Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Bone Miner Res ; 36(11): 2139-2152, 2021 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34190361

RESUMEN

The Active-Controlled Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis at High Risk (ARCH) trial (NCT01631214; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01631214) showed that romosozumab for 1 year followed by alendronate led to larger areal bone mineral density (aBMD) gains and superior fracture risk reduction versus alendronate alone. aBMD correlates with bone strength but does not capture all determinants of bone strength that might be differentially affected by various osteoporosis therapeutic agents. We therefore used quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and finite element analysis (FEA) to assess changes in lumbar spine volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), bone volume, bone mineral content (BMC), and bone strength with romosozumab versus alendronate in a subset of ARCH patients. In ARCH, 4093 postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis received monthly romosozumab 210 mg sc or weekly oral alendronate 70 mg for 12 months, followed by open-label weekly oral alendronate 70 mg for ≥12 months. Of these, 90 (49 romosozumab, 41 alendronate) enrolled in the QCT/FEA imaging substudy. QCT scans at baseline and at months 6, 12, and 24 were assessed to determine changes in integral (total), cortical, and trabecular lumbar spine vBMD and corresponding bone strength by FEA. Additional outcomes assessed include changes in aBMD, bone volume, and BMC. Romosozumab caused greater gains in lumbar spine integral, cortical, and trabecular vBMD and BMC than alendronate at months 6 and 12, with the greater gains maintained upon transition to alendronate through month 24. These improvements were accompanied by significantly greater increases in FEA bone strength (p < 0.001 at all time points). Most newly formed bone was accrued in the cortical compartment, with romosozumab showing larger absolute BMC gains than alendronate (p < 0.001 at all time points). In conclusion, romosozumab significantly improved bone mass and bone strength parameters at the lumbar spine compared with alendronate. These results are consistent with greater vertebral fracture risk reduction observed with romosozumab versus alendronate in ARCH and provide insights into structural determinants of this differential treatment effect. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).


Asunto(s)
Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica , Osteoporosis , Alendronato/farmacología , Anticuerpos Monoclonales , Densidad Ósea , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/farmacología , Femenino , Humanos , Vértebras Lumbares/diagnóstico por imagen , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/diagnóstico por imagen , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/tratamiento farmacológico , Posmenopausia
3.
J Bone Miner Res ; 35(7): 1289-1299, 2020 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32119749

RESUMEN

Odanacatib (ODN), a selective oral inhibitor of cathepsin K, was an investigational agent previously in development for the treatment of osteoporosis. In this analysis, the effects of ODN on bone remodeling/modeling and structure were examined in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven, Phase 3, Long-term Odanacatib Fracture Trial (LOFT; NCT00529373) and planned double-blind extension in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. A total of 386 transilial bone biopsies, obtained from consenting patients at baseline (ODN n = 17, placebo n = 23), month 24 (ODN n = 112, placebo n = 104), month 36 (ODN n = 42, placebo n = 41), and month 60 (ODN n = 27, placebo n = 20) were assessed by dynamic and static bone histomorphometry. Patient characteristics at baseline and BMD changes over 5 years for this subset were comparable to the overall LOFT population. Qualitative assessment of biopsies revealed no abnormalities. Consistent with the mechanism of ODN, osteoclast number was higher with ODN versus placebo over time. Regarding bone remodeling, dynamic bone formation indices in trabecular, intracortical, and endocortical surfaces were generally similar in ODN-treated versus placebo-treated patients after 2 years of treatment. Regarding periosteal modeling, the proportion of patients with periosteal double labels and the bone formation indices increased over time in the ODN-treated patients compared with placebo. This finding supported the observed numerical increase in cortical thickness at month 60 versus placebo. In conclusion, ODN treatment for 5 years did not reduce bone remodeling and increased the proportion of patients with periosteal bone formation. These results are consistent with the mechanism of action of ODN, and are associated with continued BMD increases and reduced risk of fractures compared with placebo in the LOFT Phase 3 fracture trial. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.


Asunto(s)
Compuestos de Bifenilo , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica , Osteoporosis , Compuestos de Bifenilo/uso terapéutico , Densidad Ósea , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/uso terapéutico , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/tratamiento farmacológico , Posmenopausia
4.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol ; 7(12): 899-911, 2019 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31676222

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Odanacatib, a cathepsin K inhibitor, reduces bone resorption while maintaining bone formation. Previous work has shown that odanacatib increases bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of odanacatib to reduce fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. METHODS: The Long-term Odanacatib Fracture Trial (LOFT) was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven study at 388 outpatient clinics in 40 countries. Eligible participants were women aged at least 65 years who were postmenopausal for 5 years or more, with a femoral neck or total hip bone mineral density T-score between -2·5 and -4·0 if no previous radiographic vertebral fracture, or between -1·5 and -4·0 with a previous vertebral fracture. Women with a previous hip fracture, more than one vertebral fracture, or a T-score of less than -4·0 at the total hip or femoral neck were not eligible unless they were unable or unwilling to use approved osteoporosis treatment. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oral odanacatib (50 mg once per week) or matching placebo. Randomisation was done using an interactive voice recognition system after stratification for previous radiographic vertebral fracture, and treatment was masked to study participants, investigators and their staff, and sponsor personnel. If the study completed before 5 years of double-blind treatment, consenting participants could enrol in a double-blind extension study (LOFT Extension), continuing their original treatment assignment for up to 5 years from randomisation. Primary endpoints were incidence of vertebral fractures as assessed using radiographs collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months, yearly, and at final study visit in participants for whom evaluable radiograph images were available at baseline and at least one other timepoint, and hip and non-vertebral fractures adjudicated as being a result of osteoporosis as assessed by clinical history and radiograph. Safety was assessed in participants who received at least one dose of study drug. The adjudicated cardiovascular safety endpoints were a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and new-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter. Individual cardiovascular endpoints and death were also assessed. LOFT and LOFT Extension are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00529373) and the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT number 2007-002693-66). FINDINGS: Between Sept 14, 2007, and Nov 17, 2009, we randomly assigned 16 071 evaluable patients to treatment: 8043 to odanacatib and 8028 to placebo. After a median follow-up of 36·5 months (IQR 34·43-40·15) 4297 women assigned to odanacatib and 3960 assigned to placebo enrolled in LOFT Extension (total median follow-up 47·6 months, IQR 35·45-60·06). In LOFT, cumulative incidence of primary outcomes for odanacatib versus placebo were: radiographic vertebral fractures 3·7% (251/6770) versus 7·8% (542/6910), hazard ratio (HR) 0·46, 95% CI 0·40-0·53; hip fractures 0·8% (65/8043) versus 1·6% (125/8028), 0·53, 0·39-0·71; non-vertebral fractures 5·1% (412/8043) versus 6·7% (541/8028), 0·77, 0·68-0·87; all p<0·0001. Combined results from LOFT plus LOFT Extension for cumulative incidence of primary outcomes for odanacatib versus placebo were: radiographic vertebral fractures 4·9% (341/6909) versus 9·6% (675/7011), HR 0·48, 95% CI 0·42-0·55; hip fractures 1·1% (86/8043) versus 2·0% (162/8028), 0·52, 0·40-0·67; non-vertebral fractures 6·4% (512/8043) versus 8·4% (675/8028), 0·74, 0·66-0·83; all p<0·0001. In LOFT, the composite cardiovascular endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 273 (3·4%) of 8043 patients in the odanacatib group versus 245 (3·1%) of 8028 in the placebo group (HR 1·12, 95% CI 0·95-1·34; p=0·18). New-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter occurred in 112 (1·4%) of 8043 patients in the odanacatib group versus 96 (1·2%) of 8028 in the placebo group (HR 1·18, 0·90-1·55; p=0·24). Odanacatib was associated with an increased risk of stroke (1·7% [136/8043] vs 1·3% [104/8028], HR 1·32, 1·02-1·70; p=0·034), but not myocardial infarction (0·7% [60/8043] vs 0·9% [74/8028], HR 0·82, 0·58-1·15; p=0·26). The HR for all-cause mortality was 1·13 (5·0% [401/8043] vs 4·4% [356/8028], 0·98-1·30; p=0·10). When data from LOFT Extension were included, the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in significantly more patients in the odanacatib group than in the placebo group (401 [5·0%] of 8043 vs 343 [4·3%] of 8028, HR 1·17, 1·02-1·36; p=0·029, as did stroke (2·3% [187/8043] vs 1·7% [137/8028], HR 1·37, 1·10-1·71; p=0·0051). INTERPRETATION: Odanacatib reduced the risk of fracture, but was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, specifically stroke, in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Based on the overall balance between benefit and risk, the study's sponsor decided that they would no longer pursue development of odanacatib for treatment of osteoporosis. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.


Asunto(s)
Compuestos de Bifenilo/uso terapéutico , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/uso terapéutico , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Compuestos de Bifenilo/efectos adversos , Densidad Ósea/efectos de los fármacos , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/efectos adversos , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Fracturas Óseas/epidemiología , Fracturas Óseas/prevención & control , Fracturas de Cadera/epidemiología , Fracturas de Cadera/prevención & control , Humanos , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/complicaciones , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/prevención & control , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/epidemiología , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/prevención & control , Resultado del Tratamiento
5.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 98(12): 4727-35, 2013 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24064689

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Odanacatib (ODN) is a selective cathepsin K inhibitor being developed to treat osteoporosis. OBJECTIVE: The effects of ODN were evaluated on bone mineral density (BMD), biochemical markers of bone turnover, and safety in patients previously treated with alendronate. DESIGN: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 24-month study. SETTING: The study was conducted at private or institutional practices. PARTICIPANTS: Postmenopausal women (n = 243) ≥ 60 years of age with low BMD at the total hip, femoral neck, or trochanter (T-score ≤-2.5 but >-3.5 without prior fracture or ≤-1.5 but >-3.5 with prior fracture) on alendronate for ≥ 3 years. INTERVENTION: The intervention included ODN 50 mg or placebo weekly. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was percentage change from baseline of femoral neck BMD at month 24. BMD was assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and 6, 12, and 24 months. Biochemical markers of bone turnover (serum C-telopeptides of type 1 collagen, urinary N-telopeptides of type 1 collagen, serum bone specific alkaline phosphatase, and serum N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen) were measured at baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. RESULTS: In the ODN group, BMD changes from baseline at the femoral neck, trochanter, total hip, and lumbar spine at 24 months (1.7%, 1.8%, 0.8%, and 2.3%, respectively) were significantly different from the placebo group. ODN significantly decreased urinary N-telopeptides of type 1 collagen to creatinine ratio and significantly increased serum N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen compared with placebo. Serum C-telopeptides of type 1 collagen was unexpectedly increased with ODN treatment. The safety profile appeared similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: ODN provided incremental BMD gains in osteoporotic women after alendronate treatment.


Asunto(s)
Compuestos de Bifenilo/uso terapéutico , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/uso terapéutico , Huesos/efectos de los fármacos , Catepsina K/antagonistas & inhibidores , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Proteasas/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Alendronato/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores/sangre , Compuestos de Bifenilo/efectos adversos , Densidad Ósea/efectos de los fármacos , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/efectos adversos , Remodelación Ósea/efectos de los fármacos , Huesos/metabolismo , Calcio de la Dieta/uso terapéutico , Colecalciferol/uso terapéutico , Terapia Combinada , Suplementos Dietéticos , Método Doble Ciego , Monitoreo de Drogas , Femenino , Humanos , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/sangre , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/dietoterapia , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/metabolismo , Pacientes Desistentes del Tratamiento , Inhibidores de Proteasas/efectos adversos
6.
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol ; 23(1): 73-85, 2009 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19027366

RESUMEN

Osteoporosis-related fractures affect one-third of postmenopausal women, resulting in significant morbidity, mortality and cost. Bone strength is compromised if bone remodelling favours resorption by osteoclasts over bone formation by osteoblasts. Understanding the regulation of remodelling holds the key to the management of osteoporosis. Postmenopausal women should be encouraged to embrace lifestyle changes that benefit bone health. Pharmacological intervention should be reserved for patients at risk of fracture, determined with the 10-year probability of fracture using an integrated model of risk factors (FRAX). Randomized controlled trials have shown that oestrogen/progestin hormone therapy, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, bisphosphonates, teriparatide and strontium ranelate are effective in the prevention of osteoporotic fractures. No head-to-head comparative data are available. Compliance with therapy is poor and treatment monitoring relies on surrogate markers. Every effort must be made to prevent osteoporotic fractures.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas/prevención & control , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/prevención & control , Posmenopausia/fisiología , Anciano , Envejecimiento/fisiología , Femenino , Fracturas Óseas/fisiopatología , Terapia de Reemplazo de Hormonas , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/fisiopatología , Cooperación del Paciente , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Medición de Riesgo , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo
7.
Obstet Gynecol ; 101(4): 711-21, 2003 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12681875

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of alendronate 35 mg once weekly compared with alendronate 5 mg daily in the prevention of osteoporosis. METHODS: We compared the efficacy and safety of treatment with alendronate 35 mg once weekly (n = 362) and alendronate 5 mg daily (n = 361) in a 1-year, double-blind, multicenter study of postmenopausal women (6 months or greater), aged 40-70 years, with lumbar spine and femoral neck bone mineral density T-scores between -2.5 and 1. The primary efficacy end point was the comparability of lumbar spine bone mineral density increases, defined by strict prespecified criteria. RESULTS: Mean increases in lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months were equivalent (difference between the alendronate 35-mg once-weekly group and the alendronate 5-mg daily group [90% confidence interval] at month 12 was -0.3% [-0.6, 0.1], well within the prespecified bounds of +/-1.0%). Bone mineral density increases at other skeletal sites and effects on bone turnover were also virtually identical for the two dosing regimens. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated, and the larger weekly unit dose was not associated with an increased frequency of upper gastrointestinal events. CONCLUSION: Alendronate 35 mg once weekly is therapeutically equivalent to alendronate 5 mg daily and provides patients with greater dosing convenience, in addition to the proven efficacy of alendronate and good tolerability.


Asunto(s)
Alendronato/administración & dosificación , Difosfonatos/administración & dosificación , Osteoporosis Posmenopáusica/prevención & control , Absorciometría de Fotón , Administración Oral , Adulto , Anciano , Densidad Ósea , Método Doble Ciego , Esquema de Medicación , Inglaterra , Femenino , Fémur , Cadera , Humanos , Vértebras Lumbares , Michigan , Persona de Mediana Edad , New Jersey , Nueva Zelanda , Sudáfrica , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA