Treatment Sequence for Osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is a chronic progressive disease that requires lifelong monitoring and treatment. Sequencing from one treatment to another at different ages and stages of disease is an approach that can maximize benefits and avoid potential risks from long-term treatment with a single agent.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews clinical trial data in postmenopausal women that evaluate the effects of antiresorptive agents followed by other antiresorptives, osteoanabolic agents followed by antiresorptives, and antiresorptives followed by osteoanabolic medications.

METHODS

Literature review and discussion.

RESULTS

When medications are discontinued, in the absence of sequential therapy, bone turnover rates return to baseline or above baseline, and bone loss occurs. The rate of bone loss differs for different treatments, with a very slow decline after stopping bisphosphonates and a particularly rapid decline after stopping denosumab. Careful attention to osteoporosis medication transitions can mitigate bone density loss and its consequences. For women who remain at high risk, switching from bisphosphonates to the more potent antiresorptive, denosumab, will result in further improvement in bone mineral density (BMD). When indicated, stopping denosumab can be accomplished safely by transition to an adequate bisphosphonate regimen. For high- and very-high-risk patients, treating with osteoanabolic agents first, followed by antiresorptive agents, produces substantially larger BMD gains than the reverse treatment sequence, with the biggest differences seen for BMD of the hip.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of the importance of treatment sequences can help improve osteoporosis care across the postmenopausal lifespan.

Oral daily PTH(1-34) tablets (EB613) in postmenopausal women with low BMD or osteoporosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, six-month, phase 2 study

Anabolic treatment is indicated for high and very-high risk patients with osteoporosis, but acceptance is limited because current anabolic medications require subcutaneous injections. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a novel orally administered parathyroid hormone (PTH) tablet on serum markers of bone formation [N-terminal propeptide of Type I procollagen (PINP) and osteocalcin (OC)] and bone resorption [crosslinked C-telopeptide (CTX)], bone mineral density (BMD) and safety in postmenopausal women with low BMD or osteoporosis. In this 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 161 patients were randomized to oral PTH tablets containing 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, or 2.5 mg or placebo daily. Biochemical markers were assessed at 1, 2, 3 and 6 months and BMD of lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck was measured at 6 months. Biochemical marker changes were dose dependent with minimal or no effect at the two lowest doses. At the highest dose (2.5 mg once daily), serum PINP and OC levels increased 30% within 1 month after oral PTH initiation (p < 0.0001), remained elevated through 3 months and were back to baseline at 6 months. In contrast, serum CTX levels declined 16% and 21% below baseline at 3 and 6 months respectively (both p ≤ 0.02). At 6 months, 2.5 mg tablets increased mean BMD vs placebo of the lumbar spine by 2.7%, total hip by 1.8%, and femoral neck by 2.8% (all p ≤ 0.01). There were no drug-related serious adverse events. The most common adverse events were headache, nausea, and dizziness. In contrast to subcutaneous PTH, the oral PTH tablet appears to increase BMD rapidly by the dual mechanism of stimulating formation and inhibiting bone resorption. This might be the first effective oral anabolic alternative to subcutaneous administration for the treatment of low BMD or osteoporosis.

Romosozumab in patients who experienced an on-study fracture: post hoc analyses of the FRAME and ARCH phase 3 trials

Post hoc analysis of FRAME and ARCH revealed that on-study nonvertebral and vertebral fractures by Month 12 were less common in women initially treated with romosozumab versus placebo or alendronate. Recurrent fracture risk was also lower in romosozumab‑treated patients, and there were no fracture‑related complications. Results support continuing romosozumab treatment post‑fracture.

PURPOSE

Post hoc analysis evaluating efficacy and safety of romosozumab, administered in the immediate post‑fracture period, in the FRAME and ARCH phase 3 trials.

METHODS

In FRAME (NCT01575834) and ARCH (NCT01631214), postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were randomized 1:1 to romosozumab 210 mg monthly or comparator (FRAME, placebo; ARCH, alendronate 70 mg weekly) for 12 months, followed by antiresorptive therapy (FRAME, denosumab; ARCH, alendronate). In patients who experienced on-study nonvertebral or new/worsening vertebral fracture by Month 12, we report the following: fracture and treatment‑emergent adverse event (TEAE) incidence through 36 months, bone mineral density changes (BMD), and romosozumab timing. Due to the sample sizes employed, meaningful statistical comparisons between treatments were not possible.

RESULTS

Incidence of on-study nonvertebral and vertebral fractures by Month 12 was numerically lower in romosozumab- versus comparator-treated patients (FRAME, 1.6% and 0.5% versus 2.1% and 1.6%; ARCH, 3.4% and 3.3% versus 4.6% and 4.9%, respectively). In those who experienced on-study nonvertebral fracture by Month 12, recurrent nonvertebral and subsequent vertebral fracture incidences were numerically lower in patients initially treated with romosozumab versus comparator (FRAME, 3.6% [2/56] and 1.8% [1/56] versus 9.2% [7/76] and 3.9% [3/76]; ARCH, 10.0% [7/70] and 5.7% [4/70] versus 12.6% [12/95] and 8.4% [8/95], respectively). Among those with on-study vertebral fracture by Month 12, recurrent vertebral and subsequent nonvertebral fracture incidences were numerically lower with romosozumab versus comparator (FRAME, 0.0% [0/17] and 0.0% [0/17] versus 11.9% [7/59] and 8.5% [5/59]; ARCH, 9.0% [6/67] and 7.5% [5/67] versus 15.0% [15/100] and 16.0% [16/100], respectively). In patients with fracture by Month 12, no fracture‑related complications were reported in romosozumab-treated patients. BMD gains were numerically greater with romosozumab than comparators.

CONCLUSION

Data suggest support for the efficacy and safety of continuing romosozumab treatment following fracture.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

NCT01575834; NCT01631214.

Romosozumab Efficacy in Postmenopausal Women With No Prior Fracture Who Fulfill Criteria for Very High Fracture Risk

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the efficacy of romosozumab in women from FRAME who had no prior fracture but met other criteria for very high fracture risk (VHFR).

METHODS

In FRAME, postmenopausal women received romosozumab or placebo for 12 months (year 1) followed by denosumab for 12 months (year 2). In this post hoc analysis, we applied the following criteria from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinology to define VHFR: lumbar spine or total hip T-score <-3.0 and/or Fracture Risk Assessment Tool probability of major osteoporotic fracture >30% or hip fracture >4.5% to women with no fracture history at baseline (no fracture-VHFR [NF-VHFR]). Incidence of new vertebral, clinical, and nonvertebral fractures and mean bone mineral density (BMD) percentage change from baseline were assessed at years 1 and 2.

RESULTS

Of the 7180 women in FRAME, 2825 were included in the NF-VHFR subgroup analysis. At year 1, romosozumab versus placebo reduced the incidence of new vertebral fracture (relative risk reduction [RRR]: 76%), clinical fracture (RRR: 60%), and nonvertebral fracture (RRR: 54%) (all P <.05). This fracture reduction was maintained through year 2 in women receiving the romosozumab-to-denosumab sequence versus the placebo-to-denosumab sequence for new vertebral, clinical, and nonvertebral fractures (RRR: 77%, 54%, and 46%, respectively; all P <.05). The mean BMD changes in both treatment groups were similar to those in the overall FRAME population at years 1 and 2.

CONCLUSION

Romosozumab significantly reduced vertebral, clinical, and nonvertebral fracture risk and increased the BMD more than placebo in women at VHFR.

Effects of four-year cyclic versus two-year daily teriparatide treatment on volumetric bone density and bone strength in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of cyclic vs daily teriparatide treatment (TPTD) on volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) and bone strength at the hip and spine in women who were previously untreated.

METHODS

A total of 86 women were randomized to a 24-month open label treatment of either daily TPTD (20 μg daily) or cyclic TPTD (20 μg daily for 3 months followed by 3 months off). During a 2-year extension, women in the daily TPTD group were switched to alendronate (ALN) and those in the cyclic TPTD group continued on cyclic TPTD (without any ALN). QCT images were acquired at baseline, 2-years (n = 54) and 4-years (n = 35) and analyzed for volumetric integral, cortical and trabecular bone mineral density (vBMD) and bone strength (by finite element analysis) at the hip and spine. The primary analysis presented here compared the responses across equal total TPTD doses (2 years daily vs 4 years cyclic).

RESULTS

In the spine, integral vBMD and strength increased substantially after 2 years daily and 4 years cyclic TPTD, with no significant differences (vBMD +12 % vs +11 %, respectively, p = 0.70; spine strength +21 % vs +16 %, respectively, p = 0.35). At the hip, the gains were smaller, but again no significant differences were detected between the groups for the increases in either vBMD (+2 % in both groups, p = 0.97) or hip strength (3 % vs 3 %, p = 0.91). In the spine, the vBMD increment was about twice as large in the trabecular vs peripheral compartment; in the hip, significant vBMD gain was seen only in the trabecular compartment.

CONCLUSIONS

The gains in volumetric BMD and bone strength for an equivalent dose of TPTD did not depend on whether it was administered every day over two years or cyclically over four years.

Effect of Abaloparatide on Bone Microarchitecture Assessed by Trabecular Bone Score in Women With Osteoporosis: Post Hoc Analysis of ACTIVE and ACTIVExtend

Although bone mineral density (BMD) is a predictor of fracture, many fractures occur in women with T-scores > -2.5. Bone microarchitecture, assessed by trabecular bone score (TBS), predicts fracture risk independent of BMD. We evaluated whether abaloparatide improves TBS and whether TBS trends were associated with vertebral fracture risk reduction. Women with osteoporosis randomized to abaloparatide or placebo for 18 months (ACTIVE), followed by alendronate for 24 months (ACTIVExtend), with evaluable TBS, were included in this post hoc analysis (N = 911). TBS was calculated from spine BMD scans using an algorithm adjusted for tissue thickness (TBS_th ) at baseline, 6, 18, and 43 months. Mean increments in TBS_th from baseline within and between treatment groups, proportion of women with TBS_th increments above least significant change (LSC) and proportion with degraded TBS_th (<1.027) were calculated. Risk estimates for vertebral fracture were compared using binary logistic regressions adjusted for baseline age and spine BMD. At baseline, 42% had degraded TBS_th . Mean TBS_th increased 4% after 18 months abaloparatide (p < 0.001) and was unchanged with placebo. After 2 subsequent years of alendronate, the total cumulative TBS_th increase was 4.4% with abaloparatide/alendronate and 1.7% with placebo/alendronate (group difference, p < 0.001). At 43 months, the proportion of women with degraded TBS_th had declined to 21% with abaloparatide/alendronate and 37% with placebo/alendronate (p < 0.05). An increase in TBS_th  ≥ LSC was observed in 50% of abaloparatide-treated women at 18 months and was associated with decreased odds (odds ratio [OR]; 95% confidence interval [CI]) of vertebral fracture (0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.80, 6 months; 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11-0.79, 43 months). In conclusion, abaloparatide increased TBS_th rapidly and progressively over 18 months and increments were maintained over 2 years with alendronate. TBS_th increase was associated with vertebral fracture risk reduction. Microarchitectural improvement may be one mechanism by which abaloparatide strengthens vertebral bone. © 2023 Radius Health, Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Multiple Vertebral Fractures After Denosumab Discontinuation: FREEDOM and FREEDOM Extension Trials Additional Post Hoc Analyses

It is uncertain whether the risk of vertebral fracture (VF) and multiple vertebral fractures (MVFs; ≥2 VFs) after denosumab (DMAb) discontinuation is related to treatment duration. A prior analysis of Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis Every 6 Months (FREEDOM) and FREEDOM Extension trials did not find a relationship with DMAb duration and may have underreported MVF incidence because it included women who did not have radiographs. In this post hoc exploratory analysis, the crude incidence and annualized rates of VF and MVF were determined in patients with ≥7 months' follow-up and ≥1 spine radiograph after discontinuing placebo or DMAb. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of MVF. Clinical characteristics of patients with ≥4 VFs were explored. This analysis included women who discontinued after placebo (n = 327) or DMAb either from FREEDOM or FREEDOM Extension (n = 425). The DMAb discontinuation group was subsequently dichotomized by treatment duration: short-term (≤3 years; n = 262) and long-term (>3 years; n = 213) treatment. For any VF, exposure-adjusted annualized rates per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 9.4 (95% CI, 6.4-13.4) for placebo, 6.7 (95% CI, 4.2-10.1) for short-term DMAb, and 10.7 (95% CI, 7.4-15) for long-term DMAb. Annualized rates for MVF were 3.6 (95% CI, 1.9-6.3), 2.9 (95% CI, 1.4-5.4), and 7.5 (95% CI, 4.8-11.1), respectively. Annualized rates for ≥4 VFs were 0.59 (95% CI, 0.1-2.1), 0.57 (95% CI, 0.1-2.1), and 3.34 (95% CI, 1.7-6.0), respectively. In a multivariate regression model, DMAb duration was significantly associated with MVF risk (odds ratio 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.5). Of 15 patients with ≥4 VFs, 13 had DMAb exposure (mean ± standard deviation [SD], 4.9 ± 2.2 years). The risk of MVF after DMAb discontinuation increases with increased duration of DMAb treatment. Patients transitioning off DMAb after 3 years may warrant more frequent administration of zoledronic acid or another bisphosphonate to maintain bone turnover and bone mineral density (BMD) and prevent MVF. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Comparative effectiveness and cardiovascular safety of abaloparatide and teriparatide in postmenopausal women new to anabolic therapy: A US administrative claims database study

Real-world evidence on the comparative effectiveness and safety of abaloparatide versus teriparatide in women with osteoporosis may help inform treatment decisions. Following 18 months of treatment, abaloparatide was comparable to teriparatide for prevention of nonvertebral fractures, resulted in a 22% risk reduction for hip fractures, and demonstrated similar cardiovascular safety. Osteoporotic fracture risk can be reduced with anabolic or antiresorptive medications. In addition to efficacy and safety data from controlled clinical trials, real-world evidence on comparative effectiveness and safety may help inform treatment decisions.

INTRODUCTION

The real-world effectiveness of abaloparatide versus teriparatide on nonvertebral fracture (NVF) incidence and cardiovascular safety during the 19-month period after treatment initiation were evaluated (NCT04974723).

METHODS

Anonymized US patient claims data from Symphony Health, Integrated Dataverse (IDV)®, May 1, 2017 to July 31, 2019, included women aged ≥ 50 years with ≥ 1 prescription of abaloparatide or teriparatide and no prior anabolic therapy. Most were enrolled in commercial and Medicare health plans. Index was the date of the initial prescription dispensed during the identification period. In 1:1 propensity score matched cohorts, time to first NVF following index date, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and MACE + heart failure (HF) were compared between cohorts using a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching yielded 11,616 patients per cohort. Overall median age (interquartile range) was 67 (61, 75) years, and 25.6% had a fracture history. Over 19 months, 335 patients on abaloparatide and 375 on teriparatide had a NVF (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.89 [0.77, 1.03]), and 121 and 154 patients, respectively, had a hip fracture [HR (95% CI): 0.78 (0.62, 1.00)]. The MACE and MACE + HF rates were similar between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Following 18 months of treatment, abaloparatide was comparable to teriparatide for prevention of NVF and similar cardiovascular safety was demonstrated between cohorts.

Romosozumab and antiresorptive treatment: the importance of treatment sequence

To evaluate whether treatment sequence affects romosozumab response, this analysis reviewed studies where romosozumab was administered before or following an antiresorptive (alendronate or denosumab). Initial treatment with romosozumab followed by an antiresorptive resulted in larger increases in bone mineral density of both hip and spine compared with the reverse sequence.

INTRODUCTION

Teriparatide followed by an antiresorptive increases bone mineral density (BMD) more than using an antiresorptive first. To evaluate whether treatment sequence affects romosozumab response, we reviewed randomized clinical trials where romosozumab was administered before (ARCH, FRAME) or following (STRUCTURE, Phase 2 extension) an antiresorptive (alendronate or denosumab, respectively).

METHODS

We evaluated BMD percentage change for total hip (TH) and lumbar spine (LS) and response rates (BMD gains ≥ 3% and ≥ 6%) at years 1 and 2 (except STRUCTURE with only 1-year data available).

RESULTS

With 1-year romosozumab initial therapy in ARCH and FRAME, TH BMD increased 6.2% and 6.0%, and LS BMD increased 13.7% and 13.1%, respectively. When romosozumab was administered for 1 year after alendronate (STRUCTURE) or denosumab (Phase 2 extension), TH BMD increased 2.9% and 0.9%, respectively, and LS BMD increased 9.8% and 5.3%, respectively. Over 2 years, TH and LS BMD increased 7.1% and 15.2% with romosozumab/alendronate, 8.5% and 16.6% with romosozumab/denosumab, and 3.8% and 11.5% with denosumab/romosozumab, respectively. A greater proportion of patients achieved BMD gains ≥ 6% when romosozumab was used first, particularly for TH, versus the reverse sequence (69% after romosozumab/denosumab; 15% after denosumab/romosozumab).

CONCLUSION

In this study, larger mean BMD increases and greater BMD responder rates were achieved when romosozumab was used before, versus after, an antiresorptive agent. Since BMD on treatment is a strong surrogate for bone strength and fracture risk, this analysis supports the thesis that initial treatment with romosozumab followed by an antiresorptive will result in greater efficacy versus the reverse sequence.

Effects of teriparatide and loading modality on modeling-based and remodeling-based bone formation in the human femoral neck

PURPOSE

We have previously shown that a brief course of teriparatide (TPTD) stimulates bone formation in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes of the human femoral neck, and the regions of tension and compression respond differently. The purpose of the present study was to determine how much of the new bone was formed by modeling-based formation (MBF) or remodeling-based formation (RBF).

METHODS

We performed a double-blind trial of TPTD vs. placebo (PBO) in patients about to undergo a total hip replacement (THR) for osteoarthritis. Participants were randomized to receive daily TPTD 20 μg or PBO for an average of 6.1 weeks (range 4.1-11.8 weeks) prior to THR. After an average of 3 weeks of study drug, double tetracycline labels were administered per standard protocol. During the THR an intact sample of the mid-femoral neck (FN) was procured; this was fixed, embedded, and sectioned transversely. Histomorphometric analysis was performed in the cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal envelopes. Additionally, separate analyses were performed in the tensile and compressive regions of the endocortical and periosteal envelopes. Sites of new bone formation were identified by the presence of tetracycline labels and designated as MBF if the underlying cement line was smooth and as RBF if it was scalloped. New bone formation on smooth cement lines adjacent to scalloped reversal lines was designated as overflow RBF (oRBF). The referent for all indices was bone surface (BS).

RESULTS

In the cancellous and endocortical envelopes, the proportion of mineralizing surface engaged in RBF and oRBF was higher in the TPTD-treated than the PBO-treated subjects. There was also a trend toward higher MBF in TPTD vs. PBO in both envelopes. In linear mixed-effects models, TPTD was predicted to increase formation differently on the tensile and compressive surfaces depending on patient-specific anatomy, including body weight, FN angle, offset, and cortical width and porosity. Eroded surface was not different between groups in either envelope and no significant differences were observed in any parameter in the periosteal envelope.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the predominant early effect of TPTD in the human femoral neck is to stimulate RBF and oRBF with a trend toward an increase in MBF in the endocortical and cancellous envelopes.

Teriparatide and pelvic fracture healing: a phase 2 randomized controlled trial

Pelvic fracture patients were randomized to blinded daily subcutaneous teriparatide (TPTD) or placebo to assess healing and functional outcomes over 3 months. With TPTD, there was no evidence of improved healing by CT or pain reduction; however, physical performance improved with TPTD but not placebo (group difference p < 0.03).

INTRODUCTION

To determine if teriparatide (20 μg/day; TPTD) results in improved radiologic healing, reduced pain, and improved functional outcome vs placebo over 3 months in pelvic fracture patients.

METHODS

This randomized, placebo-controlled study enrolled 35 patients (women and men >50 years old) within 4 weeks of pelvic fracture and evaluated the effect of blinded TPTD vs placebo over 3 months on fracture healing. Fracture healing from CT images at 0 and 3 months was assessed as cortical bridging using a 5-point scale. The numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain was administered monthly. Physical performance was assessed monthly by Continuous Summary Physical Performance Score (based on 4 m walk speed, timed repeated chair stands, and balance) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test.

RESULTS

The mean age was 82, and >80% were female. The intention to treat analysis showed no group difference in cortical bridging score, and 50% of fractures in TPTD-treated and 53% of fractures in placebo-treated patients were healed at 3 months, unchanged after adjustment for age, sacral fracture, and fracture displacement. Median pain score dropped significantly in both groups with no group differences. Both CSPPS and TUG improved in the teriparatide group, whereas there was no improvement in the placebo group (group difference p < 0.03 for CSPPS at 2 and 3 months).

CONCLUSION

In this small randomized, blinded study, there was no improvement in radiographic healing (CT at 3 months) or pain with TPTD vs placebo; however, there was improved physical performance in TPTD-treated subjects that was not evident in the placebo group.

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

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

Romosozumab Followed by Antiresorptive Treatment Increases the Probability of Achieving Bone Mineral Density Treatment Goals

Increases in bone mineral density (BMD) with osteoporosis treatment are associated with reduced fracture risk. Increasing BMD is therefore a goal of osteoporosis therapy. Here, we compare the probability of achieving a T-score of > -2.5 over 3 years at the total hip (TH) or lumbar spine (LS) in women with osteoporosis, ≥55 years of age, after the following treatment sequences: 1 year romosozumab followed by 2 years denosumab (FRAME and FRAME extension trials), 1 year romosozumab followed by 2 years alendronate, or alendronate-only for 3 years (ARCH trial). Probabilities of attaining the BMD target within 1 year of treatment were also determined. At both skeletal sites, in women with a baseline Tscore ≥ -2.7, there was >50% probability of achieving the BMD target with any 3-year regimen. The probability of achieving the target BMD in those with a baseline TH Tscore equal to -3.0 was 61% with romosozumab/denosumab, 38% with romosozumab/alendronate, and 9% with alendronate. In those with a baseline LS Tscore equal to -3.0, the probability of achieving a T-score > -2.5 was 93% with romosozumab/denosumab, 81% with romosozumab/alendronate, and 55% with alendronate. With 1 year of treatment, in patients with a baseline TH T-score equal to -2.7, the probability of reaching the target Tscore with romosozumab was 71% to 78% and 38% with alendronate. For patients with an initial LS T-score equal to -3.0, the probability of achieving the target T-score over 1 year was 85% to 86% with romosozumab and 25% for alendronate. Our findings suggest baseline BMD and the probability of achieving BMD T-score goals are factors to consider when selecting initial treatment for patients with osteoporosis. As baseline T-score falls below -2.7 (TH) and -3.0 (LS), alendronate has <50% likelihood of achieving a BMD goal above osteoporosis range, whereas these probabilities remain relatively high for regimens beginning with romosozumab. © 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Early changes in bone turnover and bone mineral density after discontinuation of long-term oral bisphosphonates: a post hoc analysis

This post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind study of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis found that there were early increases in bone turnover markers and decreases in bone mineral density after discontinuation of long-term alendronate. These findings might help guide treatment decisions, including monitoring after alendronate withdrawal.

INTRODUCTION

The short-term effects of discontinuing long-term bisphosphonates are poorly characterized. This post hoc analysis investigated 1-12-month changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers (BTM) after alendronate (ALN) discontinuation.

METHODS

Data were from a randomized, double-blind trial of MK-5442 (calcium-sensing receptor antagonist) following oral bisphosphonates, with placebo and continued ALN controls ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00996801). Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis had received oral bisphosphonate (≥ 3-4 preceding years; ALN for the 12 months pre-screening), continuing on ALN 70 mg/week (n = 87) or placebo (n = 88).

RESULTS

At 12 months, least-squares mean percent changes from baseline BMD (placebo vs. ALN) were lumbar spine (LS): - 0.36 vs. 1.29, total hip: - 1.44 vs. 0.46, and femoral neck (FN): - 1.26 vs. - 0.08 (all P < 0.05). BTM levels increased by 1-3 months, to 12 months, with placebo vs. ALN (P < 0.001). FN BMD decline was greater in the placebo subgroup with higher urinary N-terminal cross-linked telopeptides of type I collagen/creatinine [uNTx/Cr] (P < 0.01), and higher serum N-terminal pro-peptide of type 1 collagen [P1NP] levels (P < 0.05), at baseline. There was a trend toward greater FN BMD loss with higher BTM levels at 3 and/or 6 months. Younger age and higher LS BMD at baseline were associated with greater LS BMD loss at 12 months (P = 0.04 and < 0.01, respectively); higher baseline FN BMD predicted greater FN BMD loss (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Early changes in BTM levels and BMD were observed after discontinuation of long-term ALN. Further characterization of factors associated with patients' risk of bone loss upon bisphosphonate discontinuation is warranted.

Incidence of Hip and Subtrochanteric/Femoral Shaft Fractures in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis in the Phase 3 Long-Term Odanacatib Fracture Trial

We prospectively assessed, with predefined criteria, the location and rates of all femur fractures (hip, subtrochanteric/femoral shaft [ST/FS], including atypical [AFF] and distal fractures) in women at increased fracture risk during treatment with the cathepsin K inhibitor, odanacatib (ODN), or placebo over 5 years in the Long-Term ODN Fracture Trial (LOFT and LOFT Extension [NCT00529373, EudraCT 2007-002693-66]). ODN was an investigational antiresorptive agent previously in development as an osteoporosis treatment that, unlike bisphosphonates, reduces bone formation only transiently. Women aged ≥65 years with a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score ≤-2.5 at the total hip (TH) or femoral neck (FN) or with a radiographic vertebral fracture and T-scores ≤-1.5 at the TH or FN were randomized (1:1) to receive ODN 50 mg/week or placebo. All patients received vitamin D₃ (5600 IU/week) and calcium (total 1200 mg/d); the analysis included 16,071 women. Rates of all adjudicated low-energy femoral fractures were 0.38 versus 0.58/100 patient-years for ODN and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.82; nominal p < .001), and for low-energy hip fractures were 0.29 versus 0.56/100 patient-years, respectively (HR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.40-0.67; p < .001). The cumulative incidence of combined hip and ST/FS or hip fractures alone in the ODN group was consistently lower than in the placebo group (1.93% versus 3.11% for combined fractures and 1.53% versus 3.03% for hip fractures at 5 years, respectively). However, low-energy ST/FS fractures were more frequent in ODN-treated women than in placebo-treated women (24 versus 6, respectively). Among these, 12 fractures were adjudicated as AFF in 10 patients treated with ODN (0.03/100 patient-years) compared with none in the 6 placebo-treated women (estimated difference 0.03; 95% CI 0.02-0.06). These results provide insight into possible pathogeneses of AFF, suggesting that the current criteria for diagnosing these fractures may need to be reconsidered. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)..

Anabolic Agents for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: How Do You Choose?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are now three anabolic agents available for the treatment of postmenopausal women at high risk for fracture. The purpose of this review is to supply a rationale to aid in determining which agent should be used in which clinical settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies over the last decade have shown that anabolic agents produce faster and larger effects against fracture than antiresorptive agents. Furthermore, trials evaluating anabolic antiresorptive treatment sequences have shown that anabolic first treatment strategies produce the greatest benefits to bone density, particularly in the hip region. However, there are no head-to-head evaluations of the three anabolic therapies with fracture outcomes or bone density, and these studies are not likely to occur. How to decide which agent to use at which time in a woman's life is unknown. We review the most significant clinical trials of anabolic agents which have assessed fracture, areal or volumetric bone density, microarchitecture, and/or bone strength, as well as information gleaned from histomorphometry studies to provide a rationale for consideration of one agent vs another in various clinical settings. There is no definitive answer to this question; all three agents increase bone strength and reduce fracture risk rapidly. Since the postmenopausal lifespan could be as long as 40-50 years, it is likely that very high-risk women will utilize different anabolic agents at different points in their lives.

Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) for osteoporosis screening in US postmenopausal women: is it cost-effective?

Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) is cost-effective when it was incorporated in the routine screening for osteoporosis in community-dwelling women aged ≥ 65 years, which support guidelines, such as the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) for the diagnostic use of VFA as an important addition to fracture risk assessment.

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of VFA as a screening tool to reduce future fracture risk in US community-dwelling women aged ≥ 65 years.

METHODS

An individual-level state-transition cost-effectiveness model from a healthcare perspective was constructed using derived data from published literature. The time horizon was lifetime. Five screening strategies were compared, including no screening at all, central dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) only, VFA only, central DXA followed by VFA if the femoral neck T-score (FN-T) ≤ - 1.5, or if the FN-T ≤ - 1.0. Various initiation ages and rescreening intervals were evaluated. Oral bisphosphonate treatment for 5-year periods was assumed. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (2017 US dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained) were used as the outcome measure.

RESULTS

The incorporation of VFA slightly increased life expectancy by 0.1 years and reduced the number of subsequent osteoporotic fractures by 3.7% and 7.7% compared with using DXA alone and no screening, respectively, leading to approximately 30 billion dollars saved. Regardless of initiation ages and rescreening intervals, central DXA followed by VFA if the FN-T ≤ - 1.0 was most cost-effective ($40,792 per QALY when the screening is initiated at age 65 years and with rescreening every 5 years). Results were robust to change in VF incidence and medication costs.

CONCLUSION

In women aged ≥ 65 years, VFA is cost-effective when it was incorporated in routine screening for osteoporosis. Our findings support the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) guidelines for the diagnostic use of VFA as an important addition to fracture risk assessment.

Cardiovascular Safety of Abaloparatide in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis: Analysis From the ACTIVE Phase 3 Trial

CONTEXT

Abaloparatide is a US Food and Drug Administration-approved parathyroid hormone-related peptide analog for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at high risk of fracture.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the cardiovascular safety profile of abaloparatide.

DESIGN

Review of heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), and cardiovascular-related adverse events (AEs), including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and heart failure (HF) from: (a) ACTIVE (NCT01343004), a phase 3 trial that randomized 2463 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis to abaloparatide, teriparatide, or placebo for 18 months; (b) ACTIVExtend (NCT01657162), where participants from the abaloparatide and placebo arms received alendronate for 2 years; and (c) a pharmacology study in 55 healthy adults.

RESULTS

Abaloparatide and teriparatide transiently increased HR relative to placebo. Following first dose, mean (standard deviation [SD]) HR change from pretreatment to 1 hour posttreatment was 7.9 (8.5) beats per minute (bpm) for abaloparatide, 5.3 (7.5) for teriparatide, and 1.2 (7.1) for placebo. A similar pattern was observed over subsequent visits. In healthy volunteers, HR increase resolved within 4 hours. The corresponding change in mean supine systolic and diastolic BP 1 hour posttreatment was -2.7/-3.6 mmHg (abaloparatide), -2.0/-3.6 (teriparatide), and -1.5/-2.3 (placebo). The percentage of participants with serious cardiac AEs was similar among groups (0.9%-1.0%). In a post hoc analysis, time to first incidence of MACE + HF was longer with abaloparatide (P = 0.02 vs placebo) and teriparatide (P = 0.04 vs placebo).

CONCLUSIONS

Abaloparatide was associated with transient increases in HR and small decreases in BP in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, with no increase in risk of serious cardiac AEs, MACE, or HF.

Abaloparatide: an anabolic treatment to reduce fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE

Fractures due to osteoporosis represent a serious burden on patients and healthcare systems. The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the anabolic agent abaloparatide (ABL) for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using PubMed to identify articles focused on ABL published prior to February 10, 2020, using the search term "abaloparatide".

RESULTS

ABL, a synthetic analog of human parathyroid hormone-related protein, increased bone mineral density (BMD), improved bone microarchitecture, and increased bone strength in preclinical and clinical studies. The pivotal phase 3 trial ACTIVE and its extension (ACTIVExtend) demonstrated the efficacy of initial treatment with ABL for 18 months followed by sequential treatment with alendronate (ALN) for an additional 24 months to reduce the risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, clinical, and major osteoporotic fractures and to increase BMD in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Discontinuations from ACTIVE were slightly more common in ABL-treated patients due to dizziness, palpitations, nausea, and headache. Post hoc analyses of ACTIVE and ACTIVExtend support the efficacy and safety of ABL in relevant subpopulations including postmenopausal women with various baseline risk factors, women ≥80 years, women with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and women with renal impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

ABL is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis at high risk for fracture. Its therapeutic effects are sustained with subsequent ALN therapy.

Correction to: Abaloparatide effect on forearm bone mineral density and wrist fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

The original version of this article, published on 21 March 2019, unfortunately contains some typos in Figs. 2, 3, 4, and Supplemental Fig. 1. The corrected figures are given below.

Modeling-Based Bone Formation in the Human Femoral Neck in Subjects Treated With Denosumab

Denosumab is associated with continued gains in hip and spine BMD with up to 10 years of treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Despite potent inhibition of bone remodeling, findings in nonhuman primates suggest modeling-based bone formation (MBBF) may persist during denosumab treatment. This study assessed whether MBBF in the femoral neck (FN) is preserved in the context of inhibited remodeling in subjects receiving denosumab. This open-label study enrolled postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who had received two or more doses of denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months [Q6M]) per standard of care and were planning elective total hip replacement (THR) owing to osteoarthritis of the hip. Transverse sections of the FN were obtained after THR and analyzed histomorphometrically. MBBF, based on fluorochrome labeling and presence of smooth cement lines, was evaluated in cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal envelopes of the FN. Histomorphometric parameters were used to assess MBBF and remodeling-based bone formation (RBBF) in denosumab-treated subjects (n = 4; mean age = 73.5 years; range, 70 to 78 years) and historical female controls (n = 11; mean age = 67.8 years; range, 62 to 80 years) obtained from the placebo group of a prior study and not treated with denosumab. All analyses were descriptive. All subjects in both groups exhibited MBBF in the periosteal envelope; in cancellous and endocortical envelopes, all denosumab-treated subjects and 81.8% of controls showed evidence of MBBF. Compared with controls, denosumab-treated subjects showed 9.4-fold and 2.0-fold higher mean values of MBBF in cancellous and endocortical envelopes, respectively, whereas RBBF mean values were 5.0-fold and 5.3-fold lower. In the periosteal envelope, MBBF and RBBF rates were similar between subjects and controls. These results demonstrate the occurrence of MBBF in the human FN and suggest that denosumab preserves MBBF while inhibiting remodeling, which may contribute to the observed continued gains in BMD over time after remodeling is maximally inhibited. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

T-Score as an Indicator of Fracture Risk During Treatment With Romosozumab or Alendronate in the ARCH Trial

In the Active-Controlled Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis at High Risk (ARCH) clinical trial (NCT01631214), 1 year of romosozumab followed by alendronate reduced the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures compared to alendronate alone in women with prevalent fracture. We performed post hoc analyses of data from patients in ARCH (romosozumab, n = 1739; alendronate, n = 1726) who had a baseline BMD measurement and received at least one open-label alendronate dose. We evaluated 1-year mean BMD and corresponding T-score changes; proportions of patients achieving T-scores > -2.5 at the total hip (TH), femoral neck (FN), and lumbar spine (LS); and group differences in fracture rates after 12 months, while all participants were on alendronate. Subsequently, we investigated the relationship between T-scores achieved at the TH, FN, and LS at 12 months and subsequent fracture incidence. At 1 year, mean change from baseline in TH BMD was 6.3% (T-score change 0.31) with romosozumab versus 2.9% (T-score change 0.15) with alendronate (p < .001). The proportion of patients with TH T-score > -2.5 increased from 34% at baseline to 55% after 1 year of romosozumab and from 32% at baseline to 44% after 1 year of alendronate. Compared with patients receiving alendronate in year 1, those receiving romosozumab had a 75% reduction in new or worsening vertebral fracture (p < .001) in year 2, and a 19% reduction in nonvertebral fracture (p = .120) and 40% reduction in hip fracture (p = .041) during the open-label period. TH and FN T-scores achieved at month 12 were associated with subsequent nonvertebral and vertebral fracture rates and the relationships were independent of treatment received. LS T-score at 12 months was associated with vertebral but not nonvertebral fracture risk. We conclude that 1 year of romosozumab leads to larger BMD gains versus alendronate, and that the T-score achieved with either therapy is related to subsequent fracture risk. These data support the use of T-score as a therapeutic target for patients with osteoporosis. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Anabolic Therapy and Optimal Treatment Sequences for Patients With Osteoporosis at High Risk for Fracture

OBJECTIVE

Provide an update regarding anabolic medications for osteoporosis, which are often considered to be the last resort for patients with osteoporosis, after multiple fractures have already occurred and other medications have already been administered.

METHODS

Literature review and discussion.

RESULTS

Recent pivotal trial data for anabolic agents and randomized trials comparing anabolic and antiresorptive medications suggest that three anabolic agents (teriparatide, abaloparatide, and romosozumab) reduce nonvertebral and vertebral fractures faster and to a greater extent than potent antiresorptive treatments. Furthermore, bone density accrual is maximized when patients are given anabolic agents first, followed by potent antiresorptive therapy. Since total hip bone density during or after osteoporosis treatment has emerged as an excellent surrogate for future fracture risk, attaining a greater hip bone mineral density is a treatment goal for high-risk osteoporosis patients.

CONCLUSION

This review defines the highest-risk patients and summarizes the rationale for the evolving role of anabolic therapy in the management of postmenopausal women at high risk for fracture.

ABBREVIATIONS

ACTIVE = Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints; ARCH = Active Controlled Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis at High Risk; BMD = bone mineral density; FRAME = Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis; FRAX = Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; PTH = parathyroid hormone; TBS = trabecular bone score.

Loading modality and age influence teriparatide-induced bone formation in the human femoral neck

Teriparatide (TPTD) reduces risk of both vertebral and nonvertebral fracture, but increases bone mineral density (BMD) much more at the spine than the hip. TPTD and mechanical loading may have a synergistic anabolic effect on BMD, which may help explain these site-specific differences. Under normal daily activity, the femoral neck (FN) is under bending, placing one side under tension and the other under compression. We sought to further understand the relationship between mechanical loading and TPTD at the hip by investigating the effect of tensile versus compressive loading on TPTD stimulated bone formation indices in the human FN. Thirty-eight patients receiving total hip replacements for osteoarthritis were randomized to receive placebo (PBO) or TPTD for a mean treatment duration of 6 weeks prior to surgery, and double tetracycline labeling was administered to allow assessment of bone formation. The FN was harvested during surgery and analyzed for dynamic bone formation indices in the compressive and tensile regions of the endocortical and periosteal envelopes. Regression models relating outcome measures to patient characteristics including sex, age, body weight, and FN geometry were also analyzed. Overall, bone formation was higher with TPTD versus placebo on the endocortical surface, but not the periosteal surface. The level of bone formation in both TPTD and placebo groups was greater on the tensile endocortical surface and the compressive periosteal surface. There was a trend toward decreased endocortical eroded surface with TPTD in the compressive but not the tensile region. Patient age and sex explained the greatest variability in endocortical bone formation, and patient body mass and sex explained the greatest variability in periosteal bone formation. Our data represent the first dynamic comparison of teriparatide treatment under two loading modalities in human FN samples. Future work could determine whether specific hip loading intervention could amplify the benefits of teriparatide on the hip in clinical settings.

Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT) for clinical assessment of osteoporosis

The surgeon general of the USA defines osteoporosis as "a skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone strength, predisposing to an increased risk of fracture." Measuring bone strength, Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT), namely, finite element analysis of a patient's clinical-resolution computed tomography (CT) scan, is now available in the USA as a Medicare screening benefit for osteoporosis diagnostic testing. Helping to address under-diagnosis of osteoporosis, BCT can be applied "opportunistically" to most existing CT scans that include the spine or hip regions and were previously obtained for an unrelated medical indication. For the BCT test, no modifications are required to standard clinical CT imaging protocols. The analysis provides measurements of bone strength as well as a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-equivalent bone mineral density (BMD) T-score at the hip and a volumetric BMD of trabecular bone at the spine. Based on both the bone strength and BMD measurements, a physician can identify osteoporosis and assess fracture risk (high, increased, not increased), without needing confirmation by DXA. To help introduce BCT to clinicians and health care professionals, we describe in this review the currently available clinical implementation of the test (VirtuOst), its application for managing patients, and the underlying supporting evidence; we also discuss its main limitations and how its results can be interpreted clinically. Together, this body of evidence supports BCT as an accurate and convenient diagnostic test for osteoporosis in both sexes, particularly when used opportunistically for patients already with CT. Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT) uses a patient's CT scan to measure both bone strength and bone mineral density at the hip or spine. Performing at least as well as DXA for both diagnosing osteoporosis and assessing fracture risk, BCT is particularly well-suited to "opportunistic" use for the patient without a recent DXA who is undergoing or has previously undergone CT testing (including hip or spine regions) for an unrelated medical condition.

Correction to: Abaloparatide effect on forearm bone mineral density and wrist fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

The original version of this article, published on 21 March 2019, unfortunately contained a mistake.

Abnormal microarchitecture and stiffness in postmenopausal women with isolated osteoporosis at the 1/3 radius

BACKGROUND

Postmenopausal women with isolated osteoporosis at the 1/3 radius (1/3RO) present a therapeutic dilemma. Little is known about whether these patients have generalized skeletal fragility, and whether this finding warrants treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the biochemical and microarchitectural phenotype of women with 1/3RO compared to women with classic postmenopausal osteoporosis by DXA at the spine and hip (PMO), and controls without osteoporosis at any site.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study enrolled 266 postmenopausal women, who were grouped according to densitometric pattern. Subjects had serum biochemistries, areal BMD (aBMD) measured by DXA, trabecular and cortical vBMD, microarchitecture, and stiffness by high resolution peripheral QCT (HR-pQCT, voxel size ~82 μm) of the distal radius and tibia.

RESULTS

Mean age was 68 ± 7 years. DXA T-Scores reflected study design. By HR-pQCT, 1/3RO had abnormalities at both radius and tibia compared to controls: lower total, cortical and trabecular vBMD, cortical thickness and trabecular number, higher trabecular separation and heterogeneity, and lower whole bone stiffness. In contrast, the magnitude and pattern of abnormalities in vBMD, microarchitecture and stiffness in 1/3RO were similar to those in PMO; the difference compared to controls was similar among the two groups. Serum calcium, creatinine, parathyroid hormone, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, and 24-hour urine calcium did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Although aBMD appeared relatively preserved at the spine and hip by DXA, women with 1/3RO had significant microarchitectural and biomechanical deficits comparable to those in women with typical PMO. Further study is required to guide treatment decisions in this population.

No evidence for alteration in early secondary mineralization by either alendronate, teriparatide or combination of both in transiliac bone biopsy samples from postmenopausal osteoporotic patients

The influence of treatment with alendronate (ALN), teriparatide (TPTD) or concurrent treatment with both on the human bone matrix mineralization has not yet been fully elucidated. For this purpose we analyzed quadruple fluorochrome labelled transiliac bone biopsy samples (n = 66) from postmenopausal osteoporotic women with prior and ongoing ALN (ALN-Rx arm) or without ALN (Rx-Naïve arm) after 7 months treatment with cyclic or daily TPTD or without TPTD using quantitative backscattered electron imaging and confocal scanning laser microscopy. Additionally to the bone mineralization density distribution (BMDD) of entire cancellous and cortical compartments, we measured the mineralization kinetics, i.e. the calcium concentration between the younger (Ca_DL2) and older double labels (Ca_DL1), and in interstitial bone (Ca_int) in a subset of the biopsy cohort.

We found the BMDD from the patients with prior and ongoing ALN generally shifted to higher calcium concentrations compared to those without ALN (average degree of mineralization in cancellous bone Cn.CaMean + 3.1%, p<0.001). The typical BMDD changes expected by cyclic or daily TPTD treatment due to the increased bone turnover/formation, e.g. an increase in low mineralized bone area were not observed. Additionally, we found no influence of treatment with ALN or TPTD or combination thereof on Ca_DL2, Ca_DL1, or Ca_int. Pooling the information from all groups, Ca_DL1 was +5.9% (p<0.001) higher compared to Ca_DL2, corresponding to a mineralization rate of 0.18 wt% Ca per week during the early secondary mineralization process.

Our data suggest that the patients in the ALN-Rx arm had more highly mineralized bone matrix than those without ALN due to their lower bone turnover. The reason for the unexpected BMDD findings in the TPTD treated remain unknown and cannot be attributed to altered mineralization kinetics as no differences in the time course of early secondary mineralization were observed between the treatment groups.

•

Quadruple fluorescence labeling provided analysis of early secondary bone mineralization rate in osteoporotic patients.

•

Alendronate, teriparatide or combination of both had no influence on early secondary bone mineralization in patients.

•

The early secondary mineralization rate (increase in mineral content with time) was found to be 0.18 wt% Ca per week.

•

Patients in the ALN-Rx arm had higher average bone matrix mineralization than the patients in the Rx-naïve arm.

Standard Versus Cyclic Teriparatide and Denosumab Treatment for Osteoporosis: A Randomized Trial

In the absence of an intervening antiresorptive agent, cyclic administration of teriparatide does not increase bone mineral density (BMD) more than standard daily therapy. Because denosumab is a potent antiresorptive agent with a rapid off-effect, we hypothesized that it might be the optimal agent to help maximize bone gains with cyclic teriparatide. In this 3-year protocol, 70 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were randomized to 18 months of teriparatide followed by 18 months of denosumab (standard) or three separate 12-month cycles of 6 months of teriparatide followed by 6 months of denosumab (cyclic). BMD (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) measurements of lumbar spine (LS), total hip (TH), femoral neck (FN), and 1/3 radius (RAD) were performed every 6 months and total body bone mineral (TBBM) at 18 and 36 months. Baseline descriptive characteristics did not differ between groups except for a minimal difference in LS BMD but not T-score (mean age 65 years, mean LS T-score - 2.7). In the standard group, BMD increments at 36 months were: LS 16%, TH 4%, FN 3%, and TBBM 4.8% (all p < 0.001 versus baseline). In the cyclic group, 36-month BMD increments were similar: LS 12%, TH 4%, FN 4%, and TBBM 4.1% (all p < 0.001 versus baseline). At 36 months, the LS BMD increase with standard was slightly larger than with cyclic (p = 0.04), but at 18 months, in the cyclic group, there was no decline in RAD or TBBM (p = 0.007 and < 0.001, respectively, versus standard). Although the cyclic regimen did not improve BMD compared with standard at 36 months, there appeared to be a benefit at 18 months, especially in the highly cortical skeletal sites. This could be clinically relevant in patients at high imminent risk of fracture, particularly at nonvertebral sites. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Abaloparatide effect on forearm bone mineral density and wrist fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

PURPOSE

Wrist fractures are common, contribute significantly to morbidity in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, and occur predominantly at the ultradistal radius, a site rich in trabecular bone. This exploratory analysis of the phase 3 ACTIVE study evaluated effects of abaloparatide versus placebo and teriparatide on forearm bone mineral density (BMD) and risk of wrist fracture.

METHODS

Forearm BMD was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in a subset of 982 women from ACTIVE, evenly distributed across the three treatment groups. Wrist fractures were ascertained in the total cohort (N = 2463).

RESULTS

After 18 months, ultradistal radius BMD changes from baseline were 2.25 percentage points greater for abaloparatide compared with placebo (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38, 3.12, p < 0.001) and 1.54 percentage points greater for abaloparatide compared with teriparatide (95% CI 0.64, 2.45, p < 0.001). At 18 months, 1/3 radius BMD losses (versus baseline) were similar for abaloparatide compared with placebo (-0.42; 95% CI -1.03, 0.20; p = 0.19) but losses with teriparatide exceeded those of placebo (-1.66%; 95% CI -2.27, -1.06; p < 0.001). The decline with abaloparatide was less than that seen with teriparatide (group difference 1.22%; 95% CI 0.57, 1.87; p < 0.001). The radius BMD findings, at both ultradistal and 1/3 sites, are consistent with the numerically lower incidence of wrist fractures observed in women treated with abaloparatide compared with teriparatide (HR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.18, 1.03; p = 0.052) and placebo (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.20, 1.19, p = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with teriparatide, abaloparatide increased BMD at the ultradistal radius (primarily trabecular bone) and decreased BMD to a lesser extent at the 1/3 radius (primarily cortical bone), likely contributing to the numerically lower wrist fracture incidence observed with abaloparatide.

Relationship Between Bone Mineral Density T-Score and Nonvertebral Fracture Risk Over 10 Years of Denosumab Treatment

Although treat-to-target strategies are being discussed in osteoporosis, there is little evidence of what the target should be to reduce fracture risk maximally. We investigated the relationship between total hip BMD T-score and the incidence of nonvertebral fracture in women who received up to 10 years of continued denosumab therapy in the FREEDOM (3 years) study and its long-term Extension (up to 7 years) study. We report the percentages of women who achieved a range of T-scores at the total hip or femoral neck over 10 years of denosumab treatment (1343 women completed 10 years of treatment). The incidence of nonvertebral fractures was lower with higher total hip T-score. This relationship plateaued at a T-score between -2.0 and -1.5 and was independent of age and prevalent vertebral fractures, similar to observations in treatment-naïve subjects. Reaching a specific T-score during denosumab treatment was dependent on the baseline T-score, with higher T-scores at baseline more likely to result in higher T-scores at each time point during the study. Our findings highlight the importance of follow-up BMD measurements in patients receiving denosumab therapy because BMD remains a robust indicator of fracture risk. These data support the notion of a specific T-score threshold as a practical target for therapy in osteoporosis. © 2019 The Authors Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Comparison of BMD Changes and Bone Formation Marker Levels 3 Years After Bisphosphonate Discontinuation: FLEX and HORIZON-PFT Extension I Trials

An ASBMR Task Force recommends a drug holiday for certain women treated for ≥5 years with oral alendronate or ≥3 years with intravenous zoledronic acid, with reassessment 2 to 3 years later. It is not known whether changes in bone mineral density (BMD) or bone turnover markers differ after oral or intravenous therapy. Our goal was to compare changes in BMD and procollagen type I N propeptide (PINP) after oral or intravenous bisphosphonate use. In the Fracture Intervention Trial Long-term Extension (FLEX), women who received a mean 5 years of alendronate were randomized to placebo or continued treatment. In the Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly-Pivotal Fracture Trial Extension I (HORIZON-PFT E1), women who received 3 years of zoledronic acid were randomized to placebo or continued treatment. We examined the proportion of participants with BMD loss or PINP gain ≥ least significant change (LSC) and those whose values exceeded a threshold (T-score ≤-2.5 or PINP ≥36.0 ng/mL, a premenopausal median value). After 3 years of placebo, the FLEX group had greater mean total hip BMD decreases (-2.3% versus -1.2% in the HORIZON-PFT E1 group, p < 0.01) and greater rises in PINP (+11.6 ng/mL versus +6.7 ng/mL, p < 0.01). There was a greater proportion of individuals in FLEX with total hip BMD loss and PINP increases that exceeded LSC, and PINP values ≥36.0 ng/mL. In contrast, there were small changes in the proportion of women with femoral neck T-scores ≤-2.5 in both groups. In conclusion, 3 years after bisphosphonate discontinuation, a considerable proportion of former alendronate and zoledronic acid users had meaningful declines in total hip BMD and elevations in PINP. Despite a longer treatment course, alendronate may have a more rapid offset of drug effect than zoledronic acid. © 2018 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Administration of teriparatide for four years cyclically compared to two years daily in treatment Naïve and alendronate treated women

PURPOSE

We evaluated if equivalent doses of TPTD given cyclically over 4-years could increase BMD >2-years of daily TPTD in 2 cohorts of women; previously untreated (Rx-Naïve) and women previously treated with ALN (ALN-Rx).

METHODS

In Rx-Naïve, women were randomized to daily TPTD for 24 months (Daily; n = 23) or cyclic TPTD for 48 months (3 months on, 3 months off; Cyclic; n = 25). In ALN-Rx, women were randomized to continued ALN plus daily TPTD for 24 months, followed by ALN alone for 24 months (Daily; n = 21) or TPTD for 48 months (3 months on, 3 months off) while ALN was continued (Cyclic; n = 20). BMD (DXA) was measured at spine (LS), total hip (TH) and femoral neck (FN). The primary analysis compared 4 years of cyclic therapy to 2 years of daily therapy in RX-naïve and ALN-RX cohorts.

RESULTS

In Rx-Naïve, BMD changes at 24 months after Daily TPTD vs. 48 months after Cyclic TPTD were: LS 8.6% vs. 6.9%; TH 2.5% vs. 2.6%, and FN 1.6% vs. 2.2%. None of the BMD changes differed significantly between groups but all changes were significant over time within each group (p < 0.01 except for FN where p = 0.17 Daily; p = 0.09 Cyclic). In ALN-Rx, BMD changes at 24 months after Daily TPTD vs. 48 months after Cyclic TPTD were: LS 7.5% vs. 7.2%; TH 3.8% vs. 4.1%, and FN 3.2% vs. 2.5%. There were no differences between groups but all changes were significant within each group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The same cumulative dose of TPTD given cyclically for 4-years, does not increase BMD more than standard daily TPTD over 2-years in either Rx-Naïve or ALN-Rx women.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00668941.

Romosozumab FRAME Study: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Role of Regional Background Fracture Risk on Nonvertebral Fracture Outcome

In the pivotal Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis (FRAME; NCT01575834), 1 year of the bone-forming agent romosozumab significantly reduced new vertebral and clinical fracture risk versus placebo. Nonvertebral fracture risk was not significantly reduced in the overall population, influenced by a low placebo-group fracture rate, observed particularly in the highest-enrolling region of Latin America. In year 1 of FRAME, postmenopausal women with a T-score of -2.5 to -3.5 at the total hip or femoral neck were randomized to subcutaneous romosozumab 210 mg or placebo once monthly for 12 months. Of 7180 randomized women, 43% were from Latin America, largely Colombia and Brazil. Prespecified analyses assessed fracture risk reductions by geographic regions. A significant treatment-by-geographic region interaction for the clinical (p = 0.029) and nonvertebral fracture (p = 0.042) endpoints led to further characterization of the Latin American population and comparison with the remaining study population, grouped post hoc as rest-of-world. Nonvertebral fracture efficacy in the overall population was also assessed by baseline fracture risk using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX). Romosozumab significantly and consistently reduced new vertebral fracture risk in Latin America (70% reduction; p = 0.014) and rest-of-world (74% reduction; p < 0.001). For nonvertebral fracture, risk reductions were observed in rest-of-world (42% reduction; p = 0.012), with no treatment effect observed in Latin America, where background nonvertebral fracture risk was low (1.2% in the placebo group). Consistent with this finding, in the overall population, greater reductions in nonvertebral fracture risk were observed among women with higher FRAX scores. These findings suggest that fracture risk assessment should consider regional factors in addition to classical risk factors, such as bone mineral density. In women at high risk for fracture, romosozumab reduced nonvertebral fracture risk within 1 year. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ACTIVExtend: 24 Months of Alendronate After 18 Months of Abaloparatide or Placebo for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

PURPOSE

In women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, we investigated the effects of 24 months of treatment with alendronate (ALN) following 18 months of treatment with abaloparatide (ABL) or placebo (PBO).

METHODS

Women who completed ABL or PBO treatment in ACTIVE were eligible to receive up to 24 months of ALN. We evaluated the incidence of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) during the entire 43-month period from ACTIVE baseline to the end of ACTIVExtend and for the 24-month extension only.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-eight women from ACTIVE's ABL group and 581 from its PBO group (92% of ABL and PBO completers) were enrolled. During the full 43-month treatment period, 0.9% of evaluable women in the ABL/ALN group experienced a new radiographic vertebral fracture vs 5.6% of women in the PBO/ALN group, an 84% relative risk reduction (RRR, P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier incidence rates for other reported fracture types were significantly lower for ABL/ALN vs PBO/ALN (all P < 0.05). Gains in BMD achieved during ACTIVE were further increased during ACTIVExtend. For ACTIVExtend only, RRR for vertebral fractures was 87% with ABL/ALN vs PBO/ALN (P = 0.001). Adverse events were similar between groups. A supplemental analysis for regulatory authorities found no hip fractures in the ABL/ALN group vs five in the PBO/ALN group.

CONCLUSIONS

Eighteen months of ABL followed by 24 months of ALN reduced the risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, clinical, and major osteoporotic fractures and increased BMD. Sequential ABL followed by ALN appears to be an effective treatment option for postmenopausal women at risk for osteoporosis-related fractures.

FRAME Study: The Foundation Effect of Building Bone With 1 Year of Romosozumab Leads to Continued Lower Fracture Risk After Transition to Denosumab

Romosozumab is a bone-forming agent with a dual effect of increasing bone formation and decreasing bone resorption. In FRActure study in postmenopausal woMen with ostEoporosis (FRAME), postmenopausal women with osteoporosis received romosozumab 210 mg s.c. or placebo once monthly for 12 months, followed by denosumab 60 mg s.c. once every 6 months in both groups for 12 months. One year of romosozumab increased spine and hip BMD by 13% and 7%, respectively, and reduced vertebral and clinical fractures with persistent fracture risk reduction upon transition to denosumab over 24 months. Here, we further characterize the BMD gains with romosozumab by quantifying the percentages of patients who responded at varying magnitudes; report the mean T-score changes from baseline over the 2-year study and contrast these results with the long-term BMD gains seen with denosumab during Fracture REduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis every 6 Months (FREEDOM) and its Extension studies; and assess fracture incidence rates in year 2, when all patients received denosumab. Among 7180 patients (n = 3591 placebo, n = 3589 romosozumab), most romosozumab-treated patients experienced ≥3% gains in BMD from baseline at month 12 (spine, 96%; hip, 78%) compared with placebo (spine, 22%; hip, 16%). For romosozumab patients, mean absolute T-score increases at the spine and hip were 0.88 and 0.32, respectively, at 12 months (placebo: 0.03 and 0.01) and 1.11 and 0.45 at 24 months (placebo-to-denosumab: 0.38 and 0.17), with the 2-year gains approximating the effect of 7 years of continuous denosumab administration. Patients receiving romosozumab versus placebo in year 1 had significantly fewer vertebral fractures in year 2 (81% relative reduction; p < 0.001), with fewer fractures consistently observed across other fracture categories. The data support the clinical benefit of rebuilding the skeletal foundation with romosozumab before transitioning to antiresorptive therapy. © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Spine fracture prevalence in a nationally representative sample of US women and men aged ≥40 years: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013-2014---supplementary presentation

Spine fracture prevalence is similar in men and women, increasing from <5% in those <60 to 11% in those 70-79 and 18% in those ≥80 years. Prevalence was higher with age, lower bone mineral density (BMD), and in those meeting criteria for spine imaging. Most subjects with spine fractures were unaware of them.

Spine fracture prevalence in a nationally representative sample of US women and men aged ≥40 years: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013-2014

Spine fracture prevalence is similar in men and women, increasing from <5 % in those <60 to 11 % in those 70-79 and 18 % in those ≥80 years. Prevalence was higher with age, lower bone mineral density (BMD), and in those meeting criteria for spine imaging. Most subjects with spine fractures were unaware of them.

INTRODUCTION

Spine fractures have substantial medical significance but are seldom recognized. This study collected contemporary nationally representative spine fracture prevalence data.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of 3330 US adults aged ≥40 years participating in NHANES 2013-2014 with evaluable Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA). VFA was graded by semiquantitative measurement. BMD and an osteoporosis questionnaire were collected.

RESULTS

Overall spine fracture prevalence was 5.4 % and similar in men and women. Prevalence increased with age from <5 % in those <60 to 11 % in those 70-79 and 18 % in those ≥80 years. Fractures were more common in non-Hispanic whites and in people with lower body mass index and BMD. Among subjects with spine fracture, 26 % met BMD criteria for osteoporosis. Prevalence was higher in subjects who met National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) criteria for spine imaging (14 vs 4.7 %, P < 0.001). Only 8 % of people with a spine fracture diagnosed by VFA had a self-reported fracture, and among those who self-reported a spine fracture, only 21 % were diagnosed with fracture by VFA.

CONCLUSION

Spine fracture prevalence is similar in women and men and increases with age and lower BMD, although most subjects with spine fracture do not meet BMD criteria for osteoporosis. Since most (>90 %) individuals were unaware of their spine fractures, lateral spine imaging is needed to identify these women and men. Spine fracture prevalence was threefold higher in individuals meeting NOF criteria for spine imaging (∼1 in 7 undergoing VFA). Identifying spine fractures as part of comprehensive risk assessment may improve clinical decision making.

Treatment Sequence Matters: Anabolic and Antiresorptive Therapy for Osteoporosis

The effects of anabolic medications (teriparatide [TPTD] and parathyroid hormone [PTH]) differ in patients who have received recent treatment with potent antiresorptives. This perspective reviews studies evaluating bone density (BMD) and histomorphometric effects of treatment sequences beginning with TPTD/PTH followed by potent antiresorptives and those beginning with potent antiresorptives followed by switching to or adding TPTD. Effect of treatment sequence on spine BMD outcome is minor, with modest quantitative differences. However, when individuals established on potent bisphosphonates are switched to TPTD, hip BMD declines below baseline for at least the first 12 months after the switch to TPTD. This transient hip BMD loss is more prominent when the antiresorptive is denosumab; in this setting, hip BMD remains below baseline for almost a full 24 months. In a controlled comparison of those who switched from alendronate to TPTD versus those who added TPTD to ongoing alendronate, the effect on hip BMD was improved with combination therapy. Furthermore, hip strength improved with the addition of TPTD to ongoing alendronate, whereas it was neutral after switching from alendronate to TPTD, primarily due to the effect on cortical bone. Bone biopsy studies indicate that TPTD stimulates bone formation in patients who have not been treated previously as well as in patients on prior and ongoing bisphosphonates. Histomorphometric evidence suggests that use of alendronate with TPTD blocks the TPTD-induced increase in cortical porosity. When possible, we suggest anabolic therapy first, followed by potent antiresorptive therapy. The common practice of switching to TPTD only after patients have an inadequate response to antiresorptives (intercurrent fracture or inadequate BMD effect) is not the optimal utilization of anabolic treatment. In fact, this may result in transient loss of hip BMD and strength. In this setting, continuing a potent antiresorptive while starting TPTD might improve hip outcomes. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Eighteen Months of Treatment With Subcutaneous Abaloparatide Followed by 6 Months of Treatment With Alendronate in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis: Results of the ACTIVExtend Trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of 18 months of subcutaneous abaloparatide (ABL-SC) or placebo (PBO) followed by 6 months of alendronate (ALN) (preplanned interim analysis).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ACTIVExtend, an extension of ACTIVE, enrolled patients who completed 18 months of ABL-SC or PBO in ACTIVE to receive up to 24 additional months of open-label ALN; there was 1 month between the studies to re-consent patients.

RESULTS

Of 1243 eligible ACTIVE patients, 1139 (92%) were enrolled in ACTIVExtend beginning November 20, 2012. These results are from a prespecified 6-month interim analysis (cutoff date, June 2, 2015); the study is ongoing. Findings indicated percentages of patients with new morphometric vertebral fractures: PBO/ALN, 4.4% vs ABL-SC/ALN, 0.55%; relative risk reduction, 87% (relative risk, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04-0.41; P<.001). Kaplan-Meier estimated rates of nonvertebral fractures were PBO/ALN, 5.6% vs ABL-SC/ALN, 2.7%; risk reduction, 52% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.89; log-rank P=.02). There was also a 58% risk reduction of major osteoporotic fractures (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21-0.85; log-rank P=.01) and a 45% risk reduction of clinical fractures (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.92; log-rank P=.02) in the ABL-SC/ALN group vs the PBO/ALN group. At 25 months, bone mineral density percentage change from ACTIVE baseline for ABL-SC/ALN vs PBO/ALN was as follows: lumbar spine, 12.8%; total hip, 5.5%; femoral neck, 4.5% vs 3.5%, 1.4%, 0.5%, respectively (group differences at all sites P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Use of ABL-SC for 18 months followed by ALN for 6 months improved bone mineral density and reduced fracture risk throughout the skeleton and may be an effective treatment option for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01657162.

Effects of Abaloparatide-SC on Fractures and Bone Mineral Density in Subgroups of Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis and Varying Baseline Risk Factors

Abaloparatide-SC is a novel 34-amino acid peptide created to be a potent and selective activator of the parathyroid hormone receptor type 1 (PTHR1) signaling pathway. In the Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints (ACTIVE) Phase 3 trial (NCT01343004), abaloparatide reduced new morphometric vertebral fractures by 86% compared with placebo (p < 0.001) and nonvertebral fractures by 43% (p = 0.049) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Abaloparatide-SC increased bone mineral density (BMD) 3.4% at the total hip, 2.9% at the femoral neck, and 9.2% at the lumbar spine at 18 months (all p < 0.001 versus placebo). The analysis reported here was designed to evaluate whether fracture risk reductions and BMD accrual were consistent across different levels of baseline risk. Risk factor subgroups were predefined categorically for BMD T-score of the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck (≤-2.5 versus >-2.5 and ≤-3.0 versus >-3.0), history of nonvertebral fracture (yes versus no), prevalent vertebral fracture (yes versus no), and age (<65 versus 65 to <75 versus ≥75 years) at baseline. Forest plots show that there were no clinically meaningful interactions between any of the baseline risk factors and the treatment effect of abaloparatide-SC on new morphometric vertebral fractures, nonvertebral fractures, or BMD increases. Abaloparatide provides protection against fractures consistently across a wide variety of ages and baseline risks, including those with and without prior fractures, and it has potential utility for a broad group of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Goal-Directed Treatment for Osteoporosis: A Progress Report From the ASBMR-NOF Working Group on Goal-Directed Treatment for Osteoporosis

The American Society for Bone and Mineral Research and the United States National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) formed a working group to develop principles of goal-directed treatment and identify gaps that need to be filled to implement this approach. With goal-directed treatment, a treatment goal would first be established and choice of treatment determined by the probability of achieving that goal. Goals of treatment would be freedom from fracture, a T-score > -2.5, which is above the NOF threshold for initiating treatment, or achievement of an estimated risk level below the threshold for initiating treatment. Progress toward reaching the patient's goal would be periodically and systematically assessed by estimating the patient's compliance with treatment, reviewing fracture history, repeating vertebral imaging when indicated, and repeating measurement of bone mineral density (BMD). Using these data, a decision would be made to stop, continue, or change therapy. Some of these approaches can now be applied to clinical practice. However, the application of goal-directed treatment cannot be fully achieved until medications are available that provide greater increases in BMD and greater reduction in fracture risk than those that are currently approved; only then can patients with very high fracture risk and very low BMD achieve such goals. Furthermore, assessing future fracture risk in patients on treatment requires a new assessment tool that accurately captures the change in fracture risk associated with treatment and should also be sensitive to the importance of recent fractures as predictors of imminent fracture risk. Lastly, evidence is needed to confirm that selecting and switching treatments to achieve goals reduces fracture risk more effectively than current standard care. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Romosozumab Treatment in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Romosozumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds sclerostin, increases bone formation and decreases bone resorption.

METHODS

We enrolled 7180 postmenopausal women who had a T score of -2.5 to -3.5 at the total hip or femoral neck. Patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous injections of romosozumab (at a dose of 210 mg) or placebo monthly for 12 months; thereafter, patients in each group received denosumab for 12 months, at a dose of 60 mg, administered subcutaneously every 6 months. The coprimary end points were the cumulative incidences of new vertebral fractures at 12 months and 24 months. Secondary end points included clinical (a composite of nonvertebral and symptomatic vertebral) and nonvertebral fractures.

RESULTS

At 12 months, new vertebral fractures had occurred in 16 of 3321 patients (0.5%) in the romosozumab group, as compared with 59 of 3322 (1.8%) in the placebo group (representing a 73% lower risk with romosozumab; P<0.001). Clinical fractures had occurred in 58 of 3589 patients (1.6%) in the romosozumab group, as compared with 90 of 3591 (2.5%) in the placebo group (a 36% lower risk with romosozumab; P=0.008). Nonvertebral fractures had occurred in 56 of 3589 patients (1.6%) in the romosozumab group and in 75 of 3591 (2.1%) in the placebo group (P=0.10). At 24 months, the rates of vertebral fractures were significantly lower in the romosozumab group than in the placebo group after each group made the transition to denosumab (0.6% [21 of 3325 patients] in the romosozumab group vs. 2.5% [84 of 3327] in the placebo group, a 75% lower risk with romosozumab; P<0.001). Adverse events, including instances of hyperostosis, cardiovascular events, osteoarthritis, and cancer, appeared to be balanced between the groups. One atypical femoral fracture and two cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were observed in the romosozumab group.

CONCLUSIONS

In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, romosozumab was associated with a lower risk of vertebral fracture than placebo at 12 months and, after the transition to denosumab, at 24 months. The lower risk of clinical fracture that was seen with romosozumab was evident at 1 year. (Funded by Amgen and UCB Pharma; FRAME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01575834 .).

Effect of Abaloparatide vs Placebo on New Vertebral Fractures in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Additional therapies are needed for prevention of osteoporotic fractures. Abaloparatide is a selective activator of the parathyroid hormone type 1 receptor.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide, 80 μg, vs placebo for prevention of new vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women at risk of osteoporotic fracture.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Abaloparatide Comparator Trial In Vertebral Endpoints (ACTIVE) was a phase 3, double-blind, RCT (March 2011-October 2014) at 28 sites in 10 countries. Postmenopausal women with bone mineral density (BMD) T score ≤-2.5 and >-5.0 at the lumbar spine or femoral neck and radiological evidence ≥2 mild or ≥1 moderate lumbar or thoracic vertebral fracture or history of low-trauma nonvertebral fracture within the past 5 years were eligible. Postmenopausal women (>65 y) with fracture criteria and a T score ≤-2.0 and >-5.0 or without fracture criteria and a T score ≤-3.0 and >-5.0 could enroll.

INTERVENTIONS

Blinded, daily subcutaneous injections of placebo (n = 821); abaloparatide, 80 μg (n = 824); or open-label teriparatide, 20 μg (n = 818) for 18 months.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary end point was percentage of participants with new vertebral fracture in the abaloparatide vs placebo groups. Sample size was set to detect a 4% difference (57% risk reduction) between treatment groups. Secondary end points included change in BMD at total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine in abaloparatide-treated vs placebo participants and time to first incident nonvertebral fracture. Hypercalcemia was a prespecified safety end point in abaloparatide-treated vs teriparatide participants.

RESULTS

Among 2463 women (mean age, 69 years [range, 49-86]), 1901 completed the study. New morphometric vertebral fractures occurred less frequently in the active treatment groups vs placebo. The Kaplan-Meier estimated event rate for nonvertebral fracture was lower with abaloparatide vs placebo. BMD increases were greater with abaloparatide than placebo (all P < .001). Incidence of hypercalcemia was lower with abaloparatide (3.4%) vs teriparatide (6.4%) (risk difference [RD], −2.96 [95%CI, −5.12 to −0.87]; P = .006). [table: see text].

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, the use of subcutaneous abaloparatide, compared with placebo, reduced the risk of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures over 18 months. Further research is needed to understand the clinical importance of RD, the risks and benefits of abaloparatide treatment, and the efficacy of abaloparatide vs other osteoporosis treatments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01343004.

Effects of Daily or Cyclic Teriparatide on Bone Formation in the Iliac Crest in Women on No Prior Therapy and in Women on Alendronate

There is little information on the effects of combination therapy for osteoporosis at the tissue level. Using quadruple tetracycline-labeled bone biopsies, we have compared the bone formation response to teriparatide (TPTD) in treatment-naïve subjects (Rx-Naïve) and in subjects on prior and ongoing alendronate (ALN) treatment (ALN-Rx). Three bone envelopes were analyzed: cancellous, endocortical, and intracortical. TPTD was given as a standard, continuous daily injection or as a cyclic regimen (3 months on daily TPTD, 3 months off, 3 months on daily TPTD). Subjects were biopsied at 7 weeks and at 7 months to allow comparison of the bone formation response to the first and second cycles of TPTD. Baseline values for dynamic bone formation indices were lower in ALN-Rx than Rx-Naïve subjects. Both Rx-Naïve and ALN-RX subjects responded to TPTD with significant increases in bone formation indices at both time points. With cyclic TPTD treatment, the first and second cycles of TPTD stimulated bone formation rate in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes to a similar extent in ALN-Rx and Rx-Naïve subjects. However, in Rx-Naïve patients, bone formation rate (BFR/BS) was higher in patients receiving daily treatment compared with those receiving cyclic TPTD treatment in all three envelopes in the 7-month biopsies. This suggests that the cyclic approach does not provide a skeletal benefit in treatment-naive patients. In the 7-month biopsies, cortical porosity was higher in the Rx-Naïve group receiving daily TPTD than in all other groups. These data provide supporting evidence at the tissue level for previous biochemical and densitometric data suggesting that addition of either cyclic or daily TPTD to ongoing ALN treatment may be an effective approach for patients with severe osteoporosis already treated with ALN who remain at high risk of fracture. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.