One versus 2 years of alendronate following denosumab: the CARD extension.

When denosumab is discontinued, antiresorptive therapy is critical to reduce high-turnover bone loss. The ideal duration of antiresorptive therapy after denosumab is uncertain. This study demonstrates that both 1 and 2 years of alendronate maintained bone density gains achieved with 1 year of denosumab. BACKGROUND: When denosumab is discontinued, antiresorptive therapy is critical to attenuate high-turnover bone loss. The ideal choice and duration of antiresorptive therapy are not yet defined, however. In the Comparison of Alendronate or Raloxifene following Denosumab (CARD) study, we demonstrated that 12 months of alendronate was better able to maintain the bone mineral density (BMD) gains achieved with 12 months of denosumab versus 12 months of raloxifene. In this extension, we wished to determine if 12 months of alendronate would be sufficient in maintaining these denosumab-induced BMD gains. METHODS: In the CARD study, postmenopausal osteoporotic women aged 60-79 at high fracture risk received 12 months of denosumab 60-mg SC every 6 months followed by 12 months of either alendronate 70 mg weekly (N = 26) or raloxifene (N = 25). All subjects in the alendronate arm were then offered participation in a 1-year extension in which they were randomized to continue alendronate for an additional 12 months (N = 10) or to receive calcium and vitamin D alone (N = 8). The primary outcome was change in spine BMD between months 24 and 36. Exploratory endpoints included changes in areal BMD (aBMD) at other anatomic sites as well as changes in serum bone turnover markers. RESULTS: The CARD study demonstrated the effectiveness of 12 months alendronate in preserving denosumab-induced BMD gains. In the extension, aBMD was maintained at the spine, total hip, and femoral neck in both those randomized to an additional year of alendronate and those randomized to calcium/vitamin D alone. We did, however, observe a transient comparative decrease between months 24-30 in the calcium/vitamin D group at the total hip (P = 0.008) and femoral neck (P = 0.040). At the end of 24 months of the CARD study, bone turnover markers serum c-telopeptide (CTX) and procollagen N-propeptide of type I collagen (PINP) were suppressed in both groups and then increased more between months 24-36 in the calcium/vitamin D group than the alendronate group (P = 0.051 for CTX, P = 0.030 for P1NP). Both CTX and PINP remained below the month 0 baseline in both groups (P < 0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: With the limitations of our small sample size, these data suggest that both 1 and 2 years of alendronate effectively maintain BMD gains achieved with 1 year of denosumab and prevented any rebound in bone turnover marker levels above pre-denosumab baseline. This is the first randomized trial to assess minimum duration of bisphosphonate after short-term denosumab and may be helpful to guide clinical care. Similar studies performed after longer durations of denosumab would be helpful to further define optimal management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT03623633.

Impact of the COVID-19 era on preventative primary care for children 0-5 years old: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread disruptions to primary healthcare delivery and shifts to virtual care. Reduced in-person paediatric primary care visit rates have been reported. However, the extent to which access to primary preventative care has been impacted remains unclear. The objective of this scoping review is to characterise the utilisation of preventative primary care and its association with child development for children ages 0-5 years old during the COVID-19 era. In addition, we will determine if specific groups of children are at greater risk for reduced access to care. METHODS: A systematic search will be conducted for studies published between March 11, 2020, and October 2023 in the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Library (CENTRAL and CDSR), Web of Science, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). This scoping review will follow the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and updated by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Studies related to primary preventative care of children aged 0-5 years old conducted in English and in high-income countries will be screened. Studies published before March 11, 2020, in acute care and low-middle-income settings will be excluded. Results will be summarised for appointments attended, delayed, and missed. In addition, we will summarise findings on the impact of COVID-19 on child development. Findings will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. DISCUSSION: Further investigation is required to better understand the relationship between attendance of preventative primary care for children and its effects on child development. The findings obtained from this review will offer essential context to guide policy-making and healthcare service planning for the period following the pandemic.

The comparison of alendronate and raloxifene after denosumab (CARD) study: A comparative efficacy trial.

Denosumab discontinuation results in accelerated bone remodeling, decreased bone mineral density (BMD), and an increased risk of multiple vertebral fractures. Bisphosphonates are at least partially effective at inhibiting these consequences but there have been no randomized clinical trials assessing the efficacy of alternative antiresorptives. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of alendronate and the SERM, raloxifene, in preventing the post-denosumab high-turnover bone loss. METHODS: We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial in which 51 postmenopausal women at increased risk of fracture were randomized with equal probability to receive 12-months of denosumab 60-mg 6-monthly followed by 12-months of either alendronate 70-mg weekly or raloxifene 60-mg daily. Serum bone remodeling markers were measured at 0,6,12,15,18, and 24 and areal BMD of the distal radius, spine, and hip were measured at 0,12,18 and 24 months. RESULTS: After denosumab discontinuation, serum markers of bone remodeling remained suppressed when followed by alendronate, but gradually increased to baseline when followed by raloxifene. In the denosumab-to-alendronate group, denosumab-induced BMD gains were maintained at all sites whereas in the denosumab-to-raloxifene group, BMD decreased at the spine by 2.0% (95% CI -3.2 to -0.8, P = 0.003) and at the total hip by 1.2% (-2.1 to -0.4%, P = 0.008), but remained stable at the femoral neck and distal radius and above the original baseline at all sites. The decreases in spine and total hip BMD in the denosumab-to-raloxifene group (but not the femoral neck or distal radius) were significant when compared to the denosumab-to-alendronate group. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that after one year of denosumab, one year of alendronate is better able to maintain the inhibition of bone remodeling and BMD gains than raloxifene.