Effect of alendronate on glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in Japanese women with systemic autoimmune diseases: versus alfacalcidol

Efficacy and safety of 18 anti-osteoporotic drugs in the treatment of patients with osteoporosis caused by glucocorticoid: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Glucocorticoids are widely used in a variety of diseases, especially autoimmune diseases and inflammatory diseases, so the incidence of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is high all over the world.

Objectives

The purpose of this paper is to use the method of network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of anti-osteoporosis drugs directly and indirectly, and to explore the advantages of various anti-osteoporosis drugs based on the current evidence.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) and compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs by NMA. The risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) are used as the influence index of discontinuous data, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% CI are used as the influence index of continuous data. The statistical heterogeneity was evaluated by the calculated estimated variance (τ²), and the efficacy and safety of drugs were ranked by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The main outcome of this study was the incidence of vertebral fracture after taking several different types of drugs, and the secondary results were the incidence of non-vertebral fracture and adverse events, mean percentage change of lumbar spine (LS) and total hip (TH)bone mineral density (BMD) from baseline to at least 12 months.

Results

Among the different types of anti-GIOP, teriparatide (SUCRA 95.9%) has the lowest incidence of vertebral fracture; ibandronate (SUCRA 75.2%) has the lowest incidence of non-vertebral fracture; raloxifene (SUCRA 98.5%) has the best effect in increasing LS BMD; denosumab (SUCRA 99.7%) is the best in increasing TH BMD; calcitonin (SUCRA 92.4%) has the lowest incidence of serious adverse events.

Conclusions

Teriparatide and ibandronate are effective drugs to reduce the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in patients with GIOP. In addition, long-term use of raloxifene and denosumab can increase the BMD of LS and TH.

Treatment of Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis with Bisphosphonates Alone, Vitamin D Alone or a Combination Treatment in Eastern Asians: A Meta-Analysis

Background:

Glucocorticoid (GC)-induced osteoporosis and fractures have become a serious problem for Eastern Asians. Bisphosphonates (BPs), vitamin D and a combination treatment are effective methods to prevent and treat GC-induced osteoporosis.

Objective:

The study aimed to compare the efficacy of BPs, vitamin D and a combination treatment for preventing and managing GC-induced osteoporosis in Eastern Asians.

Methods:

A comprehensive search in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was undertaken for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effect of BPs, vitamin D and the combination treatment on GCs-induced osteoporosis in Eastern Asian populations. Primary outcome measures were the change in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers. The final search was performed in March 2019.

Results:

Nine RCTs were included. A total of 545 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with vitamin D, BPs and the combination treatment significantly alleviated osteoporosis of the spine and femoral neck in Eastern Asians with GC-induced osteoporosis. At the same time, the change in serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) and serum C-telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) levels was observed to be significantly less with BPs and the combination treatment with vitamin D alone. No significant difference was found between BPs and the combination treatment in the markers mentioned above.

Conclusion:

Compared with vitamin D alone, BPs alone and the combination treatment were significantly effective on Eastern Asians with GC-induced osteoporosis. Compared with the combination treatment, BPs alone were observed to be effective enough to increase the BMDs of the spine and femoral neck on both sides and thus prevent GC-induced osteoporosis in Eastern Asians.

Bisphosphonates for steroid-induced osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1999. Corticosteroids are widely used in inflammatory conditions as an immunosuppressive agent. Bone loss is a serious side effect of this therapy. Several studies have examined the use of bisphosphonates in the prevention and treatment of glucocorticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) and have reported varying magnitudes of effect.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of GIOP in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase up to April 2016 and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) via OVID up to January 2012 for relevant articles and conference proceedings with no language restrictions. We searched two clinical trial registries for ongoing and recently completed studies (ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal). We also reviewed reference lists of relevant review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) satisfying the following criteria: 1) prevention or treatment of GIOP; 2) adults taking a mean steroid dose of 5.0 mg/day or more; 3) active treatment including bisphosphonates of any type alone or in combination with calcium or vitamin D; 4) comparator treatment including a control of calcium or vitamin D, or both, alone or with placebo; and 4) reporting relevant outcomes. We excluded trials that included people with transplant-associated steroid use.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'risk of bias' assessment and evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Major outcomes of interest were the incidence of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures after 12 to 24 months; the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and femoral neck after 12 months; serious adverse events; withdrawals due to adverse events; and quality of life. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 27 RCTs with 3075 participants in the review. Pooled analysis for incident vertebral fractures included 12 trials (1343 participants) with high-certainty evidence and low risk of bias. In this analysis 46/597 (or 77 per 1000) people experienced new vertebral fractures in the control group compared with 31/746 (or 44 per 1000; range 27 to 70) in the bisphosphonate group; relative improvement of 43% (9% to 65% better) with bisphosphonates; absolute increased benefit of 2% fewer people sustaining fractures with bisphosphonates (5% fewer to 1% more); number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) was 31 (20 to 145) meaning that approximately 31 people would need to be treated with bisphosphonates to prevent new vertebral fractures in one person.Pooled analysis for incident nonvertebral fractures included nine trials with 1245 participants with low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and serious risk of bias as a patient-reported outcome). In this analysis 30/546 (or 55 per 1000) people experienced new nonvertebral fracture in the control group compared with 29/699 (or 42 per 1000; range 25 to 69) in the bisphosphonate group; relative improvement of 21% with bisphosphonates (33% worse to 53% better); absolute increased benefit of 1% fewer people with fractures with bisphosphonates (4% fewer to 1% more).Pooled analysis on BMD change at the lumbar spine after 12 months included 23 trials with 2042 patients. Eighteen trials with 1665 participants were included in the pooled analysis on BMD at the femoral neck after 12 months. Evidence for both outcomes was moderate-certainty (downgraded for indirectness as a surrogate marker for osteoporosis) with low risk of bias. Overall, the bisphosphonate groups reported stabilisation or increase in BMD, while the control groups showed decreased BMD over the study period. At the lumbar spine, there was an absolute increase in BMD of 3.5% with bisphosphonates (2.90% to 4.10% higher) with a relative improvement of 1.10% with bisphosphonates (0.91% to 1.29%); NNTB 3 (2 to 3). At the femoral neck, the absolute difference in BMD was 2.06% higher in the bisphosphonate group compared to the control group (1.45% to 2.68% higher) with a relative improvement of 1.29% (0.91% to 1.69%); NNTB 5 (4 to 7).Pooled analysis on serious adverse events included 15 trials (1703 participants) with low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and risk of bias). In this analysis 131/811 (or 162 per 1000) people experienced serious adverse events in the control group compared to 136/892 (or 147 per 1000; range 120 to 181) in the bisphosphonate group; absolute increased harm of 0% more serious adverse events (2% fewer to 2% more); a relative per cent change with 9% improvement (12% worse to 26% better).Pooled analysis for withdrawals due to adverse events included 15 trials (1790 patients) with low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and risk of bias). In this analysis 63/866 (or 73 per 1000) people withdrew in the control group compared to 76/924 (or 77 per 1000; range 56 to 107) in the bisphosphonate group; an absolute increased harm of 1% more withdrawals with bisphosphonates (95% CI 1% fewer to 3% more); a relative per cent change 6% worse (95% CI 47% worse to 23% better).Quality of life was not assessed in any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was high-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates are beneficial in reducing the risk of vertebral fractures with data extending to 24 months of use. There was low-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates may make little or no difference in preventing nonvertebral fractures. There was moderate-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates are beneficial in preventing and treating corticosteroid-induced bone loss at both the lumbar spine and femoral neck. Regarding harm, there was low-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates may make little or no difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events. We are cautious in interpreting these data as markers for harm and tolerability due to the potential for bias.Overall, our review supports the use of bisphosphonates to reduce the risk of vertebral fractures and the prevention and treatment of steroid-induced bone loss.

Alendronate prevents glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in patients with rheumatic diseases: A meta-analysis

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is a serious problem for patients with rheumatic diseases requiring long-term glucocorticoid treatment. Alendronate, a bisphosphonate, has been recommended in the prevention of GIOP. However, the efficacy and safety of alendronate in preventing GIOP remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of alendronate in preventing GIOP in patients with rheumatic diseases.We retrieved randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Two reviewers extracted the data and evaluated the risk of bias and quality of the evidence. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI for continuous outcomes using Review Manager, version 5.3.A total of 339 studies were found, and 9 studies (1134 patients) were included. Alendronate was not able to reduce the incidence of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.10-4.04, P = 0.62) and nonvertebral fractures (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.15-1.12, P = 0.08). Alendronate significantly increased the percent change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (MD = 3.66, 95% CI: 2.58-4.74, P < 0.05), total hip (MD = 2.08, 95% CI: 0.41-3.74, P < 0.05), and trochanter (MD = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.75-2.61, P < 0.05). Significant differences were not observed in the percent change in BMD at the femoral neck (MD = -0.33, 95% CI: -2.79 to 2.13, P = 0.79) and total body (MD = 0.64, 95% CI: -0.06 to 1.34, P = 0.07). No significant differences in the adverse events were observed in patients treated with alendronate versus the controls (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.94-1.07, P = 0.89). The odds of gastrointestinal adverse events were significantly reduced (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.97, P < 0.05).Our analysis suggests that alendronate can increase the percent change in BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, and trochanter, and is not associated with an increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events; however, the vertebral and nonvertebral fractures cannot be reduced. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the poor statistical power.

Bisphosphonates in the treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: pros

In glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO), both bone formation and resorption are altered, however, with a relative prevalence of resorption, consistent with the positive results that have been reported with bisphosphonate treatment. Many studies have investigated the effect of bisphosphonates (BPs), a widely used class of anti-resorptive drugs, showing a positive effect on bone mineral density and fracture risk. Also in case of postmenopausal osteoporosis, the safety and cost-effectiveness profile of BPs in GIO appears good. Currently, the use of BPs is recommended at the earliest by all major scientific societies in postmenopausal women and men ≥50 years at high risk of fracture receiving glucocorticoid therapy. BPs are the most commonly used anti-osteoporotic agents and they remain the current standard of care for GIO.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: who to treat with what agent?

Among the adverse events of glucocorticoid treatment are bone loss and fractures. Despite available, effective preventive measures, many patients receiving or initiating glucocorticoid therapy are not appropriately evaluated and treated for bone health and fracture risk. Populations with, or at risk of, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) to target for these measures are defined on the basis of dose and duration of glucocorticoid therapy and bone mineral density. That patients with GIOP should be treated as early as possible is generally agreed upon; however, diversity remains in intervention thresholds and management guidelines. The FRAX(®) algorithm provides a 10-year probability of fracture that can be adjusted according to glucocorticoid dose. There is no evidence that GIOP and postmenopausal osteoporosis respond differently to treatments. Available anti-osteoporotic therapies such as anti-resorptives including bisphosphonates and the bone anabolic agent teriparatide are effective for the management of GIOP. Prevention with calcium and vitamin D supplementation is less effective than specific anti-osteoporotic treatment. Anti-osteoporotic treatment should be stopped at the time of glucocorticoid cessation, unless the patient remains at increased risk of fracture.

Bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in patients with rheumatic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

While bisphosphonates (BPs) are commonly used in clinical treatment for osteoporosis, their roles on osteoporosis treatment for rheumatic patients remain unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of BPs on fractures prevention and bone mass preserving in rheumatic patients.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We searched PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant literatures with a time limit of Jan. 6, 2012. All randomized clinical trials of BPs for adult rheumatic patients with a follow-up of 6 months or more were included. We calculated relative risks (RRs) for fractures and weighted mean difference (WMD) for percent change of bone mineral density (BMD). Twenty trials were included for analysis. The RR in rheumatic patients treated with BPs was 0.61 (95%CI [0.44, 0.83], P = 0.002) for vertebral fractures, and 0.49 (95%CI [0.23, 1.02], P = 0.06) for non-vertebral fractures. The WMD of BMD change in the lumbar spine was 3.72% (95%CI [2.72, 4.72], P<0.001) at 6 months, 3.67% (95%CI [2.84, 4.50], P<0.001) at 12 months, 3.64% (95%CI [2.59, 4.69], P<0.001) at 24 months, and 5.87% (95%CI [4.59, 7.15], P<0.001) at 36 months in patients using BPs, as compared with those treated with calcium, vitamin D or calcitonin. In subgroup analyses, rheumatic patients using BPs for osteoporosis prevention had greater WMD than those using BPs for treating osteoporosis at 6 months (4.53% vs. 2.73%, P = 0.05) and 12 months (4.93% vs. 2.91%, P = 0.01).

Conclusions/Significance

In both short-term and middle-term, BPs can preserve bone mass and reduce the incidence of vertebral fractures in rheumatic patients, mainly for those who have GC consumption. The efficacy of BPs is better when using BPs to prevent rather than to treat osteoporosis in rheumatic patients.

Management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

This review summarizes the available evidence-based data that form the basis for therapeutic intervention and covers the current status of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) management, regulatory requirements, and risk-assessment options. Glucocorticoids are known to cause bone loss and fractures, yet many patients receiving or initiating glucocorticoid therapy are not appropriately evaluated and treated. An European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis workshop was convened to discuss GIOP management and to provide a report by a panel of experts. An expert panel reviewed the available studies that discussed approved therapeutic agents, focusing on randomized and controlled clinical trials reporting on bone mineral density and/or fracture risk of at least 48 weeks' duration. There is no evidence that GIOP and postmenopausal osteoporosis respond differently to treatments. The FRAX algorithm can be adjusted according to glucocorticoid dose. Available antiosteoporotic therapies such as bisphosphonates and teriparatide are efficacious in GIOP management. Several other agents approved for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis may become available for GIOP. It is advised to stop antiosteoporotic treatment after glucocorticoid cessation, unless the patient remains at increased risk of fracture. Calcium and vitamin D supplementation as an osteoporosis-prevention measure is less effective than specific antiosteoporotic treatment. Fracture end-point studies and additional studies investigating specific subpopulations (pediatric, premenopausal, or elderly patients) would strengthen the evidence base and facilitate the development of intervention thresholds and treatment guidelines.

Three-year experience with combined treatment with alendronate and alfacalcidol in Japanese patients with severe bone loss and osteoporotic fracture

Purpose:

Combined treatment with alendronate and alfacalcidol is more useful to increase bone mineral density (BMD) than alendronate or alfacalcidol alone. A retrospective study was conducted to investigate the 3-year outcome of combined treatment with alendronate and alfacalcidol in patients with severe bone loss (BMD ≤ 50% of the young adult mean) and osteoporotic fracture.

Methods:

Thirty-four patients (six men and 28 postmenopausal women) with primary or secondary osteoporosis who had been treated with alendronate and alfacalcidol for more than 3 years were analyzed. The lumbar spine or total hip BMD and bone turnover markers were monitored, and the incidence of osteoporotic fractures was assessed.

Results:

The urinary level of cross-linked N-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen and serum level of alkaline phosphatase significantly decreased (−42.5% at 3 months and −18.9% at 3 years), and the lumbar spine BMD, but not the total hip BMD, significantly increased (14.8% at 3 years), compared with the baseline values. However, the incidence of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures was 26.5% and 2.9%, respectively, suggesting a high incidence of vertebral fractures.

Conclusion:

The results of the present study suggest that combined treatment with alendronate and alfacalcidol may be useful to reduce bone turnover and increase the lumbar spine BMD in patients with severe bone loss and osteoporotic fracture. However, its efficacy against vertebral fractures appears not to be sufficient. Thus, anabolic agents such as teriparatide should be taken into consideration as first-line drugs in patients with severe osteoporosis.