Favorable skeletal benefit/risk of long-term denosumab therapy: A virtual-twin analysis of fractures prevented relative to skeletal safety events observed

Inhibition of PPP1R15A alleviates osteoporosis via suppressing RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis

Osteoporosis results from overactivation of osteoclasts. There are currently few drug options for treatment of this disease. Since the successful development of allosteric inhibitors, phosphatases have become attractive therapeutic targets. Protein phosphatase 1, regulatory subunit 15 A (PPP1R15A), is a stress-responsive protein, which promotes the UPR (unfolded protein response) and restores protein homeostasis. In this study we investigated the role of PPP1R15A in osteoporosis and osteoclastogenesis. Ovariectomy (OVX)-induced osteoporosis mouse model was established, osteoporosis was evaluated in the left femurs using micro-CT. RANKL-stimulated osteoclastogenesis was used as in vitro models. We showed that PPP1R15A expression was markedly increased in BMMs derived from OVX mice and during RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis in vitro. Knockdown of PPP1R15A or application of Sephin1 (a PPP1R15A allosteric inhibitor in a phase II clinical trial) significantly inhibited osteoclastogenesis in vitro. Sephin1 (0.78, 3.125 and 12.5 μM) dose-dependently mitigated the changes in NF-κB, MAPK, and c-FOS and the subsequent nuclear factor of activated T cells 1 (NFATc1) translocation in RANKL-stimulated BMMs. Both Sephin1 and PPP1R15A knockdown increased the phosphorylated form of eukaryotic initiation factor 2α (eIF2α); knockdown of eIF2α reduced the inhibitory effects of Sephin1 on NFATc1-luc transcription and osteoclast formation. Furthermore, Sephin1 or PPP1R15A knockdown suppressed osteoclastogenesis in CD14+ monocytes from osteoporosis patients. In OVX mice, injection of Sephin1 (4, 8 mg/kg, i.p.) every two days for 6 weeks significantly inhibited bone loss, and restored bone destruction and decreased TRAP-positive cells. This study has identified PPP1R15A as a novel target for osteoclast differentiation, and genetic inhibition or allosteric inhibitors of PPP1R15A, such as Sephin1, can be used to treat osteoporosis. This study revealed that PPP1R15A expression was increased in osteoporosis in both human and mice. Inhibition of PPP1R15A by specific knockdown or an allosteric inhibitor Sephin1 mitigated murine osteoclast formation in vitro and attenuated ovariectomy-induced osteoporosis in vivo. PPP1R15A inhibition also suppressed pathogenic osteoclastogenesis in CD14+ monocytes from osteoporosis patients. These results identify PPP1R15A as a novel regulator of osteoclastogenesis and a valuable therapeutic target for osteoporosis.

Biologic Antiresorptive: Denosumab

Background

Osteoporosis is an age-related common bone disorder characterized by low bone mineral density and increased fragility fracture risk. Various Antiresorptive medications are being used to target osteoclast mediated bone resorption to prevent bone loss and reduce fracture risk.

About Denosumab

Denosumab is a novel biological antiresorptive drug that belongs to the class of monoclonal antibodies. It binds to and inhibits the cytokine receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL), which is requisite for osteoclast differentiation, function and survival.

Effectiveness

Denosumab has been shown to be a potent and effective therapy for osteoporosis, with clinical trial data demonstrating significant improvement in bone mineral density (BMD) and reductions in fracture risk at various skeletal sites for more than 10 years of treatment.

Safety Profile

Denosumab has a favourable benefit/risk profile, with low rates of complications such as infection, atypical femoral fracture and osteonecrosis of the jawbone.

Challenges

However, denosumab treatment requires continuous administration, as discontinuation leads to rapid bone mineral loss and increased risk of multiple vertebral fractures due to rebound of bone turnover. Therefore, modification to another anti-osteoporosis drug therapy after denosumab discontinuation is required to maintain bone health.

Conclusion

Denosumab is a promising biological antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis that offers high efficacy and safety, but also poses challenges for long-term management.

Mechanistic advances in osteoporosis and anti-osteoporosis therapies

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

Zoledronic acid and denosumab for periprosthetic bone mineral density loss after joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) loss after total hip arthroplasty (THA) may threaten the survival of implants. Zoledronic acid (ZA) and denosumab were effective in reducing bone loss in conditions associated with accelerated bone turnover by inhibiting osteoclast activity. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficiency and safety of ZA and denosumab for periprosthetic BMD loss after THA.

METHODS

A systematic search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) associated with ZA or denosumab and THA was performed in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Web of Science from 1980 to 2022. Meta-analysis was performed by the Cochrane Review Manager 5 (RevMan) version 5.41. Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADEpro were applied for methodological quality and overall evidence quality, respectively.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs involving a total of 480 patients were finally included and analyzed. The pooled data that demonstrated significantly less periprosthetic BMD loss in Gruen zone 7 occurred in the intervention group patients than in the control group patients at 3 months (MD = 4.30, 95% CI: 1.78-6.82, P = 0.0008), 6 months (MD = 7.71, 95% CI: 5.41-10.02, P < 0.00001), and 12 months (MD = 8.19, 95% CI: 5.97-10.42, P < 0.00001) after THA. No serious adverse events (AEs) were observed.

CONCLUSION

In the current analysis with evidence on the efficacy and safety of ZA and denosumab, the authors recommend the use of ZA or denosumab treatment for periprosthetic bone mineral density loss.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022369273.

Long-term consequences of osteoporosis therapy with denosumab

Denosumab (DMAb) is a human monoclonal antibody used as an antiresorptive drug in the treatment of osteoporosis. Approval at a dosage of 60 mg every 6 months was based on the results of the randomized, placebo-controlled trial (FREEDOM). The design of this 3-year study included an extension for up to 10 years. Those who were randomized to DMAb continued on drug, while those who were randomized to placebo transitioned to DMAb. The 10-year experience with DMAb provides data on efficacy of drug in terms of reduced fractures and continued increases in bone mineral density (BMD). The 10-year experience with denosumab also provides information about rare complications associated with the use of DMAb, such as osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), and atypical femoral fractures (AFF). This experience provided new insights into the reversibility of effects upon discontinuation without follow-on therapy with another agent. This review focuses upon prolonged treatment with DMAb, with regard to beneficial effects on fracture reduction and safety. Additionally, its use in patients with impaired renal function, compare its results with those of bisphosphonates (BPs), the occurrence/frequency of complications, in addition to the use of different tools, from imaging techniques to histological findings, to evaluate its effects on bone tissue.

Where is bone science taking us?

Bone science has over the last decades unraveled many important pathways in bone and mineral metabolism and the interplay between genetic factors and the environment. Some of these discoveries have led to the development of pharmacological treatments of osteoporosis and rare bone diseases. Other scientific avenues have uncovered a role for the gut microbiome in regulating bone mass, which have led to investigations on the possible therapeutic role of probiotics in the prevention of osteoporosis. Huge advances have been made in identifying the genes that cause rare bone diseases, which in some cases have led to therapeutic interventions. Advances have also been made in understanding the genetic basis of the more common polygenic bone diseases, including osteoporosis and Paget's disease of bone (PDB). Polygenic profiles are used for establishing genetic risk scores aiming at early diagnosis and intervention, but also in Mendelian randomization (MR) studies to investigate both desired and undesired effects of targets for drug design.

Risk of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw Under Denosumab Compared to Bisphosphonates in Patients With Osteoporosis

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is a rare but serious adverse event associated with antiresorptive treatment. There is little evidence regarding the incidence of ONJ among patients with osteoporosis who are treated with denosumab versus bisphosphonates (BPs). The aim of this study was to determine the risk of ONJ in a real-world population. Subjects who underwent at least one dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) examination were included in the osteoporosis register of the Swiss Society of Rheumatology between January 1, 2015, and September 30, 2019. Statistical analyses included incidence rates, rate ratios, and hazard ratios for ONJ, considering sequential therapies and drug holidays as covariates. Among 9956 registered patients, 3068 (89% female, median age 69 years [63 to 76]) were treated with BPs or denosumab for a cumulative duration of 11,101 and 4236 patient-years, respectively. Seventeen cases of ONJ were identified: 12 in patients receiving denosumab at the time of ONJ diagnosis and 5 in patients receiving oral or intravenous BP therapy. The diagnosis of ONJ was confirmed by independent and blinded maxillofacial surgeons, using the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons case definition of ONJ. The incidence of ONJ per 10,000 observed patient-years was 28.3 in patients receiving denosumab and 4.5 in patients with BP-associated ONJ, yielding a rate ratio of 6.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1 to 22.8), p < 0.001. Nine of 12 patients who developed ONJ during denosumab treatment had been pretreated with BPs, but none of the 5 patients with BP-related ONJ had previously received denosumab. The risk of ONJ was higher in patients receiving denosumab therapy compared with BPs (hazard ratio 3.49, 95% CI 1.16 to 10.47, p = 0.026). Previous BP therapy before switching to denosumab may be an additional risk factor for ONJ development. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Macrophage Involvement in Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (MRONJ): A Comprehensive, Short Review

Simple Summary

Medication-related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (MRONJ) is a significant complication mainly of antiresorptive medications used in the management of bone diseases. MRONJ development may be accompanied by pain, eating discomfort, self-consciousness, and other symptoms that overall disturb patients’ everyday life. Hence, MRONJ occurrence is of growing clinical concern and affects treatment decisions. Although MRONJ has been extensively studied since being first reported in 2003, the mechanisms of disease pathogenesis have not yet been determined and disease management is mostly empirical. Recent data investigate the effects of antiresorptive medications on immune system components including macrophages and introduce these cells as key players in MRONJ pathogenesis. Considering macrophage versatility, developmental plasticity, and its pivotal role in immune response, the current short review focused on the potential involvement of these multi-potential cells in MRONJ pathogenesis. Understanding the complex role of macrophages in MRONJ pathophysiology will add new valuable data on disease prevention and control.

Abstract

Antiresorptive agents such as bisphosphonates (BP) and denosumab are commonly prescribed for the management of primary bone malignancy, bone metastasis, osteoporosis, Paget disease, or other bone disorders. Medication-related osteonecrosis of the Jaws (MRONJ) is a rare but significant complication of antiresorptive medications. Duration, dose, and antiresorptive potency as well as concomitant diseases, additional medications, and local factors affect MRONJ incidence and severity. MRONJ pathophysiology is still poorly understood. Nevertheless, decreased bone resorption due to osteoclastic inhibition along with trauma, infection/inflammation, or blood supply inhibition are considered synergistic factors for disease development. In addition, previous data research examined the effects of antiresorptive medication on immune system components and introduced potential alterations on immune response as novel elements in MRONJ pathogenesis. Considering that macrophages are the first cells in the nonspecific immune response, it is not surprising that these multifaceted players attracted increased attention in MRONJ research recently. This current review attempted to elucidate the effects of antiresorptive medications on several aspects of macrophage activity in relation to the complex inflammatory microenvironment of MRONJ. Collectively, unravelling the mode of action and extent of macrophages’ potential contribution in MRONJ occurrence will provide novel insight in disease pathogenesis and potentially identify intrinsic therapeutic targets.

Denosumab in the Treatment of Osteoporosis: 10 Years Later: A Narrative Review

The fully human monoclonal antibody denosumab was approved for treatment of osteoporosis in 2010 on the basis of its potent antiresorptive activity, which produces clinically meaningful increases in bone mineral density (BMD) and reduces fracture risk at key skeletal sites. At that time, questions remained regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of this receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL) inhibitor; and with clinical experience, new questions have arisen regarding its optimal use. Here, we examine these questions through the lens of data from the FREEDOM trial program and other studies to determine where denosumab fits in the osteoporosis treatment landscape. Clinical consensus and evidentiary support have grown for denosumab as a highly effective anti-osteoporosis therapy for patients at high risk of fracture. In the 10-year FREEDOM Extension study, denosumab treatment produced progressive incremental increases in BMD, sustained low rates of vertebral fracture, and further reduction in nonvertebral fracture risk without increased risk of infection, cancer, or immunogenicity. There was no evidence that suppression of bone turnover or mineralization was excessive, and rates of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) and atypical femoral fracture (AFF) were very low. It is now recognized, however, that transitioning to another anti-osteoporosis therapy after denosumab discontinuation is essential to mitigate a transient rebound of bone turnover causing rapid BMD loss and increased risk of multiple vertebral fractures (MVFs). Taken together, the available data show that denosumab has a favorable benefit/risk profile and is a versatile agent for preventing osteoporotic fractures in the short and long term.

Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (MRONJ): Are Antiresorptive Drugs the Main Culprits or Only Accomplices? The Triggering Role of Vitamin D Deficiency

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is a severe clinical condition characterized mostly but not exclusively by an area of exposed bone in the mandible and/or maxilla that typically does not heal over a period of 6-8 weeks. The diagnosis is first of all clinical, but an imaging feedback such as Magnetic Resonance is essential to confirm clinical suspicions. In the last few decades, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) has been widely discussed. From the first case reported in 2003, many case series and reviews have appeared in the scientific literature. Almost all papers concerning this topic conclude that bisphosphonates (BPs) can induce this severe clinical condition, particularly in cancer patients. Nevertheless, the exact mechanism by which amino-BPs would be responsible for ONJ is still debatable. Recent findings suggest a possible alternative explanation for BPs role in this pattern. In the present work we discuss how a condition of osteomalacia and low vitamin D levels might be determinant factors.

Should denosumab treatment for osteoporosis be continued indefinitely?

Denosumab was approved for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in 2010, based on the FREEDOM study, which indicated a benefit in terms of increased bone mineral density and reduced risk of major osteoporotic fracture. In the initial clinical studies it was noted that discontinuation of denosumab can lead to a rebound of bone turnover markers and loss of accrued bone mineral density. An increased risk of fractures (multiple vertebral fractures in particular) associated with discontinuation was noted after approval and marketing of denosumab. For many patients experiencing gain in bone mineral density and fracture prevention while taking denosumab, there is no reason to stop therapy. However, discontinuation of denosumab may happen due to non-adherence; potential lack of efficacy in an individual; where reimbursement for therapy is limited to those with bone mineral density in the osteoporosis range, when assessment reveals this has been exceeded; or patient or physician concern regarding side effects. This review paper aims to discuss these concerns and to summarize the data available to date regarding sequential osteoporosis therapy following denosumab cessation to reduce the risk of multiple vertebral fracture.

Effect of Denosumab on Glucose Homeostasis in Postmenopausal Women with Breast Cancer Treated with Aromatase Inhibitors: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors in women with breast cancer have been associated with cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL), increased fracture risk, and impairment of glucose metabolism. Denosumab (Dmab), a monoclonal antibody against RANKL, which is a key regulator of the osteoclast activity, is effective as an antiresorptive agent in the treatment of CTIBL. Since RANKL/RANK pathway may contribute to the pathogenesis of glucometabolic disorders, it has been suggested that Dmab may improve glucose homeostasis. Our pilot study evaluated the effect of a single administration of 60 mg Dmab on glucose metabolism in a cohort of women with breast cancer treated with aromatase inhibitors.

METHODS

Fifteen postmenopausal nondiabetic women were prospectively enrolled. Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and metabolic parameters, including FGF21, were assessed at baseline and one month after Dmab injection. Midterm glucose control was evaluated by measuring glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels 5 months after Dmab.

RESULTS

Parameters of glucose metabolism were not different one month after Dmab but circulating FGF21 levels significantly decreased (128.5 ± 46.8 versus 100.2 ± 48.8 pg/mL; p=0.016). Considering patients with insulin resistance at baseline (HOMA-IR > 2.5 and Matsuda Index < 2.5; n = 5), reduced mean fasting insulin levels (16.3 ± 4.9 versus 13.5 ± 3.5 mcU/mL; p=0.029) and increased insulin sensitivity index QUICKI (0.317 ± 0.013 versus 0.327 ± 0.009; p=0.025) were found. Nonetheless, HbA1c increased 5 months after Dmab (36.0 ± 2.3 versus 39.6 ± 3.1 mmol/mol; p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Although RANKL blockade induced a short-term positive effect on insulin sensitivity, particularly in insulin-resistant patients, a benefit on long-term glucose metabolism was not evident. In conclusion, Dmab is safe for glucose metabolism in aromatase inhibitor-treated women with breast cancer.

Failure of Oral Risedronate Therapy to Prevent Spontaneous Vertebral Fracture in a Patient Ceasing Denosumab: A Cautionary Case

Denosumab is a highly effective treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis, significantly improving BMD and reducing risk of fracture. However, denosumab's effect is transient with the risk of a rebound increase in bone turnover following withdrawal of this potent RANKL inhibitor. This poses challenges, particularly in individuals seeking to discontinue denosumab, such as those experiencing a direct complication of prolonged antiresorptive therapy or those in whom an antiresorptive drug holiday would be ordinarily considered. Bisphosphonate strategies to mitigate postdenosumab bone loss are being actively studied. We describe the case of a 73‐year‐old woman who developed a spontaneous vertebral fracture following denosumab discontinuation, despite prolonged treatment with bisphosphonate therapy both before her course of denosumab (20 years of use) and following denosumab discontinuation (1 year of use). This is a cautionary case seeking to highlight uncertainties around the safe withdrawal of denosumab therapy despite intervening treatment with bisphosphonates. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.