Teriparatide and Osteosarcoma Risk: History, Science, Elimination of Boxed Warning, and Other Label Updates.

The phase 3 trials of the bone anabolic drug teriparatide were prematurely terminated because of a preclinical finding of osteosarcoma in rats treated with high doses of teriparatide for near lifetime. Even so, results from these and subsequent clinical trials showed efficacy and tolerability. Based on the phase 3 results and additional preclinical investigations, Forteo (teriparatide) was approved for use in the United States with an indication for the treatment of osteoporosis in patients at high risk for fracture, a boxed warning regarding potential risk of osteosarcoma, a 2-year lifetime limitation of use, other risk mitigations, and a requirement to assess for risk of osteosarcoma in humans treated with teriparatide. Subsequent investigations included five real-world studies directed at assessing a connection between teriparatide and osteosarcoma risk in humans. The early studies did not identify an increased risk of osteosarcoma but were inadequate to sufficiently characterize risk, given the low incidence of this rare form of bone cancer. Learning from these efforts, two studies were undertaken using claims data to identify large cohorts of patients treated with teriparatide and assess whether these patients were found to have osteosarcoma by linking pharmacy claims data with data from cancer registries. These studies showed no increase in osteosarcoma in patients using teriparatide compared with unexposed groups, as well as to the expected population-based background incidence of the disease. Based on this real-world evidence and the totality of data collected from postmarketing use and other clinical investigations, the label was updated in 2020. The changes included addition of information from large observational studies using real-world evidence, removal of the boxed warning, and a revision of the 2-year lifetime limitation. Thus, observational studies with large sample sizes using real-world data can provide supportive evidence to facilitate regulatory decisions including the elimination of a boxed warning. © 2022 Eli Lilly and Company. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Remodeling- and Modeling-Based Bone Formation With Teriparatide Versus Denosumab: A Longitudinal Analysis From Baseline to 3 Months in the AVA Study.

There has been renewed interest of late in the role of modeling-based formation (MBF) during osteoporosis therapy. Here we describe early effects of an established anabolic (teriparatide) versus antiresorptive (denosumab) agent on remodeling-based formation (RBF), MBF, and overflow MBF (oMBF) in human transiliac bone biopsies. Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis received subcutaneous teriparatide (n = 33, 20 µg/d) or denosumab (n = 36, 60 mg once/6 months), open-label for 6 months at 7 US and Canadian sites. Subjects received double fluorochrome labeling at baseline and before biopsy at 3 months. Sites of bone formation were designated as MBF if the underlying cement line was smooth, RBF if scalloped, and oMBF if formed over smooth cement lines adjacent to scalloped reversal lines. At baseline, mean RBF/bone surface (BS), MBF/BS, and oMBF/BS were similar between the teriparatide and denosumab groups in each bone envelope assessed (cancellous, endocortical, periosteal). All types of formation significantly increased from baseline in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes (differences p < 0.001) with teriparatide (range of changes 2.9- to 21.9-fold), as did MBF in the periosteum (p < 0.001). In contrast, all types of formation were decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope, which increased 2.5-fold (difference p = 0.048). These data highlight mechanistic differences between these agents: all 3 types of bone formation increased significantly with teriparatide, whereas formation was predominantly decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except for a slight increase in MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Real-world effectiveness of daily teriparatide in Japanese patients with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture: final results from the 24-month Japan Fracture Observational Study (JFOS).

OBJECTIVE: The Japan Fracture Observational Study (JFOS), a prospective observational study, investigated the real-world effectiveness of daily teriparatide to reduce clinical fracture risk in osteoporotic patients. METHODS: In routine clinical practice, Japanese patients initiated on teriparatide 20 µg/day by subcutaneous injection were enrolled. The primary end-point was the rate of clinical fractures at 6-month intervals over 24 months. Bone mineral density (BMD), procollagen type 1 aminoterminal propeptide (P1NP), back pain, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) information was collected. RESULTS: Of 1,996 patients at baseline, 90.1% were female, and mean age was 76.9 years. Teriparatide persistence at 12 and 24 months was 68.0% and 51.6%, respectively. Compared to the first 6-month treatment interval, the odds ratio of fractures decreased by 56.4% during 6-12 months, 51.6% during 12-18 months, and 58.8% during 18-24 months (all p < .01). After 24 months, BMD increased by 17.2% (lumbar spine) and 7.9% (total hip). After 6 months, P1NP levels increased by 259.3%. A reduction in back pain (100 mm visual analog scale) of 16.1 mm at 3 months was maintained through 24 months. HRQoL (pain, daily living activities, general health) improved by ≥10% at each post-baseline time point. Of 279 (14.6%) patients with ≥1 adverse event (AE), 71 (3.7%) experienced ≥1 drug-related AE (investigator assessed), including nausea (0.7%), dizziness (0.4%), and decreased appetite (0.3%). Osteosarcoma was not reported; there were no new safety signals. CONCLUSIONS: JFOS demonstrated effectiveness of teriparatide 20 µg/day to reduce the risk of clinical fractures in Japanese patients in a real-world setting.

Teriparatide in patients with osteoporosis and type 2 diabetes.

Despite evidence for higher fracture risk, clinical effects of osteoporosis treatments in type 2 diabetes (T2D) are largely unknown. Post hoc analyses of the DANCE observational study compared T2D patients and patients without diabetes to assess the effect of teriparatide, an osteoanabolic therapy on skeletal outcomes and safety. Patients included ambulatory men and women with osteoporosis receiving teriparatide 20µg/day SQ up to 24months followed by observation up to 24months. Main outcome measures included nonvertebral fracture incidence comparing 0-6months with 6+ months of teriparatide, change from baseline in BMD and back pain severity, and serious adverse events. Analyses included 4042 patients; 291 with T2D, 3751 without diabetes. Treatment exposure did not differ by group. For T2D patients, fracture incidence was 3.5 per 100 patient-years during 0-6months treatment, and 1.6 during 6months to treatment end (47% of baseline, 95% CI 12-187%); during similar periods, for patients without diabetes, fracture incidence was 3.2 and 1.8 (57% of baseline, 95% CI 39-83%). As determinants of fracture outcome during teriparatide treatment, diabetes was not a significant factor (P=0.858), treatment duration was significant (P=0.003), and the effect of duration was not significantly different between the groups (interaction P=0.792). Increases in spine and total hip BMD did not differ between groups; increase in femoral neck BMD was greater in T2D patients than in patients without diabetes (+0.34 and +0.004g/cm(2), respectively; P=0.014). Back pain severity decreased in both groups. Teriparatide was well tolerated without new safety findings. In conclusion, during teriparatide treatment, reduction in nonvertebral fracture incidence, increase in BMD, and decrease in back pain were similar in T2D and non-diabetic patients.

Improvement of cancellous bone microstructure in patients on teriparatide following alendronate pretreatment.

An increase in procollagen type I amino-terminal propeptide (PINP) early after teriparatide initiation was shown to correlate with increased lumbar spine areal BMD and is a good predictor of the anabolic response to teriparatide. Few data exist correlating PINP and bone microstructure, and no data exist in patients on teriparatide following prior potent antiresorptive treatment. This exploratory analysis aimed to investigate the effects of teriparatide on cancellous bone microstructure and correlations of bone markers with microstructure in alendronate-pretreated patients. This was a post hoc analysis of changes in bone markers and three-dimensional indices of bone microstructure in paired iliac crest biopsies from a prospective teriparatide treatment study in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who were either treatment-naïve (TN, n=16) or alendronate-pretreated (ALN, n=29) at teriparatide initiation. Teriparatide (20µg/day) was given for 24months; biopsies were taken at baseline and endpoint, and serum concentrations of PINP and type 1 collagen cross-linked C-telopeptide (ßCTX) were measured at intervals up to 24months. In the TN and ALN groups, respectively, mean (SD) increases in three-dimensional bone volume/tissue volume were 105 (356)% (P=0.039) and 55 (139)% (P<0.005) and trabecular thickness 30.4 (30)% (P<0.001) and 30.8 (53)% (P<0.001). No significant changes were observed in trabecular number or separation. In the ALN patients, 3-month change of neither PINP nor ßCTX correlated with indices of cancellous bone microstructure. However, 12-month changes in biochemical bone markers correlated significantly with improvements in bone volume/tissue volume, r=0.502 (P<0.01) and r=0.378 (P<0.05), trabecular number, r=0.559 (P<0.01) and r=0.515 (P<0.01), and reduction of trabecular separation, r=-0.432 (P<0.05) and r=-0.530 (P<0.01), for PINP and ßCTX, respectively. We conclude that cancellous bone microstructure improved with teriparatide therapy irrespective of prior antiresorptive use.

Japan Fracture Observational Study (JFOS): patient characteristics and interim data on the use of daily teriparatide in Japanese patients with osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES: This report from the Japan Fracture Observational Study (JFOS) describes the design of the study, baseline characteristics of the patients, and interim results. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is an interim analysis from an ongoing observational study of male and female patients with osteoporosis initiating daily teriparatide treatment observed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. There was no control group. Baseline data were collected on demographic characteristics, medical and osteoporosis history, prior use of medications and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This interim analysis includes preliminary information concerning incidence of clinical fractures, bone mineral density (BMD), procollagen type 1 aminoterminal propeptide (P1NP), back pain, HRQoL, and adverse events. RESULTS: Baseline observations were completed for 1810 patients; 90.1% were female. Compared with osteoporotic patients treated with teriparatide in other observational studies, those in JFOS were older but had fewer osteoporosis risk factors. The incidence of clinical fractures was 2.9% at 6 months and 3.7% at 12 months. At 12 months, mean BMD was 8.9% higher at the lumbar spine and 0.8% higher at the total hip compared to baseline. At 6 months, the median serum concentration of P1NP was 187.7% higher than at baseline. At 12 months, back pain scores assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) were lower and HRQoL scores were higher than at baseline. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report from an observational study of daily teriparatide in Japanese osteoporotic patients at high risk of fractures. Patients in JFOS were older but had fewer osteoporosis risk factors than those treated with teriparatide in other observational studies. The interim analysis suggests that the clinical profile of teriparatide in the real world is similar to that observed in clinical trials and observational studies conducted in Europe and the United States.

Fractures in women treated with raloxifene or alendronate: a retrospective database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Raloxifene and alendronate are anti-resorptive therapies approved for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Raloxifene is also indicated to reduce the risk of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and in postmenopausal women at high risk of invasive breast cancer. A definitive study comparing the fracture effectiveness and rate of breast cancer for raloxifene and alendronate has not been published. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate fracture and breast cancer rates among patients treated with raloxifene or alendronate. METHODS: Females ≥45 years who initiated raloxifene or alendronate in 1998-2006 Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Databases, had continuous enrollment 12 months prior to and at least 12 months after the index date, and had a treatment medication possession ratio ≥80% were included in this study. Rates of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures and breast cancer during 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 years of treatment with raloxifene or alendronate were evaluated. Fracture rates were adjusted for potential treatment bias using inverse probability of treatment weights. Multivariate hazard ratios were estimated for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. RESULTS: Raloxifene patients had statistically significantly lower rates of vertebral fractures in 1, 3, 5, and 7 years and for nonvertebral fractures in 1 and 5 years. There were no statistically significant differences in the adjusted fracture rates between raloxifene and alendronate cohorts, except in the 3-year nonvertebral fracture rates where raloxifene was higher. Multivariate hazard ratios of raloxifene versus alendronate cohorts were not significantly different for vertebral and nonvertebral fracture in 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 years. Unweighted and weighted breast cancer rates were lower among raloxifene recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with alendronate and raloxifene had similar adjusted fracture rates in up to 8 years of adherent treatment, and raloxifene patients had lower breast cancer rates.

Long-term raloxifene for postmenopausal osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Due to the chronic nature of osteoporosis and the risk of invasive breast cancer, raloxifene 60 mg/day (raloxifene) is intended to be used for long-term treatment (treatment >3 years). SCOPE: We review available information concerning long-term use of raloxifene, present several new analyses, and report new data from patients who underwent iliac crest bone biopsies after 8 years of raloxifene therapy. The most important studies were the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) followed by the Continued Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (CORE). FINDINGS: The primary endpoint in MORE was incidence of vertebral fracture, and the difference between the raloxifene and placebo groups for this endpoint widened during 4 years of therapy, with the relative risk reduction during the fourth year of the study being similar to the relative risk reduction during years 0 to 3 of the study. Continued raloxifene treatment is necessary to preserve bone mineral density (BMD). In MORE, raloxifene lowered markers of bone turnover to a premenopausal reference interval. Biopsies from three patients treated with raloxifene for 8 years showed normal bone and bone cells and double label in all specimens. Invasive breast cancer risk is a clinical consideration in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, and invasive breast cancer risk reduction was the primary endpoint in CORE. In MORE and CORE, the benefit of raloxifene versus placebo in incidence of invasive breast cancer increased with greater duration of therapy up to 8 years. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term use of raloxifene has been evaluated through changes in fracture risk reduction, BMD, markers of bone turnover, iliac crest bone biopsies, and invasive breast cancer risk reduction.

Correlations between biochemical markers of bone turnover and bone density responses in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis treated with teriparatide or alendronate.

The purpose of this post hoc analysis was to determine whether baseline concentrations or early changes in serum bone turnover markers were correlated with changes in bone mineral density (BMD) at 18 months in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) treated with teriparatide (n=80; 20 mug/day) or alendronate (n=77; 10 mg/day). Bone markers included type I collagen N-terminal propeptide (PINP), type I collagen C-terminal propeptide (PICP), bone alkaline phosphatase (bone ALP), and cross-linked C-telopeptide of type I collagen (Sbeta-CTX). The relationship between baseline and early changes in markers and the 18-month changes in lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN) BMD was evaluated using Spearman correlation analysis. In the teriparatide group, increases in LS and FN BMD at 18 months were not significantly correlated with baseline marker concentrations (P>0.05) but were correlated with the increases in PINP at 1 and 6 months (P<0.05). In the alendronate group, the increase in FN BMD at 18 months was positively correlated with baseline marker concentrations (P<0.05) and negatively correlated with change in PINP and Sbeta-CTX at 1 and 6 months. In addition, in the alendronate group, the increase in LS BMD was negatively correlated with change in Sbeta-CTX at 1 month (P<0.05). Increases in BMD at the spine and hip were independent of baseline bone turnover in the teriparatide group, while increases in hip BMD were dependent on baseline bone turnover in the alendronate group. With both therapies, early changes in some bone turnover markers were correlated with 18-month gains in BMD in patients with GIO.

Benefits and risks of raloxifene by vertebral fracture status.

OBJECTIVE: Women without versus those with vertebral fracture may have different benefits and risks during raloxifene treatment. Our objective was to compare the effects of raloxifene to decrease risk for vertebral fracture and invasive breast cancer with its effect to increase risk for venous thromboembolism in postmenopausal women without or with baseline vertebral fracture. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial included postmenopausal women with osteoporosis randomized to placebo, raloxifene 60 mg/day, or raloxifene 120 mg/day for 4 years. The protocol specified subgroups based on whether or not patients had a vertebral fracture at baseline. Absolute differences between placebo and raloxifene 60 mg/day (the approved dose) for endpoints in these groups were defined as the incidence in the raloxifene group minus the incidence in the placebo group. RESULTS: Raloxifene decreased the incidence of vertebral fracture and invasive breast cancer while increasing the incidence of venous thromboembolism. All treatment by vertebral fracture status interaction p-values were greater than 0.13, indicating that the effect of raloxifene on these outcomes was not significantly different between patients without versus those with vertebral fractures. In women without baseline vertebral fracture, absolute risk differences between the raloxifene and placebo group included vertebral fracture -2.83%, invasive breast cancer -1.21%, and venous thromboembolism +0.28%. In women with baseline vertebral fracture, absolute risk differences between raloxifene and placebo group included vertebral fracture -8.21%, invasive breast cancer -0.75% and venous thromboembolism +0.91%. The analysis had limited power to test whether raloxifene had a significantly different effect on venous thromboembolism in women without versus those with a vertebral fracture. CONCLUSIONS: In women without and in those with vertebral fractures at baseline, the effects of raloxifene to decrease vertebral fracture and invasive breast cancer were greater than its effects to increase venous thromboembolism.

Effects of teriparatide versus alendronate for treating glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: thirty-six-month results of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the bone anabolic drug teriparatide (20 microg/day) with the antiresorptive drug alendronate (10 mg/day) for treating glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (OP). METHODS: This was a 36-month, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial in 428 subjects with OP (ages 22-89 years) who had received > or =5 mg/day of prednisone equivalent for > or =3 months preceding screening. Measures included changes in lumbar spine and hip bone mineral density (BMD), changes in bone biomarkers, fracture incidence, and safety. RESULTS: Increases in BMD from baseline were significantly greater in the teriparatide group than in the alendronate group, and at 36 months were 11.0% versus 5.3% for lumbar spine, 5.2% versus 2.7% for total hip, and 6.3% versus 3.4% for femoral neck (P < 0.001 for all). In the teriparatide group, median percent increases from baseline in N-terminal type I procollagen propeptide (PINP) and osteocalcin (OC) levels were significant from 1 to 36 months (P < 0.01), and increases in levels of C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) were significant from 1 to 6 months (P < 0.01). In the alendronate group, median percent decreases in PINP, OC, and CTX were significant by 6 months and remained below baseline through 36 months (P < 0.001). Fewer subjects had vertebral fractures in the teriparatide group than in the alendronate group (3 [1.7%] of 173 versus 13 [7.7%] of 169; P = 0.007), with most occurring during the first 18 months. There was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of nonvertebral fractures (16 [7.5%] of 214 subjects taking teriparatide versus 15 [7.0%] of 214 subjects taking alendronate; P = 0.843). More subjects in the teriparatide group (21%) versus the alendronate group (7%) had elevated predose serum calcium concentrations (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that subjects with glucocorticoid-induced OP treated with teriparatide for 36 months had greater increases in BMD and fewer new vertebral fractures than subjects treated with alendronate.

Reduced risk of back pain following teriparatide treatment: a meta-analysis.

Vertebral fractures are the most common osteoporotic fracture and may result in back pain with functional limitations and diminished quality of life. Teriparatide [rhPTH (1-34)] has been shown to increase bone mass and reduce the risk of vertebral and other osteoporotic fractures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of teriparatide on the risk of back pain in patients with osteoporosis. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and five trials were identified and included in our analyses. All trials were randomized, double-blinded, and parallel with either new vertebral fracture (n=1) or bone mineral density as the primary endpoint (n=4). Four studies were in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, and one was in men with idiopathic or hypogonadal osteoporosis. Two trials were placebo controlled, two trials were alendronate controlled, and one trial involved teriparatide plus hormone replacement therapy versus hormone replacement therapy alone. Reports of back pain, defined as new or worsened back pain after initiating the study drug, were obtained from adverse event databases, and the risk of back pain was analyzed using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Results were not statistically heterogeneous (P=0.60) across trials, and there were no differences between groups administered teriparatide 20 or 40 mcg/day doses (P=0.64). The rates of back pain, moderate or severe back pain, and severe back pain per 100 patient-years were numerically lower in the teriparatide versus comparator groups in each study. Compared with the pooled comparator, patients in the pooled teriparatide group had reduced risk for any back pain [relative risk, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.55-0.80)], moderate or severe back pain [relative risk, 0.60 (95% CI, 0.48-0.75)] and severe back pain [relative risk, 0.44 (95% CI, 0.28-0.68)]. Separate meta-analyses comparing teriparatide versus placebo or antiresorptive drugs gave similar results. In conclusion, patients randomized to teriparatide had a reduced risk of new or worsening back pain compared to patients randomized to placebo, hormone replacement therapy or alendronate.

Combination teriparatide and raloxifene therapy for postmenopausal osteoporosis: results from a 6-month double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

UNLABELLED: We compared combination treatment with teriparatide plus raloxifene with teriparatide alone in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis in a 6-month double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that measured biochemical markers of bone turnover and BMD. Markers of bone formation and spine BMD increased similarly with teriparatide alone and combination therapy. However, combination therapy induced a significantly smaller increase in bone resorption versus teriparatide alone and significantly increased total hip BMD versus baseline. INTRODUCTION: The effects of combining two approved treatments for osteoporosis with different modes of action were examined by comparing teriparatide [rhPTH(1-34)] monotherapy with combination teriparatide and raloxifene therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 6-month randomized, double-blind trial comparing teriparatide plus raloxifene (n = 69) versus teriparatide plus placebo (n = 68) was conducted in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. RESULTS: Bone formation (N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen [PINP]) increased similarly in both treatment groups. However, the increase in bone resorption (serum C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen [CTx]) in the combination group was significantly smaller than in the teriparatide-alone group (p = 0.015). Lumbar spine BMD significantly increased 5.19 +/- 0.67% from baseline in the teriparatide-alone group. In the combination group, lumbar spine (6.19 +/- 0.65%), femoral neck (2.23 +/- 0.64%), and total hip (2.31 +/- 0.56%) BMD significantly increased from baseline to study endpoint, and the increase in total hip BMD was significantly greater than in the teriparatide-alone group (p = 0.04). In the teriparatide-alone group, mean serum calcium levels increased from baseline to endpoint (0.30 +/- 0.06 mg/dl, p < 0.001), whereas mean serum phosphate remained unchanged. In the combination group, mean serum calcium was unchanged, and mean serum phosphate decreased (-0.20 +/- 0.06 mg/dl, p < 0.001) from baseline to endpoint. Changes in serum calcium (p < 0.001) and phosphate (p < 0.004) were significantly different between treatment groups. The safety profile of combination therapy was similar to teriparatide alone. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy increased bone formation to a similar degree as teriparatide alone. However, the increase in bone resorption was significantly less and total hip BMD significantly increased for combination therapy compared with teriparatide alone. Combination treatment with raloxifene may thus enhance the bone forming effects of teriparatide. Further studies over longer treatment duration that include fracture endpoints are necessary to fully ascertain the clinical significance of combination raloxifene plus teriparatide therapy in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Longterm reduction of back pain risk in women with osteoporosis treated with teriparatide compared with alendronate.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects on back pain of teriparatide versus alendronate, we analyzed the reporting of back pain in a head to head comparator trial and a followup study. METHODS: In the comparator trial, women were randomized to receive either daily self-injected teriparatide 40 microg plus an oral placebo (n = 73), or daily oral alendronate 10 mg plus self-injected placebo (n = 73). Treatment was for a median 14 months. After completion of the comparator trial, 72% of these patients enrolled in a nontreatment followup study. Adverse events were recorded at each comparator trial visit and followup study visit, and the incidence of new or worsening back pain in each group was compared. RESULTS: During the comparator trial, compared with women randomized to alendronate 10 mg, women randomized to teriparatide 40 microg had reduced risk for any back pain (relative risk 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.82) and moderate or severe back pain (relative risk 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.86). The differences in the reporting of back pain between the teriparatide treated women and the alendronate treated women were sustained during an interval including the comparator trial plus 18 additional months. During an interval including the comparator trial plus 30 additional months, teriparatide treated patients had numerically fewer occurrences of back pain and moderate or severe back pain. CONCLUSION: Compared with women randomized to alendronate 10 mg, women randomized to teriparatide 40 microg had reduced risk of back pain during the trial and 2.5 years of followup.

The effects of teriparatide on the incidence of back pain in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES: Back pain is a major cause of suffering, disability, and cost. The risk of developing back pain was assessed following treatment with teriparatide [rh(PTH 1-34)] in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A secondary analysis of back pain findings from the global, multi-site Fracture Prevention Trial was conducted where postmenopausal women with prevalent vertebral fractures were administered teriparatide 20 microg (n = 541) or placebo (n = 544) for a median of 19 months. Treatment-emergent back pain data were collected during adverse event monitoring, and spine radiographs were obtained at baseline and study endpoint. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The risk of back pain stratified by severity of new or worsening back pain and the risk of back pain associated with both number and severity of new vertebral fractures. RESULTS: Women randomized to teriparatide 20 microg had a 31% reduced relative risk of moderate or severe back pain (16.5% vs. 11.5%, P = 0.016) and a 57% reduced risk of severe back pain (5.2% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.011). Compared with placebo, teriparatide-treated patients experienced reduced relative risk of developing back pain associated with findings of: one or more new vertebral fractures by 83% (6.5% vs. 1.1%, P < 0.001), two or more new vertebral fractures by 91% (2.5% vs. 0.20%, P = 0.004), and one or more new moderate or severe vertebral fractures by 100% (5.1% vs. 0.0%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Teriparatide-treated women had reduced risk for moderate or severe back pain, severe back pain, and back pain associated with vertebral fractures. The mechanism of the back pain reduction likely includes the reduction both in severity and number of new vertebral fractures.