthy premenopausal women with amenorrhea or SOD. BMD loss is more rapid in perimenopause than postmenopause-decreased bone formation due to P(4) deficiency contributes. In 4 placebo-controlled RCTs, BMD loss is not prevented by P(4) in postmenopausal women with increased bone turnover. However, 5 studies of E(2)-MPA co-therapy show greater BMD increases versus E(2) alone. P(4) fracture data are lacking. P(4) prevents bone loss in pre- and possibly perimenopausal women; progesterone co-therapy with antiresorptives may increase bone formation and BMD.

Treating postmenopausal osteoporosis in women at increased risk of fracture - critical appraisal of bazedoxifene: a review

Several categories of drugs to treat osteoporosis exist in the form of bisphosphonates, strontium, parathyroid hormone, and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM). Advantages and disadvantages exist for each category as some patients may, for example, not tolerate bisphosphonates for gastrointestinal side effects, and especially in women in whom osteoporosis is frequent, several options for treatment are needed. The objectives of this review were to critically appraise the effects of bazedoxifene on risk of fractures especially in women at high risk of fractures. A systematic literature search was conducted for studies, especially randomized controlled trials with fractures as end-points. Bazedoxifene is a new member of the SERM group. The literature search identified one randomized controlled trial with fractures as end-point. This was a 3-year randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial in which 7492 postmenopausal women aged 55 to 85 years were randomly allocated to 1) bazedoxifene (20 [n = 1886] or 40 [n = 1872] mg/day); 2) raloxifene (60 mg/day, n = 1849); or 3) placebo (n = 1885). The risk of vertebral fractures decreased with both 20 (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.89) and 40 (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96) mg of bazedoxifene per day compared to placebo. There was no reduction in non-vertebral fractures. A subgroup of women with a priori high risk of fractures was identified post hoc. In this subgroup there was a reduction in the risk of non-vertebral fractures with the 20 mg dose of bazedoxifene compared to placebo (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.90). In the 40 mg bazedoxifene group no significant reduction in non-vertebral fractures was seen in this subgroup (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.20). In general post-hoc defined subgroup analyses should be interpreted with caution. However, the results indicate that bazedoxifene may be effective in preventing vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: 2010 position statement of The North American Menopause Society

OBJECTIVE

To update the evidence-based position statement published by The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) in 2006 regarding the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

METHODS

NAMS followed the general principles established for evidence-based guidelines to create this updated document. A panel of clinicians and researchers expert in the field of metabolic bone diseases and/or women's health was enlisted to review the 2006 NAMS position statement, compile supporting statements, and reach consensus on recommendations. The panel's recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees.

RESULTS

Osteoporosis, which is especially prevalent among older postmenopausal women, increases the risk of fractures. Hip and spine fractures are associated with particularly high morbidity and mortality in this population. Given the health implications of osteoporotic fractures, the primary goal of osteoporosis therapy is to prevent fractures, which is accomplished by slowing or stopping bone loss, maintaining bone strength, and minimizing or eliminating factors that may contribute to fractures. The evaluation of postmenopausal women for osteoporosis risk requires a medical history, physical examination, and diagnostic tests. Major risk factors for postmenopausal osteoporosis (as defined by bone mineral density) include advanced age, genetics, lifestyle factors (such as low calcium and vitamin D intake, smoking), thinness, and menopause status. The most common risk factors for osteoporotic fracture are advanced age, low bone mineral density, and previous fracture as an adult. Management focuses first on nonpharmacologic measures, such as a balanced diet, adequate calcium and vitamin D intake, adequate exercise, smoking cessation, avoidance of excessive alcohol intake, and fall prevention. If pharmacologic therapy is indicated, government-approved options are bisphosphonates, selective estrogen-receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone, estrogens, and calcitonin.

CONCLUSIONS

Management strategies for postmenopausal women involve identifying those at risk for fracture, followed by instituting measures that focus on reducing modifiable risk factors through dietary and lifestyle changes and, if indicated, pharmacologic therapy.

The effectiveness of intermittent rat parathyroid hormone (1-34) treatment on low bone mass due to oestrogen or androgen depletion in skeletally mature rats

Rat parathyroid hormone (PTH) 1-34 (4 microg/kg/day) was applied for 2.5 months to 9 month-old rats immediately after ovariectomy or orchidectomy or to 15 month-old rats with low bone mass which had been castrated 6 months before in order to know the effects on serum biochemistry parameters, lumbar and femoral bone mineral density, histology, cancellous and cortical bone histomorphometry, mineralisation content profile in cortical bone by backscattered-electron microscopy, and femoral torsion biomechanical testing. In ovariectomised rats, preventive PTH treatment avoided cancellous bone loss in tibial metaphysis and partially in lumbar vertebra, while in cortical bone, PTH increased endosteal resorption and periosteal formation. In intervention study, PTH did not restore cancellous bone but a strong endosteal and periosteal new bone formation was detected. In orchidectomised rats, PTH, in preventive study, avoided cancellous bone loss in metaphysis and lumbar vertebra, and a mild new bone formation in cortical bone was found. In intervention study, PTH maintained baseline cancellous bone mass, but in cortical bone a strong endosteal and periosteal new bone formation was detected. The PTH-induced new bone formation was confirmed by histology and by mineral content profiles. After castration, biomechanical properties were affected in females but not in male rats and PTH reverted this effect.

Loss of life years after a hip fracture

BACKGROUND

Patients with a hip fracture have a high mortality; however, it is not clear how large the loss of life-years is over an extended observation period.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This was a cohort study involving all patients in Denmark who suffered a hip fracture between 1977 and 2001 (n = 169,145). The survival rate for these patients was compared to that for age- and sex-matched subjects without a hip fracture (n = 524,010).

RESULTS

There was a substantial degree of excess mortality, with a pronounced variation in age and sex. The absolute number of life-years lost compared to age-matched subjects without a hip fracture was larger in younger subjects than in older subjects (men aged 51-60 years lived 7.5 years less on average while men over 80 years of age lived 3 years less). Expressed as a percentage, however, older subjects had the largest relative loss of expected remaining years of life. Men < or = 50 years of age lost 18% of their expected remaining years of life, as opposed to men > 80 years of age who lost as much as 58% of their expected remaining years of life. In women, the trend was similar but less pronounced (27% loss in women < or = 50 years of age vs. 38% in women > 80 years of age).

INTERPRETATION

A large proportion of the estimated remaining life is lost after a hip fracture, even in younger patients. Prevention may save life years, although not all of the years lost after a hip fracture may be due to the hip fracture per se.

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

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

Etidronate 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. Etidronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of etidronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE for relevant randomized controlled trials published between 1966 to 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Women receiving at least one year of etidronate for postmenopausal osteoporosis were compared to those receiving placebo and/or concurrent calcium/vitamin D. The outcome was fracture incidence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study selection and data abstraction was done in duplicate. Meta-analysis of fracture outcomes was performed with data presented as relative risks and a relative change greater than 15% was considered clinically important. Study quality was assessed through the reporting of allocation concealment, blinding and withdrawals.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies representing a total of 1248 patients were included in the review.A significant 41% relative risk reduction (RRR) in vertebral fractures across eight studies (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.96) was found. The six secondary prevention trials demonstrated a significant RRR of 47% in vertebral fractures (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87) and a 5% absolute risk reduction (ARR); compared with the pooled result for the two primary prevention trials (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.32 to 28.44), which was not significant. There were no statistically significant risk reductions for non-vertebral (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.42), hip (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.88) or wrist fractures (RR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.32 to 2.36). For adverse events, no statistically significant differences were found in the included studies. However, observational data has led to concerns regarding potential risk for upper gastrointestinal injury.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Etidronate, at 400 mg per day, demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically important benefit in the secondary prevention of vertebral fractures. No statistically significant reductions in vertebral fractures were observed when it was used for primary prevention. In addition, no statistically significant reductions in non-vertebral, hip, or wrist fractures were found, regardless of whether etidronate was used for primary or secondary prevention. The level of evidence for all outcomes is Silver (www.cochranemsk.org.).

Etidronate: what is its place in treatment of primary osteoporosis and other demineralizing diseases today?

Bisphosphonate drugs are the major treatment options for primary and secondary osteoporosis and other demineralizing bone diseases. This class of drugs was presaged over a decade ago when etidronate disodium, the "mother compound" for modern-day bisphosphonates, was first used in the treatment of osteoporosis. The cyclic use of etidronate in therapy, which is known mainly to specialists in the field, is not approved in the United States. The drug does, however, have a worldwide reputation as a relatively inexpensive, efficacious, and highly tolerable treatment for osteoporosis. Many studies still describe its use for primary osteoporosis and some have described use in immobilization bone loss, periprosthetic bone loss, and even glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. This review highlights some of these uses.

Exploration of the value of health-related quality-of-life information from clinical research and into clinical practice

Quality-of-life (QOL) instruments used in clinical research can provide important evidence to inform decisions about alternative treatments. This is particularly true when patients, such as those with cancer who are contemplating toxic chemotherapy, face tradeoffs between quantity of life and QOL or when the primary goal of therapy is to improve how patients feel. Surrogate measures (cardiac function, exercise capacity, bone density, tumor size) are inadequate substitutes for direct measurement of QOL. Quality-of-life measures will be most valuable when they comprehensively measure aspects of QOL that are both important to patients and likely to be influenced by therapy, when the QOL measurement instruments are valid (measuring what is intended) and responsive (able to detect all important changes, even if small), and when the results are readily interpretable (determining whether treatment-related changes are trivial, small but important, or large). Researchers are finding new, imaginative ways to help clinicians understand the magnitude of treatment impact on QOL. Additionally, QOL measures may be useful in clinical practice. Recent results from well-designed randomized controlled trials suggest that information on patient QOL provided to clinicians might, in some circumstances, result in benefits for these patients. Further investigation is warranted to confirm these observations and to define the particular combination of methods and settings most likely to yield important benefits.

WITHDRAWN: Etidronate for treating and preventing postmenopausal osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is a clinical syndrome of reduced bone mass and increased fracture susceptibility. There are now a number of options, including etidronate which can decrease the risk of fractures.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the efficacy of etidronate on bone density, fractures and toxicity in postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE from 1966 to December 1998, examined citations of relevant articles, and the proceedings of international osteoporosis meetings. We contacted osteoporosis investigators to identify additional studies, primary authors, and pharmaceutical industry sources for unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included thirteen trials (with 1010 participants) that randomized women to etidronate or an alternative (placebo or calcium and/or vitamin D) and measured bone density for at least one year.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each trial, three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality and abstracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

The data suggested a reduction in vertebral fractures with a pooled relative risk of 0.60% (95% CI 0.41 to 0.88). There was no effect on non-vertebral fractures (pooled relative risk 1.00, (95% CI 0.68 to 1.42)). Etidronate, relative to control, increased bone density after three years of treatment in the lumbar spine by 4.27% (95% CI 2.66 to 5.88), in the femoral neck by 2.19% (95% CI 0.43, 3.95) and in the total body by 0.97% (95% CI 0.39, 1.55). Effects were larger at 4 years, though the number of patients followed was much smaller.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Etidronate increases bone density in the lumbar spine and femoral neck. The pooled estimates of fracture reduction with etidronate are consistent with a reduction in vertebral fractures, but no effect on non-vertebral fractures.

Osteoporosis: strategies for prevention and management

Osteoporosis is a serious public health issue, affecting up to 1 in 2 women and 1 in 5 men over the age of 50 years. The common osteoporotic fractures occur at the spine, wrist and hip. For the patient affected by osteoporosis, these fractures are associated with significant morbidity and, in the case of hip and spine fractures, an excess mortality. The treatment of osteoporotic fractures is also associated with a significant healthcare cost for society. Currently, measurement of bone mineral density using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is the gold standard for the diagnosis of osteoporosis. In the future, however, assessment of fracture risk will be based on algorithms incorporating clinical risk factors and bone density measurements, where appropriate. The goal of treatment is to reduce the risk of future fracture. Patients at high risk for fracture should be assessed and screened to exclude secondary causes for osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates (alendronate, etidronate, ibandronate, risedronate) are the first-line therapy for the majority of patients and these treatments can be given either orally or intravenously. Alternative treatment options include strontium ranelate and raloxifene. Anabolic therapy with parathyroid hormone can be considered for patients with severe disease. These patients will often require referral for specialist assessment and monitoring. All patients at risk of developing osteoporosis should be given lifestyle advice regarding dietary intake of calcium and vitamin D and regular weight-bearing exercise.

[Bisphosphonates in osteoporosis therapy. Standards and perspectives]

Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of bone resorption and approved agents for both the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Many clinical studies have shown a consistent reduction in the risk of vertebral fractures with the use of these drugs, while others have shown a clear reduction in the risk of hip and other non-vertebral fractures. The bisphosphonates are divided into three generations based on their potency and chemical structure. In general, as a substance group they are well tolerated and, when applied correctly, the toxicity is low. Alternative dosages, e.g. monthly, three times a month or yearly as an oral drug or i.v. would probably improve patient compliance. Clinical studies have also shown the safety and effectiveness of bisphosphonates over a period of 3-7 years.

Treating osteoporosis: economic aspects of bisphosphonate therapy

Each year, fractures associated with osteoporosis place a significant burden on healthcare spending and result in unnecessary morbidity, mortality and reductions in quality of life for individual patients. Several treatments are available that can improve the course of this chronic bone disease, and lead to significant reductions in fractures. Bisphosphonates have proven efficacy, are widely available and currently recommended as the first-line of therapy for osteoporosis in many practice guidelines. In addition to demonstrating clinical benefit, from a health-policy perspective, the economic benefits regarding prevention and treatment must be established. In recent years, several health economic studies have examined the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of bisphosphonates in various patient groups. This paper reviews a number of these studies regarding the economic benefits of treating osteoporosis with bisphosphonates and considers for whom prevention and/or treatment is most warranted.

The cost effectiveness of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: a structured review of the literature

Osteoporotic fragility fractures constitute a significant public health concern. The lifetime risk of any osteoporotic fracture is very high (40-50% in women and 13-22% in men). Fractures are associated with significant mortality and morbidity and represent a substantial economic burden to society. Bisphosphonates (alendronate, etidronate, risedronate and ibandronate) are indicated for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis but are costly compared with other treatments, such as vitamin D and calcium. Our search identified 23 studies evaluating the cost effectiveness of bisphosphonate therapy for the treatment and prevention of fragility fractures; these studies were from five geographical areas and employed a variety of comparators and assumptions. We identified 11 studies investigating bisphosphonates in women with low bone mineral density (BMD) [T-score >2.5 standard deviations {SDs} below normal {mean} peak values for young adults] and previous fractures, five studies investigating bisphosphonates in women with low BMD and no previous fracture, one study of bisphosphonates in women with osteopenia, five studies involving screening and two studies of bisphosphonates in special populations (women initiating corticosteroid treatment and men). In women with low BMD and previous fractures, bisphosphonate therapy was most cost effective in populations aged > or =70 years and was unlikely to be cost effective in populations aged < or =50 years. There was uncertainty concerning the cost effectiveness of bisphosphonates in such populations aged 60-69 years. In women with low BMD without previous fractures, treatment with alendronate or risedronate appeared to be cost effective across countries (UK, US, Denmark), but there was some uncertainty about the cost effectiveness of etidronate in patients in the highest age groups. Identifying risk factors for fractures through means such as spine radiographs to detect vertebral deformities improves the cost effectiveness of treatment. In women with osteopenia, alendronate therapy may be cost effective in women with a T-score of -2.4SD in the US. Screening for low BMD and treatment with alendronate or etidronate appears to be cost effective in postmenopausal women in general and in women with rheumatoid arthritis initiating corticosteroid therapy. Alendronate therapy without screening was also shown to be potentially cost effective in certain at-risk male populations, as well as in women initiating corticosteroid therapy after the age of 40 years. Decision makers in the US, UK and Sweden should consider funding the use of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in women aged >70 years, particularly if they have other risk factors for fracture. Further studies are required to make more definitive conclusions in other countries and patient populations. Screening strategies for low BMD followed by bisphosphonate treatment should also be considered in the general female population aged >65 years in the UK and US and in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating corticosteroid therapy.

Effects of parathyroid hormone alone or in combination with antiresorptive therapy on bone mineral density and fracture risk--a meta-analysis

AIM

The effects of parathyroid hormone (PTH) alone or in combination with antiresorptive therapy on changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk were studied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomised placebo controlled trials were retrieved from the PubMed, Web of Science or Embase databases.

RESULTS

PTH alone or in combination with antiresorptive drugs reduced vertebral [relative risk (RR)=0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-0.47, 2p<0.01] and non-vertebral (RR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.48-0.82, 2p<0.01) fracture risk and increased spine BMD by 6.6% (95% CI: 5.2-8.1%, 2p<0.01) and hip BMD non-significantly by 1.0% (95% CI: -0.1 to 2.1%, 2p=0.08) during 11-36 months of follow-up (13 trials). The gain in spine and hip BMD tended to increase with the length of the PTH treatment. No significant effect of study duration on fracture risk could be demonstrated. The major adverse events were hypercalcaemia, nausea and discomfort at the injection sites. Only limited data are currently available on fracture risk reduction with PTH plus antiresorptive therapies.

CONCLUSION

Although the number of studies on non-vertebral fractures is limited, our pooled analysis revealed that PTH alone or in combination with antiresorptive drugs would appear to be able to reduce the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures and to increase spine and perhaps hip BMD. However, these analyses were based on cross-sectional data--i.e. based on indirect comparisons--and further studies with a direct comparison of study duration are necessary. No studies comparing PTH, PTH plus antiresorptive drugs and antiresorptive drug versus placebo in a factorial design are available; consequently, we were unable to draw any conclusions on the superiority of PTH plus antiresorptive drug versus antiresorptive drug or PTH alone with respect to BMD or fractures.

Clinical effect of bisphosphonate and vitamin D on osteoporosis: reappraisal of a multicenter double-blind clinical trial comparing etidronate and alfacalcidol

As inhibitors of bone resorption, bisphosphonates and vitamin D derivatives have been extensively used for the treatment of osteoporosis in various parts of the world, but the clinical effects of these two groups of agents have rarely been compared in detail. A multicenter, prospective, double-blind controlled study was started comparing the effects of etidronate and alfacalcidol (1-alpha-hydroxycholecalciferol) in 414 patients with established osteoporosis from 36 centers. Among these patients, 135 were given 400 mg etidronate daily at bedtime for 2 weeks followed by 10 weeks off treatment, and this cycle was repeated four times along with a placebo indistinguishable from the alfacalcidol capsule daily throughout the 48 weeks of study (Group A, High Dose Etidronate Group). In 133 patients, 200 mg etidronate was used instead of 400 mg (Group B, Low Dose Etidronate Group). In 138 patients, 1 microg alfacalcidol was given daily throughout the 48-week study period along with a placebo indistinguishable from the etidronate tablet in four separate periods of 2 weeks (Group C, Control Group). Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of the lumbar spine (L2-L4) was performed before the beginning of the study and every 12 weeks thereafter. Changes in spinal deformity were also assessed based on the lateral thoracic and lumbar spine X-ray films taken before and after the study. The lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) changes were +3.4% +/- 0.6% (mean +/- SEM) in Group A, +2.4% +/- 0.5% in Group B, and -0.5% +/- 0.4% in Group C, the former two being significantly higher than the last. New occurrence of spinal compression fracture was also significantly reduced in Group A compared to Group C. In patients without previous fracture at entry, incident fracture was 10.2% in Group C, but 0% in Groups A and B. In patients with prevalent fracture at entry, corresponding figures were 21.5% (Group C), 12.0% (Group A), and 13.2% (Group B), respectively. Alfacalcidol maintained lumbar spine BMD, preventing a decrease for 48 weeks, and etidronate significantly increased it further, demonstrating its usefulness in the treatment of established osteoporosis.

Patient Adherence to Osteoporosis Medications

Adherence to osteoporosis medications is relatively poor. Approximately 20-30% of patients taking daily or weekly treatments may suspend their treatment within 6 to 12 months of initiating therapy. Patients with poor adherence increase their risk of osteoporotic fractures and hospitalisation. The majority of patients who discontinue therapy appear to do so because of drug-induced adverse effects. Fear of adverse effects or other health risks is another commonly cited reason for discontinuing therapy. Factors associated with medication adherence include fractures, regular exercise, female sex, fewer non-osteoporosis medications and co-morbidities, early menopause, willingness to take medications, awareness of osteoporosis status based on a diagnostic test, anti-inflammatory therapy and corticosteroid therapy. Factors associated with non-adherence include adverse effects, pain and being unsure about bone mineral density (BMD) test results. Bisphosphonates, a common class of drugs for treating osteoporosis, have specific administration requirements (e.g. fasting, remaining upright and not ingesting other medications concomitantly). Patient surveys indicate that 12-18% of patients report non-compliance with at least one administration rule. Strategies to increase adherence include reducing administration frequency to weekly or monthly, monitoring patients with bone markers and BMD testing, providing adequate instructions, practitioner feedback and support, and educational materials and sessions. Future studies are needed regarding strategies to increase adherence to osteoporosis medications.

What is the number of older Canadians needed to screen by measurement of bone density to detect an undiagnosed case of osteoporosis? a population-based study from CaMos

Routine bone mineral densitometry (BMD) screening has been recommended for women aged >or=65 yr (Osteoporosis Canada [OC], International Society for Clinical Densitometry [ISCD], Canadian and United States Task Forces on Preventative Healthcare, and National Osteoporosis Foundation) and for men >or=65 yr (OC) or >or=70 yr (ISCD). We estimated the number of older Canadians needed to screen (NNS) by BMD to detect an undiagnosed case of osteoporosis, using prospective, multicenter, population-based data from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos). We included participants aged >or=65 yr with baseline dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) BMDs at the femoral neck and lumbar spine (L1-L4). Osteoporosis was defined by a T-score <or=2.5 at either site. Patients were questioned about a prior diagnosis of osteoporosis. We studied 2699 women and 1032 men aged >or=65 yr. The percentage prevalence and 95% confidence intervals were determined. In individuals aged >or=65 yr, the prevalence of osteoporosis was 25.6% in women (95% confidence interval, 24.0%, 27.3%) and 8.9% in men (7.3%, 10.8%). In 652 men aged >or=70 yr, the prevalence of osteoporosis was 11.3% (9.1%, 14.0%). Of the participants with BMD-defined osteoporosis, 76.6% of woman aged >or=65 yr (73.2%, 79.6%; 516 of 674 women), 93.4% of men aged >or=65 yr (86.4%, 96.9%; 85 of 91), and 93.2% of men >or=70 yr (84.9%, 97.0%; 68 of 73) were not aware of it. Thus, the minimum NNS by BMD testing to detect one previously undiagnosed case of osteoporosis in Canada is: 6 women aged >or=65 yr, 13 men aged >or=65 yr, and 10 men aged >or=70 yr.

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

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

Effect of etidronate in preventing periprosthetic bone loss following cemented hip arthroplasty: A randomized, double blind, controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic bone loss occurs after insertion of a total hip prosthesis and is often a result of stress shielding or altered loading of the proximal femur. Preventing the bone loss, which may threaten the prosthesis survival, with an antiresorptive drug would be highly advantageous.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our study investigated the effect of cyclic etidronate therapy on periprosthetic, contralateral hip, and spine bone mineral density (BMD) in a one-year, prospective, randomized, double-blind study in 31 patients after cemented hip arthroplasty. Etidronate was taken orally in a regimen repeated every 14 weeks, and periprosthetic BMD was measured with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the total periprosthetic area and in the seven Gruen zones at 1 week (baseline), 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

In the etidronate group there were significant temporal BMD decreases measured in Gruen zones 2, 3, 6, and 7 and in the entire proximal femur; the greatest decrease was 12.9% and was measured in zone 7 at six months. Also in the etidronate group, there was a significant 2.8% temporal BMD increase in the spine at 12 months. In the placebo group there were significant temporal BMD decreases measured in Gruen zones 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 and in the entire proximal femur; the greatest decrease was 25.5% and was measured in zone 7 at 12 months. There were no significant differences between the mean BMD measurements of the etidronate and placebo groups.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that cyclic etidronate therapy has no significant effect in suppressing periprosthetic bone loss after cemented hip arthroplasty.

Management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

To update the evidence-based position statement published by The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) in 2002 regarding the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

DESIGN

NAMS followed the general principles established for evidence-based guidelines to create this updated document. A panel of clinicians and researchers expert in the field of metabolic bone diseases and/or women's health were enlisted to review the 2002 NAMS position statement, compile supporting statements, and reach consensus on recommendations. The panel's recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees.

RESULTS

Osteoporosis, whose prevalence is especially high among elderly postmenopausal women, increases the risk of fractures. Hip and spine fractures are associated with particularly high morbidity and mortality in this population. Given the health implications of osteoporotic fractures, the primary goal of osteoporosis therapy is to prevent fractures, which is accomplished by slowing or stopping bone loss, maintaining bone strength, and minimizing or eliminating factors that may contribute to fractures. The evaluation of postmenopausal women for osteoporosis risk requires a medical history, physical examination, and diagnostic tests. Major risk factors for postmenopausal osteoporosis (as defined by bone mineral density) include advanced age, genetics, lifestyle factors (such as low calcium and vitamin D intake, smoking), thinness, and menopause status. The most common risk factors for osteoporotic fracture are advanced age, low bone mineral density, and previous fracture as an adult. Management focuses first on nonpharmacologic measures, such as a balanced diet, adequate calcium and vitamin D intake, adequate exercise, smoking cessation, avoidance of excessive alcohol intake, and fall prevention. If pharmacologic therapy is indicated, government-approved options are bisphosphonates, a selective estrogen-receptor modulator, parathyroid hormone, estrogens, and calcitonin.

CONCLUSIONS

Management strategies for postmenopausal women involve identifying those at risk of low bone density and fracture, followed by instituting measures that focus on reducing modifiable risk factors through lifestyle changes and, if indicated, pharmacologic therapy.

Canadian Consensus Conference on osteoporosis, 2006 update

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for the health care provider on the diagnosis and clinical management of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

OUTCOMES

Strategies for identifying and evaluating high-risk individuals, the use of bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers in assessing diagnosis and response to management, and recommendations regarding nutrition, physical activity, and the selection of pharmacologic therapy to prevent and manage osteoporosis.

EVIDENCE

MEDLINE and the Cochrane database were searched for articles in English on subjects related to osteoporosis diagnosis, prevention, and management from March 2001 to April 2005. The authors critically reviewed the evidence and developed the recommendations according to the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada's methodology and consensus development process.

VALUES

The quality of evidence is rated using the criteria described in the report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. Recommendations for practice are ranked according to the method described in this report.

SPONSORS

The development of this consensus guideline was supported by unrestricted educational grants from Berlex Canada Inc., Lilly Canada, Merck Frosst, Novartis, Novogen, Novo Nordisk, Proctor and Gamble, Schering Canada, and Wyeth Canada.

Current Pharmacological Options for the Management of Primary Hyperparathyroidism

Drugs for treating primary hyperparathyroidism can be divided into two main groups: (i) antiresorptive drugs that inhibit the increased bone turnover, which can be divided into estrogen-like compounds (estrogen, oral contraceptives and selective estrogen receptor modulators [SERMs]), bisphosphonates and calcitonin; and (ii) drugs that interfere with parathyroid hormone (PTH) secretion (currently only cinacalcet is available). No drugs that interfere with PTH action are currently available. Available studies suggest that all classes of drugs are able to lower serum calcium levels. However, calcitonin does so only temporarily. Estrogen-containing compounds (hormone replacement therapy) may be less attractive because of the potential risk of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease and deep vein thromboembolism. Oral contraceptives have not been shown to be able to prevent fractures in the general population, and no data are available on their effect in women with primary hyperparathyroidism. The only SERM marketed for hyperparathyroidism is raloxifene and this has not been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases, and has been shown to be able to prevent vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Two small trials suggest that raloxifene may increase bone mineral density (BMD) and decrease serum calcium levels in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism. Bisphosphonates have been shown to decrease serum calcium and increase BMD in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism, but PTH levels may increase. Cinacalcet effectively induces a sustained decrease in serum calcium and PTH for up to 1 year. However, BMD does not seem to increase. No data on hard endpoints such as fractures, kidney stones, cardiovascular disease etc. are available for any of the drugs available for the treatment of primary hyperparathyroidism.

Anti-resorptive therapy for the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis : when should treatment begin?

Osteoporosis is a condition associated with decreased bone strength and an increased fracture risk. It may be defined based on bone mineral density (BMD) with a T-score at the hip or spine of less than -2.5 standard deviations in young healthy individuals or from an osteoporotic fracture (i.e. a fracture occurring after low-energy trauma or no apparent trauma). Risk factors predisposing to fractures include: increasing age; female gender; low BMD; a prior fragility fracture; a family history of fragility fractures; low bodyweight; lack of estrogen in women (i.e. post menopause); corticosteroid use; smoking; a number of diseases; deficiency in calcium and vitamin D; an increased risk of falls (i.e. impaired vision); immobilization; and Caucasian race. The more risk factors that are present the higher the risk of fractures over the following 10 years. The need to initiate preventive therapy with anti-osteoporotic treatment increases steeply with the absolute fracture risk. Indications for referral for dual energy x-ray absorptiometry measurement of BMD include: age >65 years; age <65 years in postmenopausal women with any of the risk factors already mentioned; premature menopause (<45 years); prolonged amenorrhea (>1 year) in younger women; fragility fractures; and diseases or conditions known to lead to osteoporosis.Anti-resorptive therapies include calcium plus vitamin D, bisphosphonates (alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, ibandronate), selective estrogen receptor modulators (raloxifene), hormone replacement therapy, and calcitonin. Guidelines from several countries on when to initiate anti-resorptive therapy state that therapy may be started in patients with a prior fragility fracture (some guidelines state that in this situation no BMD measurements are necessary) or in patients with a T-score of less than -2.5 (some guidelines state that additional risk factors need to be present in this situation). Some guidelines state that anti-resorptive therapy may be initiated in patients with a T-score in the osteopenic range (from -1 to -2.5, i.e. not frank osteoporosis) in the presence of other risk factors. The cost effectiveness of anti-resorptive therapy increases with the absolute fracture risk. In some scenarios, treatment with bisphosphonates may be cost effective in a 50-year-old woman with an absolute hip fracture risk of >or=1.1% over the next 10 years.

Available medical choices for the management of menopause

The age at which menopause occurs is a critical factor in the magnitude of its consequences. Most of the medium-to-long-term effects of oestrogen deprivation depend on their duration. The timing of the last menstruation is therefore important, but hypoestrogenic amenorrhoea during the reproductive age is also a relevant factor in the evaluation of individual risks. In recent years, moving post-menopausal women from the lowest point of ovarian hypofunction has been the most important motivation for developing guidelines for the hormonal management of menopause. However, recent data suggest that this may be associated with an unacceptable increase in morbidity in a number of women. Concerns about long-term hormone replacement therapy (HRT) at menopause have recently enhanced interest in a group of molecules that act on the oestrogen receptor with selective effects, known as selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs). Of these, Raloxifene has been approved for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis, and exhibits a pattern of actions particularly well matched to the needs and concerns of post-menopausal women. Further studies on SERMs may open up new vistas in patient-specific management of post-menopausal health. Finally, debates on the specific health consequences of menopause deal mainly with the risk of chronic disease. Gynaecologists and other health professionals would be advised to develop intervention strategies at menopause according to the continuum of a woman's life, beginning at the post-menarche and extending into later life.

Epilepsy, osteoporosis and fracture risk - a meta-analysis

This meta-analysis assesses the effects of epilepsy on fracture risk and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with epilepsy. A search of PubMed was conducted using the key words epilepsy, fracture, and bone mineral. A weighted estimate of relative risk of fractures and changes in BMD (Z-score) was calculated. From the changes in BMD, expected increase in relative fracture risk was calculated. A total of 11 studies on fracture risk and 12 studies on BMD were retrieved. The relative risk of any fracture was increased (2.2, 95% CI: 1.9-2.5, five studies), as was the risk of hip (5.3, 3.2-8.8, six studies), forearm (1.7, 1.2-2.3, six studies), and spine fractures (6.2, 2.5-15.5, three studies). A large proportion of fractures (35%) seemed related to seizures. Spine (mean +/- SEM: -0.38 +/- 0.06) and hip (-0.56 +/- 0.06) BMD Z-scores were significantly decreased, hip more than spine (2P < 0.05). The expected increases in relative risk of any fracture from BMD Z-scores were 1.2-1.3, and significantly lower than observed (2P < 0.05). The deficit in BMD in patients with epilepsy is too small to explain the observed increase in fracture risk. The remainder of the increase in fracture risk may be linked to seizures.

Etidronate does not suppress periprosthetic bone loss following cemented hip arthroplasty

Periprosthetic bone loss after arthroplasty may threaten prosthesis survival. The current study investigated the effect of etidronate therapy on periprosthetic, contralateral hip, and spine bone mineral density (BMD) in a one-year, prospective, randomized, double-blind study on 46 patients after cemented hip arthroplasty. BMD was measured with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). There were no significant differences between mean BMD measurements of the etidronate and placebo groups, with the exception of the mean percent change in the spine at six months and 12 months and in Gruen zone 3 at six months; in all three cases, the etidronate group had significantly greater mean values. These findings suggest that cyclic etidronate therapy has no significant effect in suppressing periprosthetic bone loss following cemented hip arthroplasty.

Randomized trial of etidronate plus calcium and vitamin D for treatment of low bone mineral density in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Crohn's disease causes an increase in osteopenia and osteoporosis. This study assessed the efficacy of adding etidronate to calcium and vitamin D supplementation for treatment of low bone mineral density in Crohn's disease.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-four patients with Crohn's disease with decreased bone mineral density, determined by using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, were randomly assigned to receive etidronate (400 mg orally) or not for 14 days; both groups were then given daily calcium (500 mg) and vitamin D (400 IU) supplementation for 76 days. This cycle was repeated 8 times during a period of 24 months. Biochemical characteristics and bone mineral densities were assessed at 6, 12, and 24 months.

RESULTS

After 24 months bone mineral density significantly increased from baseline in both the etidronate- and the non-etidronate-treated groups (both groups receiving calcium and vitamin D supplementation) at the lumbar spine (P < .001), ultradistal radius (P < .001), and trochanter (P = .004) sites, but not at the total hip. The increase in bone mineral density was similar in each treatment group. No bone mineral density differences were found when groups were analyzed according to gender, corticosteroid use, bone mineral density at baseline, or age.

CONCLUSIONS

Low bone mineral density is frequently associated with Crohn's disease. Supplementation with daily calcium and vitamin D is associated with increases in bone mineral density. The addition of oral etidronate does not further enhance bone mineral density.

Optimizing Administration of Bisphosphonates in Women with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Bisphosphonates have been approved in the US as oral medication for the treatment of osteoporosis for about 10 years. Efficacy data exists for fracture reduction for the commonly used oral bisphosphonates but not for intravenous formulations. Based on the mechanism of action that appears to allow for longer intervals between doses, it has been possible to extend the treatment choices from the original more demanding daily oral dose to an array of options including oral weekly and more recently monthly treatment (so-called cyclical therapy) and intravenous treatment with various administration regimens. The possibility of treatment with an annual (or less frequent) intravenous administration with zoledronic acid exists. Compliance, adverse effects, and efficacy vary with each administration regimen.

Clinical Pharmacology of Potent New Bisphosphonates for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of bone resorption, used in most bone diseases associated with high bone resorption levels. Several bisphosphonates, developed to prevent and treat postmenopausal osteoporosis, increase bone mineral density and decrease biochemical markers of bone turnover, and more importantly, reduce fracture risk. Alendronate and risedronate have proven their efficacy to reduce vertebral and hip fracture risk among postmenopausal osteoporotic women, using daily regimens. Weekly intermittent schedules, however, are now most commonly prescribed, because they have shown pharmacologic equivalence to the daily regimen. Ibandronate has been the first bisphosphonate to demonstrate vertebral fracture risk reduction using an intermittent regimen. Studies using ibandronate as intravenous injections every 3 months are under way. Zoledronic acid may also be an attractive option for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis if a large ongoing trial proves that a single annual injection of this compound allows osteoporotic fracture risk reduction.