Anti-fracture efficacy of zoledronate in subgroups of osteopenic postmenopausal women: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We recently reported that the administration of zoledronate every 18 months to osteopenic older women reduces the incidence of fractures. OBJECTIVE: Here, we present a more detailed analysis of that trial to determine whether baseline clinical characteristics impact on the anti-fracture efficacy of this intervention. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial in osteopenic postmenopausal women aged ≥ 65 years, to determine the anti-fracture efficacy of zoledronate. 2000 women were recruited using electoral rolls and randomized to receive 4 infusions of either zoledronate 5 mg or normal saline, at 18-month intervals. Each participant was followed for 6 years. Calcium supplements were not supplied. RESULTS: Fragility fractures (either vertebral or nonvertebral) occurred in 190 women in the placebo group (227 fractures) and in 122 women in the zoledronate group (131 fractures), odds ratio (OR) 0.59 (95%CI 0.46, 0.76; P < 0.0001). There were no significant interactions between baseline variables (age, anthropometry, BMI, dietary calcium intake, baseline fracture status, recent falls history, bone mineral density, calculated fracture risk) and the treatment effect. In particular, the reduction in fractures appeared to be independent of baseline fracture risk, and numbers needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one woman fracturing were not significantly different across baseline fracture risk tertiles. CONCLUSIONS: The present analyses indicate that the decrease in fracture numbers is broadly consistent across this cohort. The lack of relationship between NNTs and baseline fracture risk calls into question the need for BMD measurement and precise fracture risk assessment before initiating treatment in older postmenopausal women.

Should we prescribe calcium or vitamin D supplements to treat or prevent osteoporosis?

Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the highest level of evidence to inform clinical practice. Meta-analyses of large RCTs of calcium and/or vitamin D supplements completed in the last 15 years provide strong evidence for clinical recommendations. These meta-analyses with data for > 50,000 older adults reported that calcium with or without vitamin D has only weak, inconsistent effects on fracture, and that vitamin D without calcium has no effect on fracture. Only one RCT of co-administered calcium and vitamin D in frail, institutionalized, elderly women with low dietary calcium intake and vitamin D levels showed significant reductions in fracture risk. These RCTs have also reported previously unrecognized adverse events of calcium supplements including kidney stones, myocardial infarction, hypercalcemia, and hospitalization with acute gastrointestinal symptoms. The small risk of these important adverse effects, together with the moderate risk of minor side-effects such as constipation, probably outweighs any benefits of calcium supplements on fracture. These data suggest the role for calcium and vitamin D supplements in osteoporosis management is very limited. Neither calcium nor vitamin D supplements should be recommended for fracture prevention in community-dwelling adults, although vitamin D should be considered for prevention of osteomalacia in at-risk individuals.

Calcium supplements: benefits and risks.

Calcium is an essential element in the diet, but there is continuing controversy regarding its optimal intake, and its role in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis. Most studies show little evidence of a relationship between calcium intake and bone density, or the rate of bone loss. Re-analysis of data from the placebo group from the Auckland Calcium Study demonstrates no relationship between dietary calcium intake and rate of bone loss over 5 years in healthy older women with intakes varying from <400 to >1500 mg day(-1) . Thus, supplements are not needed within this range of intakes to compensate for a demonstrable dietary deficiency, but might be acting as weak anti-resorptive agents via effects on parathyroid hormone and calcitonin. Consistent with this, supplements do acutely reduce bone resorption and produce small short-term effects on bone density, without evidence of a cumulative density benefit. As a result, anti-fracture efficacy remains unproven, with no evidence to support hip fracture prevention (other than in a cohort with severe vitamin D deficiency) and total fracture numbers are reduced by 0-10%, depending on which meta-analysis is considered. Five recent large studies have failed to demonstrate fracture prevention in their primary analyses. This must be balanced against an increase in gastrointestinal side effects (including a doubling of hospital admissions for these problems), a 17% increase in renal calculi and a 20-40% increase in risk of myocardial infarction. Each of these adverse events alone neutralizes any possible benefit in fracture prevention. Thus, calcium supplements appear to have a negative risk-benefit effect, and so should not be used routinely in the prevention or treatment of osteoporosis.

Bone density is normal and does not change over 2 years in sarcoidosis.

SUMMARY: Small studies have previously suggested that sarcoidosis may be associated with low bone mineral density. In this observational study of 64 patients with sarcoidosis, bone mineral density was within the normal range at baseline, and there was no evidence of accelerated bone loss over 1-2 years. INTRODUCTION: Several small studies have suggested that sarcoidosis may be associated with low bone mineral density (BMD). METHODS: We undertook a cross-sectional study of BMD in 64 patients with sarcoidosis. Of these, 27 with 25-hydroxyvitamin D<50 nmol/L entered a 1-year intervention study of vitamin D supplements, and 37 entered a 2-year longitudinal study of BMD, with the primary endpoint of the change in lumbar spine BMD. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 58 years, 68% were female, and 8% were currently using oral glucocorticoids. At baseline, BMD for the entire cohort was greater than the expected values for the population at the lumbar spine (mean Z-score 0.7, P<0.001) and total body (0.5, P<0.001) and similar to expected values at the femoral neck (0.2, P=0.14) and total hip (0.2, P=0.14). BMD did not change at any of these four sites (P>0.19) over 2 years in the longitudinal study. In the intervention study, vitamin D supplements had no effect on BMD, and therefore we pooled the data from all participants. BMD did not change over 1 year at the spine, total hip, or femoral neck (P>0.3), but decreased by 0.7% (95% confidence interval 0.3-1.1) at the total body (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: BMD was normal at baseline, and there was no consistent evidence of accelerated bone loss over 1-2 years, regardless of baseline vitamin D status. Patients with sarcoidosis not using oral glucocorticoids do not need routine monitoring of BMD.

Bone density in healthy men after cessation of calcium supplements: 20-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

UNLABELLED: Bone density has been followed up for 20 months following completion of a trial which compared calcium 1,200 mg/day with placebo, in normal older men. Following cessation of calcium supplements, there is a small residual benefit in total body bone density, but not at the hip or spine. INTRODUCTION: Calcium supplements, or supplements of calcium-rich foods, have a positive effect on bone mineral density (BMD). However, it is uncertain whether there are any residual benefits of calcium on BMD following cessation of supplementation. METHODS: In a previously published study, 323 healthy men were randomized to receive elemental calcium 600 mg/day (n = 108), calcium 1,200 mg/day (n = 108), or placebo (n = 107) over 2 years. Consenting men from the placebo and calcium 1,200 mg/day groups (85 and 87, respectively) were followed over the next 1-2 years (mean 20 months), off trial medication. RESULTS: In the core trial, BMD increased at all sites by 1.0-1.5% at 2 years in the group receiving calcium 1,200 mg/day, compared to the group receiving placebo. In post-trial follow-up, the calcium group has some residual benefit at the total body (0.41% above placebo; P = 0.04) but there was no significant between-group differences at other sites. CONCLUSION: Following cessation of calcium supplements in healthy men, there is a small residual benefit in total body BMD, but not at the hip or spine. This is unlikely to confer a clinically significant dividend in terms of ongoing fracture prevention.

Skeletal and nonskeletal effects of vitamin D: is vitamin D a tonic for bone and other tissues?

The vitamin D endocrine system is critical for the maintenance of circulating calcium concentrations, but recently, there has been advocacy for the widespread use of vitamin D supplements to improve skeletal and nonskeletal health. Recent studies of tissue-selective vitamin D receptor knockout mice indicate that the principal action of vitamin D responsible for the maintenance of calcium homoeostasis is the regulation of intestinal calcium absorption. High levels of vitamin D can increase bone resorption and impair mineralization, consistent with its role in maintaining circulating calcium concentrations. These findings suggest that circumspection is appropriate in its clinical use. There is now substantial clinical trial data with vitamin D supplements, which fails to establish their efficacy on bone density or the prevention of falls or fractures. However, some trials in frail and/or vitamin D-deficient populations have produced positive outcomes. Where there are positive effects of vitamin D supplementation on skeletal outcomes, these are mainly seen in cohorts with baseline circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels in the range 25-40 nmol/L or lower. A great diversity of nonskeletal conditions have been associated with low 25(OH)D, but there is little evidence for efficacy of vitamin D supplementation for such end-points. At present, supplements should be advised for populations with risk factors (e.g., lifestyle, skin color, and frailty) for having serum 25(OH)D levels in the 25- to 40-nmol/L range or below. A dose of ≤800 IU/day is adequate. This approach will maintain 25(OH)D levels well above the threshold for osteomalacia and makes allowance for the poor accuracy and precision of some 25(OH)D assays.

The Auckland calcium study: 5-year post-trial follow-up.

UNLABELLED: Five years after completion of a randomised placebo-controlled trial of calcium supplements, there was no effect of calcium on total fracture incidence, a significant reduction in vertebral and forearm fractures and, in a subset, no effect on bone density. There was no increased risk of cardiovascular events after discontinuation of calcium. INTRODUCTION: The Auckland calcium study was a 5-year randomised controlled trial of 1 g/day calcium citrate in 1,471 postmenopausal women. Calcium did not reduce total, vertebral or forearm fracture incidence, increased hip fracture incidence and had beneficial effects on bone mineral density (BMD). A secondary analysis raised concerns about the cardiovascular safety of calcium. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the effects of calcium on fracture incidence, BMD and cardiovascular endpoints persisted after supplement discontinuation. METHODS: Approximately 5-years post-trial, we collected information on the 1,408 participants alive at trial completion from the national databases of hospital admissions and deaths. We contacted 1,174 women by phone, and from these we obtained information on medical events and post-trial calcium use. We undertook BMD measurements at 10 years in a selected subset of 194 women who took study medication for 5 years in the original trial, and did not take bone-active medications post-trial. RESULTS: Over the 10-year period, there was no effect on total fracture (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75-1.07) or hip fracture incidence (1.40, 0.89-2.21), but significant reductions in forearm (0.62, 0.43-0.89) and vertebral fractures (0.52, 0.32-0.85) in those assigned to calcium. There were no between-group differences in BMD at 10 years at any site. The adverse cardiovascular outcomes observed in the 5-year trial did not persist post-trial. CONCLUSION: Calcium supplementation for 5 years had no effect on total fracture incidence at 10 years. The positive benefits on BMD and the adverse cardiovascular effects did not persist once supplements were stopped.

The impact of dietary calcium intake and vitamin D status on the effects of zoledronate.

UNLABELLED: We investigated whether baseline dietary calcium intake or vitamin D status modified the effects of zoledronate. Neither variable influenced the effect of zoledronate on bone mineral density, bone turnover, or risk of acute phase reaction, suggesting that co-administration of calcium and vitamin D supplements with zoledronate may not always be necessary. INTRODUCTION: Calcium and vitamin D supplements are often co-administered with bisphosphonates, but it is unclear whether they are necessary for therapeutic efficacy or minimizing side effects of bisphosphonates. We investigated whether baseline dietary calcium intake or vitamin D status modified the effect of zoledronate on bone mineral density (BMD) or bone turnover at 1 year, or the risk of acute phase reactions (APR). METHODS: Data were pooled from two trials of zoledronate in postmenopausal women without vitamin D deficiency in which calcium and vitamin D were not routinely administered. The cohort (zoledronate n = 154, placebo n = 68) was divided into subgroups by baseline dietary calcium intake (<800 vs. ≥800 mg/day) and vitamin D status [25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) <50 vs. ≥50 nmol/L, and <75 nmol/L vs. ≥75 nmol/L] and treatment × subgroup interactions tested. RESULTS: There were 52, 86, and 36 % of the zoledronate group and 64, 94, and 46 % of the placebo group that had dietary calcium intake ≥800 mg/day, 25OHD ≥50 nmol/L, and 25OHD ≥75 nmol/L, respectively. There were no significant interactions between treatment and either baseline dietary calcium or baseline vitamin D status for lumbar spine BMD, total hip BMD, the bone turnover markers P1NP and ß-CTx, or the risk of an APR. There was also no three-way interaction between baseline dietary calcium intake, baseline vitamin D status, and treatment for any of these variables. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline dietary calcium intake and vitamin D status did not alter the effects of zoledronate, suggesting that co-administration of calcium and vitamin D with zoledronate may not be necessary for individuals not at risk of marked vitamin D deficiency.

Cardiovascular effects of calcium supplementation.

Trials in normal older women and in patients with renal impairment suggest that calcium supplements increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. To further assess their safety, we recently conducted a meta-analysis of trials of calcium supplements, and found a 27-31% increase in risk of myocardial infarction and a 12-20% increase in risk of stroke. These findings are robust because they are based on pre-specified analyses of randomized, placebo-controlled trials and show consistent risk across the trials. The fact that cardiovascular events were not primary endpoints of any of these studies will introduce noise but not bias into the data. A recent re-analysis of the Women's Health Initiative suggests that co-administration of vitamin D with calcium does not lessen these adverse effects. The increased cardiovascular risk with calcium supplements is consistent with epidemiological data relating higher circulating calcium concentrations to cardiovascular disease in normal populations. There are several possible pathophysiological mechanisms for these effects, including effects on vascular calcification, on the function of vascular cells, and on blood coagulation. Calcium-sensing receptors might mediate some of these effects. Because calcium supplements produce small reductions in fracture risk and a small increase in cardiovascular risk, there may be no net benefit from their use. Food sources of calcium appear to produce similar benefits on bone density, although their effects on fracture are unclear. Since food sources have not been associated with adverse cardiovascular effects, they may be preferable. Available evidence suggests that other osteoporosis treatments are still effective without calcium co-administration.

Calcium supplementation and vascular disease.

Calcium supplementation has long been regarded as a fundamental part of the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal bone loss. A number of other health benefits have been suggested, including improvements in blood pressure and in serum cholesterol profiles. In light of this, we recently explored the effects of calcium supplementation on vascular disease in a large, randomized, controlled trial carried out in healthy postmenopausal women over a period of 5 years. To our surprise, we found substantial increases in vascular event rates, particularly myocardial infarction, in women randomized to calcium. These effects were more marked in those who were highly compliant with their calcium supplements. There are similar adverse trends in several other recent studies of calcium supplementation, although these are not statistically significant within each of those trials. Calcium supplementation also appears to accelerate vascular disease in patients with renal impairment, including those not yet requiring dialysis. The recent data do not provide conclusive evidence that calcium has adverse effects on vascular disease, but are consistent enough to mandate that this possibility is considered when providing advice regarding calcium intake. Further research in this area is a high priority on the women's health agenda.

Effect of calcium supplementation on hip fractures.

There have been numerous studies of the effects of calcium supplementation, with or without vitamin D, on fractures. Individually, they have not provided clarity regarding calcium's anti-fracture efficacy, though they have established that calcium does have beneficial effects on bone density throughout the skeleton in women. Meta-analysis of these data suggests that total fracture numbers are diminished. However, the data from the 5,500 women involved in trials of calcium monotherapy show consistent adverse trends in numbers of hip fractures (relative risk 1.50, 95% CI 1.06-2.12). Observational data from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures show a similar increase in risk of hip fracture associated with calcium use. We hypothesize that reduced periosteal expansion in women using calcium supplementation might account for the differences in anti-fracture efficacy of calcium at the hip, in comparison with other sites. Until there are further trial results to clarify this area, the present findings suggest that reliance on high calcium intakes to reduce the risk of hip fracture in older women is not appropriate. In addition, those at risk should be looking to other agents with a proven capacity to prevent hip fractures, such as bisphosphonates.

Determinants of vitamin D status in older men living in a subtropical climate.

INTRODUCTION: Previously we reported seasonal variation in 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels in postmenopausal women living in a subtropical climate. Because studies have suggested that there are gender differences in 25OHD levels, we sought to determine (1) the levels and determinants of 25OHD in men drawn from the same community, (2) whether seasonal variation of 25OHD occurs in men at this latitude (37 degrees S), and (3) whether these findings were comparable to those we previously observed in postmenopausal women. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 378 healthy, middle-aged and older community-dwelling men in Auckland, New Zealand. RESULTS: The mean 25OHD (SD) level was 85 (31) nmol/l. We found significant seasonal variation in 25OHD levels (peak in autumn 103 nmol/l, nadir in spring 59 nmol/l). Vitamin D insufficiency (25OHD <50 nmol/l) was uncommon (prevalence in summer 0-17%, in winter 0-20%). The major determinants of 25OHD were month of blood sampling, fat percentage, physical activity, and serum albumin. Men had higher levels of 25OHD throughout the year than women did, a finding that persisted after adjusting for potential confounding factors. In men and women the determinants of 25OHD were similar. CONCLUSION: There is significant seasonal variation in 25OHD levels in men living in a subtropical climate. In contrast to postmenopausal women, men have low rates of suboptimal vitamin D status, even in winter. Routine vitamin D supplementation for this population of men is not warranted.