Romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Effect of Hyperprolactinemia on Bone Metabolism: Focusing on Osteopenia/Osteoporosis

Prolactin is a hormone secreted from lactotroph cells in the anterior pituitary gland to induce lactation after birth. Hyperprolactinemia unrelated to lactation is a common cause of amenorrhea in women of a childbearing age, and a consequent decrease in the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) by a high prolactin level can result in decreased bone mineral density. Osteoporosis is a common skeletal disorder characterized by decreased bone mineral density (BMD) and quality, which results in decreased bone strength. In patients with hyperprolactinemia, changes in BMD can be induced indirectly by the inhibition of the GnRH-gonadal axis due to increased prolactin levels or by the direct action of prolactin on osteoblasts and, possibly, osteoclast cells. This review highlights the recent work on bone remodeling and discusses our knowledge of how prolactin modulates these interactions, with a brief literature review on the relationship between prolactin and bone metabolism and suggestions for new possibilities.

Efficacy of the Combination of Teriparatide and Denosumab in the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Meta-Analysis

Aim: Evidence on the efficacy of combination treatment of teriparatide and denosumab for osteoporosis remains controversial. We aim to compare the efficacy between the combination treatment and monotherapy among patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Methods and results: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to 26 January 2022, for relevant studies. This meta-analysis reviewed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the combination treatment of teriparatide and denosumab in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The articles were examined individually by two reviewers, and the relevant data was extracted. We combined weighted mean difference (WMD) for bone mineral density (BMD) using random- or fixed- effect models and conducted subgroup analyses. Sensitivity analyses were performed, and possible publication bias was also assessed. Overall, combination treatment enhanced the mean percent change of bone mineral density in lumbar spine than monotherapy (WMD = 2.91, 95%CI: 1.983.83; p = 0.00). And, combination treatment has been beneficial for enhancing the mean percent change of BMD in hip (WMD = 3.19, 95%CI: 2.25∼4.13; p = 0.00). There was no significant difference between combination treatment and monotherapy in terms of the adverse events (RR = 0.81, 95%CI: 0.45∼1.45; p = 0.472).

Conclusion: The meta-analysis indicates that combination treatment led to greater BMD at the lumbar spine and hip in comparison to monotherapy, without an increased incidence of adverse events.

Systematic Review Registration: (https://inplasy.com/), identifier (Inplasy Protocol 2734).

Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: ACOG Clinical Practice Guideline No. 2

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

TARGET POPULATION

Postmenopausal patients with primary osteoporosis.

METHODS

This guideline was developed using an a priori protocol in conjunction with a writing team consisting of two specialists in obstetrics and gynecology appointed by the ACOG Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines-Gynecology and one external subject matter expert. ACOG medical librarians completed a comprehensive literature search for primary literature within Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE. Studies that moved forward to the full-text screening stage were assessed by two authors from the writing team based on standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent quality assessment, and a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) evidence-to-decision framework was applied to interpret and translate the evidence into recommendation statements.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This Clinical Practice Guideline includes updated recommendations on who should receive osteoporosis pharmacotherapy, the benefits and risks of available pharmacotherapy options, treatment monitoring and follow-up, and the role of calcium and vitamin D in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Recommendations are classified by strength and evidence quality. Ungraded Good Practice Points are included to provide guidance when a formal recommendation could not be made because of inadequate or nonexistent evidence.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of Romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis

The study was conducted to illustrate the effect of Romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. Romosozumab decreased the incidence of vertebral, nonvertebral, and clinical fractures significantly. In addition, decreased incidence of falls and increased bone mineral density at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck was observed. Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that acts against the sclerostin pathway leading to enhanced bone formation and reduced bone resorption in patients with osteoporosis. Electronic search was performed on Medline (via PubMed), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and clinicaltrials.gov, till May 2020, for RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of Romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis. RCTs evaluating the effect of Romosozumab on fractures and bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. Meta-analysis was performed by Cochrane review manager 5 (RevMan) version 5.3. Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool and GRADE pro-GDT were applied for methodological quality and overall evidence quality, respectively. One hundred seventy-nine studies were screened, and 10 eligible studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 6137 patients in romosozumab group and 5732 patients in control group. Romosozumab significantly reduced the incidence of vertebral fractures [OR = 0.43 (95%CI = 0.35-0.52), High-quality evidence], nonvertebral fractures [OR = 0.78 (95%CI = 0.66-0.92), High quality], and clinical fractures [OR = 0.70 (95%CI = 0.60-0.82), High quality] at 24 months. Significant reduction in incidence risk of falls [OR = 0.87 (95%CI = 0.78-0.96), High quality] was observed with romosozumab. Bone mineral density was significantly increased in the romosozumab treated groups at lumbar spine [MD = 12.66 (95%CI = 12.66-12.67), High quality], total hip [MD = 5.69 (95%CI = 5.68 - 5.69), Moderate quality], and femoral neck [MD = 5.18 (95%CI = 5.18-5.19), Moderate quality] at 12 months. The total adverse events [RR = 0.98(95%CI = 0.96-1.01), Moderate quality] and serious adverse events [RR = 0.98(95%CI = 0.88-1.08), Moderate quality] with romosozumab were comparable to the control group. The current analysis with evidence on efficacy and safety of Romosozumab, authors opine to recommend the use of Romosozumab treatment for post-menopausal osteoporosis.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019112196.

Postmenopausal osteoporosis: risk evaluation and treatment options

Postmenopausal osteoporosis is a chronic progressive condition characterized by reduced bone mass and impaired bone quality, leading to an increased risk of fragility fractures. Osteoporotic fractures reduce quality of life and are associated with high morbidity, mortality and economic burden. Primary and secondary prevention interventions are always recommended starting from the premenopausal age, in women after menopause, however, it is essential to develop a long-term intervention strategy that allows to identify patients at high risk of fracture and the choice of therapy based on the estimated risk. This narrative review described the tools for layering the management approach in relation to low, high and very high fracture risk. Several medications are now available for the treatment of osteoporosis and the prevention of fractures; the knowledge of the efficacy, safety and additional benefits profile of the individual preparations allows an appropriate choice between the different drugs available and the possibility of adapting the prescription to the lifetime fracture risk spectrum. From the literature it emerges that menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), TSEC combination and SERMs can be drugs of choice to counteract postmenopausal bone loss in younger women or at low risk of fracture, while bisphosphonates and denosumab are appropriate for women with high risk or at an older age. Therapy with denosumab and anabolic agents such as teriparatide and romosozumab is particularly indicated for subjects with very high risk of fracture.

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.

Medical treatment of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a common chronic condition that markedly increases the risk of fractures. Osteoporotic-related fractures increase morbidity and mortality and impair quality of life. Therefore, a correct approach for fracture prevention seems mandatory. Lifestyle changes should be recommended to all patients, including weight reduction if patients are obese/overweight, increasing physical activity and avoiding alcohol consumption and smoking. Additionally, calcium and vitamin D3 should be prescribed until the vitamin D deficit is resolved. Osteoporosis treatment options mainly include antiresorptives (i.e. estrogens, selective estrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates, denosumab) and anabolic agents (i.e. teriparatide, abaloparatide, romosozumab). Although presenting differences in efficacy and side effects, they have all been shown to increase bone mineral density (BMD) and to reduce osteoporotic-related fractures. Monotherapy with antiresorptive agents, particularly oral bisphosphonates, should be considered routinely as the first option for treatment of postmenopausal women. However, in the case of side effects, therapeutic failure or the need for long-term use, anabolic agents may be considered. In high-risk patients, anabolic agents may be considered as an initial therapeutic option. The combination of antiresorptive and anabolic agents may be useful to increase BMD compared with monotherapy, but more information is warranted to determine the effects on fracture risk.

Osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis in women

Therapy to activate bone formation is required to reverse and restore the damaged bone architecture found in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The osteoanabolic drugs include teriparatide, which has been available for several years, and abaloparatide and romosozumab, novel osteoanabolic drugs that have become available more recently. By stimulating bone formation, these drugs produce greater increases in bone mass and bone strength, and they do so more quickly compared to the commonly used anti-remodeling (also called antiresorptive) drugs such as bisphosphonates. In head-to-head trials, teriparatide and romosozumab reduce fracture risk more effectively than do oral bisphosphonates in women with osteoporosis and high fracture risk. Osteoanabolic drugs have little role in the prevention of bone loss during early menopause, but they have an important place in the treatment of women at very high risk of fracture or who remain at high fracture risk after a course of bisphosphonate therapy. Primarily because of the high cost of the drugs, these therapies are initiated by specialists rather than primary-care physicians in most countries. This review will present the evidence for efficacy and safety of these drugs so that clinicians may discern their appropriate use when caring for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Diagnostic, treatment, and follow-up of osteoporosis-position statement of the Latin American Federation of Endocrinology

The Latin American Federation of Endocrinology position statement on osteoporosis was developed by endocrinologists from 9 countries. It encompasses the definition, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of the disease, the identification of barriers to healthcare, and proposals to improve the disease care in the region.

INTRODUCTION

There is a gap in the understanding of osteoporosis in Latin America. The objective of this work is to state the position of the Latin American Federation of Endocrinology on osteoporosis care in postmenopausal women to better bridge this gap.

METHODS

An experts' panel was formed comprising of 11 endocrinologists from 9 countries. A data search was conducted with a conceptual approach and data selection was based on the hierarchy of the EBHC pyramid. Unpublished data was considered for local epidemiological data and expert opinion for the identification of barriers to healthcare. An expert consensus based on the Delphi methodology was carried out. Experts were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert Scale to two provided answers to guiding questions.

RESULTS

Consensus was agreed on the answer for the questions with the higher median on the Likert scale and synthetized on 16 statements covering the definition of osteoporosis, diagnostic approach, treatment options, and follow-up. Besides clinical topics, unmet needs in osteoporosis were identified in relation to local epidemiological data, barriers to treatment, and misclassification of programs within health systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Through a process based on recognized methodological tools, FELAEN's position on osteoporosis was developed. This made it possible to state an optimum scenario for the care of the disease and helped to identify knowledge gaps. There is great variability in the approach to osteoporosis in Latin America and barriers in all the stages of healthcare persist.

The Male Athlete Triad-A Consensus Statement From the Female and Male Athlete Triad Coalition Part II: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Return-To-Play

ABSTRACT

The Male Athlete Triad is a medical syndrome most common in adolescent and young adult male athletes in sports that emphasize a lean physique, especially endurance and weight-class athletes. The 3 interrelated conditions of the Male Athlete Triad occur on spectrums of energy deficiency/low energy availability (EA), suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis, and impaired bone health, ranging from optimal health to clinically relevant outcomes of energy deficiency/low EA with or without disordered eating or eating disorder, functional hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, and osteoporosis or low bone mineral density with or without bone stress injury (BSI). Because of the importance of bone mass acquisition and health concerns in adolescence, screening is recommended during this time period in the at-risk male athlete. Diagnosis of the Male Athlete Triad is best accomplished by a multidisciplinary medical team. Clearance and return-to-play guidelines are recommended to optimize prevention and treatment. Evidence-based risk assessment protocols for the male athlete at risk for the Male Athlete Triad have been shown to be predictive for BSI and impaired bone health and should be encouraged. Improving energetic status through optimal fueling is the mainstay of treatment. A Roundtable on the Male Athlete Triad was convened by the Female and Male Athlete Triad Coalition in conjunction with the 64th Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine in Denver, Colorado, in May of 2017. In this second article, the latest clinical research to support current models of screening, diagnosis, and management for at-risk male athlete is reviewed with evidence-based recommendations.

Critical review of bone health, fracture risk and management of bone fragility in diabetes mellitus

The risk of fracture is increased in both type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, in contrast to the former, patients with T2DM usually possess higher bone mineral density. Thus, there is a considerable difference in the pathophysiological basis of poor bone health between the two types of diabetes. Impaired bone strength due to poor bone microarchitecture and low bone turnover along with increased risk of fall are among the major factors behind elevated fracture risk. Moreover, some antidiabetic medications further enhance the fragility of the bone. On the other hand, antiosteoporosis medications can affect the glucose homeostasis in these patients. It is also difficult to predict the fracture risk in these patients because conventional tools such as bone mineral density and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool score assessment can underestimate the risk. Evidence-based recommendations for risk evaluation and management of poor bone health in diabetes are sparse in the literature. With the advancement in imaging technology, newer modalities are available to evaluate the bone quality and risk assessment in patients with diabetes. The purpose of this review is to explore the pathophysiology behind poor bone health in diabetic patients. Approach to the fracture risk evaluation in both T1DM and T2DM as well as the pragmatic use and efficacy of the available treatment options have been discussed in depth.

Cardiovascular Safety Profile of Romosozumab: A Pharmacovigilance Analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

Background: Cardiovascular safety concerns for major cardiovascular events (MACE) were raised during the clinical trials of romosozumab. We aimed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety profile of romosozumab in a large pharmacovigilance database. Methods: All cases reported between January 2019 and December 2020 where romosozumab was reported were extracted from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). The outcome of interest was MACE (myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or cardiovascular death). A disproportionality analysis was conducted by estimating the reporting odds ratios (RORs) and 95% confidence intervals. Disproportionality analyses were stratified by sex and reporting region (US, Japan, other). Results: Of the 1995 eligible cases with romosozumab, the majority (N = 1188; 59.5%) originated from Japan. Overall, 206 suspected MACE reports were identified, of which the majority (n = 164; 13.8%) were from Japan, and 41 (5.2%) were from the United States (US). Among Japanese reports, patients were older and more frequently male than reports from the US. Similarly, cases with a reported MACE were older and had higher reports of cardioprotective drugs than those without cardiovascular events. Elevated reports for MACE (ROR 4.07, 95% CI: 2.39–6.93) was identified overall, which was primarily driven by the significant disproportionality measures in the Japanese reports. Conclusions: The current pharmacovigilance study identified a potential signal for elevated MACE, particularly in Japan. The results support the current safety warnings from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to avoid use in high-risk patients.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of Chinese patent medicine in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMOP) is the focus and difficult problem in the world at present, and we found that Chinese patent medicine(CPM) shown a more miraculous effect. Many kinds of Chinese patent medicine have been proved to be effective in the treatment of this disease, but it is still unclear which kind of Chinese patent medicine has the best effect. Therefore, we propose a network meta-analysis (NMA) protocol to observe the efficacy of various CPM for this disease and provide guidance for clinical practice.

METHODS

We will use the NMA method to complete this study. First, all the randomized controlled trials of CPM or CPM combined with western medicine in the treatment of PMOP were collected by searching all online Chinese and English databases. The information time limit is from the establishment of the database to August 30, 2020. Then 2 staff members will sift through all the literature and analyze the data using Stata and Winbugs.

RESULTS

Through this analysis, we will observe and rank the clinical effects of different CPM for PMOP. The main evaluation indexes include: New fracture, Quality of life, Severe side effects, Death from all causes. Secondary outcome indicators include Bone Mineral density, clinical efficiency, and some laboratory indicators, such as estradiol, serum calcium, serum, etc. CONCLUSION:: This study will rank the therapeutic effects of various proprietary Chinese medicines in the treatment of PMOP, which will be helpful in improving the PMOP treatment regimen.INPLASY registration number: INPLASY202090047.

Genomic Medicine: Lessons Learned From Monogenic and Complex Bone Disorders

Current genetic studies of monogenic and complex bone diseases have broadened our understanding of disease pathophysiology, highlighting the need for medical interventions and treatments tailored to the characteristics of patients. As genomic research progresses, novel insights into the molecular mechanisms are starting to provide support to clinical decision-making; now offering ample opportunities for disease screening, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Drug targets holding mechanisms with genetic support are more likely to be successful. Therefore, implementing genetic information to the drug development process and a molecular redefinition of skeletal disease can help overcoming current shortcomings in pharmaceutical research, including failed attempts and appalling costs. This review summarizes the achievements of genetic studies in the bone field and their application to clinical care, illustrating the imminent advent of the genomic medicine era.

Romosozumab in the treatment of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a disease characterized by weakening of the bone architecture, which leads to an increased risk of fracture. There has been interest in the development of osteoanabolic agents that can increase bone mass and reverse the deteriorating architecture of osteoporotic bone. Romosozumab is a new agent for osteoporosis that both promotes bone formation and inhibits bone resorption. It is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the activity of sclerostin, which allows the Wnt pathway to promote osteoblastogenesis and inhibit the activity of bone-resorbing osteoclasts. In clinical trials, it has proven to be superior to other agents in terms of increasing bone mineral density and reducing the incidence of fractures. This review will highlight the pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety profile of romosozumab and suggest where this medication may fit within our current management of osteoporosis.

Effectiveness and safety of Guilu Erxian Glue (a traditional Chinese medicinal product) for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of postmenopausal osteoporosis is rapidly rising, with a high proportion of patients who are vulnerable to fractures and other chronic symptoms. The commonly applied Western medicine lacks cost-efficiency and tends to have various potential side effects. Guilu Erxian Glue (GEG), an orally taken traditional Chinese medicinal product, has been advocated to manage osteoporosis for a long period. However, the evidence of the efficacy of GEG on osteoporosis seems to be less convincing and conclusive. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness and safety of GEG on postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

We will implement a systematic review and meta-analysis following the requests of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols (PRISMA-P). The PubMed database, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, VIP database, Sinomed, and grey literature sources will be retrieved for eligible studies. Randomized controlled trials investigating GEG in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis employing osteoporosis-associated outcomes measures will be eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently complete the study selection procedure, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. A third reviewer will mediate when irreconcilable discrepancies occur. Should sufficient clinical homogeneity exist, a meta-analysis will be conducted. Additionally, we will utilize the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to assess the strength of quantitative outcomes.

RESULTS

The current systematic review and meta-analysis will provide the effectiveness and safety of GEG on postmenopausal osteoporosis.

CONCLUSION

The study will offer high-quality and explicit evidence for applying GEG on the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

OSF REGISTRATION

DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/JCVBH.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: a network meta-analysis (Chongqing, China)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of different pharmacological agents, including abaloparatide and romosozumab, for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for relevant randomized controlled trials published up to July 16, 2018. After study selection according to the preplanned criteria, we performed data extraction and quality assessment. With statistical heterogeneity and inconsistency being examined, pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted to synthesize risk ratio and 95% CI. Finally, we calculated the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank the interventions, and carried out three sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our main results.

RESULTS

Our searches yielded 2,584 records in total, of which 21 were finally included in quantitative synthesis and all of them were of high quality. Our 5 outcomes of interest involved a total of 13 interventions and 67,524 participants. For each outcome, the estimated τ values all were less than or equal to 0.0747, and the P values for test of consistency varied from 0.097 to 0.941, respectively, suggesting low heterogeneity and no inconsistency. Abaloparatide and teriparatide, without statistical difference between them, had a statistically lower risk of new vertebral or nonvertebral fractures than placebo, strontium ranelate, risedronate, raloxifene, lasofoxifene (0.25 mg/d), lasofoxifene (0.5 mg/d), denosumab, and alendronate. Zoledronic acid and romosozumab, without statistical difference between them, were significantly more efficacious than placebo, risedronate, and alendronate in preventing clinical fractures. Denosumab was statistically superior to placebo in preventing new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, and to placebo, risedronate, and alendronate in preventing clinical fractures. For the outcomes of adverse events and serious adverse events, all of treatments were not statistically different from one another, except that zoledronic acid was statistically worse than placebo in terms of adverse events. Based on surface under the cumulative ranking curves, abaloparatide and teriparatide were two of the most effective treatments in preventing new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures; zoledronic acid and romosozumab were two of the most effective treatments in preventing clinical fractures, and denosumab and romosozumab were two of the best interventions for the outcome of adverse events. Three sensitivity analyses revealed the robustness of the main results.

CONCLUSIONS

Abaloparatide and teriparatide are most efficacious in preventing new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, whereas zoledronic acid and romosozumab are in preventing clinical fractures. Meanwhile, there is no statistical difference between abaloparatide, teriparatide or romosozumab, and placebo in terms of safety. Furthermore, in terms of adverse events, zoledronic acid is statistically worse than placebo, and two of the best interventions are denosumab and romosozumab, of which denosumab also reduces the risk of different kinds of fractures.

The Belgian Bone Club 2020 guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence-based guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women in Belgium.

METHODS

The Belgian Bone Club (BBC) gathered a guideline developer group. Nine "Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome" (PICO) questions covering screening, diagnosis, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, and monitoring were formulated. A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was performed to find network meta-analyses, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, guidelines, and recommendations from scientific societies published in the last 10 years. Manual searches were also performed. Summaries of evidence were provided, and recommendations were further validated by the BBC board members and other national scientific societies' experts.

RESULTS

Of the 3840 references in the search, 333 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 129 met the inclusion criteria. Osteoporosis screening using clinical risk factors should be considered. Patients with a recent (<2 years) major osteoporotic fracture were considered at very high and imminent risk of future fracture. The combination of bone mineral density measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and 10-year fracture risk was used to categorize patients as low or high risk. Patient education, the combination of weight-bearing and resistance training, and optimal calcium intake and vitamin D status were recommended. Antiresorptive and anabolic osteoporosis treatment should be considered for patients at high and very high fracture risk, respectively. Follow-up should focus on compliance, and patient-tailored monitoring should be considered.

CONCLUSION

BBC guidelines and 25 guideline recommendations bridge the gap between research and clinical practice for the screening, diagnosis, and management of osteoporosis.

Efficacy and safety of Romosozumab in treatment for low bone mineral density: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Osteoporosis is a chronic skeletal disease with an increasing prevalence. Romosozumab, as a monoclonal anti-sclerostin antibody with a dual function, has been produced. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to examine the efficacy of Romosozumab in patients with low bone mineral density. A systematic search was conducted in the most important electronic search engines like Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov at the end of July 2019 to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which evaluated the effect of Romosozumab in patients with osteoporosis and/or low bone mineral density. After evaluating the quality of articles with the Cochrane checklist, data related to the outcomes of bone mineral density (BMD) of lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, risk of clinical, vertebral and non-vertebral fractures, and risk of adverse events were extracted. Quality of evidence was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Heterogeneity between studies was evaluated by I2 and Q statistics. The meta-analysis was performed using CMA v.2.0 software. Of all the 671 initially retrieved articles, seven articles were entered into the meta-analysis after removing duplicates and reviewing papers with inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis showed that Romosozumab 210, 140, and 70 mg compared with Alendronate, Teriparatide, and placebo can increase the bone mineral density in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip. The risk of adverse events like adjudicated cardiovascular serious adverse events and adjudicated cardiovascular death was more in Romosozumab 210 mg in comparison with placebo. However, this difference was not statistically significant. Treatment with anti-sclerostin antibodies can be a proper therapeutic option in patients with osteoporosis and low bone mineral density. Based on the results of this meta-analysis, it seems that Romosozumab, with its dual function, has a positive role in the treatment of osteoporosis and low bone mineral density.

Safety of Romosozumab in Osteoporotic Men and Postmenopausal Women: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Sclerostin is a protein synthesized mainly by osteocytes whose function is to inhibit bone formation. A recent monoclonal antibody, Romosozumab, is able to block sclerostin. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the safety of Romosozumab with placebo and alendronate. Five randomized controlled trials that described the safety of Romosozumab in healthy men and postmenopausal women were analyzed. The measures to be compared were the number of adverse events and the number of serious adverse events. Specific results included injection site reaction, arthralgia, nasopharyngitis, and back pain. A total of 11,741 patients were included in this meta-analysis, in three different groups: Romosozumab, alendronate, and placebo. Significant differences were seen between the groups with regard to injection site reaction: 5.88% in the Romosozumab group versus 3.62% in the placebo group (Mantel-Haenszel [M-H] 1.54, confidence interval [95% CI] 1.22-1.96; p < 0.001) and 2.62% in the alendronate group (M-H 1.8, 95% CI 1.32-2.60; p < 0.001). In addition, patients treated with Romosozumab had significantly fewer total adverse events than the alendronate group (M-H 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.98; p < 0.05). In conclusion, Romosozumab may have lower adverse effects compared to alendronate and comparable to a placebo, except injection site reactions. Injection site reactions were more with romosozumab compared to alendronate and compared to the placebo as well. Romosozumab appears to have a similar safety profile to bisphosphonates.

Synergistic effect of sclerostin and angiotensin II receptor 1 polymorphism on arterial stiffening

Aim: We aimed to establish the association between sclerostin (a glycoprotein involved in bone metabolism) and development of pulse wave velocity (PWV) in the general population. Methods: A prospective cohort study with a total of 522 subjects. Aortic PWV was measured twice (at baseline and after approximately 8 years of follow-up) and intraindividual change in PWV per year (ΔPWV/year) was calculated. Results: ΔPWV/year increased across the sclerostin quintiles, but generally in a strong age-dependent manner. However, a significant independent positive association between sclerostin and ΔPWV/year was observed exclusively in C allele carriers of rs5186 polymorphism for the angiotensin II receptor 1 (n = 246). Conclusion: Sclerostin concentrations were associated with an accelerated natural course of arterial stiffening, but only in interaction with renin-angiotension system.

Denosumab or romosozumab therapy and risk of cardiovascular events in patients with primary osteoporosis: Systematic review and meta- analysis

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis and cardiovascular (CV) diseases are closely correlated. RANKL/RANK/OPG pathway and Wnt signalling pathway both implicated in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis and cardiovascular diseases. We aimed to investigate the effect of denosumab or romosozumab therapy on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with primary osteoporosis.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane library, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from the inception dates to June 4, 2019. Randomized clinical trials evaluating the effect of denosumab or romosozumab versus active comparators or placebo for at least 6 months in patients with primary osteoporosis or osteopenia were included. Two investigators independently extracted data for study characteristics, outcomes of interest, and risk of bias in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

17 relevant studies (denosumab: n=11, 13615 participants; romosozumab: n=6, 12219 participants) were included. No associations between denosumab therapy and risk of a composite cardiovascular outcome (1.06 [95 % CI, 0.88-1.28], p=0.54), three-point major adverse cardiovascular event (3P MACE, 1.01 [95 % CI, 0.83-1.23], p=0.93), and four-point major adverse cardiovascular event (4P MACE, 0.99 [95 % CI, 0.83-1.18], p=0.89) were identified. Romosozumab therapy did not increase the risk of composite cardiovascular outcome (1.26 [95 % CI, 0.95-1.68], p=0.11), and 3P MACE (1.41 [95 % CI, 0.99-2.02], p=0.06), while increased the risk of 4P MACE (1.39 [95 % CI, 1.01-1.90], p=0.04) among elderly men and postmenopausal woman with osteoporosis over a period of 12-36 months. Denosumab or romosozumab did not increase or reduce specific cardiovascular outcomes, including CV death or death, myocardial infarction, stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, aortic and intracranial aneurysm, aortic dissection, aortic valve disease and hypertension (all p＞0.05). Sensitivity analysis conducted by random effects model altered the result of 4P MACE in romosozumab (1.36 [0.99-1.87], p=0.06). No other significant difference was detected in the sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Denosumab therapy was not associated with any risk of composite and specific cardiovascular outcomes among patients with primary osteoporosis than active comparators or placebo, while romosozumab therapy might increase the risk of 4P MACE.

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.

Diabetes and bone

Bone disease is a serious complication to diabetes. Patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) suffer from an increased risk of fracture, most notably at the hip, compared with patients without diabetes. Confounders such as patient sex, age, body mass index, blood glucose status, fall risk, and diabetes medications may influence the fracture risk. Different underlying mechanisms contribute to bone disease in patients with diabetes. Bone quality is affected by low bone turnover in T1D and T2D, and furthermore, incorporation of advanced glycation end-products, changes in the incretin hormone response, and microvascular complications contribute to impaired bone quality and increased fracture risk. Diagnosis of bone disease in patients with diabetes is a challenge as current methods for fracture prediction such as bone mineral density T-score and fracture risk assessment tools underestimate fracture risk for patients with T1D and T2D. This review focuses on bone disease and fracture risk in patients with diabetes regarding epidemiology, underlying disease mechanisms, and diagnostic methods, and we also provide considerations regarding the management of diabetes patients with bone disease in terms of an intervention threshold and different treatments.

Osteoanabolic and dual action drugs

Teriparatide (TPTD) and abaloparatide (ABL) are the only osteoanabolic drugs available, at this time, for treatment of osteoporosis. TPTD is a 34-amino acid fragment that is identical in its primary sequence to the 34 amino acids of full-length human parathyroid hormone [hPTH(1-84)]. ABL is identical to parathyroid hormone-related peptide (PTHrP) through the first 22 residues with significantly different amino acids inserted thereafter, between residues 22 and 34. The osteoanabolic actions of PTH are due directly to its effects on cells of the osteoblast lineage and indirectly by stimulating IGF-I synthesis and suppressing sclerostin and associated enhancement of Wnt signalling. Both TPTD and ABL are ligands that bind to and activate the PTH receptor type 1 (PTHR1) receptor but they appear to do so differently: ABL favours the transient, more anabolic configuration of the receptor. Both TPTD and ABL reduce the risk of vertebral fractures and non-vertebral fractures. Both drugs are administered for a maximum of 24 months, and should be followed by an antiresorptive agent to maintain gains in bone mineral density (BMD). Romosozumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds to and inhibits sclerostin, appears to have dual actions by stimulating bone formation and reducing bone resorption. In the pivotal clinical trial, romosozumab, administered as a 210 mg monthly subcutaneous dose, significantly reduced new vertebral fractures and in a subsequent study reduced both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures.

Teriparatide versus bisphosphonates for treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of teriparatide and bisphosphonates for reducing vertebral fracture risk and bone mineral density (BMD) in lumbar spine and femoral neck in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

METHODS

We searched the literature, via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Google database to screen citations from inception to April 2018 for inclusion in this study. Only randomized controlled trials that compared teriparatide and bisphosphonates for reducing vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were included. Stata 12.0 was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis results indicated that, compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide was associated with a reduction of the vertebral fracture risk (risk ratio (RR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35, 0.93, P = 0.024). Furthermore, teriparatide therapy increased the mean percent change in BMD in lumbar spine of 6 months, 12 months and 18 months than bisphosphonates with statistically significant (P < 0.05). And, teriparatide has only beneficial in increasing the mean percent change in BMD in femoral neck of 18 months (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between teriparatide and bisphosphonates in terms of the adverse events (AEs, RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.89, 1.33, P = 0.424).

CONCLUSIONS

Teriparatide is an effective agent in reducing the risk of vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Furthermore, teriparatide can increase the BMD in lumbar spine and femoral neck in long-terms duration.

Update on the impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus on bone metabolism and material properties

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing worldwide, especially as a result of our aging society, high caloric intake and sedentary lifestyle. Besides the well-known complications of T2DM on the cardiovascular system, the eyes, kidneys and nerves, bone strength is also impaired in diabetic patients. Patients with T2DM have a 40-70% increased risk for fractures, despite having a normal to increased bone mineral density, suggesting that other factors besides bone quantity must account for increased bone fragility. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the complex effects of T2DM on bone including effects on bone cells, bone material properties and other endocrine systems that subsequently affect bone, discusses the effects of T2DM medications on bone and concludes with a model identifying factors that may contribute to poor bone quality and increased bone fragility in T2DM.

Osteoporosis in Older Persons: Old and New Players

Osteoporosis is the most common bone disease in humans. Older persons are at higher risk of osteoporotic fractures that also result in poor quality of life, disability, loss of independence, institutionalization, and higher mortality. Osteoporosis shares a distinct pathophysiologic relationship with sarcopenia, an age-related disease comprising declines in muscle mass, strength, or function. The combination of these two diseases is known as osteosarcopenia. Understanding the pathophysiology of osteosarcopenia, in addition to its diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, is key in providing older adults with the best falls and fractures prevention strategies. This review provides updated information on new discoveries on the combined pathophysiology of osteoporosis and sarcopenia that have led to the development of novel therapeutic approaches. New recommendations for the use of risk calculators and densitometry are also presented in this review as well as evidence on current and upcoming pharmacologic treatments to prevent falls and fractures in older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:831-840, 2019.

Osteoporosis in postmenopausal women in this decade: a bibliometric assessment of current research and future hotspots

Postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMOP) has already become a major public health problem. However, there was no bibliometric analysis estimating the evolutionary process of PMOP research.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess its scientific activity.

METHODS

Publications on PMOP were retrieved from Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) of the Web of Science (WoS) from 2008 to 2018. VOSviewer software was used for data mining and visualization. The quantity of papers, number of citations, citation frequency per year, and H-index were assessed and compared among different countries, institutes, and researchers.

RESULTS

A total of 11,142 papers were included and were cited 184,416 times. The USA contributed the most papers (3162), the most citations (83,270 times), and the highest H-index (115). Canada ranked first for the number of papers per million populations and per trillion GDP. Seven of the top ten funding agencies were industries. The key words were stratified into four clusters: cluster 1 ("basic research"), cluster 2 ("diagnosis"), cluster 3 ("treatment"), and cluster 4 ("others"). Average appearing years (AAY) of key words in cluster 1 were the largest compared to those in clusters 2 and 3. For hotspots, "miRNA" showed a relatively latest AAY of 2017.63, followed by "abaloparatide" and "adipokine".

CONCLUSION

We concluded that the USA and Europe were the most productive regions on PMOP, with a high prevalence of articles supported by pharmaceutical companies. Key word focus gradually shifted from "diagnosis" to "treatment" and then to precision medicine orientated "basic research". It is recommended to pay attention to potential research hotspots, such as "miRNA," "abaloparatide," and "adipokine".

The Biological Enhancement of Spinal Fusion for Spinal Degenerative Disease

In this era of aging societies, the number of elderly individuals who undergo spinal arthrodesis for various degenerative diseases is increasing. Poor bone quality and osteogenic ability in older patients, due to osteoporosis, often interfere with achieving bone fusion after spinal arthrodesis. Enhancement of bone fusion requires shifting bone homeostasis toward increased bone formation and reduced resorption. Several biological enhancement strategies of bone formation have been conducted in animal models of spinal arthrodesis and human clinical trials. Pharmacological agents for osteoporosis have also been shown to be effective in enhancing bone fusion. Cytokines, which activate bone formation, such as bone morphogenetic proteins, have already been clinically used to enhance bone fusion for spinal arthrodesis. Recently, stem cells have attracted considerable attention as a cell source of osteoblasts, promising effects in enhancing bone fusion. Drug delivery systems will also need to be further developed to assure the safe delivery of bone-enhancing agents to the site of spinal arthrodesis. Our aim in this review is to appraise the current state of knowledge and evidence regarding bone enhancement strategies for spinal fusion for degenerative spinal disorders, and to identify future directions for biological bone enhancement strategies, including pharmacological, cell and gene therapy approaches.