Sodium fluoride therapy of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

More than 30 yr of research has clearly established sodium fluoride as the most potent agent currently available for increasing spinal bone mass. The increase is dose-dependent and linear with time for at least 6 yr, probably as long as 10 yr. This is in keeping with observed pharmacological actions of fluoride to enhance recruitment of osteoblasts and matrix deposition without any consistent effect on bone resorption. Unfortunately this has not translated into therapeutic efficacy in terms of preventing the VFR in patients who are already fractured at the initiation of therapy. Whether fluoride will be effective in preventing the first fracture is currently being investigated. If successful in this regard it will not only be extremely useful as prophylaxis against osteoporotic vertebral fractures, but will also provide substantial insight into the pathogenesis of these fractures and the management of patients seen after the first or subsequent fracture. We predict that fluoride will turn out to be extremely useful for prophylaxis. Whether or not lower doses or intermittent fluoride therapy will prove to be effective in patients who have already sustained fractures, is also being actively investigated in controlled clinical trials. Given the difficulty in demonstrating therapeutic efficacy over the past 30 yr, with favorable outcomes only reported from uncontrolled studies, we are not as optimistic about these investigations. Side-effects of NaF are becoming more clearly understood and easier to manage. The gastrointestinal symptoms are short-lived and dependent on the dose and formulation. These symptoms infrequently prohibit the use of the drug. The painful lower extremity syndrome appears to us to represent a 'positive' response to NaF, reflecting abundant formation of new bone that is poorly mineralized. If detected on the basis of symptoms, therapy should be interrupted for 6-8 weeks, then restarted at a lower dose. This syndrome, while clearly related to NaF, appears to be idiosyncratic and not dose or formulation dependent. The data relating NaF to hip fractures cannot be completely ignored because of the major community health problem posed by hip fractures. However, the data are largely anecdotal. Putting all this together, we feel that there may be an important role for NaF in osteoporosis treatment but, for now, its use should be restricted to properly conducted controlled clinical trials.

Reversal of vertebral deformities in osteoporosis: measurement error or "rebound"?

Digitized morphometry of vertebral bodies on lateral spine films is used to identify and quantify vertebral deformities or fractures. One problem associated with this method is the phenomenon of "disappearing fractures," which results from the apparent increase in vertebral body heights of previously deformed vertebrae on subsequent radiographs. These have been considered biologically implausible and therefore a result of measurement error. Measurement error is unlikely to be unidirectional, so that a proportion of fractures identified by morphometry is also the result of measurement error. Since some vertebral deformities are real events, some disappearances of deformities detected by morphometry may be real events. In this report, we examine the data from our clinical trial of sodium fluoride in spinal osteoporosis to assess critically the plausibility of two hypotheses: (1) The "rebound" phenomenon results from measurement error. If this is the case, then some fractures of the same magnitude as the rebound must also represent measurement error. (2) Some deformed vertebrae in fact rebound toward their original shape and size, displaying an elastic response to deformation. If this occurs, then some vertebral deformities are transient events, not true fractures. We conclude that the variability inherent in morphometric data obtained from serial spine x-rays results in both disappearing fractures and a high false positive fracture rate. The use of more stringent criteria for defining significant deformities, or true fractures, will minimize these problems. We cannot exclude the second hypothesis, that some vertebral deformities may be transient events, but this needs further study.

Incidence of hip fractures in osteoporotic women treated with sodium fluoride.

It has been suggested recently that, although fluoride therapy may decrease the occurrence of vertebral fractures, it could increase the risk of hip fractures. To evaluate this possibility, we combined retrospective data from five medical centers that have had a large experience with this therapeutic regimen. In 416 osteoporotic patients who were followed for more than 1,000 patient-years of fluoride treatment, there were 17 nontraumatic hip fractures. This incidence of 1.6% per year is similar to the incidence, 1.9% per year, for 120 of the patients in this series who had been followed prospectively for 3 years prior to initiation of fluoride therapy. The expected incidence for women of the same age in the general community is 0.5% per year. Thus, untreated osteoporotic women are at increased risk for hip fracture, but treatment with fluoride seems neither to decrease nor to increase the incidence of hip fracture substantially.

Osteoporosis in men: diagnosis, pathophysiology, and prevention.

Osteoporosis in men is a significant problem in clinical medicine and in society in general. Systematic consideration of the differential diagnosis of osteopenia and osteoporosis in men is appropriate in every affected patient. Dynamic bone histomorphometry has diagnostic usefulness in some patients and has provided important pathogenetic implications by study of bone remodeling and turnover. Review of the multifactorial pathophysiology of age-related bone loss in men suggests that routine maintenance of adequate calcium and vitamin D intake, exercise, early recognition and treatment of testosterone deficiency, and modification of other osteoporotic risk factors may have prophylactic value. Future basic research on the cellular biology of bone in health and disease and clinical trials assessing the effects of long-term prophylactic and treatment regimens on bone mass and fracture occurrence will expand the understanding of osteoporosis in men.

Hypophosphatemic rickets with hypocalciuria following long-term treatment with aluminum-containing antacid.

We present what we believe is the first case of rickets following prolonged treatment with aluminum containing antacids that bind phosphate, in an 18-year-old mentally retarded boy with cerebral palsy and spastic quadriplegia. As expected, serum calcitriol was increased and urinary phosphate excretion was very low. However, in contrast to all published cases of antacid induced hypophosphatemic osteomalacia in adults, despite a substantial increase in bone resorption reflected by urinary total hydroxyproline excretion, urinary calcium excretion was low rather than high, and significant hypocalcemia occurred after antacids were ceased and a phosphate salt administered. We suggest that the skeleton was so under-mineralized because of growth during prolonged phosphate deficiency, possibly augmented by anticonvulsant administration and immobilization, that increased bone resorption did not release enough calcium to cause hypercalciuria, or to prevent hypocalcemia during resumption of normal mineralization.

The role of fluoride in the prevention of osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis defined as low bone mass and increased susceptibility to fracture is a reflection of the sum of peak bone mass and any bone that has been lost once peak mass has been attained. Several strategies have been applied to optimize peak bone mass and to prevent bone loss. Fluoride has greatest potential as a therapy for osteoporosis once bone has been lost. It has been demonstrated both experimentally and clinically to stimulate bone formation directly and to increase bone mass in patients who already have osteoporosis. Several bone formation/stimulation therapies are under development, and some of these have reached the stage of clinical trial. None of these therapies has been as extensively studied as fluoride, and none is sufficiently advanced in development to be clinically available in the next 3 to 5 years. Fluoride therapy for osteoporosis is already performed in many countries, and approval for use in osteoporosis in the United States is pending. The first clinical trials of NaF therapy for osteoporosis were reported by Rich and Ensinck in 1961. Since then, hundreds of reports on the successes and failures of fluoride therapy have appeared in the literature. At first glance, it seems disappointing and inexplicable that, after 40 years of research, fluoride is still considered an experimental drug in the United States. One plausible explanation is that much of the early research on this drug was suboptimal, including the author's contributions. Fluoride as a naturally occurring element is difficult to patent, and this has kept major pharmaceutical companies from investing heavily in fluoride therapy despite its obvious potential. As a result, pharmacologic and pharmacokinetics studies of fluoride are limited in scope, as are phase I and phase II human toxicology and dose-finding studies. Most early studies of large doses of plain NaF were unable to demonstrate a consistent effect on fracture rate despite a consistent and dramatic effect on bone density. Once this became obvious and as new technologies for measuring bone density became available, it became equally clear that future clinical trials would have to be performed using different formulations of fluoride and lower doses. This approach has not resulted in uniformly positive clinical trials, and one must look elsewhere for answers. The most compelling explanation is that the trials have included patients with different severity of disease, suggesting that there is point in the bone loss spectrum at which even a potent bone-stimulating agent such as fluoride is ineffective. This possibility should provoke a reappraisal of the earlier negative studies: was the failure a result of the drug or of patient selection? The answer to this question is crucial, because these failures have cast a long shadow over the safety of fluoride and are contributing more to the absence of this drug from the pharmacopoeia than any other factor.

Fluoride and the skeleton.

Fluoride has the potential to increase skeletal mass to a greater extent than any other pharmacologic agent, yet it has proven difficult to translate this into therapeutic benefit for patients with low bone mass in diseases such as osteoporosis. This apparent paradox can be explained in part by toxic actions of the ion on skeletal mineralization, impairment of the normal processes of bone resorption, and fluoride-induced decreases in strength per unit of bone (mass or volume). In part, the paradox can be explained by the late stage of osteoporosis in most patients enrolled in controlled clinical trials of fluoride, with alterations in skeletal microarchitecture beyond which restoration of mechanical integrity is not likely. Exposure of calcified tissues to environmental fluoride (water supply, dentifrices) also offers paradoxes. The anticaries effects are well documented as are the deleterious skeletal effects of endemic fluorosis when environmental exposure is too high. More controversial is the effect of seemingly nontoxic levels of exposure on the prevalence of osteoporotic fractures of the hip. This review attempts to provide a balanced overview of the conflicting literature concerning therapeutic and environmental effects of fluoride on the skeleton.

Non-dental tissue effects of fluoride.

The anti-caries effects of water fluoridation are well-established. The non-dental tissue effects of fluoride in drinking water, either naturally occurring or as an additive, have been too poorly studied to permit definitive conclusions to be drawn. Claims have been made that fluoride results in an increased occurrence of malignancies, particularly osteogenic sarcoma. Experimental rat data have not resolved this issue, and epidemiologic studies are equally unclear. Initial claims that fluoride offers protection against atherosclerosis remain viable, but here too, much more directed research is needed. Early studies suggested that a water fluoride content greater than 1 ppm resulted in a lower prevalence of osteoporotic fractures. Recent epidemiologic data seriously question this conclusion and raise the possibility that even this relatively low level may increase the prevalence of osteoporotic hip fractures. Other elements, including calcium and magnesium, also vary in amount as water fluoride content varies, and it has proved difficult to distinguish the independent effects of the various nutrients in water from each other. Therapeutic use of fluoride has been largely restricted to studies of its effect on the osteoporotic study, this important issue remains unresolved. This review provides an overview of these issues, focusing on the uncertainties alluded to, and attempting to develop strategies for future research.

Effects of different regimens of sodium fluoride treatment for osteoporosis on the structure, remodeling and mineralization of bone.

We compared initial and final bone histomorphometric findings in 66 osteoporotic patients treated with sodium fluoride (NaF) according to three regimens, and in 7 osteoporotic patients who did not receive NaF. Fourteen patients received continuous NaF 75 mg/day (high-dose) with calcium 1500 mg/day for a mean of 41 months. Twenty-six patients received continuous NaF 50 mg/day (low-dose) with calcium 2000 mg/day for a mean of 15 months, either with (10 patients) or without (16 patients) vitamin D. Twenty-six patients received cyclical low-dose NaF, alternating with vitamin D, for a mean of 15 months and a total treatment duration of 28 months, of whom 14 were and 12 were not on NaF at the time of the second biopsy. Disregarding differences between regimens, there were significant increases in total and mineralized bone volume and trabecular thickness and nonsignificant decreases in these measurements in the control group. Fluoride-induced bone formation was exclusively appositional with no evidence for the creation of new trabeculae. The effect of low-dose NaF on bone structure was the same when the same total dose was given continuously or intermittently, and when the patient was or was not taking vitamin D. The increases in total and mineralized bone volume but not trabecular thickness were greater with high-dose than with low-dose NaF. Low-dose NaF caused modest but significant increases in all osteoid indices, and modest but significant declines in adjusted apposition rate and osteoid maturation rate and no change in bone formation rate. With high-dose NaF, the increase in BV/TV was greater but all indices of osteoid accumulation were much higher and all indices of impaired osteoblast function and mineralization were much lower, and 12 of 14 patients had some form of osteomalacia. This occurred also in 3 of 30 patients treated with low-dose NaF who were not taking vitamin D; the mean increase in osteoid thickness was significantly greater in these patients than in 22 low-dose patients who were taking vitamin D. We conclude: (1) The inconsistent effect of NaF in increasing bone strength is partly due to failure to restore connectivity in patients with severe bone loss and partly due to substantial osteoid accumulation. (2) Even low-dose NaF causes impaired osteoblast function, but this is much greater with high-dose prolonged therapy. (3) There is an unexplained discrepancy between the increase in bone formation implied by increases in spinal bone mineral and the lack of increase in bone formation measured histomorphometrically. (4) Defective mineralization is more closely related to the total cumulative dose of NaF than to the duration of treatment, and with low-dose treatment may be preventable by vitamin D. (5) Future clinical trials should be carried out with smaller doses of NaF and before there has been substantial loss of horizontal trabeculae in the spine.

A randomized trial of sodium fluoride as a treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis.

The anti-fracture efficacy of sodium fluoride (NaF) was evaluated in 84 postmenopausal white women with spinal osteoporosis. The dose of NaF used was 75 mg/day and all patients in this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial received calcium supplements (carbonate salt) 1500 mg/day in addition to participating in a structured physical therapy program. For each of the outcome measures (change in stature, change in cortical bone mass in the forearm and development of new vertebral fractures determined by change in vertebral morphometry and by scintigraphy) there was no significant difference between the fluoride or placebo treated groups. Side effects, predominantly gastrointestinal symptoms and the development of the painful lower extremity syndrome, occurred significantly more frequently in the fluoride group (P less than 0.05). Peripheral fractures were not more frequent in the fluoride group. We conclude that, in the dose and manner used in this study, NaF is no more effective than placebo in retarding the progression of spinal osteoporosis. There is no role for NaF in the treatment of osteoporosis outside the confines of clinical research.