Using Osteoporosis Therapies in Combination

Insights and implications of sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis

Osteoporosis, a metabolic bone disease characterized by low bone mineral density and deterioration of bone microarchitecture, has led to a high risk of fatal osteoporotic fractures worldwide. Accumulating evidence has revealed that sexual dimorphism is a notable feature of osteoporosis, with sex-specific differences in epidemiology and pathogenesis. Specifically, females are more susceptible than males to osteoporosis, while males are more prone to disability or death from the disease. To date, sex chromosome abnormalities and steroid hormones have been proven to contribute greatly to sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis by regulating the functions of bone cells. Understanding the sex-specific differences in osteoporosis and its related complications is essential for improving treatment strategies tailored to women and men. This literature review focuses on the mechanisms underlying sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis, mainly in a population of aging patients, chronic glucocorticoid administration, and diabetes. Moreover, we highlight the implications of sexual dimorphism for developing therapeutics and preventive strategies and screening approaches tailored to women and men. Additionally, the challenges in translating bench research to bedside treatments and future directions to overcome these obstacles will be discussed.

Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Management of Bone Loss in Patients with Critical Illness

Patients with critical illnesses are at higher risk of comorbidities, which can include bone mineral density loss, bone turnover marker increase, and fragility fractures. Patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) have a higher risk of bone fractures. Since hypermetabolism is a characteristic of ICU patients, such patients are often rapidly affected by systemic deterioration, which often results in systemic wasting disease. Major risk factors for ICU-related bone loss include physical restraint, inflammation, neuroendocrine stress, malnutrition, and medications. A medical history of critical illness should be acknowledged as a risk factor for impaired bone metabolism. Bone loss associated with ICU admission should be recognized as a key component of post-intensive care syndrome, and further research that focuses on treatment protocols and prevention strategies is required. Studies aimed at maintaining gut integrity have emphasized protein administration and nutrition, while research is ongoing to evaluate the therapeutic benefits of anti-resorptive agents and physical therapy. This review examines both current and innovative clinical strategies that are used for identifying risk factors of bone loss. It provides an overview of perioperative outcomes and discusses the emerging novel treatment modalities. Furthermore, the review presents future directions in the treatment of ICU-related bone loss.

Mechanistic advances in osteoporosis and anti-osteoporosis therapies

Osteoporosis is a type of bone loss disease characterized by a reduction in bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue. With the intensification of global aging, this disease is now regarded as one of the major public health problems that often leads to unbearable pain, risk of bone fractures, and even death, causing an enormous burden at both the human and socioeconomic layers. Classic anti-osteoporosis pharmacological options include anti-resorptive and anabolic agents, whose ability to improve bone mineral density and resist bone fracture is being gradually confirmed. However, long-term or high-frequency use of these drugs may bring some side effects and adverse reactions. Therefore, an increasing number of studies are devoted to finding new pathogenesis or potential therapeutic targets of osteoporosis, and it is of great importance to comprehensively recognize osteoporosis and develop viable and efficient therapeutic approaches. In this study, we systematically reviewed literatures and clinical evidences to both mechanistically and clinically demonstrate the state-of-art advances in osteoporosis. This work will endow readers with the mechanistical advances and clinical knowledge of osteoporosis and furthermore present the most updated anti-osteoporosis therapies.

Effect of Teriparatide on Bone Mineral Density and Bone Markers in Real-Life: Argentine Experience

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of teriparatide (TPTD) on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone markers under clinical practice conditions. To assess whether the results in real-life match those published in clinical trials.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of postmenopausal women treated with TPTD for at least 12 months.

RESULTS

264 patients were included in the study. Main characteristics are as follows: age: 68.7 ± 10.2 years, previous fractures: 57.6%, and previously treated with antiresorptive (AR-prior): 79%. All bone turnover markers studied significantly increased after 6 months. CTX and BGP remained high up to 24 months, but total and bone alkaline phosphatase returned to basal values at month 18. There was a significant increase in lumbar spine (LS) BMD after 6 months (+6.2%), with a maximum peak at 24 months (+13%). Femoral neck (FN) and total hip (TH) BMD showed a significant increase later than LS (just at month 12), reaching a maximum peak at month 24 (FN + 7.9% and TH + 5.5%). A significant increase in LS BMD was found from month 6 to month 24 compared to basal in both AR-naïve, and AR-prior patients (+16.7% and +10.5%, respectively), without significant differences between the two groups. Comparable results were found in FN and TH BMD. Main conclusions. As reported in real-life clinical studies, treatment of osteoporotic postmenopausal women with TPTD induced a significant increase in bone turnover markers from month 6 onward and an increase in BMD from months 6-12 with continuous gain up to month 24. The real-life results of our study matched the results of randomized clinical trials. In addition, TPTD induced an increase in BMD, regardless of the previous use of AR.

Biased and allosteric modulation of bone cell-expressing G protein-coupled receptors as a novel approach to osteoporosis therapy

On the cellular level, osteoporosis (OP) is a result of imbalanced bone remodeling, in which osteoclastic bone resorption outcompetes osteoblastic bone formation. Currently available OP medications include both antiresorptive and bone-forming drugs. However, their long-term use in OP patients, mainly in postmenopausal women, is accompanied by severe side effects. Notably, the fundamental coupling between bone resorption and formation processes underlies the existence of an undesirable secondary outcome that bone anabolic or anti-resorptive drugs also reduce bone formation. This drawback requires the development of anti-OP drugs capable of selectively stimulating osteoblastogenesis and concomitantly reducing osteoclastogenesis. We propose that the application of small synthetic biased and allosteric modulators of bone cell receptors, which belong to the G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR) family, could be the key to resolving the undesired anti-OP drug selectivity. This approach is based on the capacity of these GPCR modulators, unlike the natural ligands, to trigger signaling pathways that promote beneficial effects on bone remodeling while blocking potentially deleterious effects. Under the settings of OP, an optimal anti-OP drug should provide fine-tuned regulation of downstream effects, for example, intermittent cyclic AMP (cAMP) elevation, preservation of Ca²⁺ balance, stimulation of osteoprotegerin (OPG) and estrogen production, suppression of sclerostin secretion, and/or preserved/enhanced canonical β-catenin/Wnt signaling pathway. As such, selective modulation of GPCRs involved in bone remodeling presents a promising approach in OP treatment. This review focuses on the evidence for the validity of our hypothesis.

Role of bone-forming agents in the management of osteoporosis

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

Combination Therapy of PTH and Antiresorptive Drugs on Osteoporosis: A Review of Treatment Alternatives

Antiresorptive drugs have been widely used for osteoporosis. Intermittent parathyroid hormone (PTH), an anabolic agent, increases osteoblast production rate and inhibits apoptosis of osteoblasts, thus increasing skeletal mass besides improving bone microarchitecture and strength. Combination therapy for osteoporosis produced great interests and controversies. Therefore, we performed a systematic literature search from PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINDHL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the search terms PTH or teriparatide combined with bisphosphonate, alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, raloxifene, denosumab, and zoledronic acid with the limit osteoporosis. At last, 36 related articles were included for further analysis. Findings from previous studies revealed that combination therapy in different conditions of naive or previous bisphosphonate treatment might have different outcomes. The use of combination therapy, however, may be an alternative option among osteoporotic patients with a history of bisphosphonate use. Combined teriparatide with denosumab appear to show the most substantial and clinically relevant skeletal benefits to osteoporotic patients. Additional research is necessary to define optimal methods of developing sequential and/or cyclical combinations of PTH and antiresorptive agents.

A biomimetically hierarchical polyetherketoneketone scaffold for osteoporotic bone repair

Osteoporotic fractures are prevalent in society, and their incidence appears to be increasing as the worldwide population ages. However, conventional bone repair materials hardly satisfy the requirements for the repair of pathological fractures. Here, we developed a biomimetic polyetherketoneketone scaffold with a functionalized strontium-doped nanohydroxyapatite coating for osteoporotic bone defect applications. The scaffold has a hierarchically porous architecture and mechanical strength similar to that of osteoporotic trabecular bone. In vitro and in vivo studies demonstrated that the scaffold could promote osteoporotic bone regeneration and delay adjacent bone loss via regulating both osteoblasts and osteoclasts. In addition, the correlations between multiple preimplantation and postimplantation parameters were evaluated to determine the potential predictors of in vivo performance of the material. The current work not only develops a promising candidate for osteoporotic bone repair but also provides a viable approach for designing other functional biomaterials and predicting their translational value.

A single dose of zoledronate preserves bone mineral density for up to 2 years after a second course of romosozumab

This phase 2 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of transitioning to zoledronate following romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. A single dose of 5 mg zoledronate generally maintained the robust BMD gains accrued with romosozumab treatment and was well tolerated.

INTRODUCTION

Follow-on therapy with an antiresorptive agent is necessary to maintain the skeletal benefits of romosozumab therapy. We evaluated the use of zoledronate following romosozumab treatment.

METHODS

This phase 2, dose-finding study enrolled postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density (BMD). Subjects who received various romosozumab doses or placebo from months 0-24 were rerandomized to denosumab (60 mg SC Q6M) or placebo for 12 months, followed by open-label romosozumab (210 mg QM) for 12 months. At month 48, subjects who had received active treatment for 48 months were assigned to no further active treatment and all other subjects were assigned to zoledronate 5 mg IV. Efficacy (BMD, P1NP, and β-CTX) and safety were evaluated for 24 months, up to month 72.

RESULTS

A total of 141 subjects entered the month 48-72 period, with 51 in the no further active treatment group and 90 in the zoledronate group. In subjects receiving no further active treatment, lumbar spine (LS) BMD decreased by 10.8% from months 48-72 but remained 4.2% above the original baseline. In subjects receiving zoledronate, LS BMD was maintained (percentage changes: - 0.8% from months 48-72; 12.8% from months 0-72). Similar patterns were observed for proximal femur BMD in both groups. With no further active treatment, P1NP and β-CTX decreased but remained above baseline at month 72. Following zoledronate, P1NP and β-CTX levels initially decreased but approached baseline by month 72. No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSION

A zoledronate follow-on regimen can maintain robust BMD gains achieved with romosozumab treatment.

Molecular Mechanisms and Emerging Therapeutics for Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is the most common chronic metabolic bone disease. It has been estimated that more than 10 million people in the United States and 200 million men and women worldwide have osteoporosis. Given that the aging population is rapidly increasing in many countries, osteoporosis could become a global challenge with an impact on the quality of life of the affected individuals. Osteoporosis can be defined as a condition characterized by low bone density and increased risk of fractures due to the deterioration of the bone architecture. Thus, the major goal of treatment is to reduce the risk for fractures. There are several treatment options, mostly medications that can control disease progression in risk groups, such as postmenopausal women and elderly men. Recent studies on the basic molecular mechanisms and clinical implications of osteoporosis have identified novel therapeutic targets. Emerging therapies targeting novel disease mechanisms could provide powerful approaches for osteoporosis management in the future. Here, we review the etiology of osteoporosis and the molecular mechanism of bone remodeling, present current pharmacological options, and discuss emerging therapies targeting novel mechanisms, investigational treatments, and new promising therapeutic approaches.

Combination therapies in the treatment of osteoporosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Osteoporotic fractures are common and can be devastating. Although multiple different medications with unique mechanisms of action are currently available in our arsenal to attempt to prevent fractures, an ideal opportunity in which to use these medications in combination remains elusive. New data has emerged over the past few years in regards to assessing which medication combinations may be productive and efficacious.

RECENT FINDINGS

Previous studies performed using different medications to treat osteoporosis in combination proved either not overall beneficial or inconclusive. More recent studies suggest a potential additive and synergistic benefit of certain combination therapies, particularly with the use of denosumab and teriparatide in select situations.

SUMMARY

The knowledge of modern data as to when the potential use of combination therapy in treating osteoporosis may be useful is critical to the acquisition of proficiency in the ideal management of our patients at highest risk for fracture. Although not recommended yet by current guidelines, the advancement of expertise in this field, both in research studies, and clinical practice, will help us discern how to best consider the use of combination treatment now and in the future.

Molecular-Based Treatment Strategies for Osteoporosis: A Literature Review

Osteoporosis is an unavoidable public health problem in an aging or aged society. Anti-resorptive agents (calcitonin, estrogen, and selective estrogen-receptor modulators, bisphosphonates, anti-receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand antibody along with calcium and vitamin D supplementations) and anabolic agents (parathyroid hormone and related peptide analogs, sclerostin inhibitors) have major roles in current treatment regimens and are used alone or in combination based on the pathological condition. Recent advancements in the molecular understanding of bone metabolism and in bioengineering will open the door to future treatment paradigms for osteoporosis, including antibody agents, stem cells, and gene therapies. This review provides an overview of the molecular mechanisms, clinical evidence, and potential adverse effects of drugs that are currently used or under development for the treatment of osteoporosis to aid clinicians in deciding how to select the best treatment option.

Osteoporosis

Fractures resulting from osteoporosis become increasingly common in women after age 55 years and men after age 65 years, resulting in substantial bone-associated morbidities, and increased mortality and health-care costs. Research advances have led to a more accurate assessment of fracture risk and have increased the range of therapeutic options available to prevent fractures. Fracture risk algorithms that combine clinical risk factors and bone mineral density are now widely used in clinical practice to target high-risk individuals for treatment. The discovery of key pathways regulating bone resorption and formation has identified new approaches to treatment with distinctive mechanisms of action. Osteoporosis is a chronic condition and long-term, sometimes lifelong, management is required. In individuals at high risk of fracture, the benefit versus risk profile is likely to be favourable for up to 10 years of treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab. In people at a very high or imminent risk of fracture, therapy with teriparatide or abaloparatide should be considered; however, since treatment duration with these drugs is restricted to 18-24 months, treatment should be continued with an antiresorptive drug. Individuals at high risk of fractures do not receive adequate treatment and strategies to address this treatment gap-eg, widespread implementation of Fracture Liaison Services and improvement of adherence to therapy-are important challenges for the future.

Combination therapy with parathyroid hormone analogs and antiresorptive agents for osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Combination therapy with parathyroid hormone (PTH) analogs and antiresorptive agents may be more effective than monotherapy for the treatment of osteoporosis. This study aimed to estimate the effectiveness and safety of this combination therapy for osteoporosis. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to May 1, 2018, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a duration of at least 6 months on adults with osteoporosis treated with combination therapy versus monotherapy. Outcomes included fractures, bone mineral density (BMD) changes, and adverse events. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model, to estimate risk ratios (RRs) for fractures, and mean differences (MDs) for BMD changes. A total of 19 RCTs and 2177 patients were included. Compared with monotherapy, combination therapy had an advantage of 36% (RR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.98) regarding fracture risk reduction. It also appears to improve lumbar spine BMD by 4.06% (95%CI = 2.60-5.53) and total hip BMD by 1.89% (95%CI = 1.25-2.53). No RCT reported an increased risk of serious adverse events. Among patients with osteoporosis, combination therapy was superior to monotherapy regarding improvement of the lumbar spine and total hip BMD, without risk of serious adverse events. Combination therapy also had an advantage over monotherapy on fracture risk reduction. However, owing to the limited sample size, additional larger studies are required to confirm this benefit.

Proceedings of the 2018 Santa Fe Bone Symposium: Advances in the Management of Osteoporosis

The Santa Fe Bone Symposium is an annual meeting devoted to clinical applications of recent advances in skeletal research. The 19th Santa Fe Bone Symposium convened August 3-4, 2018, in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA. Attendees included physicians of many specialties, fellows in training, advanced practice providers, clinical researchers, and bone density technologists. The format consisted of lectures, case presentations by endocrinology fellows, and panel discussions, with all involving extensive interactive discussions. Topics were diverse, including an evolutionary history of calcium homeostasis, osteoporosis treatment in the very old, optimizing outcomes with orthopedic surgery, microbiome and bone, new strategies for combination and sequential therapy of osteoporosis, exercise as medicine, manifestations of parathyroid hormone excess and deficiency, parathyroid hormone as a therapeutic agent, cell senescence and bone health, and managing patients outside clinical practice guidelines. The National Bone Health Alliance conducted a premeeting on development of fracture liaison services. A workshop was devoted to Bone Health TeleECHO (Bone Health Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes), a strategy of ongoing medical education for healthcare professions to expand capacity to deliver best practice skeletal healthcare in underserved communities and reduce the osteoporosis treatment gap.

Clinical advantages and disadvantages of anabolic bone therapies targeting the WNT pathway

The WNT signalling pathway is a key regulator of bone metabolism, particularly bone formation, which has helped to define the role of osteocytes - the most abundant bone cells - as orchestrators of bone remodelling. Several molecules involved in the control of the WNT signalling pathway have been identified as potential targets for the development of bone-building therapeutics for patients with osteoporosis. Several of these molecules have been investigated in animal models, but only inhibitors of sclerostin (which is produced by osteocytes) have been investigated in phase III clinical studies. Here, we review the rationale for these developments and the specificity and potential off-target actions of WNT-based therapeutics. We also describe the available preclinical and clinical studies and discuss the benefits and risks of using sclerostin inhibitors for the management of patients with osteoporosis.

Combination therapy of anabolic agents and bisphosphonates on bone mineral density in patients with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether the concomitant combination therapy of anabolic agents and bisphosphonates produces more effects on bone mineral density (BMD) than anabolic agents alone in patients with osteoporosis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for publications from 1 January 1980 to 1 August 2016 to identify all the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. The primary outcome was the mean per cent changes in BMD at the lumbar spine, the total hip and the femoral neck with an optimal period of treatment (6 to 12 months). The secondary outcome was the mean per cent changes in BMD at the same sites with the full period of recommendation (18 to 24 months). A random-effects model was used to estimate the standardised mean differences (SMDs) and the 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Seven studies, with 747 patients, were included. With the optimal period, the concomitant combination therapy demonstrated a significant advantage over a monotherapy in BMD improvement at the total hip (SMD 0.42; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.58) and the femoral neck (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46), but not for the spine BMD (SMD 0.13; 95% CI -0.17 to 0.43). With the full period, the concomitant combination therapy did not improve the BMD at the lumbar spine (SMD -0.06; 95% CI -0.71 to 0.59), the total hip (SMD 0.05; 95% CI -0.71 to 0.82) and the femoral neck (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -1.15 to 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with anabolic monotherapy, the concomitant combination therapy of anabolic agents and bisphosphonates significantly improved the BMD at the total hip and femoral neck with a shorter term (6 to 12 months) and produced similar benefits on BMD for the longer term (18 to 24 months). Also, the effect of concomitant combination therapy might be affected by the dose of anabolic agents.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016041335.

Proceedings of the 2017 Santa Fe Bone Symposium: Insights and Emerging Concepts in the Management of Osteoporosis

The 18th Annual Santa Fe Bone Symposium was held on August 4-5, 2017, in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA. The symposium convenes health-care providers and clinical researchers to present and discuss clinical applications of recent advances in research of skeletal diseases. The program includes lectures, oral presentations by endocrinology fellows, case-based panel discussions, and breakout sessions on topics of interest, with emphasis on participation and interaction of all participants. Topics included the evaluation and treatment of adult survivors with pediatric bone diseases, risk assessment and management of atypical femur fractures, nonpharmacologic strategies in the care of osteoporosis, and skeletal effects of parathyroid hormone with opportunities for therapeutic intervention. Management of skeletal complications of rheumatic diseases was discussed. Insights into sequential and combined use of antiresorptive agents were presented. Individualization of patient treatment decisions when clinical practice guidelines may not be applicable was covered. Challenges and opportunities with osteoporosis drug development were discussed. There was an update on progress of Bone Health TeleECHO (Bone Health Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes), a teleconferencing strategy for sharing knowledge and expanding capacity to deliver best-practice skeletal health care.

Combination therapy of anabolic and nonbisphosphonates antiresorptive agents for the treatment of osteoporosis: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

According to the mechanisms of action, combination therapy of anabolic and antiresorptive agents may produce more effect for the treatment of osteoporosis. However, the combination therapy of anabolic agents and bisphosphonates reports no benefit and even reduced the anabolic effects of anabolic agents. This study aims to assess the effect of combination therapy of anabolic and nonbisphosphonates antiresorptive agents in adults with osteoporosis.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 1980 to November 1, 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with osteoporosis treated in combination therapy of anabolic and nonbisphosphonates antiresorptive agents compared with monotherapy of either agent alone. The primary outcome was the incidence of fractures. The secondary outcomes were the bone mineral density (BMD) changes at lumbar spine and total hip. Continuous outcomes were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI), while dichotomous outcomes were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI. The meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. I statistic (I > 50% as a threshold indicates significant heterogeneity) was used to assess the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 10 trials with a total of 1042 patients were included. The pooled results showed that the combination therapy demonstrated a significant advantage over a monotherapy in the BMD improvement at the lumbar spine (SMD 1.18; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.72; I = 93%) and the total hip (SMD 0.89; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.29; I = 88%) and further reduce the fracture risk (RR, 0.45; 95%CI, 0.21 to 0.94; I = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-to-moderate-quality evidence shows that the combination therapy of anabolic and nonbisphosphonates antiresorptive agents is superior to monotherapy in improving the BMD and reducing the fracture risk. However, further high methodological quality studies are needed to determine the antifracture efficacy, cost-effectiveness and safety of this strategy of combination therapy.