Effects after starting or switching from bisphosphonate to romosozumab or denosumab in Japanese postmenopausal patients

Romosozumab versus denosumab in long-term users of glucocorticoids: A pilot randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of romosozumab (ROMO) and denosumab (DEN) in prevalent long-term glucocorticoid (GC) users.

METHODS

Adult patients receiving oral prednisolone (≥5 mg/day) with high risk of fracture were randomized to receive subcutaneous ROMO (210 mg monthly) or DEN (60 mg 6-monthly) for 12 months, followed by DEN for two more doses. The primary end point was the change in spine bone mineral density (BMD) from Months 0 to 12. Secondary end points included changes in BMD of the spine/hip/femoral neck and bone turnover markers at various time points and adverse events.

RESULTS

Seventy patients (age 62.6 ± 9.1 years; 96% women; median prednisolone dose 5.0 mg/day; duration of therapy 10.7 ± 7.4 years) were enrolled, and 63 completed the study. At Month 12, the spine BMD increased significantly in both ROMO (+7.3% ± 4.5%; p < 0.001) and DEN (+2.3% ± 3.1%; p < 0.001) groups. The absolute spine BMD gain from Months 0 to 12 was significantly greater in ROMO-treated patients (p < 0.001). Although the total hip BMD at Month 12 also increased significantly in the ROMO (+1.6% ± 3.3%; p = 0.01) and DEN groups (+1.6% ± 2.6%; p = 0.003), the absolute BMD gain was not significantly different between the groups. At Month 24, the spine BMD continued to increase in both the ROMO (+9.7% ± 4.8%; p < 0.001) and DEN group (+3.0% ± 3.0%; p < 0.001) compared to baseline, and the absolute BMD gain remained significantly greater in ROMO-treated patients. The total hip BMD continued to increase in both groups (ROMO +2.9% ± 3.7%; p < 0.001; DEN +2.2% ± 3.4%; p = 0.001), but the changes from baseline were similar. Injection site reaction was more frequently reported in ROMO-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

ROMO was superior to DEN in raising the spine BMD at Month 12 in chronic GC users. After switching to DEN, ROMO-treated patients continued to gain spine BMD to a greater extent than DEN until Month 24.

Effectiveness of romosozumab in patients with osteoporosis at high fracture risk: a Japanese real-world study

INTRODUCTION

To describe the real-world use of romosozumab in Japan, we conducted a chart review of > 1000 Japanese patients with osteoporosis (OP) at high risk of fracture, across multiple medical institutions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Treatment-naïve and prior OP-treatment patients who received romosozumab for 12 months followed by ≥ 6 months of sequential OP treatment were included. The primary objective described the baseline demographics and clinical characteristics; secondary objectives evaluated changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers in all patients and effectiveness of romosozumab in a sub-group of treatment-naïve patients using the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX®).

RESULTS

Of the 1027 patients (92.4% female), 45.0% were treatment-naïve. The mean ± SD age of treatment-naïve versus prior OP-treatment patients was 76.8 ± 8.5 and 77.1 ± 8.5 years. The most frequent prior OP treatment was bisphosphonates (45.0%). Romosozumab treatment for 12 months increased BMD at the lumbar spine in all groups; the median percent change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD was higher in the treatment-naïve (13.4%) versus prior OP-treatment group (bisphosphonates [9.2%], teriparatide [11.3%], denosumab [DMAb, 4.5%]). DMAb, bisphosphonates, or teriparatide after romosozumab maintained the BMD gains at all skeletal sites at month 18 in treatment-naïve patients. Most treatment-naïve patients were at high risk of fracture, BMD increased consistently with romosozumab regardless of the baseline fracture risk assessed by FRAX.

CONCLUSION

This large-scale, multicenter chart review provides clinically relevant insights into the profiles of patients initiating romosozumab, effectiveness of real-world romosozumab use, and sequential therapy in Japanese patients at high risk of fracture.

Romosozumab is associated with greater trabecular bone score improvement compared to denosumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis

In this study, romosozumab demonstrated significantly greater improvement in trabecular bone score compared to denosumab therapy in postmenopausal women previously treated with antiresorptive agents. Notably, in patients previously treated with anti-resorptive agents, treatment with romosozumab resulted in similar increases in trabecular bone score compared to that of drug-naïve patients.

PURPOSE

Romosozumab significantly increases bone mineral density (BMD) and rapidly reduces fracture risk. Whether romosozumab can improve the spinal trabecular bone score (TBS) as a bone quality indicator merits further investigation.

METHODS

Data for postmenopausal women starting romosozumab or denosumab treatment at Severance Hospital, Korea, were analyzed. Romosozumab and denosumab groups were 1:1 matched using propensity scores, considering relevant covariates. Good responders were defined as those with TBS improvement of 5.8% or greater.

RESULTS

Overall, 174 patients (romosozumab, n = 87; denosumab, n = 87) were analyzed. Matched groups did not differ in age (64 years), weight, height, previous fracture (38%), lumbar spine or femoral neck BMD (T-score, -3.4 and -2.6, respectively), or prior bisphosphonate or selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) exposure (50%). The romosozumab group exhibited a greater increase in lumbar spine BMD (15.2% vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001) and TBS (3.7% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.013) than the denosumab group. In patients transitioning from bisphosphonate or SERM, romosozumab users showed greater improvement in TBS compared to denosumab users (3.9% versus 0.8%, P = 0.006); the drug-naive group showed no significant difference (3.6% versus 2.7%, P = 0.472). The romosozumab group had a higher proportion of good responders than the denosumab group (33.3% vs. 18.4%, p = 0.024). Romosozumab therapy for 12 months resulted in 3.8-fold higher odds of a good response in TBS than denosumab after covariate adjustment (adjusted odds ratio 3.85, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Romosozumab could improve bone mass and bone quality, measured by TBS, in postmenopausal osteoporosis, particularly as a subsequent regimen in patients previously taking anti-resorptive agents.

Meta-analysis of the effects of denosumab and romosozumab on bone mineral density and turnover markers in patients with osteoporosis

Purpose

To assess the alterations in bone mineral density and bone turnover marker concentrations following the administration of denosumab and romosozumab therapies in patients with osteoporosis.

Methods

PubMed was searched for studies published until January 28, 2023, that investigated the clinical efficacy and bone turnover marker changes of denosumab and romosozumab in the treatment of osteoporosis, with a minimum follow-up of 3 months in each study. Studies were screened, and data on changes in bone mineral density (BMD), P1NP, and TRACP-5b levels after treatment were extracted and included in the analysis.

Results

Six studies were analyzed. At 3 months after treatment, the romosozumab group showed greater changes in lumbar BMD and bone turnover markers. BMD of total hip and femoral neck was relatively delayed. Beginning at 6 to 12 months, romosozumab showed greater changes in bone mineral density and markers of bone turnover.

Conclusion

Both romosozumab and denosumab have antiosteoporotic effects, with greater effects on BMD and bone turnover markers observed within 12 months of romosozumab treatment.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42023395034.

Nonresponder Considerations for Romosozumab Treatment

Romosozumab can increase bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with osteoporosis, but some patients do not respond to it. This study aimed to identify risk factors for being a nonresponder to romosozumab treatment. This retrospective observational study included 92 patients. Romosozumab (210 mg) was subcutaneously administered to the participants every 4 weeks over 12 months. We excluded patients who previously underwent treatment for osteoporosis to assess the impact of romosozumab alone. We evaluated the proportion of patients who did not respond to romosozumab treatment to the lumbar spine and hip with increased BMD. Nonresponders were defined as those with a bone density change of < 3% after 12 months of treatment. We compared demographics and biochemical markers between responders and nonresponders. We found that 11.5% of patients were nonresponders at the lumbar spine, and 56.8% were nonresponders at the hip. A risk factor for nonresponse at the spine was low type I procollagen N-terminal propeptide (P1NP) values at 1 month. The cutoff value for P1NP at month 1 was 50 ng/ml. We found that 11.5% and 56.8% of patients experienced no significant improvement in the lumbar spine and hip BMD, respectively. Clinicians should use nonresponse risk factors to inform decisions about romosozumab treatment for patients with osteoporosis.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Zoledronate Acid or Denosumab After Switching from Romosozumab in Japanese Postmenopausal Patients

We aimed to compare the efficacy of switching from romosozumab (RMAb) to denosumab (DMAb) or zoledronic acid (Zol) with respect to changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone metabolism. We also aimed to determine predictors of changes in BMD among patients who received sequential therapy from RMAb. One hundred patients who received RMAb therapy were recruited for this study. A total 49 patients received bisphosphonate (BP) pre-treatment and 51 received active vitamin D3 analog pre-treatment or no treatment. Forty-two patients were switched to Zol (BP-RMAb-Zol; 20 and RMAb-Zol; 22), and 58 patients were switched to DMAb (BP-RMAb-DMAb; 29 and RMAb-DMAb; 29). Longitudinal changes in bone metabolic markers (P1NP and TRACP-5b) and BMD were also evaluated. In the BP-RMAb-Zol group, TRACP-5b increased after administration of Zol, and the mean BMD of the lumbar spine (LS) was significantly lower than those in the BP-RMAb-DMAb, RMAb-Zol and RMAb-DMAb groups at 24 months. The % changes in BMD of the LS after 24 months were associated with TRACP-5b values at baseline and at 12 months in patients who received Zol therapy, and with TRACP-5b value at baseline in patients who received DMAb therapy. The DMAb follow-on regimen could be considered more effective than Zol as a sequential agent for the enhancement of BMD after RMAb in patients with BP pretreatment. TRACP-5b, especially the baseline value, may predict the efficacy of sequential therapy from RMAb, as well as previous treatments.

One-Year Romosozumab Treatment Followed by One-Year Denosumab Treatment for Osteoporosis in Patients on Hemodialysis: An Observational Study

There is limited evidence on the use of romosozumab (ROMO) in the treatment of osteoporosis in patients on hemodialysis (HD); thus, we aimed to investigate this topic. This prospective, observational, single-center cohort study included 13 prior osteoporosis treatment-naïve patients on HD with osteoporosis. They first received ROMO once monthly for 12 months (210 mg; subcutaneously once every month). Thereafter, they received denosumab (DENO) for an additional 12 months (60 mg; subcutaneously once every 6 months). We examined the incidence of new fractures; treatment safety; and temporal changes in the bone mineral density (BMD), bone metabolism markers, and vascular calcification. No new cases of fractures were noted. The median one-year percentage changes (from the baseline) in the BMDs at the lumbar spine (LS), total hip (TH), and femoral neck (FN) were + 9.0%, + 2.5%, and + 4.7%, respectively. These changes were maintained for 24 months. The corresponding relative changes from the baseline to 24 months thereafter were + 14.9%, + 5.4%, and + 6.5%, respectively. The percentage changes in TH BMD and FN BMD were negatively correlated with baseline BMD. Coronary artery and thoracic aorta calcification scores increased slightly from baseline to 12 months thereafter. However, fatal events (cardiovascular disease-associated and all-cause deaths) did not occur during ROMO treatment. Effectiveness of ROMO was better in patients who had severe osteoporosis with low TH BMD, low FN BMD, and high tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b level at ROMO initiation.

Effect of the duration of previous osteoporosis treatment on the effect of romosozumab treatment

The effect of romosozumab is affected by previous osteoporosis treatment. Here we showed that the duration of the previous treatment just before romosozumab affects the therapeutic effect of romosozumab. Using denosumab and oral bisphosphonates for more than 1 year attenuates the effect of romosozumab.

INTRODUCTION

As an anti-sclerostin antibody, romosozumab suppresses bone resorption and stimulates bone formation. We investigated whether the effectiveness of 12 months of romosozumab treatment depended on the duration of previous treatment with teriparatide, denosumab, or oral bisphosphonates.

METHODS

In total, 259 osteoporosis patients received subcutaneous injections of romosozumab (210 mg) every 4 weeks during 2019 and 2020. This study was designed as a pre-post comparison. The end points were the percent changes of bone mineral density (BMD) after 12 months of romosozumab treatment. The patients were divided into seven groups depending on the type and duration of previous treatment before starting romosozumab as follows: non-previous treatment group, change from teriparatide used for 1 year or less/more than 1 year, change from denosumab used for 1 year or less/more than 1 year, and change from oral bisphosphonates used for 1 year or less/more than 1 year.

RESULTS

The effects of previous treatment with teriparatide on the effectiveness of 12-month romosozumab did not clearly depend on the duration of treatment (p > 0.05). In contrast, the effects of previous treatments with denosumab or oral bisphosphonates on the effectiveness of 12-month romosozumab depended on the previous treatment duration, which was reflected by the differences in percent change of the spine BMD (both p < 0.05), however, there were no significant differences in the percent change of the total hip BMD (both p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The duration of the previous treatment affected the effectiveness of romosozumab. Using denosumab and oral bisphosphonate for more than 1 year attenuated the effect of romosozumab.

Therapeutic Treatments for Osteoporosis-Which Combination of Pills Is the Best among the Bad?

Osteoporosis is a chronical, systemic skeletal disorder characterized by an increase in bone resorption, which leads to reduced bone density. The reduction in bone mineral density and therefore low bone mass results in an increased risk of fractures. Osteoporosis is caused by an imbalance in the normally strictly regulated bone homeostasis. This imbalance is caused by overactive bone-resorbing osteoclasts, while bone-synthesizing osteoblasts do not compensate for this. In this review, the mechanism is presented, underlined by in vitro and animal models to investigate this imbalance as well as the current status of clinical trials. Furthermore, new therapeutic strategies for osteoporosis are presented, such as anabolic treatments and catabolic treatments and treatments using biomaterials and biomolecules. Another focus is on new combination therapies with multiple drugs which are currently considered more beneficial for the treatment of osteoporosis than monotherapies. Taken together, this review starts with an overview and ends with the newest approaches for osteoporosis therapies and a future perspective not presented so far.

Change in tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase isoform 5b levels, a marker of bone metabolism, in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir alafenamide

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is associated with the risk of osteoporosis and bone mineral density (BMD) loss. Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is associated with a slightly lower degree of BMD loss compared with tenofovir disoproxil, without loss of the excellent anti-HBV effects. The aim of the present study was to verify the effect of bone metabolism in patients with HBV treated with TAF. A total of 87 patients were treated with TAF. Of these, 32 patients were treatment naïve, and 55 patients were treated with entecavir (ETV) for at least 1 year, after which ETV was switched to TAF. At the start of TAF and after 1 year, BMD in the lumbar and neck of the femur, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase isoform 5b (TRACP-5b) levels as a marker of bone metabolism and serum inorganic phosphorus (P) were compared to estimate bone metabolism. Serum creatinine (Cr), cystatin C, urine protein and β2 microglobulin levels were evaluated to estimate kidney function. Treatment with TAF for 1 year decreased TRACP-5b levels, particularly in patients with bone disease, except for a minimal significant change (MSC; decrease of 12.4%) in TRACP-5b levels. The change in rate of TRACP-5b levels were positively associated with changes in P, Cr-estimated glomerular filtration rate and TRACP-5b levels at the start of TAF. Logistic regression analysis showed that increased BMD in the lumbar region contributed to the switch from ETV to TAF. TAF induced a decrease in TRACP-5b levels in patients with HBV. Bone disease was a contributing factor for MSC. Since TRACP-5b can be used as a marker of bone metabolism and fractures, TAF may exhibit potential in preventing fractures in patients with HBV.

Rheumatoid Arthritis is a Risk Factor for Refracture in Patients with Fragility Fractures

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had fragility fractures are at an increased risk of refractures.

METHODS

Patients with fragility fractures who were treated surgically at ten hospitals from 2008 to 2017 and who underwent follow-up for more than 24 months were either categorized into a group comprising patients with RA or a group comprising patients without RA (controls). The groups were matched 1:1 by propensity score matching. Accordingly, 240 matched participants were included in this study. The primary outcome was the refracture rate in patients with RA as compared to in the controls. Multivariable analyses were also conducted on patients with RA to evaluate the odds ratios (ORs) for the refracture rates.

RESULTS

Patients with RA were significantly associated with increased rates of refractures during the first 24 months (OR: 2.714, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.015-7.255; P = 0.040). Multivariable analyses revealed a significant association between increased refracture rates and long-term RA (OR: 6.308, 95% CI: 1.195-33.292; P=0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA who have experienced fragility fractures are at an increased risk of refractures. Long-term RA is a substantial risk factor for refractures.