Bisphosphonates and glucocorticoid osteoporosis in men: results of a randomized controlled trial comparing zoledronic acid with risedronate

Osteoporosis management-current and future perspectives - A systemic review

Introduction

Osteoporosis is a geriatric metabolic ailment distinguished by low bone mineral density (BMD) and strength with enhanced micro-architectural retrogression of the extracellular matrix, further increasing bone fragility risk. Osteoporotic fractures and associated complications become common in women and men after 55 and 65 years, respectively. The loss in BMD markedly enhances the risk of fracture, non-skeletal injury, and subsequent pain, adversely affecting the quality of life.

Methods

Data summarised in this review were sourced and summarised, including contributions from 2008 to 2023, online from scientific search engines, based on scientific inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Results

Biochemical serum markers such as BALP, collagen, osteocalcin, and cathepsin-K levels can reveal the osteoporotic status. DEXA scan techniques evaluate the whole body's BMD and bone mineral content (BMC), crucial in osteoporosis management. Anabolic and anti-osteoporotic agents are commonly used to enhance bone formation, minimize bone resorption, and regulate remodelling. The challenges and side effects of drug therapy can be overcome by combining the various drug moieties.

Conclusion

The current review discusses the management protocol for osteoporosis, ranging from lifestyle modification, including physical exercise, pharmaceutical approaches, drug delivery applications, and advanced therapeutic possibilities of AI and machine learning techniques to reduce osteoporosis complications and fracture risk.

Denosumab, teriparatide and bisphosphonates for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background: Several medications have been used for glucocorticoids-induced osteoporosis (GIO). However, the best therapeutic option for GIO is still controversial. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of denosumab, teriparatide and bisphosphonates for patients with GIO. Methods: Relevant randomized controlled trials published in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov up to August 2023 were searched. The following efficiency and safety outcomes were extracted for comparison: bone mineral density (BMD) percentage changes in lumbar spine, femur neck and total hip, and incidences of adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), vertebrae and non-vertebrae fracture. Bayesian random effects models were used for multiple treatment comparisons. Results: 11 eligible RCTs involving 2,877 patients were identified. All the six medications including alendronate, risedronate, etidronate, zoledronate, teriparatide, and denosumab and were effective in increasing BMD. Teriparatide and denosumab were more effective in improving lumbar spine and femur neck BMD, and reducing vertebrae fracture. Alendronate and denosumab were more effective in improving total hip BMD. Alendronate and teriparatide had the lowest incidences of AEs and SAEs. Conclusion: Teriparatide denosumab and the bisphosphonates are all effective in improving BMD for GIO patients. Based on this network meta-analysis, teriparatide and denosumab have higher efficiency in improving lumbar spine and femur neck BMD, and reducing vertebrae fracture. Systematic Review Registration: 10.17605/OSF.IO/2G8YA, identifier CRD42023456305.

Antiresorptive treatments for corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIO) is the most common type of secondary osteoporosis, leading to fractures, and increased morbidity and mortality.

SOURCE OF DATA

Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus and Google Scholar databases.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Prolonged glucocorticoids administration leads to secondary osteoporosis.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

The optimal management for CIO is controversial.

GROWING POINTS

The present study compared bone mineral density, fractures and adverse events in patients undergoing treatment with risedronate, alendronate, zoledronate, denosumab or etidronate for CIO.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

For selected patients with CIO, alendronate performed better overall. These results must be interpreted within the limitations of the present study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Osteoporosis Due to Hormone Imbalance: An Overview of the Effects of Estrogen Deficiency and Glucocorticoid Overuse on Bone Turnover

Osteoporosis is a serious health issue among aging postmenopausal women. The majority of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis have bone loss related to estrogen deficiency. The rapid bone loss results from an increase in bone turnover with an imbalance between bone resorption and bone formation. Osteoporosis can also result from excessive glucocorticoid usage, which induces bone demineralization with significant changes of spatial heterogeneities of bone at microscale, indicating potential risk of fracture. This review is a summary of current literature about the molecular mechanisms of actions, the risk factors, and treatment of estrogen deficiency related osteoporosis (EDOP) and glucocorticoid induced osteoporosis (GIOP). Estrogen binds with estrogen receptor to promote the expression of osteoprotegerin (OPG), and to suppress the action of nuclear factor-κβ ligand (RANKL), thus inhibiting osteoclast formation and bone resorptive activity. It can also activate Wnt/β-catenin signaling to increase osteogenesis, and upregulate BMP signaling to promote mesenchymal stem cell differentiation from pre-osteoblasts to osteoblasts, rather than adipocytes. The lack of estrogen will alter the expression of estrogen target genes, increasing the secretion of IL-1, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF). On the other hand, excessive glucocorticoids interfere the canonical BMP pathway and inhibit Wnt protein production, causing mesenchymal progenitor cells to differentiate toward adipocytes rather than osteoblasts. It can also increase RANKL/OPG ratio to promote bone resorption by enhancing the maturation and activation of osteoclast. Moreover, excess glucocorticoids are associated with osteoblast and osteocyte apoptosis, resulting in declined bone formation. The main focuses of treatment for EDOP and GIOP are somewhat different. Avoiding excessive glucocorticoid use is mandatory in patients with GIOP. In contrast, appropriate estrogen supplement is deemed the primary treatment for females with EDOP of various causes. Other pharmacological treatments include bisphosphonate, teriparatide, and RANKL inhibitors. Nevertheless, more detailed actions of EDOP and GIOP along with the safety and effectiveness of medications for treating osteoporosis warrant further investigation.

[Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis-Focus treatment (part 2)]

The following substances are approved for the treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: the oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate, the intravenous bisphosphonate zoledronate, the RANKL antibody denosumab as antiresorptive substances and teriparatide as osteoanabolic substance. In comparison to placebo a reduction of vertebral fractures is proven for all mentioned substances. Thereby, teriparatide is more effective than alendronate and risedronate with respect to the reduction of vertebral fractures. The severity of osteoporosis, especially the presence of osteoporotic fractures, the approach of treatment (preventive or curative) and contraindications are factors that are important for the differentiated application of the mentioned substances. Furthermore, it must be noted that the effect of osteoanabolic treatment must be stabilized by a subsequent antiresorptive treatment and that after termination of antiresorptive treatment with denosumab a temporary bisphosphonate treatment is required to prevent a rebound phenomenon.

German Society of Rheumatology recommendations for management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoids are of substantial therapeutic importance in the treatment of inflammatory diseases, but are also associated with bone mineral density loss, osteoporosis, and fractures, especially with long-term use.

OBJECTIVE

To develop recommendations for the management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in adult patients on long-term glucocorticoid (GC) treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (SLR) was conducted to synthesize the evidence for GIOP prevention and treatment options. Recommendations were developed based on SLR/level of evidence and by previously defined questions and in a structured group consensus process.

RESULTS

Recommendations include supplementation with calcium and vitamin D under long-term GC therapy in adults. If specific osteologic treatment is indicated, we recommend bisphosphonates or denosumab as first-line treatment. If fracture risk is high, we recommend teriparatide as primary specific osteologic treatment. Denosumab should be used in cases of severe renal insufficiency, and specific osteologic treatment should not be given in pregnancy. For patients who have not reached the treatment goal, a switch to another class of specific osteologic drugs should be performed. We recommend re-evaluation after a treatment duration of 3-5 years or after termination of long-term GC treatment.

CONCLUSION

This work aims to provide evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for the best possible management of GIOP in Germany and to support treatment decisions.

[German Society of Rheumatology Recommendations for the management of glucocorticoid-induced Osteoporosis. German version]

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoids are of substantial therapeutic importance in the treatment of inflammatory diseases, but are also associated with bone mineral density loss, osteoporosis, and fractures, especially with long-term use.

OBJECTIVE

To develop recommendations for the management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in adult patients on long-term glucocorticoid (GC) treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (SLR) was conducted to synthesize the evidence for GIOP prevention and treatment options. Recommendations were developed based on SLR/level of evidence and by previously defined questions and in a structured group consensus process.

RESULTS

Recommendations include supplementation with calcium and vitamin D under long-term GC therapy in adults. If specific osteologic treatment is indicated, we recommend bisphosphonates or denosumab as first-line treatment. If fracture risk is high, we recommend teriparatide as primary specific osteologic treatment. Denosumab should be used in cases of severe renal insufficiency, and specific osteologic treatment should not be given in pregnancy. For patients who have not reached the treatment goal, a switch to another class of specific osteologic drugs should be performed. We recommend re-evaluation after a treatment duration of 3-5 years or after termination of long-term GC treatment.

CONCLUSION

This work aims to provide evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for the best possible management of GIOP in Germany and to support treatment decisions.

Glucocorticoid- and Transplantation-Induced Osteoporosis

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is the most common cause of secondary osteoporosis; nonetheless, it remains an undertreated condition. Transplantation-induced osteoporosis encompasses a broad range of unique pathogenetic features with distinct characteristics dependent on the transplanted organ. Understanding the pathogenesis of bone loss is key to recommending osteoporosis therapy in these patients. This review summarizes recent advances and addresses current issues in these fields.

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

Background

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Effects of bisphosphonates on osteoporosis: Focus on zoledronate

Osteoporosis is a bone disease that mainly affects older people and postmenopausal women. Lack of proper treatment for this disease gives rise to many problems in patients and occasionally leads to death. Many drugs have been utilized to treat osteoporosis but the most effective one is the bisphosphonates (BPs) family. This family has several positive effects on bone tissue, including promoting bone healing, enhancing bone mineral density, reducing bone resorption, preventing pathologic fractures, suppressing bone turnover, and modulating bone remodeling. On the other hand, there have also been inconclusive reports that BPs might have a desirable or even adverse impact on osteoporotic patients. Therefore, we set out to examine the positive and negative effects of this family, with a focus on the most potent one that is zoledronate (Zol), in clinical usage. Zoledronate is an amino-BPs and nitrogen-containing drug which is the most powerful BPs on osteoporosis treatment or prevention. Many studies showed its effectiveness in the treatment of osteoporosis and bone healing. As Zol enjoys a considerable potential in treating and preventing osteoporosis, it can be used as one of the effective treatments in this field.

Zoledronate

Zoledronate is the most potent and most long-acting bisphosphonate in clinical use, and is administered as an intravenous infusion. Its major uses are in osteoporosis, Paget's disease, and in myeloma and cancers to reduce adverse skeletal related events (SREs). In benign disease, it is a first- or second-line treatment for osteoporosis, achieving anti-fracture efficacy comparable to that of the RANKL blocker, denosumab, over 3 years, and it reduces fracture risk in osteopenic older women. It is the preferred treatment for Paget's disease, achieving higher rates of remissions which are much more prolonged than with any other agent. Some trials have suggested that it reduces mortality, cardiovascular disease and cancer, but these findings are not consistent across all studies. It is nephrotoxic, so should not be given to those with significant renal impairment, and, like other potent anti-resorptive agents, can cause hypocalcemia in patients with severe vitamin D deficiency, which should be corrected before administration. Its most common adverse effect is the acute phase response, seen in 30-40% of patients after their first dose, and much less commonly subsequently. Clinical trials in osteoporosis have not demonstrated increases in osteonecrosis of the jaw or in atypical femoral fractures. Observational databases are currently inadequate to determine whether these problems are increased in zoledronate users. Now available as a generic, zoledronate is a cost-effective agent for fracture prevention and for management of Paget's disease, but wider provision of infusion facilities is important to increase patient access. There is a need to further explore its potential for reducing cancer, cardiovascular disease and mortality, since these effects could be substantially more important than its skeletal actions.

Pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis and options for treatment

Glucocorticoids are widely used to suppress inflammation or the immune system. High doses and long-term use of glucocorticoids lead to an important and common iatrogenic complication, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, in a substantial proportion of patients. Glucocorticoids mainly increase bone resorption during the initial phase (the first year of treatment) by enhancing the differentiation and maturation of osteoclasts. Glucocorticoids also inhibit osteoblastogenesis and promote apoptosis of osteoblasts and osteocytes, resulting in decreased bone formation during long-term use. Several indirect effects of glucocorticoids on bone metabolism, such as suppression of production of insulin-like growth factor 1 or growth hormone, are involved in the pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Fracture risk assessment for all patients with long-term use of oral glucocorticoids is required. Non-pharmacological interventions to manage the risk of fracture should be prescribed to all patients, while pharmacological management is reserved for patients who have increased fracture risk. Various treatment options can be used, ranging from bisphosphonates to denosumab, as well as teriparatide. Finally, appropriate monitoring during treatment is also important.

Denosumab Versus Risedronate in Glucocorticoid-Induced Osteoporosis: Final Results of a Twenty-Four-Month Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Trial

Objective

Clinical trial results have shown that, in glucocorticoid‐treated patients, treatment with denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously once every 6 months (Q6M) increased spine and hip bone mineral density (BMD) at month 12 significantly more than treatment with risedronate 5 mg orally once daily (QD). The present analysis was performed to compare efficacy and characterize safety through month 24.

Methods

This phase III study enrolled men and women ≥18 years old who had received ≥7.5 mg daily prednisone or equivalent for <3 months (glucocorticoid‐initiating) or for ≥3 months (glucocorticoid‐continuing) before screening. All patients <50 years old had a history of osteoporotic fracture. Glucocorticoid‐continuing patients ≥50 years old had T scores of −2.0 or less (or −1.0 or less with fracture history). Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously Q6M or risedronate 5 mg orally QD for 24 months, with daily calcium and vitamin D.

Results

Of 795 patients, 590 (74.2%) completed the study (in the glucocorticoid‐initiating group, 109 of 145 patients treated with denosumab and 117 of 145 patients treated with risedronate; in the glucocorticoid‐continuing group, 186 of 253 patients treated with denosumab and 178 of 252 patients treated with risedronate). Denosumab was superior to risedronate in increasing lumbar spine and total hip BMD at all time points assessed, among glucocorticoid‐initiating patients (24‐month lumbar spine: BMD increase of 6.2% versus 1.7%, respectively [P < 0.001]; 24‐month total hip: BMD increase of 3.1% versus 0.0% [P < 0.001]) and among glucocorticoid‐continuing patients (24‐month lumbar spine: BMD increase of 6.4% versus 3.2% [P < 0.001]; 24‐month total hip: BMD increase of 2.9% versus 0.5% [P < 0.001]). Adverse events, serious adverse events (including infections), and fractures were similar between treatment groups.

Conclusion

Denosumab was superior to risedronate in terms of increases in spine and hip BMD through month 24, and the safety profile was similar between treatment groups. Denosumab may offer a new osteoporosis treatment option for glucocorticoid‐treated patients.

Korean Guideline for the Prevention and Treatment of Glucocorticoid-induced Osteoporosis

Background

To develop guidelines and recommendations to prevent and treat glucocorticoid (GC)-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in Korea.

Methods

The Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research and the Korean College of Rheumatology have developed this guideline based on Guidance for the Development of Clinical Practice Guidelines ver. 1.0 established by the National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. This guideline was developed by adapting previously published guidelines, and a systematic review and quality assessment were performed.

Results

This guideline applies to adults aged ≥19 years who are using or plan to use GCs. It does not include children and adolescents. An initial assessment of fracture risk should be performed within 6 months of initial GC use. Fracture risk should be estimated using the fracture-risk assessment tool (FRAX) after adjustments for GC dose, history of osteoporotic fractures, and bone mineral density (BMD) results. All patients administered with prednisolone or an equivalent medication at a dose ≥2.5 mg/day for ≥3 months are recommended to use adequate calcium and vitamin D during treatment. Patients showing a moderate-to-high fracture risk should be treated with additional medication for osteoporosis. All patients continuing GC therapy should undergo annual BMD testing, vertebral X-ray, and fracture risk assessment using FRAX. When treatment failure is suspected, switching to another drug should be considered.

Conclusions

This guideline is intended to guide clinicians in the prevention and treatment of GIOP.

Efficacy and Safety of Zoledronic Acid for Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

We conducted a meta-analysis based on eligible studies to assess the efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid treatment for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for eligible studies that assessed the efficacy of zoledronic acid in the prevention of fractures among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. The primary outcomes were new vertebral fracture, nonvertebral fracture, and hip fracture. Secondary outcomes were bone mineral density (BMD) and safety outcomes. A fixed-effect or random-effect model was used to pool the estimates according to the heterogeneity among the included studies. Eight randomized controlled trials, involving 13,335 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled results showed that treatment with zoledronic acid significantly reduced the incidences of nonvertebral fractures, vertebral fractures, and hip fractures, as compared with placebo. Zoledronic acid was also associated with significant improvement in BMD at lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, and trochanter. However, the incidence of any adverse events was higher in the zoledronic acid group than that in the control group, and serious adverse events were comparable between the 2 groups. This meta-analysis indicated that zoledronic acid could significantly reduce the fracture risk and increase BMD in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Furthermore, it would not result in serious adverse events. Zoledronic acid could be used as an effective and well-tolerated treatment for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Effects of alendronate and alfacalcidol on bone in patients with myasthenia gravis initiating glucocorticoids treatment

OBJECTIVE

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are the first-line treatment for myasthenia gravis (MG) and act as long-term immunosuppressants. However, GCs can induce osteoporosis and bone fractures. In this study, we evaluate the effects of oral alendronate and alfacalcidol, or alfacalcidol alone on the bone of Chinese patients with MG who will initiate treatment with GCs.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A total of 75 patients were included in this 12-month prospective, open-label, single-centre study. Patients with bone mineral density (BMD) T-score less than -1.0 at baseline were treated with 70 mg of alendronate per week. Patients with BMD T-score greater than -1.0 at baseline were included in the alfacalcidol-alone group. Patients in two groups were treated with 0.25 μg of alfacalcidol every other day and 600 mg of calcium daily.

RESULTS

After 12 months of treatment, the mean BMD of lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip increased by 3.4% (P = .002), 1.8% (P = .21) and 2.6% (P = .02), respectively, in alendronate group. In alfacalcidol-alone group, the mean BMD of lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip decreased by 6.1%, 3.2% and 3.3%, respectively (all P < .001 vs baseline).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated for the first time that treatment with alendronate combined with alfacalcidol significantly increased BMD, decreased bone turnover biomarker levels and reduced the occurrence of hypercalciuria in a large cohort of Chinese patients with MG who initiated treatment with glucocorticoids. However, treatment with alfacalcidol alone failed to prevent bone loss in patients with MG receiving glucocorticoid therapy.

Theranostic Bioabsorbable Bone Fixation Plate with Drug-Layered Double Hydroxide Nanohybrids

A bioabsorbable polymeric bone plate enabled with both diagnostic and therapeutic functionalities (radiopacity and sustained drug release, respectively) is proposed. To this end, a drug-inorganic nanohybrid (RS-LDH) is examined as a theranostic agent by intercalating an anti-resorptive bone remodeling drug, risedronate (RS) into a layered double hydroxide (LDH) via an ion-exchange reaction. The RS-LDH is prepared as a sheet with a biodegradable polymer, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), and is then attached onto the clinically approved bioabsorbable bone plate to produce the theranostic plate. Because of the presence of the metals in the LDH, the theranostic plate results in discernible in vivo X-ray images for up to four weeks after implantation. Concurrently, bone regeneration is also significantly improved compared with the other control groups, likely because of this material's sustained drug-release property. The theranostic plate is also largely biocompatible, similar to the plate already approved for clinical use. It is concluded that the combination of a biodegradable bone plate with RS-LDH nanohybrids can constitute a promising system with theranostic ability in both X-ray diagnosis and expedited bone repair.

Factors associated with the accuracy of self-reported osteoporosis in the community

We examined the agreement between self-reported osteoporosis and bone mineral density (BMD) results through dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) using data from a national representative sample taken from the US communities. Six-year data from the continuous National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2006, 2007-2008, and 2009-2010 were merged. Participants included adults 50 years of age or older whose data appeared in both questionnaire and medical examination data files. Self-reported osteoporosis was defined by an affirmative response to a question in the osteoporosis questionnaire then compared with BMD-defined osteoporosis, defined by BMD values taken from the examination data. Agreement between self-reported osteoporosis and DXA results were low. Kappa was only 0.24 (95 % confidence interval = 0.21-0.27), and sensitivity and positive predictive value were 28.0 and 40.8 %, respectively. When stratified by gender or age group, agreement remained poor. Self-report of osteoporosis would not be suitable for accurate prevalence estimates for osteoporosis regardless of gender or age group.

Bisphosphonates for steroid-induced osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparative Efficacy of Bisphosphonates to Prevent Fracture in Men with Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analyses

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is an under-recognized problem threatening men. Bisphosphonates are the main treatment but their comparative efficacy is unclear for men with osteoporosis. Therefore, we performed this systematic review with network meta-analyses to summarize the evidence of comparative efficacy of bisphosphonates in men with osteoporosis.

METHODS

We completed network meta-analyses with a frequentist model to compare the efficacy of different bisphosphonates. Randomized controlled trials investigating bisphosphonates used in men with osteoporosis were included. The primary outcome was the rate of patients with a new vertebral fracture. The secondary outcome was the rate of patients with a non-vertebral fracture, which was defined as any fractures reported other than vertebral fractures. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed to compare bisphosphonates with placebo. We included open-label studies in the analyses as a sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Ten trials were included, using alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid. No significant difference was found between any pairs of alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid for both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. Zoledronic acid ranked as the most effective in preventing vertebral fracture in primary osteoporosis. Risedronate ranked best in preventing non-vertebral fracture in both primary osteoporosis and corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis. In the sensitivity analyses with the open-label studies, the ranking order did not change.

CONCLUSION

The current evidence for bisphosphonates used in men with osteoporosis is inadequate. On the basis of the current evidence, zoledronic acid is most effective at preventing vertebral fractures, while risedronate has the highest possibility to rank the first in preventing non-vertebral fracture in men with primary osteoporosis and corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis. More well-designed studies are needed to test our findings and to better know the comparative efficacy of bisphosphonate to prevent vertebral fracture in men with osteoporosis.

Sclerostin-antibody treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis maintained bone mass and strength

This study was to determine if antibody against sclerostin (Scl-Ab) could prevent glucocorticoid (GC)-induced osteoporosis in mice. We found that Scl-Ab prevented GC-induced reduction in bone mass and bone strength and that the anabolic effects of Scl-Ab might be partially achieved through the preservation of osteoblast activity through autophagy.

INTRODUCTION

Glucocorticoids (GCs) inhibit bone formation by altering osteoblast and osteocyte cell activity and lifespan. A monoclonal antibody against sclerostin, Scl-Ab, increased bone mass in both preclinical animal and clinical studies in subjects with low bone mass. The objectives of this study were to determine if treatment with the Scl-Ab could prevent loss of bone mass and strength in a mouse model of GC excess and to elucidate if Scl-Ab modulated bone cell activity through autophagy.

METHODS

We generated reporter mice that globally expressed dsRed fused to LC3, a protein marker for autophagosomes, and evaluated the dose-dependent effects of GCs (0, 0.8, 2.8, and 4 mg/kg/day) and Scl-Ab on autophagic osteoblasts, bone mass, and bone strength.

RESULTS

GC treatment at 2.8 and 4 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone significantly lowered trabecular bone volume (Tb-BV/TV) at the lumbar vertebrae and distal femurs, cortical bone mass at the mid-shaft femur (FS), and cortical bone strength compared to placebo (PL). In mice treated with GC and Scl-Ab, Tb-BV/TV increased by 60-125 %, apparent bone strength of the lumbar vertebrae by 30-70 %, FS-BV by 10-18 %, and FS-apparent strength by 13-15 %, as compared to GC vehicle-treated mice. GC treatment at 4 mg/kg/day reduced the number of autophagic osteoblasts by 70 % on the vertebral trabecular bone surface compared to the placebo group (PL, GC 0 mg), and GC + Scl-Ab treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with Scl-Ab prevented GC-induced reduction in both trabecular and cortical bone mass and strength and appeared to maintain osteoblast activity through autophagy.

Male Osteoporosis in the Elderly

Osteoporosis is now recognized as an important public health problem in elderly men as fragility fractures are complicated by increased morbidity, mortality, and social costs. This review comprises an overview of recent findings in pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of male osteoporosis, with particular regard to the old population.

Bisphosphonates in the treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: pros

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

2014 update of recommendations on the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

OBJECTIVES

To update the recommendations on the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis issued in 2003 by the French National Authority for Health (HAS). This update was performed under the aegis of the Bone Section of the French Society for Rheumatology (SFR) and Osteoporosis Research and Information Group (GRIO), in collaboration with four French learned societies (primary-care, gastroenterology, internal medicine, and nephrology).

METHODS

A task force composed of members of the medical specialties involved in managing patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis conducted a systematic literature review according to the method developed by the HAS then used the results to develop updated recommendations.

RESULTS

These recommendations are intended for all physicians involved in the management of patients who are scheduled to start, or are taking, long-term glucocorticoid therapy (≥ 3 months) in any dose and for any reason. In postmenopausal women and men older than 50 years of age, treatment is warranted in the presence of any of the following risk factors for fracture: history of bone frailty fracture after 50 years of age, bone mineral density T-score ≤ −2.5 at one or more sites, age ≥ 70 years, and dosage ≥ 7.5 mg/d prednisone-equivalent for longer than 3 months. Bisphosphonates can be used in all these situations; teriparatide can be given as first-line therapy in patients at high fracture risk but is reimbursed by the French statutory health insurance system only in patients having two or more prevalent vertebral fractures. The fracture risk is lower in non-menopausal women and in men younger than 50 years of age,in whom treatment decisions should rest on a case-by-case evaluation.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations are intended to clarify the pharmacological management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: clinical data in relation to disease demographics, bone mineral density and fracture risk

INTRODUCTION

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is the most common type of secondary osteoporosis. Patient selection and the treatment choice remain to be controversial. None of the proposed management guidelines are widely accepted. We evaluate the available clinical data, the efficacy of current medication and we propose an overall algorithm for managing GIOP.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides a critical review of in vivo and clinical evidence regarding GIOP and developing evidence-based algorithm of treatment. Data base used includes MEDLINE® (1950 to May 2014).

EXPERT OPINION

Patient-specific treatment is the gold standard of care. Glucocorticoid (GC)-treated patients must comply with a healthy lifestyle and receive 1000 mg of calcium and at least 800 mg of Vitamin D daily. Bisphosphonate (BP) therapy is the current standard of care for prevention and treatment of GIOP. Most of bisphosphonates demonstrated benefit in lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) and some in hip BMD. Alendronate, risedronate and zoledronate showed vertebral anti-fracture efficacy in postmenopausal women and men. Scarce data however when compared head to head with BP efficacy. In post-menopausal women, early antiresorptive BP treatment appears to be efficient and safe. In premenopausal women and patients at high risk of fracture receiving long-term GC therapy however, teriparitide may be advised alternatively.

Prevention of glucocorticoid induced bone changes with beta-ecdysone

Beta-ecdysone (βEcd) is a phytoecdysteroid found in the dry roots and seeds of the asteraceae and achyranthes plants, and is reported to increase osteogenesis in vitro. Since glucocorticoid (GC) excess is associated with a decrease in bone formation, the purpose of this study was to determine if treatment with βEcd could prevent GC-induced osteoporosis. Two-month-old male Swiss-Webster mice (n=8-10/group) were randomized to either placebo or slow release prednisolone pellets (3.3mg/kg/day) and treated with vehicle control or βEcd (0.5mg/kg/day) for 21days. GC treatment inhibited age-dependent trabecular gain and cortical bone expansion and this was accompanied by a 30-50% lower bone formation rate (BFR) at both the endosteal and periosteal surfaces. Mice treated with only βEcd significantly increased bone formation on the endosteal and periosteal bone surfaces, and increased cortical bone mass were their controls to compare to GC alone. Concurrent treatment of βEcd and GC completely prevented the GC-induced reduction in BFR, trabecular bone volume and partially prevented cortical bone loss. In vitro studies determined that βEcd prevented the GC increase in autophagy of the bone marrow stromal cells as well as in whole bone. In summary, βEcd prevented GC induced changes in bone formation, bone cell viability and bone mass. Additional studies are warranted of βEcd for the treatment of GC induced bone loss.

Diagnosis and management of osteonecrosis of the jaw: a systematic review and international consensus

This work provides a systematic review of the literature from January 2003 to April 2014 pertaining to the incidence, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), and offers recommendations for its management based on multidisciplinary international consensus. ONJ is associated with oncology-dose parenteral antiresorptive therapy of bisphosphonates (BP) and denosumab (Dmab). The incidence of ONJ is greatest in the oncology patient population (1% to 15%), where high doses of these medications are used at frequent intervals. In the osteoporosis patient population, the incidence of ONJ is estimated at 0.001% to 0.01%, marginally higher than the incidence in the general population (<0.001%). New insights into the pathophysiology of ONJ include antiresorptive effects of BPs and Dmab, effects of BPs on gamma delta T-cells and on monocyte and macrophage function, as well as the role of local bacterial infection, inflammation, and necrosis. Advances in imaging include the use of cone beam computerized tomography assessing cortical and cancellous architecture with lower radiation exposure, magnetic resonance imaging, bone scanning, and positron emission tomography, although plain films often suffice. Other risk factors for ONJ include glucocorticoid use, maxillary or mandibular bone surgery, poor oral hygiene, chronic inflammation, diabetes mellitus, ill-fitting dentures, as well as other drugs, including antiangiogenic agents. Prevention strategies for ONJ include elimination or stabilization of oral disease prior to initiation of antiresorptive agents, as well as maintenance of good oral hygiene. In those patients at high risk for the development of ONJ, including cancer patients receiving high-dose BP or Dmab therapy, consideration should be given to withholding antiresorptive therapy following extensive oral surgery until the surgical site heals with mature mucosal coverage. Management of ONJ is based on the stage of the disease, size of the lesions, and the presence of contributing drug therapy and comorbidity. Conservative therapy includes topical antibiotic oral rinses and systemic antibiotic therapy. Localized surgical debridement is indicated in advanced nonresponsive disease and has been successful. Early data have suggested enhanced osseous wound healing with teriparatide in those without contraindications for its use. Experimental therapy includes bone marrow stem cell intralesional transplantation, low-level laser therapy, local platelet-derived growth factor application, hyperbaric oxygen, and tissue grafting.

New strategies for osteoporosis patients previously managed with strontium ranelate

The aim of this article is to describe potential alternatives to patients no longer eligible for management with strontium ranelate for osteoporosis according to the recommendations by the European Medicines Agency. A systematic search of Pubmed was done for papers on fracture efficacy of various treatments for osteoporosis, and potential harms especially in terms of cardiovascular events and stroke. The results showed that drugs more efficacious in terms of relative risk reduction of fractures than strontium ranelate were alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, and denosumab. Raloxifene, as for strontium, may be associated with an increased risk of deep venous thromboembolism and fatal stroke. In terms of cardiovascular events special attention may be given to calcium supplements. Thus, patients at risk of stroke and ischemic cardiac events such as acute myocardial infarction should not use strontium ranelate. Ideally more efficacious drugs in terms of fracture reduction should be used such as alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate or denosumab. Raloxifene may pose a special problem as this too may be associated with an increased risk of fatal strokes. Other less-potent drugs in terms of fracture reduction should only be used if no alternatives are available (ibandronate, pamidronate, clodronate). Parathyroid hormone or analogs may be used for a limited time interval in specially selected patients and needs to be followed up with antiresorptive treatment to prevent loss of the bone gained. However, it should be remembered that no head-to-head comparison studies exist.

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

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

Glucocorticoids and bone: local effects and systemic implications

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are highly effective in the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune conditions but their therapeutic use is limited by numerous adverse effects. Recent insights into the mechanisms of action of both endogenous and exogenous GCs on bone cells have unlocked new approaches to the development of effective strategies for the prevention and treatment of GC-induced osteoporosis. Furthermore, topical studies in rodents indicate that the osteoblast-derived peptide, osteocalcin, plays a central role in the pathogenesis of GC-induced diabetes and obesity. These exciting findings mechanistically link the detrimental effects of GCs on bone and energy metabolism. In this article we review the physiology and pathophysiology of GC action on bone cells, and discuss current and emerging concepts regarding the molecular mechanisms underlying adverse effects of GCs such as osteoporosis and diabetes.

Intravenous treatment with ibandronate normalizes bone matrix mineralization and reduces cortical porosity after two years in male osteoporosis: a paired biopsy study

The spectrum of therapeutic options and the amount of clinical trials for male osteoporosis (mOP) is lower than those for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Therefore, we examined the effects of 24 months of ibandronate (IBN) treatment (3 mg/3 mL intravenously every 3 months) on bone material quality in 19 subjects with mOP within an open-label, single-center, prospective phase III study (Eudract number 2006-006692-20). Patients (median age [25th, 75th percentiles] 53.0 [44.5; 57.0] years) were included if they had low bone mineral density (BMD) and/or at least one low trauma fracture and no secondary cause of osteoporosis. The primary endpoint was to evaluate IBN effects on cancellous (Cn.) and cortical (Ct.) bone mineralization density distribution (BMDD) based on quantitative backscattered electron imaging (qBEI) of paired transiliacal bone biopsies (baseline, 24 months). Secondary endpoints included changes in areal bone mineral density (BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) and serum markers of bone turnover including type I collagen peptides CrossLaps (CTX), procollagen type 1 amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP), and osteocalcin (OC). At baseline, cancellous bone matrix mineralization from mOP was lower than published reference data (mean degree of mineralization Cn.CaMean -1.8%, p < 0.01). IBN treatment increased calcium concentrations versus baseline (Cn.CaMean +2.4%, Ct.CaMean, +3.0% both p < 0.01), and reduced heterogeneity of mineralization (Cn.CaWidth -14%, p = 0.044; Ct.CaWidth, -16%, p = 0.001), leading to cancellous BMDD within normal range. IBN treatment was associated with a decrease in porosity of mineralized cortical tissue (-25%, p = 0.01); increases in BMD at the lumbar spine, the femoral neck, and the total hip (+3.3%, +1.9%, and +5.6%, respectively, p ≤ 0.01); and reductions in CTX (-37.5%), P1NP (-44.4%), and OC (-36.3%, all p < 0.01). Our BMDD findings are in line with the reduction of bone turnover markers and the increase in BMD by IBN in our patients and suggest that the latter mainly reflects the increase in matrix mineralization and the reduction of cortical porosity in this cohort with mOP.

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.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: mechanisms, management, and future perspectives

Glucocorticoids are widely used for their unsurpassed anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. However, the therapeutic use of glucocorticoids is almost always limited by substantial adverse outcomes such as osteoporosis, diabetes, and obesity. These unwanted outcomes are a major dilemma for clinicians because improvements in the primary disorder seem to be achievable only by accepting substantial adverse effects that are often difficult to prevent or treat. To understand the pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, it is necessary to consider that the actions of glucocorticoids on bone and mineral metabolism are strongly dose and time dependent. At physiological concentrations, endogenous glucocorticoids are key regulators of mesenchymal cell differentiation and bone development, with additional regulatory roles in renal and intestinal calcium handling. However, at supraphysiological concentrations, glucocorticoids affect the same systems in different and often unfavourable ways. For many years, these anabolic and catabolic actions of glucocorticoids on bone were deemed paradoxical. In this Review, we highlight recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the physiology and pathophysiology of glucocorticoid action on the skeleton and discuss present and future management strategies for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Clinical experience with intravenous zoledronic acid in the treatment of male osteoporosis: evidence and opinions

Osteoporosis frequently remains underrecognized and undertreated in men. Most osteoporosis-related fractures could be prevented if men at risk would be diagnosed, treated, and remained compliant with therapy. Bisphosphonates, the mainstay of osteoporosis treatment, are potent antiresorptive agents that inhibit osteoclast activity, suppress in vivo markers of bone turnover, increase bone mineral density, decrease fractures, and likely improve survival in men with osteoporosis. The focus of the article is on intravenous zoledronic acid, which may be a preferable alternative to oral bisphosphonate therapy in patients with cognitive dysfunction, the inability to sit upright, polypharmacy, significant gastrointestinal pathology or suspected medication noncompliance. Zoledronic acid is approved in the United States (US) and European Union (EU) as an annual 5 mg intravenous infusion to treat osteoporosis in men. The zoledronic acid 4 mg intravenous dose has been studied in the prevention of bone loss associated with androgen deprivation therapy. This article reviews the evidence for zoledronic acid, currently the most potent bisphosphonate available for clinical use, and its therapeutic effects in the treatment of men with osteoporosis.

Male osteoporosis: A review

Osteoporosis in men is a heterogeneous disease that has received little attention. However, one third of worldwide hip fractures occur in the male population. This problem is more prevalent in people over 70 years of age. The etiology can be idiopathic or secondary to hypogonadism, vitamin D deficiency and inadequate calcium intake, hormonal treatments for prostate cancer, use of toxic and every disease or drug use that alters bone metabolism.Risk factors such as a previous history of fragility fracture should be assessed for the diagnosis. However, risk factors in men are very heterogeneous. There are significant differences in the pharmacological treatment of osteoporosis between men and women fundamentally due to the level of evidence in published trials supporting each treatment. New treatments will offer new therapeutic prospects. The goal of this work is a revision of the present status knowledge about male osteoporosis.

Efficacy of intravenous zoledronic acid in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of zoledronic acid in treatment and prevention of osteoporosis with placebo.

METHODS

Random control trials regarding zoledronic acid in treatment of osteoporosis were retrieved by selecting Medline, EMbase and Pubmed databases till April 2012. The RevMan software was used for all of the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 9 trials were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled effect showed that zoledronic acid could increase the bone mineral density by 2.98 times compared with placebo, and reduce the rate of fracture in patients by 32%. The results should the zoledronic acid intervention had significantly less serious adverse events than controls, and the odds ratio was 0.81 (0.76-0.87). The longer term intervention, more than 12 months intervention, could gain a better prevention effect for osteoporosis (OR, 95%CI for BMD was 3.35, 2.77-3.92; for fracture was 0.67, 0.54-0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

This present study shows that zoledronic acid could be effective approach in the prevention of osteoporosis, and could increase the bone mineral density and reduce the risk of fracture.

Male osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is now recognized as a major threat to health in aging men. Morbidity and mortality, particularly following hip fracture, are substantial. Although trabecular bone loss starts in early adulthood, loss of cortical bone only seems to occur from midlife onwards. Declining bioavailable estradiol levels plays an integral role in male age-associated bone loss. Both pharmacologic and supportive care interventions are important for optimal care in men at an increased fracture risk.