Response rates for lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck bone mineral density in men treated with abaloparatide: results from the ATOM study.

Osteoporosis in men is an underappreciated public health issue, accounting for approximately 30% of the societal burden of osteoporosis. Although the prevalence of osteoporosis in men is lower, fracture-related morbidity and mortality rates exceed those of women. Abaloparatide is a synthetic, 34-amino acid peptide with homology to human parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP), which favors bone formation by selective activation of PTH receptor type 1. In the Abaloparatide for the Treatment of Men With Osteoporosis (ATOM; NCT03512262) trial, 228 men with primary or hypogonadism-associated osteoporosis were randomized to receive subcutaneous injections of abaloparatide 80 µg or placebo. Abaloparatide significantly improved LS, TH, and FN BMD when compared with placebo. In this prespecified analysis, the proportion of men with a percent change from baseline of >0%, >3%, and > 6% in BMD at the LS, TH, and FN at 3, 6, and 12 mo and/or a shift in T-score category (based on LS and TH T-scores) at 12 mo was compared between the abaloparatide and placebo groups in ATOM. There were significantly more men with a BMD gain of >3% at all 3 anatomical sites in the abaloparatide than placebo group at month 6 (18/122 [14.8%] vs 1/70 [1.4%], P = .002) and at month 12 (38/119 [31.9%] vs 1/66 [1.5%], P < .0001). At month 3, more men treated with abaloparatide than placebo had a > 3% BMD increase at the LS (82/134 [61.2%] vs 21/68 [30.9%], P < .0001). A greater proportion of men treated with abaloparatide had an improvement in T-score category from osteoporosis to low BMD or normal when compared with placebo. In conclusion, use of abaloparatide compared with placebo for 12 mo resulted in significant and rapid improvements in BMD in men with osteoporosis from the ATOM study.

Loading dose vitamin D3 improves vitamin D insufficiency in adults undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A randomized controlled trial.

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (aHSCT) patients are well known to be at high risk of vitamin D (vit D) deficiency. This study assessed whether a loading dose (100,000 IU) of vitamin D3 pre-aHSCT could effectively achieve and maintain sufficient post-transplant vit D levels (serum total 25 hydroxy vitamin D (25(OH)D) ≥ 75nmol/L). Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was also conducted for bone health evaluation. 74 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, either to the high vit D group (single loading dose (100,000 IU) plus 2,000 IU vit D3 daily) or the control group (2,000 IU vit D3 daily). Vit D levels were measured at three time points (baseline, day 30 and day 100 post-aHSCT). At baseline, fewer than 50% patients had a sufficient 25(OH)D (control: 42.9%; high vit D: 43.6%). The proportion of patients with sufficient 25(OH)D (nmol/L) was increased at day 30 and day 100, with a trend of higher proportion in the high vit D group at day 30 (high vit D vs. control: 89.7% vs. 74.3%, p = 0.08). The increased 25(OH)D was significantly higher in the high vit D group at day 30 (high vit D vs. control: 29±25.2 vs. 14 ±21.9, p = 0.01). Insufficient vit D level before transplant (baseline) was an independent risk factor for vit D insufficiency (serum 25(OH)D < 75nmol/L) post-aHSCT (OR = 4.16, p = 0.03). DXA suggested significant bone loss for total hip in both groups, and in the femoral neck for the control group only. In conclusion, single loading dose vitamin D3 significantly increased total 25(OH)D levels at day 30 post-transplant, and the intervention was especially beneficial for patients with baseline vit D insufficiency. We acknowledge that the primary outcome at day 100 post-aHSCT indicating superiority of loading dose versus daily dose supplementation was not met.

Cardiovascular Impact of Calcium and Vitamin D Supplements: A Narrative Review.

Calcium and vitamin D play an important role in mineral homeostasis and the maintenance of skeletal health. Calcium and vitamin D supplements have been widely used for fracture prevention in elderly populations. Many trials have studied the effectiveness and cardiovascular safety of calcium and vitamin D supplementation, with disparate results. In this review, we summarize the most important trials and systematic reviews. There is significant heterogeneity in clinical trial design, differences in the nature of trial outcomes (self-reported vs. verified), prior calcium intake, and trial size. Inconsistent results have been reported concerning the effects of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes. Most current guidelines recommend calcium intake of up to 1,200 mg daily, preferably from the diet, without concern for cardiovascular risk. Recommendations regarding vitamin D supplementation vary widely. There is compelling evidence from well-conducted randomized trials that modest vitamin D supplementation is safe but does not confer cardiovascular benefit or cardiovascular harm.

Asia-pacific consensus on osteoporotic fracture prevention in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis but no fragility fractures.

Postmenopausal women are at significant risk for osteoporotic fractures due to their rapid bone loss. Half of all postmenopausal women will get an osteoporosis-related fracture over their lifetime, with 25% developing a spine deformity and 15% developing a hip fracture. By 2050, more than half of all osteoporotic fractures will occur in Asia, with postmenopausal women being the most susceptible. Early management can halt or even reverse the progression of osteoporosis. Consequently, on October 31, 2020, the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association hosted the Asia-Pacific (AP) Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention (POFP) consensus meeting, which was supported by the Asian Federation of Osteoporosis Societies (AFOS) and the Asia Pacific Osteoporosis Foundation (APOF). International and domestic experts developed ten applicable statements for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis but no fragility fractures in the AP region. The experts advocated, for example, that postmenopausal women with a high fracture risk be reimbursed for pharmaceutical therapy to prevent osteoporotic fractures. More clinical experience and data are required to modify intervention tactics.

The Efficacy and Safety of Abaloparatide-SC in Men With Osteoporosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Abaloparatide significantly increased bone mineral density (BMD) in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis and decreased risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, and clinical fractures compared with placebo. The Abaloparatide for the Treatment of Men with Osteoporosis (ATOM; NCT03512262) study evaluated the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide compared with placebo in men. Eligible men aged 40 to 85 years with osteoporosis were randomized 2:1 to daily subcutaneous injections of abaloparatide 80 µg or placebo for 12 months. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD. Key secondary endpoints included BMD change from baseline at the total hip and femoral neck. A total of 228 men were randomized (abaloparatide, n = 149; placebo, n = 79). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups (mean age, 68.3 years; mean lumbar spine BMD T-score, -2.1). At 12 months, BMD gains were greater with abaloparatide compared with placebo at the lumbar spine (least squares mean percentage change [standard error]: 8.48 [0.54] versus 1.17 [0.72]), total hip (2.14 [0.27] versus 0.01 [0.35]), and femoral neck (2.98 [0.34] versus 0.15 [0.45]) (all p < 0.0001). The most common (≥5%) treatment-emergent adverse events were injection site reaction, dizziness, nasopharyngitis, arthralgia, bronchitis, hypertension, and headache. During 12 months of abaloparatide treatment, men with osteoporosis exhibited rapid and significant improvements in BMD with a safety profile consistent with previous studies. These results suggest abaloparatide can be considered as an effective anabolic treatment option for men with osteoporosis. © 2022 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).

The role of osteoanabolic agents in the management of patients with osteoporosis.

Reducing fracture risk is the objective of osteoporosis treatment. Bone-forming osteoporosis drugs increase bone mass, restore bone microarchitecture, and reduce fracture risk more effectively than oral bisphosphonates, providing strong justification for the use of these agents as the initial therapy or after anti-remodeling agents in patients at very high risk of fracture. At the end of a 12-to-24-month course of osteoanabolic therapy, transitioning to a potent anti-remodeling agent maintains and enhances the treatment benefit. This review describes the clinical applications of osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis.

A retrospective observational study of osteoporosis management after a fragility fracture in primary care.

In many countries, osteoporosis is predominantly managed by primary care physicians; however, management after a fragility fracture has not been widely investigated. We describe osteoporosis care gaps in a real-world patient cohort. Our findings help inform initiatives to identify and overcome obstacles to effective management of patients after fragility fracture. PURPOSE: A fragility fracture is a major risk factor for subsequent fracture in adults aged ≥ 50 years. This retrospective observational study aimed to characterize post-fracture management in Canadian primary care. METHODS: A total of 778 patients with an index fragility fracture (low-trauma, excluding small bones) occurring between 2014 and 2016 were identified from medical records at 76 primary care centers in Canada, with follow-up until January 2018. RESULTS: Of 778 patients (80.5% female, median age [IQR] 73 [64-80]), 215 were on osteoporosis treatment and 269 had osteoporosis diagnosis recorded prior to their index fracture. The median follow-up was 363 (IQR 91-808) days. Of patients not on osteoporosis treatment at their index fracture, 60.2% (n = 339/563) remained untreated after their index fracture and 62.2% (n = 23/37) continued untreated after their subsequent fracture. After their index fracture, fracture risk assessment (FRAX or CAROC) was not performed in 83.2% (n = 647/778) of patients, and 59.9% (n = 466/778) of patients did not receive bone mineral density testing. Of patients without osteoporosis diagnosis recorded prior to their index date, 61.3% (n = 300/489) remained undiagnosed after their index fracture. At least one subsequent fracture occurred in 11.5% (n = 86/778) of patients. CONCLUSION: In the primary care setting, fragility fracture infrequently resulted in osteoporosis treatment or fracture risk assessment, even after multiple fragility fractures. These results suggest a fragility fracture is not recognized as a major risk factor for subsequent fracture and its occurrence does not prompt primary care physicians to intervene. These data urge initiatives to identify and overcome obstacles to primary care physicians' effective management of patients after fragility fractures.

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.

Exploring the Association between Pain and Fracture Characteristics in Women with Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to estimate the association between pain and the number, severity, and location of fractures in women with osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Method: We used an 11-point numeric pain rating scale to assess pain during movement in the preceding week and lateral spinal radiographs to confirm number, location, and severity of vertebral fractures. In model 1, we assessed the association between pain during movement and the number, severity, and location of fractures. We adjusted model 2 for pain medication use and age. Results: The mean age of participants was 76.4 (SD 6.9) years. We found no statistically significant associations between pain and fracture number (estimated ß = 0.23, 95% CI: -0.27, 0.68), fracture severity (estimated ß = -0.46, 95% CI: -1.38, 0.49), or fracture location at T4-T8 (estimated ß = 0.06, 95% CI: -1.26, 1.34), T9-L1 (estimated ß = 0.35, 95% CI: -1.17, 1.74), or L2-L4 (estimated ß = 0.40, 95% CI: -1.01, 1.75). Age and pain medication use were not significantly associated with pain. Model 1 accounted for 4.7% and model 2 for 7.2% of the variance in self-reported pain. Conclusion: The number, location, and severity of fractures do not appear to be the primary explanation for pain in women with vertebral fractures. Clinicians must consider other factors contributing to pain.

Objectif : estimer le lien entre la douleur et le nombre, la gravité et le foyer des fractures chez les femmes atteintes de fractures vertébrales ostéoporotiques. Méthodologie : utilisation d'une échelle d'évaluation numérique de la douleur en 11 points pour établir la douleur pendant le mouvement au cours de la semaine précédente et de radiographies vertébrales latérales pour confirmer le nombre, le foyer et la gravité des fractures vertébrales. Dans le modèle 1, les chercheurs ont évalué l'association entre la douleur pendant le mouvement et le nombre, la gravité et le foyer des fractures. Ils ont rajusté le modèle 2 pour tenir compte de la médication contre la douleur et de l'âge. Résultats : les participants avaient un âge moyen de 76,4 ans (ÉT 6,9). Les chercheurs n'ont pas trouvé d'associations importantes entre la douleur et le nombre de fractures (ß estimatif = 0,23, IC à 95 % : ­0,27, 0,68), la gravité des fractures (ß estimatif = ­0,46, IC à 95 % : ­1,38, 0,49) ou le foyer des fractures aux vertèbres T4 à T8 (ß estimatif = 0,06, IC à 95 % : ­1,26, 1,34), aux vertèbres T9 à L1 (b estimatif = 0,35, IC à 95 % : ­1,17, 1,74) ou aux vertèbres L2 à L4 (ß estimatif = 0,40, IC à 95 % : ­1,01, 1,75). L'âge et l'utilisation d'analgésiques n'étaient pas associés à la douleur de manière significative. Le modèle 1 représentait 4,7 % et le modèle 2, 7,2 % des écarts en matière de douleur autodéclarée. Conclusion : Le nombre, le foyer et la gravité des fractures ne semblaient pas être l'explication primaire de la douleur chez les femmes atteintes de fractures vertébrales. Les cliniciens doivent envisager d'autres facteurs qui contribuent à la douleur.

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. Video abstract: Denosumab in the Treatment of Osteoporosis-10 Years Later (MP4 62727 KB).

The association between trunk muscle endurance, balance and falls self-efficacy in women with osteoporotic vertebral fractures: an exploratory analysis from a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Trunk muscle endurance may be associated with balance and falls self-efficacy for people with osteoporosis. However, all previous studies have examined trunk muscle strength rather than endurance. PURPOSE: To explore the relationships between trunk muscle endurance and standing balance and falls self-efficacy for women with vertebral fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an exploratory, secondary analysis of baseline data of a pilot randomized controlled trial in Ontario, Canada. Thirty-one women with osteoporosis, aged 65 years or older, with at least one vertebral fracture were included. The associations between balance (Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation) and trunk muscle endurance (Timed Loaded Standing Test) and falls self-efficacy (Falls Efficacy Scale International) and trunk muscle endurance were tested via Spearman rank order correlation with Fisher's z transformations. RESULTS: Trunk muscle endurance was correlated with better balance performance on the Balance Outcome Measure for Elder Rehabilitation [Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.85; p < 0.001], but not with falls self efficacy (Spearman correlation coefficient; -0.22; 95% confidence interval: -0.53 to 0.14; p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Trunk muscle endurance was moderately associated with better standing balance performance but not falls self-efficacy, highlighting the importance of trunk muscle endurance for standing balance for older adults with osteoporosis and vertebral fractures.Implications for RehabilitationOlder adults with osteoporosis and vertebral fractures who have better trunk muscle endurance may also have better standing balance.There was no association between trunk muscle endurance and how confident a person is that they will not fall while completing various activities of daily living.Trunk muscle endurance training could be included as part of a standing balance rehabilitation program for this population.

Exploring Fear of Falling and Exercise Self-Efficacy in Older Women With Vertebral Fractures.

Fear of falling is a common issue among older adults, which decreases quality of life and leads to an avoidance of activities they are still able to do. The goal of this secondary data analysis was to explore the relationship between fear of falling and exercise self-efficacy in 141 women with at least one nontraumatic Genant Grade 2 vertebral fracture. Fear of falling, exercise self-efficacy, history of falling, the number of falls, the use of assisting devices, and pain at rest or during movement were obtained using medical history and health status questionnaires. There was a negative association between fear of falling and exercise self-efficacy (pseudo R2 = .253; p = .004), which persisted when the analysis was adjusted for history and number of falls, use of assistive devices, and pain at rest (pseudo R2 = .329; p < .0001) or during movement (pseudo R2 = .321; p < .0001). Fear of falling may be negatively associated with exercise self-efficacy in older women with vertebral fracture.

Denosumab Safety and Efficacy Among Participants in the FREEDOM Extension Study With Mild to Moderate Chronic Kidney Disease.

CONTEXT: The effects of long-term exposure to denosumab in individuals with renal insufficiency are unknown. OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis evaluates the long-term safety and efficacy of denosumab in individuals with mild-to-moderate chronic kidney disease (CKD) (stages 2 and 3) using data from the pivotal phase 3, double-blind, 3-year FREEDOM (NCT00089791) and open-label, 7-year extension (NCT00523341) studies. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Women age 60 to 90 years with a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score of less than -2.5 to greater than -4.0 at the total hip or lumbar spine were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months (long-term arm) or placebo (cross-over arm) in FREEDOM; eligible participants could enroll in the extension to receive denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months. Change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from study baseline and annualized rates of fracture and adverse events (AEs) were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Most participants (1259/1969 [64%] long-term arm; 1173/1781 [66%] crossover arm) with baseline CKD stage 2 or 3 remained within the same CKD subgroup at study completion; less than 3% progressed to CKD stage 4. Participants in all eGFR subgroups showed similar, persistent BMD gains over time and a low incidence of fractures. The percentage of participants reporting serious AEs was similar among renal subgroups (normal, CKD stage 2, CKD stage 3a, CKD stage 3b) both for the long-term (54% vs 52% vs 57% vs 58%) and crossover (43% vs 42% vs 43% vs 68%) arms, except CKD stage 3b subgroup, crossover arm. CONCLUSION: The safety and efficacy of denosumab did not differ among participants with mild to moderate CKD.

Distribution of Prevalent and Incident Vertebral Fractures and Their Association with Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women in the Teriparatide Versus Risedronate VERO Clinical Trial.

Vertebral fractures (VFx) occur most frequently in the mid-thoracic and thoraco-lumbar regions, which experience the highest mechanical loading along the spine. The prevalence and incidence of VFx by their location and severity, and their relationship with bone mineral density (BMD), are seldom reported in randomized clinical trial cohorts. The VERO trial randomized 1360 postmenopausal women with at least two moderate or one severe VFx to receive either teriparatide or risedronate for up to 24 months. In this post hoc analysis, we describe the centrally read distribution and severity of prevalent and incident VFx, and the association of their location with the baseline BMD. At baseline, 21.4% of all evaluable vertebral bodies had a prevalent VFx; most commonly at L1, T12, L2 and T11 (38.5%, 37.4%, 25.3% and 23.5% of patients, respectively). Patients with prevalent VFx only at T12/L1 showed a higher baseline BMD compared to patients with VFx at other levels. At month 24, 100 patients had 126 incident VFx (teriparatide: 35; risedronate: 91). The most frequent incident VFx occurred at T12 (n = 17, 1.6% of patients), followed by L1 and T11 (n = 14, 1.3% both). The frequency of incident VFx was lower at all vertebral levels in patients given teriparatide. These results confirm prior reports that VFx occurs more frequently at mid-thoracic and thoraco-lumbar regions of the spine. Patients with these VFx locations have higher BMD than those who fracture at other sites, suggesting a role for mechanical stress in the etiology of VFx. Teriparatide is superior to risedronate in the prevention of VFx at these common fracture locations.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01709110.

Favorable skeletal benefit/risk of long-term denosumab therapy: A virtual-twin analysis of fractures prevented relative to skeletal safety events observed.

Antiresorptive therapies reduce fracture risk; however, long-term bone turnover inhibition may raise concerns about rare, but serious, skeletal adverse events-atypical femoral fracture (AFF) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). Denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against RANKL, has demonstrated sustained low vertebral and nonvertebral fracture rates with low skeletal adverse event rates in the 3-year FREEDOM trial and its 7-year Extension (in which all subjects received open-label denosumab). In this analysis, we aimed to estimate fractures prevented relative to skeletal adverse events observed with 10 years of denosumab therapy. We modeled a hypothetical placebo group using the virtual-twin method, thereby allowing calculation of fractures prevented with denosumab treatment (relative to the virtual-placebo group) in the context of AFF or ONJ events observed in the long-term denosumab group. Estimated virtual-placebo and observed long-term denosumab exposure-adjusted fracture rates per 100,000 subject-years were calculated for fractures classified as clinical (3180 and 1777, respectively), major osteoporotic (2699 and 1525), vertebral (1879 and 901), and nonvertebral (2924 and 1528), and compared with observed AFF and ONJ in the long-term denosumab group (5 and 35 per 100,000 subject-years, respectively). The skeletal benefit/risk ratio (fractures prevented per adverse event observed) for clinical fractures was 281 (AFF) and 40 (ONJ). Based on this model, denosumab treatment for up to 10 years has a favorable skeletal benefit/risk profile when comparing fractures prevented per skeletal adverse event observed. Clinical trial registration: NCT00089791, NCT00523341.

The Effects of Home Exercise in Older Women With Vertebral Fractures: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Regular exercise is advocated in osteoporosis guidelines to prevent fractures. Few studies have evaluated the effect of exercise on functional performance, posture, and other outcomes that are important to patients after vertebral fractures. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study will explore the effect of home exercise versus control on functional performance, posture, and patient-reported outcome measures. DESIGN: This study was a parallel 2-arm pilot feasibility trial with 1:1 randomization to exercise or attentional control groups. SETTING: This study took place in 5 Canadian and 2 Australian academic or community hospitals/centers. PARTICIPANTS: This study included 141 women ≥65 years of age with radiographically confirmed vertebral fractures. INTERVENTION: A physical therapist delivered exercise and behavioral counseling in 6 home visits over 8 months and monthly calls. Participants were to exercise ≥3 times weekly. Controls received equal attention. MEASUREMENTS: Functional performance, posture, quality of life, pain, and behavior-change outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 6 (questionnaires only) and 12 months. Adherence to exercise was assessed by calendar diary. All t tests examined between-group mean differences (MD) in change from baseline in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. RESULTS: There was a small effect of exercise on 5 times sit-to-stand test versus control (MD = -1.58 [95% CI = -3.09 to -0.07], intention-to-treat; MD = -1.49 [95% CI = -3.12 to 0.16], per-protocol). There were no other major or statistically significant MDs for any other measured outcomes after follow-up. Adherence declined over time. LIMITATIONS: Treatment effects on variables may have been underestimated due to multiple comparisons and underpowered analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory estimate of the effect of exercise on functional leg muscle strength was consistent in direction and magnitude with other trials in individuals with vertebral fractures. Declining adherence to home exercise suggests that strategies to enhance long-term adherence might be important in future confirmatory trials.

Psychotropic medications and proton pump inhibitors and the risk of fractures in the teriparatide versus risedronate VERO clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: VERO is a fracture endpoint study in women with established osteoporosis that showed reduction in the risks of new vertebral fractures (VFx) and clinical fractures in women randomized to teriparatide compared with risedronate. Patients on psychotropic drugs (hypnotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants [selective serotonin- and norepinephrine-reuptake inhibitors: SSRIs and SNRIs]) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may be at a higher risk of fractures. We studied the association of exposure to these medications with the risk of fractures in the VERO study cohort, including an assessment of their potential interactions with the assigned clinical trial drugs. METHODS: A total of 1360 postmenopausal women with at least 2 moderate or 1 severe VFx and bone mineral density T-score ≤-1.50 were randomized to subcutaneous daily teriparatide (20µg) or oral weekly risedronate (35mg) in a double-blind, double-dummy, 2-year trial. In thispost-hoc analysis, multivariable log-binomial and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate adjusted risk ratios (RR) or hazard ratios (HR) for the exposure to these concomitant medications with the occurrence of incident fractures. We also assessed treatment effect modifications on anti-fracture efficacy driven by the use of these medications. RESULTS: There were 406 (29.9 %), 347 (25.5 %) and 176 (12.9 %) subjects taking PPIs, benzodiazepines/hypnotics, and SSRIs/SNRIs during the study, respectively. For all fracture endpoints, the greater risk reduction of teriparatide versus risedronate did not significantly differ within the categories of psychotropic drugs and PPIs. Multivariable analysis showed that the risk of pooled new and worsened VFx was higher in PPI users than in non-PPI users (RR: 1.57; p=0.032), regardless of the study treatment. Benzodiazepine/hypnotic drug users showed an increased risk of clinical fractures (HR: 1.71; p=0.026) and non-vertebral fragility fractures (NVFFx, HR: 1.89; p=0.017), regardless of the study treatment. Increases in the risk of clinical fractures (HR: 1.93; p=0.018) and NVFFx (HR: 2.16; p=0.011) were also observed in SSRI/SNRI users, regardless of the study treatment. CONCLUSION: In postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis, the superior anti-fracture efficacy of teriparatide compared with risedronate was consistent regardless of psychotropic or PPI drugs use. Patients taking psychotropic drugs and PPIs showed a higher risk for NVFFx and VFx respectively, compared to those not on these medications.

Bone Mineral Density After Transitioning From Denosumab to Alendronate.

CONTEXT: There are few studies on patients transitioning from denosumab to bisphosphonates. OBJECTIVE: To investigate patient characteristics and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) after transitioning from denosumab to alendronate. DESIGN: Randomized, open-label, 2-year crossover Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction (DAPS) study (NCT00518531). SETTING: 25 study centers in the US and Canada. PATIENTS: Treatment-naïve postmenopausal women with BMD T-scores from -2.0 to -4.0. INTERVENTIONS: This post hoc analysis evaluated women randomized to subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg every 6 months in year 1 followed by once-weekly oral alendronate 70 mg in year 2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A 3% BMD threshold identified participants who lost, maintained, or gained BMD in year 2 on alendronate. RESULTS: Of 126 participants randomized to denosumab, 115 (91%) transitioned to alendronate in year 2. BMD increased by 3% to 6% with denosumab in year 1 and by 0% to 1% with alendronate in year 2. After transitioning to alendronate, most participants maintained or increased BMD; 15.9%, 7.6%, and 21.7% lost BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck, respectively. Few participants fell below their pretreatment baseline BMD value; this occurred most often in those who lost BMD in year 2. Women who lost BMD with alendronate in year 2 also showed a greater percent change in BMD with denosumab in year 1. The BMD change in year 2 was similar regardless of baseline characteristics or adherence to oral alendronate. CONCLUSION: Alendronate can effectively maintain the BMD gains accrued after 1 year of denosumab in most patients, regardless of baseline characteristics.

Repeating Measurement of Bone Mineral Density when Monitoring with Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry: 2019 ISCD Official Position.

Bone mineral density (BMD) can be measured at multiple skeletal sites using various technologies to aid clinical decision-making in bone and mineral disorders. BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has a critical role in predicting risk of fracture, diagnosis of osteoporosis, and monitoring patients. In clinical practice, DXA remains the most available and best validated tool for monitoring patients. A quality baseline DXA scan is essential for comparison with all subsequent scans. Monitoring patients with serial measurements requires technical expertise and knowledge of the least significant change in order to determine when follow-up scans should be repeated. Prior ISCD Official Positions have clarified how and when repeat DXA is useful as well as the interpretation of results. The 2019 ISCD Official Positions considered new evidence and clarifies if and when BMD should be repeated. There is good evidence showing that repeat BMD measurement can identify people who experience bone loss, which is an independent predictor of fracture risk. There is good evidence showing that the reduction in spine and hip fractures with osteoporosis medication is proportional to the change in BMD with treatment. There is evidence that measuring BMD is useful following discontinuation of osteoporosis treatment. There is less documentation addressing the effectiveness of monitoring BMD to improve medication adherence, whether monitoring of BMD reduces the risk of fracture, or effectively discriminates patients who should and should not recommence treatment following an interruption of medication. Further research is needed in all of these areas.