Risedronate once monthly: a potential new regimen for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

Formulation development and in vitro-in vivo assessment of protransfersomal gel of anti-resorptive drug in osteoporosis treatment

Osteoporosis is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and economic burden worldwide. Despite being an effective in combating the bone-deteriorating disorders, bisphosphonates have several shortcomings including poor and variable bioavailability, low permeability, high toxicity, etc. In this study, we developed and optimized protransfersome formulation for the drug risedronate sodium (RIS-Na) with the goal of enhancing its bioavailability and hence patient compliance. Phase separation coacervation technique was utilized for development of optimized formulation. Optimization was achieved by using three-factor, three-level Box-Behnken design combined with Response Surface Methodology (RSM). This enabled us to decipher the effect of 3 independent variables (Phospholipid, Tween-80 and Sodium Deoxycholate) on three dependent parameters (entrapment efficiency, vesicle size and transdermal flux). Optimized formulation was further evaluated for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. Smooth, spherical protransfersomes with a size of 260 ± 18 nm, having entrapment efficiency and flux of 80.4 ± 4.90% and 8.41 ± 0.148 μg/cm²/h, respectively were prepared. Ex vivo studies revealed a shorter lag time of 1.21 ± 0.18 h and higher flux associated with transdermal formulation. CLSM analysis further revealed better drug penetration (220 μm) through the skin in case of protransfersomes as compared to drug solution (72 μm). Additionally, biomechanical, biochemical, and histo-pathological studies further validated the results. Thus, it was concluded that protransfersome formulation has a great potential in providing better therapeutic efficacy of risedronate than its conventional counterpart.

Europium sulfide nanoprobes predict antiretroviral drug delivery into HIV-1 cell and tissue reservoirs

Background: Delivery of long-acting nanoformulated antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) to human immunodeficiency virus type one cell and tissue reservoirs underlies next generation antiretroviral therapeutics. Nanotheranostics, comprised of trackable nanoparticle adjuncts, can facilitate ARV delivery through real-time drug tracking made possible through bioimaging platforms. Methods: To model HIV-1 therapeutic delivery, europium sulfide (EuS) nanoprobes were developed, characterized and then deployed to cells, tissues, and rodents. Tests were performed with nanoformulated rilpivirine (NRPV), a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) used clinically to suppress or prevent HIV-1 infection. First, CD4+ T cells and monocyte-derived macrophages were EuS-treated with and without endocytic blockers to identify nanoprobe uptake into cells. Second, Balb/c mice were co-dosed with NRPV and EuS or lutetium177-doped EuS (177LuEuS) theranostic nanoparticles to assess NRPV biodistribution via mass spectrometry. Third, single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT-CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) bioimaging were used to determine nanotheranostic and NRPV anatomic redistribution over time. Results: EuS nanoprobes and NRPV entered cells through dynamin-dependent pathways. SPECT-CT and MRI identified biodistribution patterns within the reticuloendothelial system for EuS that was coordinate with NRPV trafficking. Conclusions: EuS nanoprobes parallel the uptake and biodistribution of NRPV. These data support their use in modeling NRPV delivery to improve treatment strategies.

Risedronate to Prevent Bone Loss After Sleeve Gastrectomy: Study Design and Feasibility Report of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Mounting evidence implicates bariatric surgery as a cause of increased skeletal fragility and fracture risk. Bisphosphonate therapy reduces osteoporotic fracture risk and may be effective in minimizing bone loss associated with bariatric surgery. The main objective of this pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT; Clinical Trial No. NCT03411902) was to determine the feasibility of recruiting, treating, and following 24 older patients who had undergone sleeve gastrectomy in a 6 month RCT examining the efficacy of 150‐mg once‐monthly risedronate (versus placebo) in the prevention of surgical weight‐loss–associated bone loss. Feasibility was defined as: (i) >30% recruitment yield, (ii) >80% retention, (iii) >80% pills taken, (iv) <20% adverse events (AEs), and (v) >80% participant satisfaction. Study recruitment occurred over 17 months. Seventy participants were referred, with 24 randomized (34% yield) to risedronate (n = 11) or placebo (n = 13). Average age was 56 ± 7 years, 83% were female (63% postmenopausal), and 21% were black. The risedronate group had a higher baseline BMI than the placebo group (48.1 ± 7.2 versus 41.9 ± 3.8 kg/m²). The 10‐year fracture risk was low (6.0% major osteoporotic fracture, 0.4% hip fracture); however, three individuals (12.5%, all risedronate group) were osteopenic at baseline. Twenty‐one participants returned for 6‐month follow‐up testing (88% retention) with all (n = 3) loss to follow‐up occurring in the risedronate group. Average number of pills taken among completers was 5.9 ± 0.4 and 6.0 ± 0.0 in the risedronate and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.21), with active participants taking >80% of allotted pills. Five AEs (3.7% AE rate) were reported; one definitely related, four not related, and none serious. All participants reported high satisfaction with participation in the study. Use of bisphosphonates as a novel therapeutic to preserve bone density in patients who had undergone a sleeve gastrectomy appears feasible and well‐tolerated. Knowledge gained from this pilot RCT will be used to inform the design of an appropriately powered trial.

Clinical Trial Registration

http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03411902. Weight Loss With Risedronate for Bone Health. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Medication adherence part two: predictors of nonadherence and adherence

PURPOSE

This is the second of a three-part series on medication adherence in which the authors describe the continuum of adherence to nonadherence of medication usage.

DATA SOURCES

Research articles through MEDLINE and PubMed.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the magnitude and scope of the problem of medication nonadherence is the first step in reaching better adherence rates (described in Part One of this series). The second step is to recognize the complexities of the reasons for medication adherence/nonadherence (described here). Reasons for nonadherence include beliefs related to the benefits of medication for physical and mental disorders, complexities of systems of health care and treatment plans, and lifestyle and demographic characteristics of patients. The final step is to evaluate each patient for medication adherence, tailoring the plan of care according to patient and system specific barriers (described in Part Three of this series).

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurse practitioners must recognize a critical element of thorough care is to assess medication adherence at each patient visit, countering patient and system barriers as indicated. Nurse practitioners also need to adjust assessment and prescribing practices according to the evidence for best practices to improve medication adherence.

Efficacy, tolerability and safety of once-monthly administration of 75mg risedronate in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis: a comparison with a 2.5mg once-daily dosage regimen

Oral risedronate has been shown to be effective in the treatment of osteoporosis when administered once-daily or once-weekly in Japan. This randomized, double-blind, multicenter 12-month study was conducted to compare the efficacy and tolerability of oral risedronate 75mg once-monthly with 2.5mg once-daily in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis. Bone mineral density (BMD), biochemical markers of bone metabolism, fractures, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. At the end of the study (Month 12, last observation carried forward [M12, LOCF]), mean percent change (SD) from baseline in lumbar spine (L2-L4) BMD, measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (primary endpoint), was increased by 5.69 (4.00)% in the 2.5mg once-daily group (n=428), and 5.98 (4.54)% in the 75mg once-monthly group (n=422). In the non-inferiority t-test (non-inferiority margin Δ=1.5%), the 75mg once-monthly group was non-inferior to the 2.5mg once-daily group (p<0.0001). The difference between treatment groups was 0.28% (95% CI, -0.31% to 0.88%). Changes in biochemical markers of bone metabolism were generally comparable in the two groups, although decreases in the percent change from baseline in urinary NTX/CRN and CTX/CRN were statistically greater in the 2.5mg once-daily group than the 75mg once-monthly group. The frequency of new vertebral fractures (including aggravation of prevalent fractures) at the end of the study (M12, LOCF) was also similar in the two groups: 1.2% in the 2.5mg once-daily group and 1.3% in the 75mg once-monthly group. The incidence of mild/moderate/severe AEs was 75.5%/6.3%/0.5% in the 2.5mg once-daily group and 77.7%/8.1%/0.7% in the 75mg once-monthly group. AEs associated with gastrointestinal symptoms occurred in approximately 30% of subjects in each group but with no severe cases. AEs potentially associated with acute phase reaction (including symptoms of influenza-like illness or pyrexia starting within 3days of the first dose of the study drug and with a duration of 7days or less) only occurred in the 75mg once-monthly group (2.1%, 9/422 subjects; influenza-like symptoms in 1 subject and pyrexia in 8 subjects), although the incidence was low without any severe cases. In conclusion, risedronate 75mg once-monthly (a dosage which is 30 times higher than risedronate 2.5mg once-daily) had non-inferior efficacy in terms of BMD and was similarly well tolerated compared to the once-daily regimen in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis. Consistent with the once-daily and once-weekly dosage, the once-monthly dosage of risedronate 75mg was half that used outside Japan (150mg).

Clinical utility of risedronate in postmenopausal osteoporosis: patient considerations with delayed-release formulation

Bisphosphonates are the most widely prescribed treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis, secondary osteoporosis, and male osteoporosis. Notwithstanding their high effectiveness and favorable safety profile, the adherence to bisphosphonate treatment remains low. Different treatment strategies aim to improve the clinical effectiveness of bisphosphonate therapy. This review paper assesses the clinical utility of oral intermittent risedronate in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The new delayed-release risedronate formulation is a safer and easy to use alternative to other risedronate therapy. Oral risedronate, a potent nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate, has been extensively studied using daily regimens. A new intermittent (weekly) dosing regimen confirmed its clinical effectiveness in relation to vertebral and nonvertebral fracture prevention. The absence of significant differences in the incidence of adverse effects confirmed the favorable tolerability of the weekly dosage. In efforts to improve patient adherence to treatment, an innovative, delayed-release formulation of risedronate, which ensures adequate bioavailability of the active compound when taken with food, was introduced. The once-weekly delayed-release formulation of risedronate proved to be noninferior to the daily dosage of risedronate in terms of bone mineral density and markers of bone turnover. In addition, the incidence of new morphometric vertebral fractures was comparable in both treatment regimens. The new delayed-release formulation of risedronate showed a favorable safety profile. Delayed-release risedronate is a promising, new, effective, and convenient alternative to current bisphosphonate treatments. It appears to allow better patient adherence to antiresorptive treatment.

Once-monthly risedronate for postmenopausal osteoporosis

Bisphosphonates are the mainstay of treatment for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Despite numerous clinical trials documenting efficacy, tolerability, and safety of bisphosphonate therapy, long-term persistence and adherence to these agents remains low. This has serious consequences for patients with osteoporosis in that medication non-compliance is associated with significantly higher fracture risk. This review explores the unique physicochemical properties of bisphosphonates that allow more convenient intermittent dosing and whether less frequent dosing regimens improve compliance. Bisphosphonates are now available as oral drugs (taken daily, weekly, or monthly) or as intravenous preparations (given every 3 months or annually). The safety and efficacy of these various preparations are reviewed and compared, with particular emphasis on the newest agent to be approved, once-monthly risedronate. In contrast to monthly oral ibandronate, risedronate is the first and only monthly oral bisphosphonate to offer both vertebral and non-vertebral fracture reduction, based upon non-inferiority trials. Whether the greater convenience of this monthly oral bisphosphonate will translate into improved compliance and lower fracture risk is yet to be determined.

Current and emerging pharmacologic therapies for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis

Postmenopausal osteoporosis is an asymptomatic skeletal disease that is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Osteoporotic fractures are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality and impaired quality of life-socially, emotionally, and financially. Considering the growing burden of osteoporotic fractures worldwide, there remains an ongoing need for progress in the diagnosis of osteoporosis, identification of individuals at high fracture risk, and treatment to prevent fractures. Adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D is recommended as baseline therapy for osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Available pharmacological agents for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis may not be appropriate for all women. Oral bisphosphonates are generally considered first-line therapy for patients with osteoporosis, but their use may be limited by gastrointestinal side effects. Other agents include hormone therapy, the selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) raloxifene, salmon calcitonin, teriparatide (human recombinant parathyroid hormone), and strontium ranelate (in some countries). Factors that may contribute to poor compliance and persistence with current osteoporosis therapies include drug intolerance, complexity of dosing regimens, and poor understanding of the relative benefit and risk with treatment. Emerging therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis include novel SERMs (bazedoxifene, lasofoxifene, ospemifene, arzoxifene) and denosumab. Because SERMs can display mixed functional estrogen receptor agonist or antagonist activity depending on the target tissue, they may confer beneficial effects on bone with limited stimulation of other tissues (e.g., breast, endometrium). Clinical investigation of these promising new agents is ongoing to evaluate efficacy and safety, with the goal of developing effective strategies to maximize long-term tolerance, compliance, and persistence with therapy.

Risedronate on two consecutive days per month

Risedronate, an orally administered pyridinal bisphosphonate, is effective in the treatment and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Efforts to optimize patient adherence and persistence with, and hence the effectiveness of, therapy have led to the development of a 75 mg tablet to be taken on two consecutive days each month (2CDM). After 1 year of treatment, risedronate 75 mg 2CDM was noninferior to risedronate 5 mg once daily in improving lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) in an ongoing (2-year) randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multinational trial in 1229 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Mean percentage increases in BMD from baseline at 12 months were 3.4% and 3.6% in the 75 mg 2CDM and 5 mg once-daily groups; the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the treatment difference (5 mg once daily - 75 mg 2CDM; -0.19%, 0.62%) did not exceed the predefined noninferiority margin (1.5%). In general, improvements in hip BMD and reductions in bone turnover markers with the 75 mg 2CDM regimen were not significantly different from those with the 5 mg once-daily regimen; there was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of new vertebral fractures at 12 months. The tolerability profile (including the incidence of upper gastrointestinal tract adverse events) of risedronate 75 mg 2CDM in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis was similar to that of risedronate 5 mg once daily.