Bisphosphonates in dentistry: Historical perspectives, adverse effects, and novel applications.

Studies of the potential role of bisphosphonates in dentistry date back to physical chemical research in the 1960s, and the genesis of the discovery of bisphosphonate pharmacology in part can be linked to some of this work. Since that time, parallel research on the effects of bisphosphonates on bone metabolism continued, while efforts in the dental field included studies of bisphosphonate effects on dental calculus, caries, and alveolar bone loss. While some utility of this drug class in the dental field was identified, leading to their experimental use in various dentrifice formulations and in some dental applications clinically, adverse effects of bisphosphonates in the jaws have also received attention. Most recently, certain bisphosphonates, particularly those with strong bone targeting properties, but limited biochemical effects (low potency bisphosphonates), are being studied as a local remedy for the concerns of adverse effects associated with other more potent members of this drug class. Additionally, low potency bisphosphonate analogs are under study as vectors to target active drugs to the mineral surfaces of the jawbones. These latter efforts have been devised for the prevention and treatment of oral problems, such as infections associated with oral surgery and implants. Advances in the utility and mechanistic understanding of the bisphosphonate class may enable additional oral therapeutic options for the management of multiple aspects of dental health.

Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling for assessing risk of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that patients with bisphosphonate (BP)-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) accumulate higher levels of BP in bone than those without BRONJ. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Pmetrics package and published data, we designed a population pharmacokinetic model of pamidronate concentration in plasma and bone and derived a toxic bone BP threshold of 0.2 mmol/L. With the model, and using patient individual BP duration and bone mineral content estimated from lean body weight, we calculated bone BP levels in 153 subjects. RESULTS: Mean bone BP in 69 BRONJ cases was higher than in 84 controls (0.20 vs 0.10 mmol/L, P < 0.001), consistent with the toxic bone threshold of 0.2 mmol/L. BRONJ was also associated with longer duration BP therapy (5.3 vs 2.7 years, P < 0.001), older age (76 vs 70 years, P < 0.001), and Asian race (49% vs 14%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our model accurately discriminated BRONJ cases from controls among patients on BP therapy.

Quantification by energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy of alendronate in the diseased jaw bone of patients with bisphosphonate-related jaw osteonecrosis.

OBJECTIVE: Recently, specific in vitro bisphosphonate concentrations have been established for reaching a toxic threshold that could result in the induction of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ), but these data have not been validated in vivo. The purpose of this study was to quantify the concentration of bisphosphonates (BPs) in the diseased jaw bone of patients experiencing BRONJ. STUDY DESIGN: We hypothesized that if the average natural nitrogen content of mammalian bone is known, the excess of nitrogen in the jaw bone of BRONJ patients is likely to reflect the concentration of amino-BP. To test our hypothesis, jaw bone specimens from patients with BRONJ were acquired after sequestrectomy and analyzed by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). RESULTS: The EDS analysis of the bone demonstrated a highly linear correlation between increasing concentrations of BP and the increasing percentage of nitrogen measured at the bone surfaces (R(2) = .9851, P = .0149). CONCLUSIONS: SEM/EDS can be a valuable tool for assessing BP concentration in jaw bone and provides important insight into BP pharmacokinetics and BRONJ.