Prevention and Management of Denosumab Discontinuation Rebound Fractures.

Denosumab rebound-associated fractures occur in approximately 1 out of 14 patients who discontinue denosumab therapy without sequential antiresorptive therapy. They occur due to excessive bone resorption after missed or delayed denosumab doses. The fractures are multiple and quality of life altering. This phenomenon occurs in all patient populations that use prolonged denosumab therapy. Average delay in denosumab dosing beyond 7 months or discontinuation of denosumab without sequential therapy is associated with increased mortality in retrospective studies. Multiple medication regimens used after the end of denosumab therapy have been shown to substantially reduce the risk of rebound vertebral fractures.

The relationship between treatment-related changes in total hip BMD measured after 12, 18, and 24 mo and fracture risk reduction in osteoporosis clinical trials: the FNIH-ASBMR-SABRE project.

There is a strong association between total hip bone mineral density (THBMD) changes after 24 mo of treatment and reduced fracture risk. We examined whether changes in THBMD after 12 and 18 mo of treatment are also associated with fracture risk reduction. We used individual patient data (n = 122 235 participants) from 22 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials of osteoporosis medications. We calculated the difference in mean percent change in THBMD (active-placebo) at 12, 18, and 24 mo using data available for each trial. We determined the treatment-related fracture reductions for the entire follow-up period, using logistic regression for radiologic vertebral fractures and Cox regression for hip, non-vertebral, "all" (combination of non-vertebral, clinical vertebral, and radiologic vertebral) fractures and all clinical fractures (combination of non-vertebral and clinical vertebral). We performed meta-regression to estimate the study-level association (r2 and 95% confidence interval) between treatment-related differences in THBMD changes for each BMD measurement interval and fracture risk reduction. The meta-regression revealed that for vertebral fractures, the r2 (95% confidence interval) was 0.59 (0.19, 0.75), 0.69 (0.32, 0.82), and 0.73 (0.33, 0.84) for 12, 18, and 24 mo, respectively. Similar patterns were observed for hip: r2 = 0.27 (0.00, 0.54), 0.39 (0.02, 0.63), and 0.41 (0.02, 0.65); non-vertebral: r2 = 0.27 (0.01, 0.52), 0.49 (0.10, 0.69), and 0.53 (0.11, 0.72); all fractures: r2 = 0.44 (0.10, 0.64), 0.63 (0.24, 0.77), and 0.66 (0.25, 0.80); and all clinical fractures: r2 = 0.46 (0.11, 0.65), 0.64 (0.26, 0.78), and 0.71 (0.32, 0.83), for 12-, 18-, and 24-mo changes in THBMD, respectively. These findings demonstrate that treatment-related THBMD changes at 12, 18, and 24 mo are associated with fracture risk reductions across trials. We conclude that BMD measurement intervals as short as 12 mo could be used to assess fracture efficacy, but the association is stronger with longer BMD measurement intervals.

In this study, we looked at how changes in hip bone density over time relate to the risk of fractures in people taking osteoporosis medications. We analysed data from over 122 000 participants across 22 different clinical trials. We found that the increase in bone density measured after 12, 18, and 24 mo of treatment was linked to the risk of fractures. Specifically, greater improvements in bone density were associated with fewer fractures in the spine, hips, and other bones. Using statistical methods, we calculated the strength of this association. We discovered that the later, we measured BMD in people taking the medication, the stronger the link between improved bone density and reduced fracture risk became. Our findings suggest that bone density measurements after 12 mo of treatment could help predict how well a medication will prevent fractures. However, the best predictions came from bone density changes measured over longer periods.

Impact of Teriparatide and Denosumab on Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures.

Background and Objectives: Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are prevalent among the elderly, often leading to significant pain, morbidity, and mortality. Effective management of underlying osteoporosis is essential to prevent subsequent fractures. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of teriparatide and denosumab treatments in patients with OVCFs to determine their relative effectiveness in improving patient outcomes. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 78 patients diagnosed with an acute thoracolumbar OVCF who received either teriparatide (35 patients) or denosumab (43 patients) within three months of a fracture. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and EQ-5D quality of life scores at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Bone mineral density (BMD) and radiographic outcomes were evaluated initially and at 12 months post-treatment. Results: Both treatment groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS, ODI, and EQ-5D scores over 12 months. No significant differences were observed between the teriparatide and denosumab groups in terms of clinical outcomes or radiographic measurements at any time point. Fracture union and BMD improvements were similarly observed in both groups. The teriparatide group had a lower baseline BMD, but this did not affect the overall outcomes. Conclusions: Both teriparatide and denosumab are effective in improving clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients with OVCFs. Despite concerns about denosumab's potential to hinder fracture healing, our study found no significant differences between the two treatments. These findings support the use of denosumab for early treatment of OVCFs to prevent subsequent fractures without compromising fracture healing. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-Osteoporotic Agents across CKD Stages: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis poses a significant health concern, especially for individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD). CKD disrupts mineral and bone metabolism, heightening the risk of fractures and complicating the management of osteoporosis. While anti-osteoporotic interventions aim to address bone health in CKD patients, ongoing research is essential to understand the comparative efficacy and safety of these medications, particularly in different CKD stages, notably in stages 4 and 5. METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of osteoporosis interventions in CKD up to June 15, 2024. The analysis utilized the pooled odds ratio (OR) along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), employing Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, version 3.0. To assess heterogeneity in the results of individual studies, we used Cochran's Q statistic and the I2 statistic. RESULTS: We analyzed 12 randomized controlled trials involving 31,027 participants, revealing a significantly lower risk of vertebral fractures with anti-osteoporotic agents (teriparatide, denosumab, romosozumab, raloxifene) compared to placebo (pooled OR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.22-0.36]). Stratification by CKD stages showed a lower risk in Stages 1-3 but no significant reduction in stages 4 and 5. Teriparatide, denosumab, and romosozumab were effective in lowering fracture risk, whereas Raloxifene showed no significant effect. The lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip BMD showed no significant differences between anti-osteoporotic agents (denosumab, raloxifene, risedronate, alendronate, teriparatide) and placebo. However, romosozumab demonstrated a significantly greater BMD change in all kidney function categories. No reported side effects were observed in CKD stages 1-5 across the trials. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis highlights the effectiveness of anti-osteoporotic agents in lowering vertebral fracture risk in CKD patients, particularly in stages 1-3. However, this benefit is not apparent in stages 4 and 5, necessitating further research. Despite the absence of reported side effects in CKD patients, clinicians should carefully assess the suitability of these medications, considering individual risks and benefits.

A Real-world Study of Denosumab For Reducing Refracture Risk after Percutaneous Vertebral Augmentation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use of anti-osteoporotic agents and refracture incidence in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) following percutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) and to evaluate the real-world treatment of patients using denosumab following PVA. This study aims to provide spine surgeons with empirical insights derived from real-world scenarios to enhance the management of bone health in OVCF patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was based on data from the MarketScan and Optum databases from the USA. Female patients aged 55-90 years who underwent PVA for OVCF between January 2013 and March 2020 were included and followed up from the day after surgery. Patients who received at least one dose of denosumab were included in the denosumab cohort and were further divided into the on-treatment and off-treatment groups according to whether they received a second dose of denosumab, with follow-up beginning on the index day (225 days after the first denosumab dose). In this study, the off-treatment group was considered as the control group. Refracture incidence after PVA, the proportion of patients using anti-osteoporotic agents in the total study population, and refracture incidence after the index day in the denosumab cohort were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 13,451 and 21,420 patients from the MarketScan and Optum databases, respectively, were included. In the denosumab cohort, the cumulative incidence of clinical osteoporotic fractures within 3 years after the index day was significantly lower in the on-treatment group than in the off-treatment group (MarketScan database: 23.0% vs 39.0%, p = 0.002; Optum database: 28.2% vs 40.0%, p = 0.023). The cumulative incidence of clinical vertebral fractures was also lower in the on-treatment group than in the off-treatment group, with a significant difference in the MarketScan database (14.4% vs 25.5%, p = 0.002) and a numerical difference was found in the Optum database (20.2% vs 27.5%, p = 0.084).The proportion of patients using anti-osteoporotic agents was low at 6 months postoperatively, with only approximately 7% using denosumab and 13%-15% taking oral bisphosphonates. CONCLUSION: Postmenopausal women have a high refracture rate and a low proportion of anti-osteoporotic drug use after PVA. Continued denosumab treatment after PVA is associated with a lower risk of osteoporotic and clinical vertebral fractures. Therefore, denosumab may be a treatment option for patients with osteoporosis after PVA.

Bone-active drugs in premenopausal women with breast cancer under hormone-deprivation therapies.

BACKGROUND: Bone health management in premenopausal women with breast cancer (BC) under hormone-deprivation therapies (HDTs) is often challenging, and the effectiveness of bone-active drugs is still unknown. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included 306 premenopausal women with early BC undergoing HDTs. Bone mineral density (BMD) and morphometric vertebral fractures (VFs) were assessed 12 months after HDT initiation and then after at least 24 months. RESULTS: After initial assessment, bone-active drugs were prescribed in 77.5% of women (151 denosumab 60 mg/6 months, 86 bisphosphonates). After 47.0 ± 20.1 months, new VFs were found in 16 women (5.2%). Vertebral fracture risk was significantly associated with obesity (odds ratio [OR] 3.87, P = .028), family history of hip fractures or VFs (OR 3.21, P = .040], chemotherapy-induced menopause (OR 6.48, P < .001), preexisting VFs (OR 25.36, P < .001), baseline T-score less than or equal to -2.5 standard deviation (SD) at any skeletal site (OR 4.14, P = .036), and changes at lumbar and total hip BMD (OR 0.94, P = .038 and OR 0.88, P < .001, respectively). New VFs occurred more frequently in women untreated compared to those treated with bone-active drugs (14/69, 20.8% vs 2/237, 0.8%; P < .001) and the anti-fracture effectiveness remained significant after correction for BMI (OR 0.03; P < .001), family history of fractures (OR 0.03; P < .001), chemotherapy-induced menopause (OR 0.04; P < .001), and preexisting VFs (OR 0.01; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Premenopausal women under HDTs are at high risk of VFs in relationship with high BMI, densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis, preexisting VFs, and family history of osteoporotic fractures. Vertebral fractures in this setting might be effectively prevented by bisphosphonates or denosumab.

Risk factors for vertebral fracture in rheumatoid arthritis patients using biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (cases over 5 years): An observational study.

While biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are considered beneficial for preventing osteoporosis and bone fracture, it is unclear whether bone loss is involved in the development of vertebral fracture, and few reports have examined the factors related to vertebral fracture in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients using bDMARDs. This study aims to identify factors influencing vertebral fracture in RA patients treated with bDMARDs. We retrospectively examined the records of 129 RA patients treated with bDMARDs for over 5 years. The lumbar spine and femoral bone mineral density, Disease Activity Score-28-C-Reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP) value, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) score were evaluated. The frequency of new vertebral fracture during the study and their risk factors were investigated. A comparison between the fracture group and the nonfracture group was performed. Multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression analysis to detect risk factors for new vertebral fracture. The number of patients with new vertebral fracture during follow-up was 15 (11.6%) of the 129 patients in the study. Age and mHAQ score were significantly higher and lumbar spine and femoral neck bone mineral density were significantly lower in the fracture group than the nonfracture group. The risk factors for new vertebral fracture during the disease course were older age and higher mHAQ score indicating no remission over the 5 years of follow-up. In this study, there was no significant difference in disease indices such as the DAS28-CRP value and the SDAI between the fracture and nonfracture groups, suggesting an effective control of RA with bDMARDs. However, age and the mHAQ score, an index of RA dysfunction, were significantly higher in the fracture group. These results suggest that improving functional impairment may be important to prevent vertebral fracture in patients using bDMARDs.

Undiagnosed vertebral fragility fractures in patients with distal radius fragility fractures: an opportunity for prevention of morbimortality in osteoporotic patients in developing countries.

Our study investigates vertebral fractures in individuals with distal radius fractures. Among 512 patients, 41.21% had vertebral fractures, predominantly in the lumbar spine. These findings highlight the importance of screening for vertebral fractures in this population, informing early intervention strategies to mitigate risks associated with osteoporosis. PURPOSE: This study's main goal was to look into the frequency, location, kind, and severity of asymptomatic vertebral fragility fractures (VFF) in people who had fractures of the fragility of the distal radius. Although VFF is frequently misdiagnosed, it is linked to higher mortality, morbidity, and hip fracture risk. The study also attempted to investigate the relationship between VFF and certain demographic and lifestyle factors, as well as FRAX data, in this patient population. METHODS: Between January, 2021, and January, 2022, individuals with low-energy distal radial fractures who presented to the emergency room of tertiary care hospital of Karachi, Pakistan, were the subject of a cross-sectional study and were 45 years of age or older except those who fitted the exclusion criteria (n = 208). The thoracic and/or lumbar spine was imaged using radiology, and information on demographics, way of life, and FRAX (Fracture Risk Assessment Tool) was gathered. Using the Genant semiquantitative approach, an impartial and blinded orthopaedist identified VF in the images and determined their severity. SPSS version 20 was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven (41.21%) of them were found to have radiographic VFF and only 12 (2.34%) of the 512 patients who were tested were getting osteoporotic therapy. The thoracic spine (32.7%), followed by the lumbar spine (43.12%), was the area most frequently afflicted. In 24.17% of the patients, multiple fractures of the thoracolumbar spine were found. The wedge form (54.5%), followed by biconcave (30.81%) and crush (14.7%), was the most prevalent VFF type. The majority of detected VFF were rated as having a 25-40% height loss (64.9%) then severe (> 40%) fractures (35.1%), according to the Genant grading method. Notably, there were no variations in smoking, drinking, BMI, or FRAX score between patients with and without VFF that were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Based on our study's findings, it is clear that osteoporotic vertebral fragility fractures occur in almost half of individuals with distal radius fractures. The lumbar spine is notably the most affected region, predominantly with wedge fractures. Given the high prevalence of asymptomatic vertebral fragility fractures (VFF), proactive measures are necessary to mitigate associated risks. Prioritising comprehensive fall risk assessments for these patients and interventions to enhance bone mineral density and strength are crucial. Early identification of asymptomatic VFF enables timely intervention, optimising patient care and minimising the risk of complications in this vulnerable population.

Achieving osteoporosis treat-to-target goals with teriparatide or alendronate: sub-analysis of Japanese Osteoporosis Intervention Trial-05 (JOINT-05).

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether bone mineral density (BMD) ≥ -2.5 SD could be used as the treat-to-target (T2T) goal when treating osteoporosis with teriparatide (TPTD) and alendronate (ALN), and to investigate the relationship with incident vertebral fracture by re-analyzing data from a randomized, controlled trial (JOINT-05) involving postmenopausal Japanese women at high fracture risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants received sequential therapy with once-weekly TPTD for 72 weeks, followed by ALN for 48 weeks (TPTD-ALN group) or ALN monotherapy for 120 weeks (ALN group). BMDs were measured at the lumbar spine (L2-4), total hip, and femoral neck at 0, 24, 48, 72, and 120 weeks by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The T2T goal was BMD ≥ -2.5 SD, and the endpoint was the proportion of participants with baseline BMD < -2.5 SD in three measurement sites achieving BMD ≥ -2.5 SD. RESULTS: A total of 559 participants were selected. BMD ≥ -2.5 SD at 120 weeks in the L2-4, total hip, and femoral neck sites was achieved in 20.5%, 23.1%, and 5.9%, respectively, in the TPTD-ALN group and 22.2%, 11.7%, and 7.3%, respectively, in the ALN group. Incident vertebral fractures occurred in areas of both lower and high BMD. CONCLUSION: During the 1.5-year treatment period, more than 20% of participants achieved BMD ≥ -2.5 SD as a T2T goal at L2-4. Since the achievement level differed depending on the BMD measurement site, the appropriate site should be selected according to the baseline BMD level.

Zoledronate After Denosumab Discontinuation: Is Repeated Administrations More Effective Than Single Infusion?

BACKGROUND: After denosumab (Dmab) discontinuation C-terminal telopeptide (CTX) levels increase, bone mineral density (BMD) decreases and multiple vertebral fractures (FX) may occur with relevant impacts on women's health. A sequential therapy with bisphosphonates is recommended, and the European Calcified Tissue Society (ECTS) proposed repeated zoledronate (ZOL) administrations in patients with persistently high CTX levels, although the efficacy of this schedule is unknown. In this retrospective study, we describe BMD changes and FX rate in 52 patients managed according to the ECTS recommendations. METHODS: We measured CTX levels and administered ZOL after 1 month from Dmab withdrawal (t0). After 6 months (t1), we administered a second ZOL infusion, if CTX levels were ≥280 ng/L. BMD changes and FX rate were assessed on average after 17 months from Dmab withdrawal. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of patients repeated ZOL infusion. In this group, spine BMD declined significantly (-5.5 ± 5.6%), while it remained stable in the group with CTX levels <280 ng/L (-0.1 ± 5.5%, P = 0.008). All fractured patients (9.6%) had received >5 Dmab injections and 2 ZOL infusions. The BMD worsening after Dmab withdrawal was associated with CTX t1 [odds ratio (OR) 2.9, interquartile range (IQR) 1.3-6.6, P = .009] and spine BMD gain during Dmab therapy corrected for the number of Dmab injections (OR 3.0, IQR 1.2-7.2, P = .014). A CTX level at t1 > 212 ng/L had 100% sensitivity in predicting the BMD loss. CONCLUSION: In patients with uncontrolled CTX levels after Dmab withdrawal, 2 ZOL infusions 6 months apart do not prevent BMD loss and FX.

Romosozumab in patients who experienced an on-study fracture: post hoc analyses of the FRAME and ARCH phase 3 trials.

Post hoc analysis of FRAME and ARCH revealed that on-study nonvertebral and vertebral fractures by Month 12 were less common in women initially treated with romosozumab versus placebo or alendronate. Recurrent fracture risk was also lower in romosozumab­treated patients, and there were no fracture­related complications. Results support continuing romosozumab treatment post­fracture. PURPOSE: Post hoc analysis evaluating efficacy and safety of romosozumab, administered in the immediate post­fracture period, in the FRAME and ARCH phase 3 trials. METHODS: In FRAME (NCT01575834) and ARCH (NCT01631214), postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were randomized 1:1 to romosozumab 210 mg monthly or comparator (FRAME, placebo; ARCH, alendronate 70 mg weekly) for 12 months, followed by antiresorptive therapy (FRAME, denosumab; ARCH, alendronate). In patients who experienced on-study nonvertebral or new/worsening vertebral fracture by Month 12, we report the following: fracture and treatment­emergent adverse event (TEAE) incidence through 36 months, bone mineral density changes (BMD), and romosozumab timing. Due to the sample sizes employed, meaningful statistical comparisons between treatments were not possible. RESULTS: Incidence of on-study nonvertebral and vertebral fractures by Month 12 was numerically lower in romosozumab- versus comparator-treated patients (FRAME, 1.6% and 0.5% versus 2.1% and 1.6%; ARCH, 3.4% and 3.3% versus 4.6% and 4.9%, respectively). In those who experienced on-study nonvertebral fracture by Month 12, recurrent nonvertebral and subsequent vertebral fracture incidences were numerically lower in patients initially treated with romosozumab versus comparator (FRAME, 3.6% [2/56] and 1.8% [1/56] versus 9.2% [7/76] and 3.9% [3/76]; ARCH, 10.0% [7/70] and 5.7% [4/70] versus 12.6% [12/95] and 8.4% [8/95], respectively). Among those with on-study vertebral fracture by Month 12, recurrent vertebral and subsequent nonvertebral fracture incidences were numerically lower with romosozumab versus comparator (FRAME, 0.0% [0/17] and 0.0% [0/17] versus 11.9% [7/59] and 8.5% [5/59]; ARCH, 9.0% [6/67] and 7.5% [5/67] versus 15.0% [15/100] and 16.0% [16/100], respectively). In patients with fracture by Month 12, no fracture­related complications were reported in romosozumab-treated patients. BMD gains were numerically greater with romosozumab than comparators. CONCLUSION: Data suggest support for the efficacy and safety of continuing romosozumab treatment following fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: NCT01575834; NCT01631214.

Etidronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration, leading to increased fracture risk. Etidronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts - bone cells that break down bone tissue. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2008. For clinical relevance, we investigated etidronate's effects on postmenopausal women stratified by fracture risk (low versus high). OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of intermittent/cyclic etidronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk of fracture, respectively. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, two clinical trial registers, the websites of drug approval agencies, and the bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews. We identified eligible trials published between 1966 and February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of etidronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Women in the experimental arms must have received at least one year of etidronate, with or without other anti-osteoporotic drugs and concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Eligible comparators were placebo (i.e. no treatment; or calcium, vitamin D, or both) or another anti-osteoporotic drug. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. We classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled one or more of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, a low bone mineral density T-score (≤ -2.5), or aged 75 years or older. If none of these criteria were met, we considered the study to be primary prevention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The review has three main comparisons: (1) etidronate 400 mg/day versus placebo; (2) etidronate 200 mg/day versus placebo; (3) etidronate at any dosage versus another anti-osteoporotic agent. We stratified the analyses for each comparison into primary and secondary prevention studies. For major outcomes in the placebo-controlled studies of etidronate 400 mg/day, we followed our original review by defining a greater than 15% relative change as clinically important. For all outcomes of interest, we extracted outcome measurements at the longest time point in the study. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty studies met the review's eligibility criteria. Of these, 26 studies, with a total of 2770 women, reported data that we could extract and quantitatively synthesize. There were nine primary and 17 secondary prevention studies. We had concerns about at least one risk of bias domain in each study. None of the studies described appropriate methods for allocation concealment, although 27% described adequate methods of random sequence generation. We judged that only 8% of the studies avoided performance bias, and provided adequate descriptions of appropriate blinding methods. One-quarter of studies that reported efficacy outcomes were at high risk of attrition bias, whilst 23% of studies reporting safety outcomes were at high risk in this domain. The 30 included studies compared (1) etidronate 400 mg/day to placebo (13 studies: nine primary and four secondary prevention); (2) etidronate 200 mg/day to placebo (three studies, all secondary prevention); or (3) etidronate (both dosing regimens) to another anti-osteoporotic agent (14 studies: one primary and 13 secondary prevention). We discuss only the etidronate 400 mg/day versus placebo comparison here. For primary prevention, we collected moderate- to very low-certainty evidence from nine studies (one to four years in length) including 740 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Compared to placebo, etidronate 400 mg/day probably results in little to no difference in non-vertebral fractures (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 1.61); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 4.8% fewer, 95% CI 8.9% fewer to 6.1% more) and serious adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.54; ARR 1.1% fewer, 95% CI 4.9% fewer to 5.3% more), based on moderate-certainty evidence. Etidronate 400 mg/day may result in little to no difference in clinical vertebral fractures (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.32 to 28.44; ARR 0.02% more, 95% CI 0% fewer to 0% more) and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.47; ARR 2.3% more, 95% CI 1.1% fewer to 8.4% more), based on low-certainty evidence. We do not know the effect of etidronate on hip fractures because the evidence is very uncertain (RR not estimable based on very low-certainty evidence). Wrist fractures were not reported in the included studies. For secondary prevention, four studies (two to four years in length) including 667 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided the evidence. Compared to placebo, etidronate 400 mg/day may make little or no difference to non-vertebral fractures (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.58; ARR 0.9% more, 95% CI 3.8% fewer to 8.1% more), based on low-certainty evidence. The evidence is very uncertain about etidronate's effects on hip fractures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.17 to 5.19; ARR 0.0% fewer, 95% CI 1.2% fewer to 6.3% more), wrist fractures (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.04; ARR 0.0% fewer, 95% CI 2.5% fewer to 15.9% more), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.18; ARR 0.4% more, 95% CI 1.9% fewer to 4.9% more), and serious adverse events (RR not estimable), compared to placebo. Clinical vertebral fractures were not reported in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This update echoes the key findings of our previous review that etidronate probably makes or may make little to no difference to vertebral and non-vertebral fractures for both primary and secondary prevention.

The positive impact of smoking cessation on fracture risk in a nationwide cohort study.

Many studies sought to demonstrate the association between smoking and fracture risk. However, the correlation between smoking and fractures remains controversial. This study aimed to examine the impact of smoking and smoking cessation on the occurrence of fractures using prospective nationwide cohort data. We enrolled those who underwent a National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) health checkup in 2009-2010 who had a previous health checkup 4-year prior (2005-2006). The study population of 4,028,559 subjects was classified into three groups (non-smoker, smoking cessation, current smoker). The study population was also analyzed according to fracture type (all fractures, vertebral fracture, hip fracture). Lastly, the smoking cessation group and current smoker group were divided into four subgroups based on a lifetime smoking amount cut-off of 20 pack-years (PY). Multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of fracture were examined through a Cox proportional hazards model. After multivariable adjustment, non-smokers showed the lowest risk of fracture (HR = 0.818, CI 0.807-0.828, p < 0.0001) and smoking cessation significantly lowered the risk of fracture (HR 0.938, 95% CI 0.917-0.959, p < 0.0001) compared to current smokers. Regardless of 20PY, all smoking cessation subgroups showed significantly less risk of fractures than current smokers with ≥ 20PYs. Smoking increases the risk of fracture, and smoking cessation lowers the risk of fracture.

The Safety and Efficacy of Abaloparatide on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aging of the population increases the incidence of postmenopausal osteoporosis, which threatens the health of elderly women. Abaloparatide is a synthetic peptide analogue of the human parathyroid hormone-related protein that has recently been approved for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Its efficacy and safety have not been systematically evaluated. Therefore, studies on the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide could be of assistance in the clinical medication of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of abaloparatide in postmenopausal osteoporosis. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were electronically searched from inception to July 6, 2023, for relevant randomized controlled trials. Two review authors independently conducted the study screening, quality assessment (based on the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool recommended in the Cochrane handbook), and data extraction. Outcome measures included bone mineral density (BMD), bone turnover and metabolic markers, incidence of fractures, and adverse events. Data analyses were processed by using Stata SE15. FINDINGS: Ultimately, 8 randomized controlled trials, involving a total of 3705 postmenopausal women, were included. Meta-analysis showed that abaloparatide administration significantly increased the BMD of the lumbar vertebrae (standardized mean difference [SMD], 1.28 [95% CI, 0.81-1.76); I2 = 78.5%]), femoral neck (SMD, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.17-1.23; I2 = 75.7%]), and hip bone (SMD, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.53-1.20; I2 = 60.4%]) in postmenopausal women compared with the control group. Type I procollagen N-terminal propeptide, a bone formation marker, was also elevated after abaloparatide administration. The incidence of vertebral fracture was lower in the abaloparatide group than in the control group (risk ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06-0.26; I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the abaloparatide and the placebo groups (risk ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06; I2 = 0%). IMPLICATIONS: Abaloparatide has a protective effect on women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. It could reduce their risk for vertebral fracture; increase their BMD of the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and hip; and alleviate symptoms and complications of postmenopausal osteoporosis with considerable safety. Limitations of this study include not searching the gray literature and not performing a subgroup analysis. PROSPERO Registration No.: CRD42022370944.

An online clinical decision tool to screen for vertebral fragility fractures (Vfrac) in older women presenting with back pain in general practice: protocol for a feasibility study in preparation for a future cluster randomised controlled trial.

This feasibility study for a future definitive randomized trial assesses the use and acceptability of a new clinical decision tool to identify risk of a vertebral fracture and those who should be referred for spinal radiography in women aged 65 or over presenting to primary care with back pain. PURPOSE: Approximately 12% of older adults have vertebral fragility fractures, but currently fewer than one-third are diagnosed, potentially limiting access to bone protection treatment. Vfrac is a vertebral fracture screening tool which classifies individuals into high or low risk of having a vertebral fracture, allowing targeting of spinal radiographs to high-risk individuals. The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate the use of an online version of Vfrac in primary care. METHODS: The study will run in six general practices, with three given the Vfrac tool for use on older women (> 65 years) consulting with back pain and three using standard clinical processes for managing such back pain. Anonymised data covering a 12-month period will be collected from all sites on consultations by older women with back pain. Focus groups will be undertaken with healthcare professionals and patients on whom the tool was used to understand the acceptability of Vfrac and identify factors that impact its use. These patients will be sent a paper version of the Vfrac questionnaire to self-complete at home. Outputs of the self-completion Vfrac (high versus low risk) will be compared with the face-to-face Vfrac (high versus low risk), and agreement assessed using Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: This study will evaluate the use and acceptability of Vfrac within primary care and determine if data on resource use can be collected accurately and comprehensively. CONCLUSIONS: This article describes the protocol of the Vfrac feasibility study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN18000119 (registered 01/03/2022) and ISRCTN12150779 (registered 10/01/2022).

[Brittle bones]. / 5 minutes pour apprendre. Des os fragiles.

The use of corticosteroids is common in our clinical practice. Cortico-induced osteoporosis should be taken into consideration when using a dosage higher than 7.5 mg/d of prednisone or equivalent for a minimum of 3 months. We describe the case of a 69-year-old female patient who received long-term corticosteroid treatment for low back pain and developed secondary vertebral compression fractures. This case illustrates the importance of assessing fracture risk when prescribing corticosteroids, in order to offer preventive measures and introduce (in subjects with high risk) prophylactic treatments aiming to reduce the risk of irreversible consequences.

[Development of the new guidelines on osteoporosis : Methodological and content development]. / Entwicklung der neuen Leitlinien Osteoporose : Methodische und inhaltliche Entwicklung.

Since 2018, the present S3 guideline Prophylaxis, Diagnosis and Therapy of Osteoporosis (AWMF 183-001) has been updated following a previous update of the underlying PICO questions (Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome questions) for a systematic literature search. The focus of the guideline update, in addition to updating the evidence supporting literature along with recommendations, was the development of a risk calculator for vertebral fractures and femoral neck fractures. This is essential for managing risk assessment because of the multitude of risk factors that contribute to fracture risk. This article considers the development of the guideline update methodologically and substantively, the latter by reflecting on the core themes of the guideline update.

Cholecalciferol Use Is Associated With a Decreased Risk of Incident Morphometric Vertebral Fractures in Acromegaly.

CONTEXT: Skeletal fragility is observed in 30% to 60% of acromegaly patients, representing an emerging complication of the disease that increases disability. Despite several studies having investigated the clinical and hormonal prognostic factors for the occurrence of vertebral fractures (VFs) in acromegaly, very few data are available on their prevention/treatment including the effect of vitamin D (VD) supplementation, which has been reported to have a fracture-protective effect in several studies in patients with osteoporosis. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the role of cholecalciferol (D3) supplementation in the prevention of incident VFs (i-VFs) in acromegaly. METHODS: A longitudinal, retrospective and multicenter study was performed on 61 acromegaly patients treated and untreated with D3 supplementation. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated with D3 supplementation according to clinical guidelines. The median D3 weekly dosage was 8500 IU (interquartile range [IQR]: 3900). The median duration of D3 supplementation was 94 months (IQR: 38). At last follow-up, i-VFs were diagnosed in 14 patients (23%). I-VFs were less prevalent in patients on D3 supplementation (14.3% of cases) compared to patients not treated with D3 (85.7%; P = .02). The final level of serum V25OH-D was significantly lower in patients who developed i-VFs (28.6 ng/mL, IQR: 4.1) compared to patients who did not develop i-VFs (34.2 ng/mL, IQR: 9.6; P = .05). The logistic regression confirmed the protective role of D3 supplementation on the occurrence of i-VFs (odds ratio: 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.79; P = .01). CONCLUSION: It is likely that D3 supplementation could lead to a reduction in i-VFs in acromegaly.

Establishment of a novel risk prediction model for recompression of augmented vertebrae at the thoracolumbar junction and modified puncture technique for prevention: a multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Recompression of augmented vertebrae (RCAV) is often seen after percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP), especially at the thoracolumbar junction. The authors aimed to develop and validate a risk prediction model (nomogram) for RCAV and to evaluate the efficacy of a modified puncture technique for RCAV prevention after PKP for thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs). METHODS: Patients who underwent PKP for single thoracolumbar OVFs (T10-L2) between January 2016 and October 2020 were reviewed and followed up for at least 2 years. All patients were randomly divided into a training group (70%) and a validation group (30%). Relevant potential data affecting recompression were collected. Predictors were screened by using binary logistic regression analysis to construct the nomogram. Calibration and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the consistency of the prediction models. Finally, the efficacy of the modified puncture technique for prevention of RCAV in OVF patients with a preoperative intravertebral cleft (IVC) was further demonstrated through binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 394 patients were included and 116 of them (29.4%) sustained RCAV. The independent risk factors included decreased bone mineral density, lower level of serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D3, larger C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), preoperative IVC, and solid-lump cement distribution. The area under the curve (AUC) of the prediction model was 0.824 in the training group and 0.875 in the validation group patients. The calibration curve indicated the predictive power of this nomogram, with the preoperative IVC having the highest prediction accuracy (AUC 0.705). The modified puncture technique significantly reduced the incidence of RCAV by enhancing bone cement distribution into a sufficiently diffused distribution in OVF patients with preoperative IVC. CONCLUSIONS: The nomogram prediction model had satisfactory accuracy and clinical utility for identification of patients at low and high risk of postoperative RCAV. Patients at high risk of postoperative RCAV might benefit from the target puncture technique and vitamin D supplementation as well as effective antiosteoporotic therapies.