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.

Despite the superior benefits of bone building (anabolic) agents and guidelines supporting their use, these medications are used in a minority of patients for whom they are appropriate, in part because they require daily or monthly injections, which limit patient acceptance. An oral anabolic tablet has potential to address this substantial treatment gap. In this double-blind, placebo controlled, dose-finding randomized study, 161 postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density or osteoporosis were treated with varying doses of the active part of parathyroid hormone [PTH(1-34)] or placebo given in daily oral tablets for 6 months. The highest oral PTH tablet dose (2.5 mg), produced an increase in markers of bone formation while simultaneously decreasing the markers of bone breakdown. Significant gains in bone mineral density of the spine and hip were observed at the end of the 6-month study and there were no significant safety concerns. The 2.5 mg oral PTH tablet dose was well tolerated when patients were instructed to titrate up to the full dose. We conclude that this PTH tablet might be the first effective orally administered bone building medication and should be studied further in treatment of women with osteoporosis.

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.

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.

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 (TBSth ) at baseline, 6, 18, and 43 months. Mean increments in TBSth from baseline within and between treatment groups, proportion of women with TBSth increments above least significant change (LSC) and proportion with degraded TBSth (<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 TBSth . Mean TBSth increased 4% after 18 months abaloparatide (p < 0.001) and was unchanged with placebo. After 2 subsequent years of alendronate, the total cumulative TBSth 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 TBSth had declined to 21% with abaloparatide/alendronate and 37% with placebo/alendronate (p < 0.05). An increase in TBSth  ≥ 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 TBSth rapidly and progressively over 18 months and increments were maintained over 2 years with alendronate. TBSth 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).

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.

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).

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

Abaloparatide followed by alendronate in women ≥80 years with osteoporosis: post hoc analysis of ACTIVExtend.

OBJECTIVE: Fracture risk increases with age, but few studies focus on persons ≥80 years. In the ACTIVE trial, treatment with abaloparatide for 18 months reduced osteoporotic fracture risk and increased bone mineral density. These effects were maintained with 24 months alendronate treatment in ACTIVExtend. We postulated that similar improvements in bone mineral density and safety would be demonstrated in women ≥80 years. METHODS: Post hoc analyses of bone mineral density and fracture incidence in women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture ≥80 years from ACTIVExtend. RESULTS: In total, 56 women aged ≥80 years at ACTIVE baseline entered the ACTIVExtend study; 46 of these completed the study. Mean age was 83.3 years; other baseline characteristics were similar. At the end of ACTIVE, bone mineral density increased at all sites for abaloparatide versus placebo. Bone mineral density increased in parallel in both groups during alendronate therapy (19 to 43 months) in ACTIVExtend. At month 43, mean percent change in bone mineral density from baseline was 17.2% abaloparatide/alendronate versus 8.6% placebo/alendronate (P < 0.0001) at the lumbar spine, 5.3% abaloparatide/alendronate versus 3.0% placebo/alendronate (P = 0.024) at the total hip, and 4.6% abaloparatide/alendronate versus 3.1% placebo/alendronate (P = 0.044) at the femoral neck. Fracture incidence was low and did not differ significantly between groups. Sequential treatment with abaloparatide followed by alendronate was well tolerated; the proportion of participants reporting adverse events was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential treatment with abaloparatide followed by alendronate (43 months follow-up) in this small subgroup of ACTIVExtend participants suggests abaloparatide is well tolerated and effective in women aged ≥80 years. : Video Summary:http://links.lww.com/MENO/A618.

Video Summary:http://links.lww.com/MENO/A618.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.