Combination therapy with risedronate and teriparatide in male osteoporosis

Efficacy and safety of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in osteoporosis not previously treated with bisphosphonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The study found that in osteoporosis patients who had not previously received bisphosphonate treatment and were in a treatment cycle of over 12 months, both teriparatide and denosumab significantly increased bone mineral density compared to bisphosphonates. Additionally, teriparatide was also shown to significantly decrease the risk of fractures.

OBJECTIVE

The systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates and denosumab vs. bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporosis who had not previously received bisphosphonates.

METHODS

We conducted a search of published literature from inception to May 31, 2023, including databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, VIP, and WanFang. The study only included head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide and denosumab with bisphosphonates to treat patients with osteoporosis. Fixed-effect model and random-effect model were used due to clinical heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was performed via Stata 17.0.

RESULTS

A total of 6680 patients were enrolled across 23 eligible trials. The results of the meta-analysis showed that teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture (risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.51, 0.74), P < 0.001). Denosumab showed no benefit compared to bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of fracture in treating osteoporosis (RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.62, 1.57), P = 0.96). Compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide and denosumab could significantly improve femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) (P < 0.05). Furthermore, teriparatide and denosumab did not increase the incidence of adverse events (teriparatide vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.92, 95% CI (0.79, 1.08), P = 0.32; denosumab vs. bisphosphonates, RR 0.98, 95% CI (0.95, 1.02), P = 0.37).

CONCLUSIONS

Teriparatide is superior to bisphosphonates in decreasing the risk of fracture in patients with osteoporosis. In addition, teriparatide and denosumab were more efficacious than bisphosphonates in increasing the percentage change in BMD at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine.

Treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis with concurrent denosumab and romosozumab: a case report

Osteoporosis is a metabolic bone disorder for which treatment options include antiresorptive therapies (e.g., bisphosphonates, denosumab); anabolics (e.g., teriparatide, abaloparatide); and dual mechanisms (e.g., romosozumab). Management of osteoporosis with concurrent antiresorptive and anabolic agents may be superior to monotherapy, as demonstrated in the DATA trial with the combination of denosumab and teriparatide. However, there is limited experience with the combination of denosumab and romosozumab, which may be an alternative antiresorptive/anabolic regimen for individuals who are not candidates for PTH receptor agonists. In this case, we present a young man with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis who could not tolerate a daily injectable anabolic and who experienced improvement in bone mineral density with concurrent denosumab and off-label romosozumab administration.

Efficacy of osteoporosis pharmacological treatments in men: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to systematically identify and review the efficacy of pharmacological treatments in men with osteoporosis.

METHODS

Medline (via Ovid) and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched up to May 2023 for any randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the efficacy of osteoporotic treatment on the evolution of Bone Mineral Density (BMD) and incidence of fractures of men suffering from primary osteoporosis. If at least two studies used the same pharmacological treatment and evaluated the same outcome, a random effect model meta-analysis was applied to reported pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

From the 1,061 studies identified through bibliographic search, 21 RCTs fitted the inclusion criteria. Bisphosphonates (k = 10, n = 2992 men with osteoporosis) improved all three BMD sites compared to placebo; lumbar spine: MD + 4.75% (95% CI 3.45, 6.05); total hip: MD + 2.72% (95% CI 2.06; 3.37); femoral neck: MD + 2.26% (95% CI 1.67; 2.85). Denososumab (k = 2, n = 242), Teriparatide (k = 2, n = 309) and Abaloparatide (k = 2, n = 248) also produced significant improvement of all sites BMD compared to placebo. Romosozumab was only identified in one study and was therefore not meta-analysed. In this study, Romosozumab increased significantly BMD compared to placebo. Incident fractures were reported in 16 RCTs but only four reported fractures as the primary outcome. Treatments were associated with a lower incidence of fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Medications used in the management of osteoporosis in women appear to provide similar benefits in men with osteoporosis. Therefore, the algorithm for the management of osteoporosis in men could be similar to the one previously recommended for the management of osteoporosis in women.

Long-term and sequential treatment for osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder that causes impairment of bone structure and strength, leading to a progressively increased risk of fragility fractures. The global prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the ageing population. Owing to the chronic character of osteoporosis, years or even decades of preventive measures or therapy are required. The long-term use of bone-specific pharmacological treatment options, including antiresorptive and/or osteoanabolic approaches, has raised concerns around adverse effects or potential rebound phenomena after treatment discontinuation. Imaging options, risk scores and the assessment of bone turnover during initiation and monitoring of such therapies could help to inform individualized treatment strategies. Combination therapies are currently used less often than 'sequential' treatments. However, all patients with osteoporosis, including those with secondary and rare causes of osteoporosis, as well as specific patient populations (for example, young adults, men and pregnant women) require new approaches for long-term therapy and disease monitoring. New pathophysiological aspects of bone metabolism might therefore help to inform and revolutionize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Primary Osteoporosis or Low Bone Mass to Prevent Fractures in Adults: A Living Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION

This guideline updates the 2017 American College of Physicians (ACP) recommendations on pharmacologic treatment of primary osteoporosis or low bone mass to prevent fractures in adults.

METHODS

The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on an updated systematic review of evidence and graded them using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system.

AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION

The audience for this guideline includes all clinicians. The patient population includes adults with primary osteoporosis or low bone mass.

RECOMMENDATION 1A

ACP recommends that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (strong recommendation; high-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 1B

ACP suggests that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2A

ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2B

ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 3

ACP suggests that clinicians use the sclerostin inhibitor (romosozumab, moderate-certainty evidence) or recombinant PTH (teriparatide, low-certainty evidence), followed by a bisphosphonate, to reduce the risk of fractures only in females with primary osteoporosis with very high risk of fracture (conditional recommendation).

RECOMMENDATION 4

ACP suggests that clinicians take an individualized approach regarding whether to start pharmacologic treatment with a bisphosphonate in females over the age of 65 with low bone mass (osteopenia) to reduce the risk of fractures (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

Uterine Metabolomic Analysis for the Regulation of Eggshell Calcification in Chickens

Eggshell quality is economically important for table eggs and functionally indispensable for hatching eggs. During the formation of eggshell in the uterus, organic matrixes in uterine fluid can control and modify the formation of calcified eggshell. At present, there are limited studies focusing on the effect of uterine organic metabolites on eggshell quality. In this study, an LC-MS-based metabolomic technology was performed to identify the crucial uterine metabolites that differently presented in hens producing eggs with divergent eggshell quality (eggshell strength, thickness, and weight). More than 1000 metabolites were identified in uterine fluid, and six putative metabolites, including phosphatidylcholine, diacylglycerol, verapamil, risedronate, coproporphyrinogen III, and biliverdin, were screened to play crucial roles in eggshell calcification. Then, two trials for oral administration and in vitro calcite crystal growth were conducted to verify the effect of potential different metabolites on the eggshell quality. Verapamil has a temporary effect on decreasing eggshell strength and eggshell thickness. Coproporphyrinogen III could induce smaller calcite crystals to improve eggshell strength while biliverdin could modify crystal morphology by forming rougher faces and rounder edges to strengthen the eggshell. The present study gives us new insight to understand the role of uterine fluid matrixes in eggshell calcification.

Osteoporosis Remission and New Bone Formation with Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles

Nanotechnology changed the concept of treatment for a variety of diseases, producing a huge impact regarding drug and gene delivery. Among the different targeted diseases, osteoporosis has devastating clinical and economic consequences. Since current osteoporosis treatments present several side effects, new treatment approaches are needed. Recently, the application of small interfering RNA (siRNA) has become a promising alternative. Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway controls bone development and formation. This pathway is negatively regulated by sclerostin, which knock-down through siRNA application would potentially promote bone formation. However, the major bottleneck for siRNA-based treatments is the necessity of a delivery vector, bringing nanotechnology as a potential solution. Among the available nanocarriers, mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) have attracted great attention for intracellular delivery of siRNAs. The mesoporous structure of MSNs permits the delivery of siRNAs together with another biomolecule, achieving a combination therapy. Here, the effectiveness of a new potential osteoporosis treatment based on MSNs is evaluated. The proposed system is effective in delivering SOST siRNA and osteostatin through systemic injection to bone tissue. The nanoparticle administration produced an increase expression of osteogenic related genes improving the bone microarchitecture. The treated osteoporotic mice recovered values of a healthy situation approaching to osteoporosis remission.

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.

Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture.

DATA SOURCES

For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0-33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories.

LIMITATIONS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Overview of treatment approaches to osteoporosis

Efficient therapies are available for the treatment of osteoporosis. Anti-resorptive therapies, including bisphosphonates and denosumab, increase bone mineral density (BMD) and reduce the risk of fractures by 20-70%. Bone-forming or dual-action treatments stimulate bone formation and increase BMD more than the anti-resorptive therapies. Two studies have demonstrated that these treatments are superior to anti-resorptives in preventing fractures in patients with severe osteoporosis. Bone-forming or dual-action treatments should be followed by anti-resorptive treatment to maintain the fracture risk reduction. The BMD gains seen with bone-forming and dual-action treatments are greater in treatment-naïve patients compared to patients pretreated with anti-resorptive treatments. However, the antifracture efficacy seems to be preserved. Treatment failure will often lead to switch of treatment from orally to parentally administrated anti-resorptives treatment or from anti-resorptive to bone-forming or dual-action treatment. Osteoporosis is a chronic condition and therefore needs a long-term management plan with a personalized approach to treatment. LINKED ARTICLES: This article is part of a themed issue on The molecular pharmacology of bone and cancer-related bone diseases. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v178.9/issuetoc.

Combination therapy in the Col1a2G610C mouse model of Osteogenesis Imperfecta reveals an additive effect of enhancing LRP5 signaling and inhibiting TGFβ signaling on trabecular bone but not on cortical bone

Enhancing LRP5 signaling and inhibiting TGFβ signaling have each been reported to increase bone mass and improve bone strength in wild-type mice. Monotherapy targeting LRP5 signaling, or TGFβ signaling, also improved bone properties in mouse models of Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI). We investigated whether additive or synergistic increases in bone properties would be attained if enhanced LRP5 signaling was combined with TGFβ inhibition. We crossed an Lrp5 high bone mass (HBM) allele (Lrp5^A214V) into the Col1a2^G610C/+ mouse model of OI. At 6-weeks-of-age we began treating mice with an antibody that inhibits TGFβ1, β2, and β3 (mAb 1D11), or with an isotype-matched control antibody (mAb 13C4). At 12-weeks-old, we observed that combining enhanced LRP5 signaling with inhibited TGFβ signaling produced an additive effect on femoral and vertebral trabecular bone volumes, but not on cortical bone volumes. Although enhanced LRP5 signaling increased femur strength in a 3-point bending assay in Col1a2^G610C/+ mice, femur strength did not improve further with TGFβ inhibition. Neither enhanced LRP5 signaling nor TGFβ inhibition, alone or in combination, improved femur 3-point-bending post-yield displacement in Col1a2^G610C/+ mice. These pre-clinical studies indicate combination therapies that target LRP5 and TGFβ signaling should increase trabecular bone mass in patients with OI more than targeting either signaling pathway alone. Whether additive increases in trabecular bone mass will occur in, and clinically benefit, patients with OI needs to be determined.

Effects of teriparatide compared with risedronate in the treatment of osteoporosis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effects and safety of teriparatide with risedronate in the treatment of osteoporosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library database were systematically reviewed for studies published up to February 24, 2019. Eligible studies that compared the effects of teriparatide with risedronate in osteoporosis were included in this meta-analysis. The outcomes included percentage change in bone mineral density (BMD) of lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, the incidence of clinical fractures, serum bone markers, and adverse events. A random-effects or fixed-effects model was used to pool the estimate, according to the heterogeneity among the included studies.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with risedronate, teriparatide was associated with a significant increase in lumbar spine BMD [weight mean difference (WMD)=4.24, 95%CI: 3.11, 5.36; P < .001], femoral neck BMD (WMD=2.28, 95%CI: 1.39, 3.18; P < .001), and total hip BMD (WMD = 1.19, 95%CI: 0.47, 1.91; P = .001). Moreover, patients in teriparatide group had significantly lower incidences of clinical fracture (risk ratio [RR] = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.72; P < .001), new vertebral fracture (RR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.63; P < .001), and non-vertebral fracture (RR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.40, 0.98; P = .042) than those in risedronate group. There were significant differences between the 2 groups in serum change, including P1NP (WMD = 122.34, 95%CI: 68.89, 175.99; P < .001), CTx (WMD = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.29, 0.96; P < .001), and iPTH (WMD = -13.18, 95%CI: -15.04, -11.33; P < .001). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the 2 groups (RR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.69, 1.25; P = .610).

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that teriparatide was more effective than risedronate for increasing the BMD in lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, as well as reducing the incidences of clinical fracture, new vertebral fracture and non-vertebral fracture. There was no significant difference in incidence of adverse events between the 2 drugs. Considering the potential limitations in the present study, further large-scale, well-performed randomized trials are needed to verify our findings.

Combination and sequential treatment in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis

Introduction: Since postmenopausal osteoporosis is a chronic, potentially disabling condition requiring long-term treatment, the physician is expected to decide the optimal treatment strategy, e.g. how to use the available osteoanabolic and antiresorptive agents, sequentially or in combination, in the most effective and safe way, based on personalized patient care.Areas covered: Herein, the authors outline clinical data regarding the efficacy and safety of various sequential treatment strategies. More specifically, they compare the efficacy of osteoanabolic agents when they precede or follow antiresorptive treatment, as well as the efficacy of antiresorptives following other antiresorptives. Finally, the authors quote and discuss available evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of the co-administration of osteoanabolics and antiresorptives in comparison with monotherapies.Expert opinion: Initiation with an osteoanabolic agent followed by an antiresorptive seems to be the optimal treatment sequence, at least in patients with severe osteoporosis. Osteoanabolic treatment following antiresorptives seems to lead in more modest responses in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers. Combination therapy with teriparatide and denosumab or zoledronate has achieved higher BMD gains compared to each agent alone; however, due to the high cost, combination therapy is rarely compensated. On the contrary, the combination of teriparatide with alendronate results in smaller BMD increases than TPTD monotherapy.

Forecasting the critical role of intermittent therapies for the control of bone resorption

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is a chronic metabolic disease characterized by an imbalance of bone resorption and formation, leading to bone fragility and increased susceptibility to fracture. Parathyroid hormone is approved therapy for the treatment of osteoporosis.

METHODS

The intermittent therapy of parathyroid hormone requires accurate administration. Meta-analysis is conducted to draw a clear picture of the impact of intermittent therapy and dose rates relative to time, on the osteoporotic patients. A novel mathematical model is presented in this article synchronised with the parametric values, depicted from meta-analysis.

FINDINGS

Results obtained from the mathematical model are in close agreement with the results obtained from the clinical trials. The model can be used to forecast the drug potency and dosage rates, to control the vicious cycle of osteoporosis.

INTERPRETATIONS

The intermittent administration of parathyroid hormone, rather than the continuous administration, is more effective, furthermore it is also concluded that a mathematical model, linked with the extensive literature of clinical trials, using meta-analysis can help in drug administration and future clinical studies of drug development.

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.

Effects of teriparatide on hip and upper limb fractures in patients with osteoporosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

In randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with teriparatide, the number of patients with incident hip fractures was small and insufficiently powered to show statistically significant differences between groups. We, therefore, conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of teriparatide in the reduction of hip and upper limb fractures in women and men with osteoporosis. A comprehensive search of databases until 22 November 2017 was conducted for RCTs of at least 6-month duration that reported non-spine fractures (hip, humerus, forearm, wrist), either as an efficacy or safety endpoint. Only RCTs that included patients with the approved treatment indications and dose for use of teriparatide were included; trials with off-label use of teriparatide were excluded. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Statistical procedures included Peto's method and Mantel-Haenszel with empirical correction, as most of the RCTs reported zero events in at least one of the treatment arms. Study results are expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Publication bias and heterogeneity were evaluated with standard statistical tests. Twenty-three RCTs were included, 19 with an active-controlled arm (representing 64.9% of the patients included in the control group) and 11 double-blind, representing data on 8644 subjects, 3893 of them treated with teriparatide. Mean age (SD) was 67.0 (4.5) years, median treatment duration 18 months (range: 6 to 24 months). A total of 34 incident hip, 31 humerus, 31 forearm, and 62 wrist fractures were included. Meta-analysis results showed an OR (95% CI) for hip fractures of 0.44 (0.22-0.87; p = 0.019) in patients treated with teriparatide compared with controls. The effects on the risk of humerus [1.02 (0.50-2.08)], forearm [0.53 (0.26-1.08)] and wrist fractures [1.21 (0.72-2.04)] were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). This meta-analysis provides evidence of efficacy of teriparatide in reducing hip fractures by 56% in patients with osteoporosis.

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.

Treatment of Osteoporosis: Unmet Needs and Emerging Solutions

Efficient therapies are available for the treatment of osteoporosis, however, there are still unmet needs. Anti-resorptive therapies only increase bone mineral density to a certain extent and reduce the risk of non-vertebral fractures by 20%, only one anabolic option is available in most parts of the world-the effect of which levels off over time, and the evidence for combination therapy targeting both resorption and formation is limited. In addition, identification and treatment of patients with high and imminent fracture risk following a recent fracture and long-term adherence to treatment are 2 other very prominent challenges to the management of osteoporosis. The current review will focus on emerging osteoporosis treatments and optimized use of the existing treatments that may help overcome the currently unmet needs in the management of 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.

Optimizing Sequential and Combined Anabolic and Antiresorptive Osteoporosis Therapy

As osteoporosis therapy options have expanded, and clinical guidelines have begun to embrace the concept of limited treatment courses and “drug holidays,” the choices that physicians must make when initiating, electing to continue, or switching therapies have become more complex. As a result, one of the fundamental issues that must be carefully considered is whether, when, and in what sequence anabolic therapies should be utilized. This review evaluates the current evidence supporting the optimal sequence for the use of anabolic and antiresorptive drugs and assesses the expanding number of clinical trials favoring the initial use of anabolic therapy followed by an antiresorptive agent. This review also explores the evidence suggesting that the effectiveness of anabolic medications are diminished when used in patients that have been previously treated with specific antiresorptive drugs for prolonged periods. Finally, the recent advances in designing combination antiresorptive/anabolic treatment approaches are detailed, with a focus on combined denosumab/teriparatide regimens, which appear to provide the most substantial and clinically relevant skeletal benefits to patients with established osteoporosis. © 2018 The Authors. JBMR Plus is published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Improving Combination Osteoporosis Therapy in a Preclinical Model of Heightened Osteoanabolism

Combining anticatabolic agents with parathyroid hormone (PTH) to enhance bone mass has yielded mixed results in osteoporosis patients. Toward the goal of enhancing the efficacy of these regimens, we tested their utility in combination with loss of the transcription factor Nmp4 because disabling this gene amplifies PTH-induced increases in trabecular bone in mice by boosting osteoblast secretory activity. We addressed whether combining a sustained anabolic response with an anticatabolic results in superior bone acquisition compared with PTH monotherapy. Additionally, we inquired whether Nmp4 interferes with anticatabolic efficacy. Wild-type and Nmp4-/- mice were ovariectomized at 12 weeks of age, followed by therapy regimens, administered from 16 to 24 weeks, and included individually or combined PTH, alendronate (ALN), zoledronate (ZOL), and raloxifene (RAL). Anabolic therapeutic efficacy generally corresponded with PTH + RAL = PTH + ZOL > PTH + ALN = PTH > vehicle control. Loss of Nmp4 enhanced femoral trabecular bone increases under PTH + RAL and PTH + ZOL. RAL and ZOL promoted bone restoration, but unexpectedly, loss of Nmp4 boosted RAL-induced increases in femoral trabecular bone. The combination of PTH, RAL, and loss of Nmp4 significantly increased bone marrow osteoprogenitor number, but did not affect adipogenesis or osteoclastogenesis. RAL, but not ZOL, increased osteoprogenitors in both genotypes. Nmp4 status did not influence bone serum marker responses to treatments, but Nmp4-/- mice as a group showed elevated levels of the bone formation marker osteocalcin. We conclude that the heightened osteoanabolism of the Nmp4-/- skeleton enhances the effectiveness of diverse osteoporosis treatments, in part by increasing hyperanabolic osteoprogenitors. Nmp4 provides a promising target pathway for identifying barriers to pharmacologically induced bone formation.

Guidelines of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology for the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in men

Osteoporosis, a metabolic disease characterized by low bone mass, deterioration of the bone tissue microarchitecture and increased susceptibility to fractures, is commonly regarded as a women's health problem. This point of view is based on the fact that compared with men, women have lower bone mineral density and longer lifespans and lose bone mass faster, especially after menopause, due to a marked decrease in serum estrogen levels. However, in the last 20 years, osteoporosis in men has become recognized as a public health problem due to the occurrence of an increasingly higher number of fragility fractures. Approximately 30% of all hip fractures occur in men. Recent studies show that the probability of fracture due to hip, vertebral or wrist fragility in Caucasian men older than fifty years, for the rest of their lives, is approximately 13% versus a 40% probability of fragility fractures in women. Men show bone mass loss and fractures later than women. Although older men have a higher risk of fracture, approximately half of all hip fractures occur before the age of 80. Life expectancy is increasing for both sexes in Brazil and worldwide, albeit at a higher rate for men than for women. This Guideline was based on a systematic review of the literature on the prevalence, etiology, diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in men.

Using Osteoporosis Therapies in Combination

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this review is to update evidence regarding the use of osteoporosis drugs in sequence or in combination to optimize increases in bone mass and strength.

RECENT FINDINGS

Simultaneous use of denosumab plus teriparatide produces larger increases in BMD than does monotherapy. The use of bisphosphonates or denosumab after teriparatide results in progressive gains in BMD. When switching from bisphosphonates and especially denosumab to teriparatide, an overlap of 6-12 months may prevent the transient loss of BMD in cortical sites. Phase 3 trials document fracture risk reduction with anabolic therapy for 12-18 months followed by an anti-remodeling drug. With the exception of adding teriparatide to ongoing denosumab therapy, there is little evidence to support the use of more than one osteoporosis drug at a time. In contrast, sequential therapy regimens of anabolic drugs followed by potent anti-remodeling agents will be the new standard for treating patients at imminent risk of fracture.

Effect of Sequential Treatment with Bisphosphonates After Teriparatide in Ovariectomized Rats: A Direct Comparison Between Risedronate and Alendronate

Teriparatide (TPTD), a recombinant human parathyroid hormone N-terminal fragment (1-34), is a widely used bone anabolic drug for osteoporosis. Sequential treatment with antiresorptives such as bisphosphonates after TPTD discontinuation is generally recommended. However, relative effects of bisphosphonates have not been determined. In the present study, we directly compared effects of risedronate (RIS) and alendronate (ALN) on bone mineral density (BMD), bone turnover, structural property and strength in ovariectomized (OVX) rats, when administered after TPTD. Female Sprague Dawley rats were divided into one sham-operated and eight ovariectomized groups. TPTD, RIS, and ALN were given subcutaneously twice per week for 4 or 8 weeks after 4 week treatment with TPTD. TPTD significantly increased BMD (+9.6%) in OVX rats after 4 weeks of treatment. 8 weeks after TPTD withdrawal, vehicle-treated group showed a blunted BMD increase of +8.4% from the baseline. In contrast, 8 weeks of treatment with RIS and ALN significantly increased BMD to 17.4 and 21.8%, respectively. While ALN caused a consistently larger increase in BMD, sequential treatment with RIS resulted in lower Tb.Sp compared to ALN in the fourth lumbar vertebra as well as in greater stiffness in compression test. In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that sequential therapy with ALN and RIS after TPTD both improved bone mass and structure. Our results further suggest that RIS may have a greater effect on improving bone quality and stiffness than ALN despite less prominent effect on BMD. Further studies are necessary to determine clinical relevance of these findings to fracture rate.

Two-year clinical outcome of denosumab treatment alone and in combination with teriparatide in Japanese treatment-naive postmenopausal osteoporotic women

This randomized prospective study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome of denosumab treatment alone and in combination with teriparatide in treatment-naive postmenopausal Japanese female patients with osteoporosis. Thirty patients were randomly assigned to two groups: (1) denosumab group (denosumab alone, n=13); and (2) combination group (denosumab+teriparatide, n=17). Serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP), serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRACP)-5b, urinary cross-linked N-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen (NTX), and bone mineral density (BMD) of L1–4 lumbar vertebrae (L-BMD) and bilateral total hips (H-BMD) were determined at the first visit and at various time points up to 24 months post-treatment to determine percentage changes. Serum TRACP-5b and urinary NTX were equally suppressed in both groups and maintained at low levels, with slight increases at 12, 18 and 24 months. BAP was significantly decreased in both groups from 4 to 24 months, with significant differences between the groups at 4, 8 and 15 months (P<0.05). L-BMD was significantly increased at most time points in both groups, with a significant difference between the combination group and denosumab group at 24 months (17.2% increase versus 9.6% increase; P<0.05). There was no significant difference in H-BMD between the two groups, although the levels tended to be higher in the combination group than in the denosumab group (9.5% increase versus 5.6% increase). These findings suggest that denosumab+teriparatide combination therapy may represent an important treatment for primary osteoporotic patients at high risk of vertebral fracture.

Localization of Minodronate in Mouse Femora Through Isotope Microscopy

Minodronate is highlighted for its marked and sustained effects on osteoporotic bones. To determine the duration of minodronate's effects, we have assessed the localization of the drug in mouse bones through isotope microscopy, after labeling it with a stable nitrogen isotope ([(15)N]-minodronate). In addition, minodronate-treated bones were assessed by histochemistry and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Eight-week-old male ICR mice received [(15)N]-minodronate (1 mg/kg) intravenously and were sacrificed after 3 hr, 24 hr, 1 week, and 1 month. Isotope microscopy showed that [(15)N]-minodronate was present mainly beneath osteoblasts rather than nearby osteoclasts. At 3 hr after minodronate administration, histochemistry and TEM showed osteoclasts with well-developed ruffled borders. However, osteoclasts were roughly attached to the bone surfaces and did not feature ruffled borders at 24 hr after minodronate administration. The numbers of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-positive osteoclasts and alkaline phosphatase-reactive osteoblastic area were not reduced suddenly, and apoptotic osteoclasts appeared in 1 week and 1 month after the injections. Von Kossa staining demonstrated that osteoclasts treated with minodronate did not incorporate mineralized bone matrix. Taken together, minodronate accumulates in bone underneath osteoblasts rather than under bone-resorbing osteoclasts; therefore, it is likely that the minodronate-coated bone matrix is resistant to osteoclastic resorption, which results in a long-lasting and bone-preserving effect.

Parathyroid Hormone and Parathyroid Hormone-Related Protein Analogs in Osteoporosis Therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose is to review the efficacy and optimal use of parathyroid hormone and parathyroid hormone-related protein analogs in osteoporosis treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

The parathyroid hormone analog teriparatide, a potent stimulator of bone remodeling, increases hip and spine bone mineral density and reduces the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in postmenopausal osteoporotic women. The parathyroid hormone-related protein analog, abaloparatide, also reduces fracture incidence but has pharmacological effects that differ from teriparatide, particularly in cortical bone. These analogs provide maximal benefit when their use is followed by a potent antiresorptive medication. Moreover, studies have shown that the combination of teriparatide and the RANK-ligand inhibitor, denosumab, increase bone density and estimated strength more than monotherapy and more than any currently available regimen. Parathyroid hormone and parathyroid hormone-related protein analogs, whether as monotherapy, in combination with antiresorptive agents or in sequence with antiresorptive agents, will likely play an expanding role in osteoporosis management.

Use of combination therapy in the treatment of primary osteoporosis: protocol for a network meta-analysis of randomised trials

INTRODUCTION

The existing medications approved for treatment of primary osteoporosis can be divided into antiresorptive drugs and anabolic drugs. According to the mechanisms of action, the combined therapy may produce a synergistic effect on bone mineral density (BMD) compared with monotherapy, and thus improves the efficacy of fracture resistance. This network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacies of different combined methods for the treatment of primary osteoporosis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases will be searched to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that evaluate the effectiveness of combined therapy versus monotherapy for primary osteoporosis. The primary outcome will be the BMD changes at the lumbar spine and total hip, and the secondary outcome will be the risks of vertebral fracture and non-vertebral fracture. The efficacies of different combined methods will be compared via traditional pairwise meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane tool and the quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation for network meta-analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required because this is a protocol for a systematic review without including confidential personal data or data on interventions on patients. Our results will be published in a peer-review journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42016038569.

Effects of Daily or Cyclic Teriparatide on Bone Formation in the Iliac Crest in Women on No Prior Therapy and in Women on Alendronate

There is little information on the effects of combination therapy for osteoporosis at the tissue level. Using quadruple tetracycline-labeled bone biopsies, we have compared the bone formation response to teriparatide (TPTD) in treatment-naïve subjects (Rx-Naïve) and in subjects on prior and ongoing alendronate (ALN) treatment (ALN-Rx). Three bone envelopes were analyzed: cancellous, endocortical, and intracortical. TPTD was given as a standard, continuous daily injection or as a cyclic regimen (3 months on daily TPTD, 3 months off, 3 months on daily TPTD). Subjects were biopsied at 7 weeks and at 7 months to allow comparison of the bone formation response to the first and second cycles of TPTD. Baseline values for dynamic bone formation indices were lower in ALN-Rx than Rx-Naïve subjects. Both Rx-Naïve and ALN-RX subjects responded to TPTD with significant increases in bone formation indices at both time points. With cyclic TPTD treatment, the first and second cycles of TPTD stimulated bone formation rate in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes to a similar extent in ALN-Rx and Rx-Naïve subjects. However, in Rx-Naïve patients, bone formation rate (BFR/BS) was higher in patients receiving daily treatment compared with those receiving cyclic TPTD treatment in all three envelopes in the 7-month biopsies. This suggests that the cyclic approach does not provide a skeletal benefit in treatment-naive patients. In the 7-month biopsies, cortical porosity was higher in the Rx-Naïve group receiving daily TPTD than in all other groups. These data provide supporting evidence at the tissue level for previous biochemical and densitometric data suggesting that addition of either cyclic or daily TPTD to ongoing ALN treatment may be an effective approach for patients with severe osteoporosis already treated with ALN who remain at high risk of fracture. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Response to Therapy With Teriparatide, Denosumab, or Both in Postmenopausal Women in the DATA (Denosumab and Teriparatide Administration) Study Randomized Controlled Trial

Both antiresorptive and anabolic osteoporosis medications increase bone mineral density (BMD), but no single agent can restore normal bone strength in most osteoporotic patients. Moreover, the magnitude and consistency of the patient response to each individual agent vary depending on the anatomic site. In the DATA study, we reported that in postmenopausal osteoporotic women, 2 years of combined denosumab and teriparatide increase mean BMD at the hip and spine more than either drug alone. In the current analysis, we wished to determine if the individual rates of BMD response were also greater among women treated with both drugs. In DATA, 94 postmenopausal osteoporotic women (ages 51-91) were randomized to receive teriparatide (20 mcg subcutaneously daily), denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 mo), or both medications for 24 mo. The BMD of the total hip (TH), femoral neck (FN), and lumbar spine (LS) were assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The 82 subjects who completed all 2-yr treatments were analyzed. Responders were defined as experiencing BMD increases of >3%. An "excellent response" was defined as an increase of >6%. Over 24 mo, TH BMD increased by >3% in 36%, 53%, and 92% of women in the teriparatide, denosumab, and combination groups, respectively, and by >6% in 11%, 17%, and 50% in the teriparatide, denosumab, and combination groups, respectively (p < 0.01 for all comparisons vs combination). FN response rates were similar to TH. In the LS, BMD increased by >3% in 85%, 93%, and 100% of women in the teriparatide, denosumab, and combination groups, respectively (p = nonsignificant for all comparisons) and by >6% in 63%, 78%, and 100% of women in the teriparatide, denosumab, and combination groups, respectively (combination vs teriparatide, p = 0.001; combination vs denosumab, p = 0.016). In summary, more women treated with 24 mo of combined denosumab and teriparatide achieved a significant response at the TH and FN than those treated with either drug alone. All women treated with both agents together experienced an excellent response at the LS. These results support the continued investigation of combined denosumab and teriparatide therapy in postmenopausal osteoporotic women utilizing clinical endpoints such as fracture reduction.

New horizons in osteoporosis therapies

Efficient therapies are available for the treatment of osteoporosis, however, there are still unmet needs. Anti-resorptive therapies only increase bone mineral density to a certain extent and reduce the risk of non-vertebral fractures by 20%, only one anabolic option is available-the effect of which levels off over time, and the evidence for combination therapy targeting both resorption and formation is limited. The current review will focus on emerging treatments of osteoporosis with the potential of enhanced anabolic effects (romosozumab and abaloparatide) or uncoupling of resorption and formation (odanacatib and romosozumab) as well as the effect of combination therapy.

The Efficacy of Parathyroid Hormone Analogues in Combination With Bisphosphonates for the Treatment of Osteoporosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Parathyroid hormone (PTH) analogues increase bone strength primarily by stimulating bone formation, whereas antiresorptive drugs (bisphosphonates) reduce bone resorption. Therefore, some studies have been designed to test the hypothesis that the concurrent administration of the 2 agents would increase bone density more than the use of either one alone. This meta-analysis aimed to determine whether combining PTH analogues with bisphosphonates would be superior to PTH alone. Electronic databases were searched to identify relevant publications up to March, 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PTH analogues combined bisphosphonates with PTH for osteoporosis were analyzed. According to the Cochrane Handbook for systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.2, we identified eligible studies, evaluated the methodological quality, and abstracted relevant data. Totally 7 studies involving 641 patients were included for meta-analysis. The pooled data showed that there were no significant differences in the percent change of spine BMD (MD1-year = -0.97, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.86, P = 0.30; MD2-year =  - 0.57, 95% CI -5.01 to 6.14, P = 0.84), femoral neck BMD (MD1-year = 0.60, 95% CI -0.91 to 2.10, P = 0.44; MD2-year = -0.73, 95% CI -4.97 to 3.51, P = 0.74), the risk of vertebral fracture (risk ratio [RR] = 1.27; 95% CI 0.29-5.57; P = 0.75), and the risk of nonvertebral fracture (RR = 0.97; 95% CI 0.40-2.35; P = 0.95) between the 2 groups, whereas combination group improves the percent change of hip BMD at 1 year (MD = 1.16, 95% CI 0.56-1.76; P < 0.01) than PTH analogues group. Our results showed that there was no evidence for the superiority of combination therapy, although significant change was found for hip BMD at 1 year in combination group. Further large multicenter randomized controlled trials are still needed to investigate the efficacy of combination therapy.

Effect of Combined Teriparatide and Monthly Risedronate Therapy on Cancellous Bone Mass in Orchidectomized Rats: A Bone Histomorphometry Study

This study investigated the effects of combined teriparatide (an anabolic agent) and monthly risedronate (an anti-resorptive agent) therapy on cancellous bone mass in orchidectomized (ORX) rats. Fifty 14-week-old male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized into five groups of ten animals each: sham-operation + vehicle; ORX + vehicle; ORX + risedronate (90 μg/kg subcutaneous, every 4 weeks); ORX + teriparatide (30 μg/kg subcutaneous, three times per week); and ORX + risedronate + teriparatide. After the 12-week experimental period, cancellous bone in the tibial proximal metaphysis was examined by static and dynamic histomorphometric analyses. ORX decreased bone volume per total volume (BV/TV) and trabecular number (Tb.N), and increased trabecular separation (Tb.Sp). Risedronate increased BV/TV and Tb.N above the sham control values, while teriparatide prevented the ORX-induced decrease in BV/TV and increased trabecular width (Tb.Wi) above sham control levels. Risedronate decreased Tb.Sp below control values, while teriparatide prevented the ORX-induced increase in Tb.Sp. The combination of teriparatide and risedronate further increased BV/TV and Tb.N and decreased Tb.Sp as a result of suppression of bone remodeling, compared with teriparatide alone. These results suggest that teriparatide and monthly risedronate exert different effects on cancellous bone structure and thus have additive effects on cancellous bone mass in ORX rats.

Comparison of Bone Mineral Density in Lumbar Spine and Fracture Rate among Eight Drugs in Treatments of Osteoporosis in Men: A Network Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

The preferred treatment for osteoporosis in men is debated, and pairwise meta-analysis cannot obtain hierarchies of these treatments.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to integrate the evidence and provide hierarchies of eight drugs based on their effect on the bone mineral density in the lumbar spine (BMD in LS) and the fracture rate.

DATA SOURCES

Eligible studies were identified by searching Amed, British Nursing Index, EMBASE, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Google Scholar, SIGLE, the National Technical Information Service, the National Research Register (UK), and the Current Controlled Trials databases.

STUDY SELECTION

RCTs or quasi-RCTs reporting at least two drugs (two active drugs or one active drug and a placebo) used to treat osteoporosis in men were selected by two authors.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently extracted the data.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirteen studies involving 3647 patients were included. Compared with placebo therapy, zoledronate (SMDs 13.48, 95% credible intervals 11.88-15.08) yielded the most significant effect on increasing the BMD in LS, followed by alendronate (11.04, 9.68-12.41), teriparatide (20mcg) + risedronate (10.98, 8.55-13.48), risedronate (10.33, 8.68-12.01), teriparatide (20mcg) (9.33, 6.87-11.76), strontium ranelate (8.88, 7.51-10.24), ibandronate (5.49, 3.82-7.16), parathyroid hormone (1-84) (4.89, 3.12-6.62) and alfacalcidol (3.42, 1.7-5.2). Placebo therapy had a significantly higher fracture rate in contrast to risedronate (OR 2.51, 95% CrI 1.23-4.24) or zoledronate (2.92, 1.29-5.62) or teriparatide (20mcg) (4.04, 1.36-8.49) or teriparatide (40mcg) (3.5, 1.14-8.34). Zoledronate ranked first for increasing the BMD in LS, and teriparatide (20mg) was ranked first for decreasing the fracture rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Zoledronate might be the best choice to increase the BMD in LS and teriparatide (20mg) might lead to the lowest fracture rate.

Bone markers and osteoporosis therapy

Several factors are involved in determining bone quality including bone density, bone turnover, the extent of trabecular bone connectivity, cortical porosity and geometry. Metabolically active and in a continuous process of remodeling, approximately 20% of bone tissue is renewed annually. Bone turn over markers (BTM) are frequently used in clinical trials and to provide valid information about the effectiveness of osteoporosis treatment, reflecting the state of bone metabolism and its response to treatment, although they are not useful alone to estimate bone loss. In this review the behavior of BTM from different clinical trials or different osteoporotic drugs will be addressed.

Anabolic and antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis: combination and sequential approaches

In the recent Bone Key Reports review, it was noted that combinations of anabolic and antiresorptive agents have potential to improve bone density and bone strength more than either agent as monotherapy. Small clinical trials have been performed evaluating combinations of PTH1-34 (TPTD) or PTH1-84 (PTH) with a variety of antiresorptives including hormone/estrogen therapy, raloxifene, alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, zoledronic acid, and denosumab. Most of the studies evaluate dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry outcomes, and a few trials report volumetric mineral density (BMD) by quantitative computed tomography, followed by finite element modeling to calculate bone strength. None of the studies has been powered to assess differences in fracture incidence between combination therapy and monotherapy. BMD outcomes vary based on the timing of introduction of the anabolic agent (before, during, or after antiresorptive treatment), as well as the specific anabolic and antiresorptive used. Furthermore, effects of combination therapies are site-dependent. The most consistent effect of combining antiresorptive agents with PTH or TPTD is a superior hip BMD outcome compared with TPTD/PTH alone. This is most evident when TPTD/PTH is combined with a bisphosphonate or denosumab. In contrast to findings in the hip, in the majority of studies, there is no benefit to spine BMD with combination therapy vs monotherapy. The 2 exceptions to this are when TPTD is combined with denosumab and when TPTD is given as monotherapy first for 9 months, followed by the addition of alendronate (with continuation administration of TPTD). Based on what we now know, in patients previously treated with bisphosphonates who suffer hip fractures or who have very low or declining hip BMD, strong consideration should be given to starting TPTD and continuing a potent antiresorptive agent (possibly switching to zoledronic acid or denosumab) to improve hip BMD and strength quickly. Furthermore, in treatment naïve individuals with very severe osteoporosis, such as those with spine and hip fractures, combination therapy with TPTD and denosumab or TPTD followed by combination treatment with a potent bisphosphonate or denosumab should be considered to maximize early increases in BMD throughout the skeleton (Cosman BoneKEy Rep 3, 2014).

Efficacy and safety of currently marketed anti-osteoporosis medications

During the past 2 decades, many interventions were proven effective in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The objective of an anti-osteoporosis treatment is to reduce fracture rates, ideally at all skeletal sites (i.e. spine, hip, and other non-spine). The armamentarium against osteoporosis includes anti-resorptive agents (i.e. bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators and denosumab), bone-forming agents (i.e. peptides from the parathyroid hormone family) and one agent with a dual mechanism of action (i.e. strontium ranelate). All these medications combine antifracture efficacy with a reasonable benefit/risk profile. However, the choice of a particular chemical entity, in one individual patient is based on the knowledge and expertise of the physician. Prioritization of drugs should be based on the individual profile of the patient, the severity of osteoporosis and the specific contraindications, warnings and precautions of use of the various available medications.

Effect of risedronate in osteoporotic HIV males, according to gonadal status: a pilot study

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of risedronate on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers in HIV-infected osteoporotic males, according to their gonadal status. HIV patients were followed up for 24 months and divided into two groups: patients with osteoporosis or osteopenia with fractures (group A, n = 20) and those without (group B, n = 21). Group A and B were further divided according to the presence of reduced androgenizations. Both groups were treated with cholecalciferol 800 I.U. and calcium (Ca) 1,000 mg orally every day for the first 12 months. Risedronate 75 mg for two consecutive days a month orally was then added in group A, for another 12 months. Group B continued treatment with Ca and vitamin D. Every 6 months each patient underwent biochemical evaluation, and BMD measurement. A significant increase in lumbar BMD was observed in HIV males with adequate androgenization after 12 months of risedronate treatment in group A together with a reduction of bone turnover markers. BMD remained stable with a concomitant significant slight reduction of bone turnover markers in group B. Risedronate increased BMD and reduced bone turnover markers to a greater extent in patients with adequate androgenization compared to osteoporotic HIV males with symptomatic hypoandrogenization.

Literature review: The effects of teriparatide therapy at the hip in patients with osteoporosis

Teriparatide is a skeletal anabolic treatment for patients with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture. Because adequate clinical trials have not yet been conducted to assess the efficacy of teriparatide for reducing the risk of hip fracture, we review here the literature regarding how treatment with teriparatide affects the hip in patients with osteoporosis. Teriparatide increases cancellous bone volume, improves bone architecture, and - uniquely among osteoporosis treatments - increases cortical thickness and cortical porosity. By bone scan and positron emission tomography, teriparatide increases bone formation throughout the skeleton, including the hip. Consistent with these findings, studies using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and quantitative computed tomography for longitudinal assessment of changes at the hip have consistently shown increases in areal and volumetric bone mineral density, cortical thickness, and finite element-estimated hip strength in patients treated with teriparatide. Finally, in clinical fracture-outcome trials, treatment with teriparatide has been shown to reduce the risk of nonvertebral fracture, a composite endpoint that includes hip fracture. Taken together, this body of evidence suggests that teriparatide positively affects the hip in patients with osteoporosis.

Combination therapy for osteoporosis: a reappraisal

Combinations of anabolic and antiresorptive agents have potential to improve bone density and bone strength more than either agent alone. A large number of relatively small clinical trials have been performed evaluating combinations of PTH1-34 or PTH1-84 with a variety of antiresorptives, including hormone/estrogen therapy, raloxifene, alendronate (Aln), risedronate, ibandronate, zoledronic acid and denosumab (Dmab). Most of the studies evaluate dual-X-ray densitometry outcomes, with a few trials reporting volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) by quantitative computed tomography followed by finite element modeling of bone strength. None of the studies has been powered to assess differences in fracture incidence between combination therapy and monotherapy. BMD outcomes vary depending on the timing of introduction of the anabolic agent (before, during or after antiresorptive treatment), as well as according to the specific anabolic and antiresorptive used. Furthermore, effects of combination therapies are site dependent. The most consistent effect of combining antiresorptive agents with parathyroid hormone (PTH) is a superior hip BMD outcome compared with PTH alone. This is most evident when PTH is combined with a bisphosphonate or Dmab. In contrast to findings in the hip, in the majority of studies there is no benefit to spine BMD with combination therapy when compared with monotherapy. The two exceptions to this are when PTH is combined with Dmab and when PTH is given as monotherapy first for 9 months followed by the addition of Aln and continuation of PTH as combination treatment. On the basis of what we now know, in patients on bisphosphonates who suffer hip fractures or who have very low hip BMD, strong consideration should be given to starting teriparatide and continuing a bisphosphonate (possibly switching to zoledronic acid or even Dmab) to maximize hip BMD and strength. Furthermore, in treatment-naive individuals with very severe osteoporosis, such as those with spine and hip fractures, combination therapy with PTH and Dmab or PTH followed by combination treatment with a potent bisphosphonate or Dmab should be considered to maximize early increases in BMD.

The effect of zoledronic acid on the fracture risk in men with osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized studies on osteoporosis treatment with bisphosphonates in men are rare. This review focuses on a recent trial and compares the results with other studies.

METHODS

This review provides a summary of recent literature on fracture risk in men following treatment with zoledronic acid. According to a recent clinical study with 1,199 men, zoledronic acid was linked to a lower risk of vertebral fractures. In this manuscript, a re-analysis of the presented statistical data will be demonstrated by performing a Bonferroni-correction to adjust for type 1 error accumulation in multiple statistical tests.

RESULTS

It will be shown that the provided evidence linking zoledronic acid to a lower fracture risk in male osteoporosis is true, but less pronounced than originally assumed.

CONCLUSION

Comparative clinical studies are recommended, where the benefits of different bisphosphonates are compared to each other under the same experimental conditions.

Idiopathic osteoporosis in men

Over the last decade, the increasingly significant problem of osteoporosis in men has begun to receive much more attention than in the past. In particular, recent observations from large scale population studies in males led to an advance in the understanding of morphologic basis of growth, maintenance and loss of bone in men, as well as new insights about the pathophysiology and treatment of this disorder. While fracture risk consistently increases after age 65 in men (with up to 50 % of cases due to secondary etiologies), osteoporosis and fractures may also occur in young or middle aged males in the absence of an identifiable etiology. For this category (so called idiopathic osteoporosis), there are still major gaps in knowledge, particularly concerning the etiology and the clinical management. This article provides a summary of recent developments in the acquisition and maintenance of bone strength in men, as well as new insights about the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of idiopathic osteoporosis.

A mechanical model for predicting the probability of osteoporotic hip fractures based in DXA measurements and finite element simulation

BACKGROUND

Osteoporotic hip fractures represent major cause of disability, loss of quality of life and even mortality among the elderly population. Decisions on drug therapy are based on the assessment of risk factors for fracture, from BMD measurements. The combination of biomechanical models with clinical studies could better estimate bone strength and supporting the specialists in their decision.

METHODS

A model to assess the probability of fracture, based on the Damage and Fracture Mechanics has been developed, evaluating the mechanical magnitudes involved in the fracture process from clinical BMD measurements. The model is intended for simulating the degenerative process in the skeleton, with the consequent lost of bone mass and hence the decrease of its mechanical resistance which enables the fracture due to different traumatisms. Clinical studies were chosen, both in non-treatment conditions and receiving drug therapy, and fitted to specific patients according their actual BMD measures. The predictive model is applied in a FE simulation of the proximal femur. The fracture zone would be determined according loading scenario (sideway fall, impact, accidental loads, etc.), using the mechanical properties of bone obtained from the evolutionary model corresponding to the considered time.

RESULTS

BMD evolution in untreated patients and in those under different treatments was analyzed. Evolutionary curves of fracture probability were obtained from the evolution of mechanical damage. The evolutionary curve of the untreated group of patients presented a marked increase of the fracture probability, while the curves of patients under drug treatment showed variable decreased risks, depending on the therapy type.

CONCLUSION

The FE model allowed to obtain detailed maps of damage and fracture probability, identifying high-risk local zones at femoral neck and intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric areas, which are the typical locations of osteoporotic hip fractures.The developed model is suitable for being used in individualized cases. The model might better identify at-risk individuals in early stages of osteoporosis and might be helpful for treatment decisions.