Denosumabe e teriparatida para o tratamento indivíduos com osteoporose grave e falha terapêutica aos medicamentos disponíveis no Sistema Único de Saúde / Denosumab and teriparatide for the treatment of individuals with severe osteoporosis and therapeutic failure to the drugs available in the Unified Health System

INTRODUÇÃO: A osteoporose, doença que aumenta da fragilidade óssea e suscetibilidade à fratura, afeta cerca de 200 milhões de pessoas no mundo. No geral, a prevalência de osteoporose em estudos brasileiros varia de 6% a 33% dependendo da população e outras variáveis avaliadas. Entre os indivíduos com osteoporose, aqueles que apresentaram fratura osteoporótica têm duas vezes o risco para nova fratura. Para evitar novas fraturas, o tratamento preconizado deve incluir estratégias medicamentosas e não medicamentosas. Entre as medicamentosas, suplementação de cálcio e colecalciferol, alendronato, risedronato, pamidronato, raloxifeno, calcitonina e estrógenos conjugados são opções disponíveis no Protocolo Clínico de Diretrizes Terapêuticas (PCDT) de Osteoporose do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). Apesar da disponibilidade de tratamentos, estima-se que 25% dos pacientes continuam a apresentar falha terapêutica aos tratamentos disponíveis. Nesse contexto, as diretrizes clínicas nacionais e internacionais de sociedade médicas, recomendam o uso de denosumabe ou teriparatida a pacientes com osteoporose grave e falha terapêutica aos medicamentos disponíveis no SUS (alendronato, pamidronato, raloxifeno e risedronato). Entretanto, há incerteza se os benefícios identificados para população em tratamento de primeira linha, principal população incluída nos estudos, são sustentados em população com osteoporose grave e falha terapêutica em vigência de tratamento; e se a escolha, por estas opções terapêuticas, pode valer a pena e ser viável economicamente para o SUS. Assim, o objetivo do presente relatório é analisar as evidências científicas sobre eficácia, efetividade, segurança, bem como evidências econômicas do denosumabe e da teriparatida para o tratamento de pacientes com osteoporose grave com falha terapêutica aos medicamentos disponíveis no SUS (alendronato, pamidronato, raloxifeno e risedronato). TECNOLOGIAS: Denosumabe (Prolia®) e teriparatida (Fortéo®). PERGUNTA: Os medicamentos denosumabe e

Atrial fibrillation in patients treated with intravenous zoledronic or pamidronic acid: a pharmacoepidemiological study.

OBJECTIVE: Atrial fibrillation (AF) may be triggered by intravenous bisphosphonates (IVBPs) such as zoledronic acid or pamidronic acid. Our objective was to confirm the association between AF and IVBPs in a real-life large pharmacovigilance database. DESIGN: A systematic analysis of VigiBase, the World Health Organization's pharmacovigilance database. METHODS: Analysis of adverse events reported as 'atrial fibrillation' (according to the Medical Dictionary for Drug Regulatory Activities) associated with the use of zoledronic acid or pamidronic acid, in VigiBase, the World Health Organization's global Individual Case Safety Report (ICSR) database. All ICSRs reporting AF associated with zoledronic acid or pamidronic acid were included in a disproportionality analysis determining the lower end of the 95% credibility interval for the information component (IC025), showing a statistical association when >0. RESULTS: 530 ICSRs reporting on the association between AF and IVBPs were extracted. Bayesian disproportionality analysis detected a significant association between AF and use of zoledronic acid (IC025 = 1.83) and pamidronic acid (IC025 = 2.16). Further analysis of these ICSRs determined that AF was severe in 85.0% of cases and with a mortality of 17.7%. The risk of severe AF was increased (OR: 2.98 (95% CI: 1.17-7.57), P = 0.02) following zoledronic acid vs pamidronic acid, after adjustment for age and gender. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first VigiBase pharmacoepidemiological study confirming the association between IVBPs and AF. Most AF were severe, with a high frequency of lethal outcome. The risk of severe AF was increased following zoledronic acid use compared to pamidronic acid, advocating for a cautious use of IVBPs.

Bisphosphonates or RANK-ligand-inhibitors for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are used as supportive treatment in men with prostate cancer and bone metastases to prevent skeletal-related events (SREs). SREs such as pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, surgery and radiotherapy to the bone, and hypercalcemia lead to morbidity, a poor performance status, and impaired quality of life. Efficacy and acceptability of the bone-targeted therapy is therefore of high relevance. Until now recommendations in guidelines on which bone-modifying agents should be used are rare and inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of bisphosphonates and RANKL-inhibitors as supportive treatment for prostate cancer patients with bone metastases and to generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to their safety and efficacy using network meta-analysis. SEARCH METHODS: We identified studies by electronically searching the bibliographic databases Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until 23 March 2020. We searched the Cochrane Library and various trial registries and screened abstracts of conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials comparing different bisphosphonates and RANKL-inihibitors with each other or against no further treatment or placebo for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases. We included men with castration-restrictive and castration-sensitive prostate cancer and conducted subgroup analyses according to this criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. We defined proportion of participants with pain response and the adverse events renal impairment and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) as the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were SREs in total and each separately (see above), mortality, quality of life, and further adverse events such as grade 3 to 4 adverse events, hypocalcemia, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. We conducted network meta-analysis and generated treatment rankings for all outcomes, except quality of life due to insufficient reporting on this outcome. We compiled ranking plots to compare single outcomes of efficacy against outcomes of acceptability of the bone-modifying agents. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-five trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Twenty-one trials could be considered in the quantitative analysis, of which six bisphosphonates (zoledronic acid, risedronate, pamidronate, alendronate, etidronate, or clodronate) were compared with each other, the RANKL-inhibitor denosumab, or no treatment/placebo. By conducting network meta-analysis we were able to compare all of these reported agents directly and/or indirectly within the network for each outcome. In the abstract only the comparisons of zoledronic acid and denosumab against the main comparator (no treatment/placebo) are described for outcomes that were predefined as most relevant and that also appear in the 'Summary of findings' table. Other results, as well as results of subgroup analyses regarding castration status of participants, are displayed in the Results section of the full text. Treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases the proportion of participants with pain response when compared to no treatment/placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 2.32; per 1000 participants 121 more (19 less to 349 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 1013 participants). For this outcome none of the trials reported results for the comparison with denosumab. The adverse event renal impairment probably occurs more often when treated with zoledronic acid compared to treatment/placebo (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.45; per 1000 participants 78 more (10 more to 180 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 6 trials including 1769 participants). Results for denosumab could not be included for this outcome, since zero events cannot be considered in the network meta-analysis, therefore it does not appear in the ranking. Treatment with denosumab results in increased occurrence of the adverse event ONJ (RR 3.45, 95% CI 1.06 to 11.24; per 1000 participants 30 more (1 more to 125 more); high-certainty evidence; 4 trials, 3006 participants) compared to no treatment/placebo. When comparing zoledronic acid to no treatment/placebo, the confidence intervals include the possibility of benefit or harm, therefore treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases ONJ (RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.87; per 1000 participants 11 more (3 less to 47 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 3006 participants). Compared to no treatment/placebo, treatment with zoledronic acid (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97) and denosumab (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) may result in a reduction of the total number of SREs (per 1000 participants 75 fewer (131 fewer to 14 fewer) and 131 fewer (215 fewer to 19 fewer); both low-certainty evidence; 12 trials, 5240 participants). Treatment with zoledronic acid and denosumab likely neither reduces nor increases mortality when compared to no treatment/placebo (zoledronic acid RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; per 1000 participants 48 fewer (97 fewer to 5 more); denosumab RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11; per 1000 participants 34 fewer (111 fewer to 54 more); both moderate-certainty evidence; 13 trials, 5494 participants). Due to insufficient reporting, no network meta-analysis was possible for the outcome quality of life. One study with 1904 participants comparing zoledronic acid and denosumab showed that more zoledronic acid-treated participants than denosumab-treated participants experienced a greater than or equal to five-point decrease in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General total scores over a range of 18 months (average relative difference = 6.8%, range -9.4% to 14.6%) or worsening of cancer-related quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When considering bone-modifying agents as supportive treatment, one has to balance between efficacy and acceptability. Results suggest that Zoledronic acid likely increases both the proportion of participants with pain response, and the proportion of participants experiencing adverse events However, more trials with head-to-head comparisons including all potential agents are needed to draw the whole picture and proof the results of this analysis.

Adjuvant therapies in the management of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO), low-intensity laser (LIL), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the management of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (MRONJ). METHODS: A literature search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Two examiners independently assessed eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. RESULTS: There was improvement in 75.6% of the 41 patients submitted to HBO, with positive effects on pain relief and decreased size and number of lesions at a faster rate, with better effects when the drug was discontinued. For LIL, 158 (64.2%) of the 246 patients/sites improved the symptoms and 98 (39.8%) healed completely. Fourteen (17.3%) of the 81 patients treated with PRP significantly improved the symptoms and 65 (80.2%) completely healed. CONCLUSIONS: These therapies served as safe and effective adjuvant modalities for MRONJ treatment. The lack of randomized clinical trials evidences the need for more high-quality investigations on the subject.

WNT1-associated osteogenesis imperfecta with atrophic frontal lobes and arachnoid cysts.

A rare form of osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) caused by Wingless-type MMTV integration site family 1 (WNT1) mutations combines central nervous system (CNS) anomalies with the characteristic increased susceptibility to fractures. We report an additional case where arachnoid cysts extend the phenotype, and that also confirms the association of intellectual disabilities with asymmetric cerebellar hypoplasia here. Interestingly, if the cerebellum is normal in this disorder, intelligence is as well, analogous to an association with similar delays in a subset of patients with sporadic unilateral cerebellar hypoplasia. Those cases typically appear to represent vascular disruptions, and we suggest that most brain anomalies in WNT1-associated OI have vascular origins related to a role for WNT1 in CNS angiogenesis. This unusual combination of benign cerebellar findings with effects on higher functions in these two situations raises the possibility that WNT1 is involved in the pathogenesis of the associated sporadic cases as well. Finally, our patient reacted poorly to pamidronate, which appears ineffective with this form of OI, so that a lack of improvement is an indication for molecular testing that includes WNT1.

Elderly man with mandibular pain.

CLINICAL INTRODUCTION: A 77-year-old man presented to the ED with a history of fevers, purulent drainage and right mandibular pain. He had been diagnosed with multiple myeloma 2 years previously and was receiving treatment with pamidronate. On presentation, the lower right lip and chin were anaesthetic, tooth number 31 had grade 2 mobility and a 15 mm long ulceration was present on the lingual aspect of the mandible (figure 1). Antibiotics were administered, and a maxillofacial CT without contrast was performed (figure 2).emermed;36/1/17/F1F1F1Figure 1Clinical examination revealing a 15 mm long ulceration (arrow mark) associated with the lingual aspect of tooth number 31.emermed;36/1/17/F2F2F2Figure 2CT maxillofacial (coronal) demonstrating osseous destruction (arrow mark) of the right mandibular body. QUESTION: What is your diagnosis?Odontogenic abscessBenign fibro-osseous lesionMedication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ)Metastatic malignancy.

A case of severe, irreversible hypocalcemia after one dose of pamidronate administered for hypercalcemia of malignancy.

This is a case report of a patient who developed severe, irreversible hypocalcemia after receiving one dose of pamidronate 90 mg for hypercalcemia of malignancy. Hypocalcemia is a known risk of bisphosphonate treatments, but the incidence of severe hypocalcemia is rare, and the risk factors are well established. However, in the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy, the treatment objective is to reduce the elevated serum calcium level, and the bisphosphonate is usually given as one time dose only. The potential for developing severe hypocalcemia may not be considered a significant concern in this setting compared to the setting of the treatment of bone metastasis, where the baseline serum calcium level is not elevated and the bisphosphonate is administered at a regular interval of every three to four weeks. Furthermore, there is unawareness of prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in cancer patients, especially in those with advanced cancer, which may lead to inadvertent, severe hypocalcemia from bisphosphonate treatment. The objective of this case report is to bring awareness to the risk of severe hypocalcemia in patients with hypercalcemia of malignancy and the high prevalence of unrecognized vitamin D deficiency in cancer patients.