Oral Bisphosphonate use Reduces Cardiovascular Events in a Cohort of Danish Patients Referred for Bone Mineral Density

Impact of oral bisphosphonate drug holiday on mortality following hip fracture: a population-based cohort study

CONTEXT

Current clinical guidelines recommend a drug holiday after extended use of oral bisphosphonates. However, no studies have investigated the impact of drug holidays before hip fractures on post-fracture mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of drug holiday on post-fracture mortality in patients with extended use of oral bisphosphonates.

DESIGN

Retrospective population-based cohort study.

SETTING

All patients with hip fractures in Victoria, Australia from 2014-18.

PATIENTS

Patients adherent to oral alendronate or risedronate for ≥5 years prior to hip fracture.

INTERVENTION(S)

Group-based trajectory modelling categorized patients into different bisphosphonate usage after 5-year good adherence.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Post-fracture mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 365 patients with good adherence (medication possession ratio ≥80%) to oral alendronate/risedronate for ≥5 years. Most patients (69%) continued to use oral bisphosphonates till admission for hip fracture; 17% had discontinued for one year and 14% had discontinued for two years. Post-fracture mortality was higher in patients who had discontinued risedronate for one year (Hazard ratio [HR] 2.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-4.53) and two years (HR 3.08, 95% CI 1.48-6.41) prior to hip fracture. No increase or decrease in post-fracture mortality was observed in patients who had discontinued alendronate for one year (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.29-1.18) or two years (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.57-1.93) prior to hip fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-fracture mortality is higher in people who discontinue risedronate, but not alendronate, for 1 or 2 years after being adherent to treatment for at least 5 years. The type of bisphosphonate may be a factor to consider when planning drug holidays.

The State of Use and Utility of Negative Controls in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies

Uses of real-world data in drug safety and effectiveness studies are often challenged by various sources of bias. We undertook a systematic search of the published literature through September 2020 to evaluate the state of use and utility of negative controls to address bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Two reviewers independently evaluated study eligibility and abstracted data. Our search identified 184 eligible studies for inclusion. Cohort studies (115, 63%) and administrative data (114, 62%) were, respectively, the most common study design and data type used. Most studies used negative control outcomes (91, 50%), and for most studies the target source of bias was unmeasured confounding (93, 51%). We identified 4 utility domains of negative controls: 1) bias detection (149, 81%), 2) bias correction (16, 9%), 3) P-value calibration (8, 4%), and 4) performance assessment of different methods used in drug safety studies (31, 17%). The most popular methodologies used were the 95% confidence interval and P-value calibration. In addition, we identified 2 reference sets with structured steps to check the causality assumption of the negative control. While negative controls are powerful tools in bias detection, we found many studies lacked checking the underlying assumptions. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Electrocardiogram Changes Following Intravenous Bisphosphonate Infusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Bisphosphonates are first-line treatments for several bone and mineral disorders. Studies have reported an increased incidence of serious atrial fibrillation in patients receiving bisphosphonates; however, uncertainty remains as to whether electrical disturbances are precipitated by bisphosphonates. We aimed to review the literature for studies reporting electrocardiogram (ECG) findings in patients receiving intravenous bisphosphonates for any indication. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception until January 14, 2023, for studies reporting ECG parameters after intravenous bisphosphonate infusion. We excluded studies that only reported atrial fibrillation. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Continuous data were meta-analyzed if reported in at least two studies. Random-effects models were fitted and reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). We found 1083 unique records, of which 11 met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies had a low to low/moderate risk of bias. Six prospective cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. Five studies used zoledronic acid, whereas one study used pamidronate. Most studies (n = 4) were conducted in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, one study was conducted in patients with bone metastases, and one study in children with osteoporosis secondary to cerebral palsy. Study populations ranged from n = 15 to n = 116. Heart rate-corrected QT (QTc) was significantly longer post-infusion (SMD = 0.46 ms [95% CI 0.80 to 0.11]; n = 67 patients, k = 2 studies, τ2  = 0). There were no differences in heart rate, P wave (maximum), P wave (minimum), P wave dispersion, PR interval, QRS duration, QTc, QTc (maximum), QTc (minimum), and QTc dispersion. The correlation between pre- and post-infusion QTc was not significant (p = 0.93). Overall, there is a weak association between intravenous bisphosphonate infusion and a QTc interval prolongation. However, there is insufficient evidence to support an association between intravenous bisphosphonate and any ECG variable changes, which may precipitate atrial fibrillation. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Antiosteoporosis medications and cardiovascular disease: a population-based nationwide nested case-control study

Purpose: Patients with osteoporosis are at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Several antiosteoporosis medications have been demonstrated with the benefit of preventing osteoporosis. Our aim is to assess the CVD risks associated with antiosteoporosis medications using the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan between 2000 and 2016. Methods: Among 41,102 patients of 40+ years old with newly diagnosed osteoporosis, 69.1% (N = 28,387) of patients were included in the user cohort of antiosteoporosis medicines, of whom 13, 472 developed CVD by the end of 2016, while 14,915 did not. Using the nested case-control analysis in the user cohort (88.0% women and 77.4% elderly), we applied conditional logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of eight types of CVD for the users of denosumab, bisphosphonate, teriparatide, and hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Results: The adjusted ORs of overall CVDs were 0.13 (95% CI: 0.12-0.15) for denosumab users, 0.52 (95% CI: 0.45-0.61) for teriparatide users, and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76-0.85) for bisphosphonate users. The HRT users were at higher odds of coronary artery and peripheral artery diseases, heart failure, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis. Conclusion: Denosumab, teriparatide, and bisphosphonate may have more protective effects against CVD than hormone therapy. Physicians may take subsequent cardiovascular risks into account when choosing an adequate antiosteoporosis medication for patients with osteoporosis.

Association between bisphosphonate use and stroke risk: a meta-analysis

Previous studies have suggested that bisphosphonates may reduce stroke risk. This meta-analysis, which included 21 studies with 741,274 participants, revealed that bisphosphonates might be associated with lower stroke risk. However, evidence derived from randomized controlled trials identified no statistically significant association. Future high-quality studies are still required to determine causality.

PURPOSE

Whether bisphosphonates may reduce the risk of stroke remains inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between bisphosphonate use and the risk of stroke based on up-to-date evidence.

METHODS

We searched for studies evaluating the effects of bisphosphonate on the risk of stroke from inception until January 3, 2022, on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane libraries and updated our search until August 22, 2022, using PubMed to identify any new potential published studies. Two or more reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the study quality. We retrieved the data to synthesize the pooled relative risk (RR) of stroke associated with bisphosphonate use compared with controls; random-effects models were used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies (7 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 14 observational studies) involving 741,274 participants were included in our meta-analysis. Overall, bisphosphonate use was associated with a lower risk of stroke, but the result was only borderline significant (pooled RR = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-0.99, p = 0.048), and high between-study heterogeneity was found (I2 = 83.7%). Subgroup analyses showed that the evidence derived from RCTs suggested no significant association between bisphosphonate use and stroke risk (pooled RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.76-1.13, p = 0.462; I2 = 13.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that bisphosphonate use is associated with a lower risk of stroke. However, the current evidence does not lead to a definite conclusion due to the borderline statistical significance and high between-study heterogeneity. Future studies, especially RCTs, are necessary to assess causality.

Association of oral bisphosphonates with cardioembolic ischemic stroke: a nested case-control study

Background: Bisphosphonates have been reported to increase the risk of atrial fibrillation. Therefore, it is conceivable that they may increase the risk of cardioembolic ischemic stroke (IS). However, most epidemiological studies carried out thus far have not shown an increased risk of IS, though none separated by the main pathophysiologic IS subtype (cardioembolic and non-cardioembolic) which may be crucial. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that the use of oral bisphosphonates increases specifically the risk of cardioembolic IS, and explored the effect of treatment duration, as well as the potential interaction between oral bisphosphonates and calcium supplements and anticoagulants. Methods: We performed a case-control study nested in a cohort of patients aged 40-99 years, using the Spanish primary healthcare database BIFAP, over the period 2002-2015. Incident cases of IS were identified and classified as cardioembolic or non-cardioembolic. Five controls per case were randomly selected, matched for age, sex, and index date (first recording of IS) using an incidence-density sampling. The association of IS (overall and by subtype) with the use of oral bisphosphonates within the last year before index date was assessed by computing the adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and their 95% CI using a conditional logistic regression. Only initiators of oral bisphosphonates were considered. Results: A total of 13,781 incident cases of IS and 65,909 controls were included. The mean age was 74.5 (SD ± 12.4) years and 51.6% were male. Among cases, 3.15% were current users of oral bisphosphonates, while among controls they were 2.62%, yielding an AOR of 1.15 (95% CI:1.01-1.30). Of all cases, 4,568 (33.1%) were classified as cardioembolic IS (matched with 21,697 controls) and 9,213 (66.9%) as non-cardioembolic IS (matched with 44,212 controls) yielding an AOR of 1.35 (95% CI:1.10-1.66) and 1.03 (95% CI: 0.88-1.21), respectively. The association with cardioembolic IS was clearly duration-dependent (AOR≤1 year = 1.10; 95% CI:0.82-1.49; AOR>1-3 years = 1.41; 95% CI:1.01-1.97; AOR>3 years = 1.81; 95% CI:1.25-2.62; p for trend = 0.001) and completely blunted by anticoagulants, even in long-term users (AOR>1 year = 0.59; 0.30-1.16). An interaction between oral bisphosphonates and calcium supplements was suggested. Conclusion: The use of oral bisphosphonates increases specifically the odds of cardioembolic IS, in a duration-dependent manner, while leaves materially unaffected the odds of non-cardioembolic IS.

Antiresorptive Medication Use Is not Associated With Acute Cardiovascular Risk: An Observational Study

CONTEXT

Bisphosphonates have been reported to be cardioprotective in some, but not all, studies. It is unknown whether denosumab (Dmab) use protects against cardiovascular events (CVEs).

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether oral bisphosphonate (oBP) or Dmab use is associated with CVEs in persons with incident fracture.

METHODS

Participants with an incident minimal trauma fracture from the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study, a population-based cohort from NSW, Australia, were followed between 2005/2009 and 2017. Questionnaire data were linked to hospital admissions (Admitted Patients Data Collection [APDC]) by the Centre for Health Record Linkage). Medicare Benefit Schedule (MBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) data sets were provided by Services Australia. Data was stored in a secure computing environment (Secure Unified Research Environment). Fractures, CVEs, and comorbidities were identified from the APDC and oBP and Dmab medication from the PBS. oBP and Dmab users were matched to never users (NoRx) by propensity scores. The main outcome measures were association between oBP and Dmab with CVE (acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, cerebrovascular accident, and transient ischemic attack) and were determined using a stratified Cox's proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

There were 880 pairs of oBP and NoRx (616 women) and 770 pairs of Dmab and NoRx (615 women) followed for ∼4.3 years. CVE risk was similar for oBP and NoRx Hazard Ratios (HR) women, 0.88 [95% CI 0.65-1.18]; men, 1.07 [95% CI 0.72-1.57]). Similar findings were obtained for Dmab (Hazard Ratios (HR) women, 1.08 [95% CI 0.78-1.50]; men, 1.55 [95% CI 0.96-2.48]).

CONCLUSION

oBP and Dmab use was not associated with CVEs.

Cardiac adverse events in bisphosphonate and teriparatide users: An international pharmacovigilance study

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular effects of osteoporosis medications have recently been highlighted. Although oral and intravenous bisphosphonates are assumed to have similar cardiovascular safety, few head-to-head comparisons exist. The cardiovascular safety of teriparatide is unknown. Aim We conducted a pharmacovigilance safety study of cardiac events using real-life adverse event reports from alendronate, zoledronic acid and teriparatide users.

METHODS

Adverse drug reactions were obtained from Vigibase, a WHO database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) from 130 countries (1967-2020). ISCRs for atrial fibrillation (AF), angina pectoris, arteriosclerosis coronary artery (ACA), cardiac arrhythmias, coronary artery disease (CAD), thromboembolic events (TE), ischaemic heart disease (IHD), torsade de pointes/QT prolongation (TDP) associated with alendronate, zoledronic acid and teriparatide use were extracted. Data were included in a disproportionality analysis where the lower end of the 95 % credibility interval for the information component (IC₀₂₅), showing a statistical association when >0. Head-to-head comparisons of ISCRs were estimated by age-adjusted odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals.

RESULTS

465 episodes of angina, 287 ACA, 13,385 arrhythmias, 792 CAD, 6743 TE, 3264 IHD, 1037 myocardial infarcts, and 3714 TDP events were recorded across 50,365 alendronate, 52,436 zoledronic acid and 137,629 teriparatide users. There was a significant association between alendronate and zoledronate with all outcomes except MI. Teriparatide use was associated with AF, arrythmias and angina only. In head-to-head comparisons, teriparatide use was associated with fewer ACA and CAD events than alendronate and fewer ACA than zoledronic acid.

DISCUSSION

Osteoporosis medication use is associated with adverse cardiac events, except for MI, and these appear to be more common with oral and intravenous bisphosphonates than teriparatide. Our data do not support differential effects of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates on cardiac events. Mechanisms whereby teriparatide may be cardio-protective warrant further investigation.

Effectiveness and Safety of Treatments to Prevent Fractures in People With Low Bone Mass or Primary Osteoporosis: A Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis for the American College of Physicians

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the United States.

PURPOSE

To evaluate low bone mass and osteoporosis treatments to prevent fractures.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Ovid Evidence Based Medicine Reviews: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2014 through February 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Adults receiving eligible interventions for low bone mass or osteoporosis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for fracture outcomes, and RCTs and large observational studies (n ≥1000) for harms.

DATA EXTRACTION

Abstracted by 1 reviewer and verified by a second. Independent, dual assessments of risk of bias and certainty of evidence (CoE).

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 34 RCTs (in 100 publications) and 36 observational studies. Bisphosphonates and denosumab reduced hip, clinical and radiographic vertebral, and other clinical fractures in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis (moderate to high CoE). Bisphosphonates for 36 months or more may increase the risk for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), but the absolute risks were low. Abaloparatide and teriparatide reduced clinical and radiographic vertebral fractures but increased the risk for withdrawals due to adverse events (WAEs; moderate to high CoE). Raloxifene and bazedoxifene for 36 months or more reduced radiographic vertebral but not clinical fractures (low to moderate CoE). Abaloparatide, teriparatide, and sequential romosozumab, then alendronate, may be more effective than bisphosphonates in reducing clinical fractures for 17 to 24 months in older postmenopausal females at very high fracture risk (low to moderate CoE). Bisphosphonates may reduce clinical fractures in older females with low bone mass (low CoE) and radiographic vertebral fractures in males with osteoporosis (low to moderate CoE).

LIMITATION

Few studies examined participants with low bone mass, males, or Black-identifying persons, sequential therapy, or treatment beyond 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Bisphosphonates, denosumab, abaloparatide, teriparatide, and romosozumab, followed by alendronate, reduce clinical fractures in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis. Abaloparatide and teriparatide increased WAEs; longer duration bisphosphonate use may increase AFF and ONJ risk though these events were rare.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42021236220).

Osteoporosis epidemiology using international cohorts

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update on the most important new cohort studies within osteoporosis and their bearing on clinical management and directions for future research.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified a collection of new observational cohort studies - including new reports from already established large cohorts - and intervention studies providing new insights into osteoporosis pathophysiology, risk finding, intervention, and treatment barriers.

SUMMARY

Recent cohort studies in osteoporosis highlight the importance of timely identification and treatment of people who are at high risk of suffering osteoporotic fractures. Physical performance is a strong indicator of fracture risk and one that is tightly linked to a number of chronic conditions, not least inflammatory conditions like rheumatoid arthritis. Advances in case finding may involve opportunistic screening for low bone mineral density and vertebral fractures of radiology images obtained for other purposes, polygenic risk scores, and routinely collected medication and comorbidity information.

Cardiovascular Safety and Effectiveness of Bisphosphonates: From Intervention Trials to Real-Life Data

Both osteoporosis with related fragility fractures and cardiovascular diseases are rapidly outspreading worldwide. Since they are often coexistent in elderly patients and may be related to possible common pathogenetic mechanisms, the possible reciprocal effects of drugs employed to treat these diseases have to be considered in clinical practice. Bisphosphonates, the agents most largely employed to decrease bone fragility, have been shown to be overall safe with respect to cardiovascular diseases and even capable of reducing cardiovascular morbidity in some settings, as mainly shown by real life studies. No randomized controlled trials with cardiovascular outcomes as primary endpoints are available. While contradictory results have emerged about a possible BSP-mediated reduction of overall mortality, it is undeniable that these drugs can be employed safely in patients with high fracture risk, since no increased mortality has ever been demonstrated. Although partial reassurance has emerged from meta-analysis assessing the risk of cardiac arrhythmias during bisphosphonates treatment, caution is warranted in administering this class of drugs to patients at risk for atrial fibrillation, possibly preferring other antiresorptives or anabolics, according to osteoporosis guidelines. This paper focuses on the complex relationship between bisphosphonates use and cardiovascular disease and possible co-management issues.

Romosozumab and cardiovascular safety in Japan

Romosozumab is a potent pharmacological tool to prevent fractures in osteoporosis patients, and its mechanism of action is distinct from any other drugs. The efficacy of romosozumab to prevent osteoporotic fractures is remarkable. However, there remains a concern of increased cardiovascular adverse events. Further relevant investigations are essential to understand whether romosozumab is actually involved in the development of cardiovascular events or not. We need more robust evidence to establish an appropriate and reasonable guide to prescribe romosozumab in our clinical practice.

Cardiovascular Safety of Antifracture Medications in Patients With Osteoporosis: A Narrative Review of Evidence From Randomized Studies

Osteoporosis and cardiovascular (CV) disease share common risk factors and pathophysiology. Low bone mineral density (BMD) and fractures appear to increase the risk for multiple CV diseases. Equally, prevalent CV disease appears to predispose to bone loss and increase fracture rates. This relationship has naturally provoked the hypothesis that stopping bone loss may result in some CV benefit. Secondary analyses of safety and adverse event data from many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have attempted to clarify this putative association. Recently, the discontinuation of odanacatib (anti-cathepsin K monoclonal antibody) over stroke concerns and the imbalance in ischemic events in romosozumab-treated (anti-sclerostin monoclonal antibody) women compared to bisphosphonate-treated women, has provided further justification to better characterize potential CV benefits and harms of osteoporosis medications. This review delves into the seminal, and other major RCTs of osteoporosis medications and, using both published data and additional information provided on trial registration pages, examines the evidence for CV safety and harms of these medications. Accepted and emerging "off-target" effects are explored for validity, biological plausibility, and clinical importance. A brief research agenda is provided to stimulate the next wave of clinical development and CV understanding of osteoporosis medications. © 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.