Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of bone fragility in people living with HIV: a position statement from the Swiss Association against Osteoporosis.

Life expectancy of people living with HIV (PLWH) is reaching similar length as in the general population. Accordingly, age-related comorbidities, including osteoporosis, are increasing. Fracture risk is higher and increases approximately 10 years earlier in PLWH. Classical risk factors of bone fragility are highly prevalent in PLWH but factors specific for HIV infection itself and the type of antiretroviral therapy (ART) (triple combination antiretroviral therapy) regimen (especially tenofovir and protease inhibitors) also contribute to bone loss. The majority of bone loss occurs during virus activity and at initiation of ART (immune reconstitution) and is associated with an increase of bone resorption (upregulation RANKL). Recent data indicate that calcium and vitamin D supplements as ART initiation lower BMD loss. The reduction of tenofovir plasma concentrations with tenofovir alafenamide attenuates BMD loss but it remains unknown whether it will contribute to reduce fracture risk. Hence, special considerations for the management of bone fragility in PLWH are warranted. Based on the current state of epidemiology and pathophysiology of osteoporosis in PLWH, we provide the consensus of the Swiss Association against Osteoporosis on best practice for diagnosis, prevention, and management of osteoporosis in this population. Periodic assessment of fracture risk is indicated in all HIV patients and general preventive measures should be implemented. All postmenopausal women, men above 50 years of age, and patients with other clinical risk for fragility fractures qualify for BMD measurement. An algorithm clarifies when treatment with bisphosphonates and review of ART regimen in favour of more bone-friendly options are indicated.

Can one or two high doses of oral vitamin D3 correct insufficiency in a non-supplemented rheumatologic population?

SUMMARY: We evaluated the effectiveness of supplementation with high dose of oral vitamin D3 to correct vitamin D insufficiency. We have shown that one or two oral bolus of 300,000 IU of vitamin D3 can correct vitamin D insufficiency in 50% of patients and that the patients who benefited more from supplementation were those with the lowest baseline levels. INTRODUCTION: Adherence with daily oral supplements of vitamin D3 is suboptimal. We evaluated the effectiveness of a single high dose of oral vitamin D3 (300,000 IU) to correct vitamin D insufficiency in a rheumatologic population. METHODS: Over 1 month, 292 patients had levels of 25-OH vitamin D determined. Results were classified as: deficiency <10 ng/ml, insufficiency ≥10 to 30 ng/ml, and normal ≥30 ng/ml. We added a category using the IOM recommended cut-off of 20 ng/ml. Patients with deficient or normal levels were excluded, as well as patients already supplemented with vitamin D3. Selected patients (141) with vitamin D insufficiency (18.5 ng/ml (10.2-29.1) received a prescription for 300,000 IU of oral vitamin D3 and were asked to return after 3 (M3) and 6 months (M6). Patients still insufficient at M3 received a second prescription for 300,000 IU of oral vitamin D3. Relation between changes in 25-OH vitamin D between M3 and M0 and baseline values were assessed. RESULTS: Patients (124) had a blood test at M3. Two (2%) had deficiency (8.1 ng/ml (7.5-8.7)) and 50 (40%) normal results (36.7 ng/ml (30.5-5.5)). Seventy-two (58%) were insufficient (23.6 ng/ml (13.8-29.8)) and received a second prescription for 300,000 IU of oral vitamin D3. Of the 50/124 patients who had normal results at M3 and did not receive a second prescription, 36 (72%) had a test at M6. Seventeen (47%) had normal results (34.8 ng/ml (30.3-42.8)) and 19 (53%) were insufficient (25.6 ng/ml (15.2-29.9)). Of the 72/124 patients who receive a second prescription, 54 (75%) had a test at M6. Twenty-eight (52%) had insufficiency (23.2 ng/ml (12.8-28.7)) and 26 (48%) had normal results (33.8 ng/ml (30.0-43.7)). At M3, 84% patients achieved a 25-OH vitamin D level >20 ng/ml. The lowest the baseline value, the highest the change after 3 months (negative relation with a correlation coefficient r = -0.3, p = 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that one or two oral bolus of 300,000 IU of vitamin D3 can correct vitamin D insufficiency in 50% of patients.

[Therapeutic goal of vitamin D: optimal serum level and dose requirements]. / Aspects thérapeutiques de la vitamine D: quels taux cibler avec quels traitements?

Therapeutic goal of vitamin D: optimal serum level and dose requirements Results of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses investigating the effect of vitamin D supplementation on falls and fractures are inconsistent. The optimal serum level 25(OH) vitamin D for musculoskeletal and global health is > or = 30 ng/ml (75 nmol/l) for some experts and 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/l) for some others. A daily dose of vitamin D is better than high intermittent doses to reach this goal. High dose once-yearly vitamin D therapy may increase the incidence of fractures and falls. High serum level of vitamin D is probably harmful for the musculoskeletal system and health at large. The optimal benefits for musculoskeletal health are obtained with an 800 UI daily dose and a serum level of near 30 ng/ml (75 nmol/l).

[Role of slow-acting anti-arthritic agents in osteoarthritis (chondroitin sulfate, glucosamine, hyaluronic acid)]. / Place des antiarthrosiques symptomatiques d'action lente dans l'arthrose (sulfate de chondroïtine, glucosamine, acide hyaluronique).

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the major causes of pain and of outpatient's clinics. 15 years ago, physiopathology of OA and its potential therapeutic targets were announced to be better understood, but the results of therapeutic trials were finally not as convincing as expected. Slow Acting Drugs (SADs) are part of the treatments evaluated in OA. Even if evidence based medicine is low, positive effects of SADs have been observed. We can reasonably propose these treatments for a short test period. It can sometimes enable us to decrease the dosage of others treatment such as NSAIDs. In any case, the physician must properly inform the patient about products available in Switzerland and must be aware of degrees of purity and costs of the products available on the intemet.