Bisphosphonates and γδ t-cells: New insights into old drugs

Inflammatory eye reactions with bisphosphonates and other osteoporosis medications: what are the risks?

Inflammatory eye reactions (IERs) are rare but have been associated with medications to treat osteoporosis. The aim of this review is to summarize the current literature on the association between IERs and specific medications to treat osteoporosis (bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, strontium, denosumab and teriparatide). We cover the known epidemiology, potential pathogenic mechanisms and a resume of unanswered questions. Briefly, this review highlights that none of the existing randomized clinical trials were powered to identify these rare adverse events, and the majority of the information available is from spontaneous case reports and case series reporting associations between bisphosphonates and IERs. No case reports describe IERs after other anti-osteoporosis medications. Importantly, some case reports describe recurrence of the IER after affected patients were rechallenged with the same or another bisphosphonate, and that no reported cases resolved without discontinuation of the bisphosphonate. However, three large population-based cohort studies have shown conflicting results between osteoporosis treatments and IERs, but overall these studies suggest that IERs may actually be part of underlying inflammatory disease processes that also cause osteoporosis, rather than due to the medications used to treat osteoporosis themselves. There are no clear pathogenic mechanisms for how bisphosphonates could potentially cause IERs. However, the drug is secreted into the tears by the lacrimal gland and could cause irritation to the mucous membranes with subsequent release of inflammatory mediators, similar to the systemic response typically seen after infusion of bisphosphonates. However, in summary it is still not known whether there is a true causal association between bisphosphonates or other anti-osteoporosis medications and IERs, or whether it is confounding by indication and is actually due to underlying inflammatory diseases that cause both osteoporosis and IERs.

Long-term effects of amino-bisphosphonates on circulating γδ T cells

The aim of this study was to explore whether desensitization to the occurrence of the acute-phase response (APR) in patients previously treated with amino-bisphosphonates (N-BPs) is due to a long-lasting reduction in the number of circulating γδ T cells. Circulating lymphocyte subpopulation counts were obtained from 63 patients with postmenopausal or senile osteoporosis at baseline and after 2 days and 12 months of the first intravenous (IV) 5 mg zoledronic acid (ZOL) infusion. At baseline both the proportion and absolute number of circulating γδ T cells were significantly higher in patients who had never used N-BPs vs. previous users, either oral or IV. A typical APR was observed in none of the patients given IV ZOL a year earlier, in 6 (22 %) of the patients previously treated with oral N-BPs, and in 13 (57 %) of the patients naive to any N-BP treatment. In patients naive to N-BPs, a significant reduction in both total lymphocytes and their subsets was observed 2 days after ZOL infusion; all these changes returned to baseline values 1 year later with the exception of γδ T cells, which remained significantly lower in terms of both proportion and absolute number. These results indicate for the first time that both IV and oral N-BP treatments are associated with a long-lasting decrease in circulating γδ T cells, and this may explain the lower incidence of APR in patients previously exposed to N-BPs. Other clinical implications of this sustained effect of N-BPs on immune-regulatory cells might be important.

Mechanisms of action of bisphosphonates: similarities and differences and their potential influence on clinical efficacy

Bisphosphonates (BPs) are well established as the leading drugs for the treatment of osteoporosis. There is new knowledge about how they work. The differences that exist among individual BPs in terms of mineral binding and biochemical actions may explain differences in their clinical behavior and effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION

The classical pharmacological effects of bisphosphonates (BPs) appear to be the result of two key properties: their affinity for bone mineral and their inhibitory effects on osteoclasts.

DISCUSSION

There is new information about both properties. Mineral binding affinities differ among the clinically used BPs and may influence their differential distribution within bone, their biological potency, and their duration of action. The antiresorptive effects of the nitrogen-containing BPs (including alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, and zoledronate) appear to result from their inhibition of the enzyme farnesyl pyrophosphate synthase (FPPS) in osteoclasts. FPPS is a key enzyme in the mevalonate pathway, which generates isoprenoid lipids utilized for the post-translational modification of small GTP-binding proteins that are essential for osteoclast function. Effects on other cellular targets, such as osteocytes, may also be important. BPs share several common properties as a drug class. However, as with other families of drugs, there are obvious chemical, biochemical, and pharmacological differences among the individual BPs. Each BP has a unique profile that may help to explain potential clinical differences among them, in terms of their speed and duration of action, and effects on fracture reduction.

Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw: does it occur in children?

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonate use in adult patients has been linked to osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). This complication has not been systematically assessed in a paediatric population receiving bisphosphonates.

OBJECTIVE

To assess our cohort of paediatric patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonate for occurrence of ONJ.

DESIGN

Observational study at a tertiary children's hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 42 paediatric patients with osteoporosis who received bisphosphonate infusions for a mean of 6.5 years (SD 2.7 years) were assessed clinically and radiographically for possible ONJ. Among 42, 37 patients had received disodium pamidronate 1 mg/kg/dose at a mean cumulative dose of 19.8 mg/kg and zoledronic acid (ZA) 0.05 mg/kg/dose at a mean cumulative dose of 0.49 mg/kg; four had received ZA and one received pamidronate alone. Invasive dental treatment during bisphosphonate treatment, a known risk factor for osteonecrosis, was specifically assessed.

RESULTS

In all patients assessed, including 11 who had invasive dental treatment, there were no cases of osteonecrosis.

CONCLUSION

ONJ has so far not been demonstrated in this patient group.

On the horizon: can bisphosphonates prevent bone metastases?

Skeletal complications of bone metastases increase the risk of death and undermine patients' functional independence and quality of life. Although bisphosphonates are integral in the treatment regimen of patients with metastatic bone disease and have demonstrated efficacy in delaying the onset and reducing the incidence of skeletal-related events, there is great interest in developing treatments to prevent metastasis to bone. Emerging evidence indicates that the potential benefits of bisphosphonate therapy extend beyond the treatment of metastatic bone lesions. Data from preclinical studies suggest that bisphosphonates may have antitumour activity and may prevent bone metastasis. The mechanisms of these antitumour effects are currently under investigation and may include induction of apoptosis, inhibition of tumour cell invasion and angiogenesis, and tumour growth reduction. Therefore, patients with early-stage disease may benefit from early bisphosphonate therapy, before bone metastasis develops, and investigations are ongoing to determine the clinical utility of bisphosphonates in this setting.