Percutaneous administration of allogeneic bone-forming cells for the treatment of delayed unions of fractures: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Overall, 5-10% of fractures result in delayed unions or non-unions, causing major disabilities and a huge socioeconomic burden. Since rescue surgery with autologous bone grafts can cause additional challenges, alternative treatment options have been developed to stimulate a deficient healing process. This study assessed the technical feasibility, safety and preliminary efficacy of local percutaneous implantation of allogeneic bone-forming cells in delayed unions of long bone fractures. METHODS: In this phase I/IIA open-label pilot trial, 22 adult patients with non-infected delayed unions of long bone fractures, which failed to consolidate after 3 to 7 months, received a percutaneous implantation of allogeneic bone-forming cells derived from bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (ALLOB; Bone Therapeutics) into the fracture site (50 × 106 to 100 × 106 cells). Patients were monitored for adverse events and need for rescue surgery for 30 months. Fracture healing was monitored by Tomographic Union Score (TUS) and modified Radiographic Union Score. The health status was evaluated using the Global Disease Evaluation (GDE) score and pain at palpation using a visual analogue scale. The presence of reactive anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies was evaluated. RESULTS: During the 6-month follow-up, three serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in two patients, of which two were considered as possibly treatment-related. None of the 21 patients in the per-protocol efficacy population needed rescue surgery within 6 months, but 2/21 (9.5%) patients had rescue surgery within 30 months post-treatment. At 6 months post-treatment, an improvement of at least 2 points in TUS was reached in 76.2% of patients, the GDE score improved by a mean of 48%, and pain at palpation at the fracture site was reduced by an average of 61% compared to baseline. The proportion of blood samples containing donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies increased from 8/22 (36.4%) before treatment to 13/22 (59.1%) at 6 months post-treatment, but no treatment-mediated allogeneic immune reactions were observed. CONCLUSION: This pilot study showed that the percutaneous implantation of allogeneic bone-forming cells was technically feasible and well tolerated in patients with delayed unions of long bone fractures. Preliminary efficacy evidence is supporting the further development of this treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02020590 . Registered on 25 December 2013. ALLOB-DU1, A pilot Phase I/IIa, multicentre, open proof-of-concept study on the efficacy and safetyof allogeneic osteoblastic cells (ALLOB®) implantation in non-infected delayed-union fractures.

Bimagrumab to improve recovery after hip fracture in older adults: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase 2a/b trial.

BACKGROUND: Older adult patients (ie, those aged ≥60 years) undergoing surgery for hip fracture repair frequently experience loss of muscle mass and strength due to poor mobility and delayed functional recovery. No proven treatment is currently available to enhance recovery of physical function in this growing patient population. This study aimed to investigate whether bimagrumab, a human monoclonal antibody targeting activin type 2 receptors, can improve post-surgical recovery. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, phase 2a/b trial was done at 50 clinical research centres in 18 countries. Participants aged 60 years or older with a body-mass index of 15-35 kg/m2 who had undergone internal fixation or hemiarthroplasty for a proximal femoral fracture (confirmed by radiography) in the previous 6 weeks were eligible. Patients with a history of a high-energy subtrochanteric fracture or any other lower limb fracture in the past 6 months, or any major surgery of the lower limbs in the past 3 months were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:2) via interactive response technology to receive intravenous treatment with placebo, bimagrumab 70 mg, bimagrumab 210 mg, or bimagrumab 700 mg every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. Participants, investigators, site personnel, and study sponsor personnel in participating countries were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in total lean body mass, measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, at week 24 in the full analysis set, which included all randomised participants who had received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. Key secondary endpoints included changes in habitual gait speed (measured in m/s) and short physical performance battery score between baseline and 24 weeks. Safety and tolerability were assessed by recording adverse events and vital signs on weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48, and by laboratory assessments and electrocardiography at the screening visit and on days 1, 84, and 168. Safety was assessed in all randomised participants who had received at least one dose of study drug, analysed according to treatment received. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02152761. FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2014, and Dec 15, 2017, 384 patients were screened, of whom 250 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the placebo group (n=72), the bimagrumab 70 mg group (n=34), the bimagrumab 210 mg group (n=69), or the bimagrumab 700 mg group (n=75). A total of 207 (83%) participants completed the 24-week treatment period. There was a significant absolute increase in lean body mass from baseline compared with placebo (0·2 kg [SD 2·0]) in the bimagrumab 210 mg group (1·9 kg [1·7]; p<0·0001) and in the bimagrumab 700 mg group 2·8 kg [2·2]; p<0·0001) but not in the bimagrumab 70 mg group (0·6 kg [SD 2·2]; significance not assessed). Changes in habitual gait speed and short physical performance battery scores between baseline and week 24 were not significantly different across the treatment groups, suggesting no enhancement of physical recovery with bimagrumab over placebo. Bimagrumab was safe and well tolerated. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were falls (six [18%] of 34 participants in the bimagrumab 70 mg group; 12 [17%] of 69 participants in the bimagrumab 210 mg group; 14 [19%] of 75 participants in the bimagrumab 700 mg group; and 13 [18%] of 72 participants in the placebo group), muscle spasms (two [6%] in the bimagrumab 70 mg group; 17 [25%] in the bimagrumab 210 mg group; 12 [16%] in the bimagrumab 700 mg group; and six [8%] in the placebo group), and arthralgia (five [15%] in the bimagrumab 70 mg group; six [9%] in the bimagrumab 210 mg group; nine [12%] in the bimagrumab 700 mg group; and five [7%] in the placebo group). Six deaths were reported during the study, none of which were considered by investigators as related to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: Bimagrumab treatment for 24 weeks led to dose-dependent, significant increases in lean body mass in older patients recovering from hip fracture surgery when compared with placebo. However, no functional benefit was observed in recovery of mobility or lower extremity function following bimagrumab treatment compared with placebo. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

Addition of Liposome Bupivacaine to Bupivacaine HCl Versus Bupivacaine HCl Alone for Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block in Patients Having Major Shoulder Surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We examined whether liposome bupivacaine (Exparel) given in the interscalene brachial plexus block lowers pain in the setting of multimodal postoperative pain management for major shoulder surgery. METHODS: Fifty-two adult patients were randomized to receive either 5 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine HCl immediately followed by 10 mL of liposome bupivacaine 133 mg (n = 26) or 15 mL of 0.25% standard bupivacaine alone (n = 26) in interscalene brachial plexus block. The primary outcome (worst pain in the first postoperative week) was assessed by the Modified Brief Pain Inventory short form. Secondary outcomes were overall satisfaction with analgesia (OBAS), functionality of the surgical arm, sleep duration, time to first opioid (tramadol) request and opioid consumption (mEq), sensory-motor block characteristics, and the occurrence of adverse effects. RESULTS: Worst pain was lower in patients given liposome bupivacaine added to standard bupivacaine than in patients given standard bupivacaine alone (generalized estimating equation [GEE] estimated marginal mean values, 3.6 ± 0.3 vs 5.3 ± 0.4 points on the Numeric Rating Scale, respectively, although the effect was modest, 1.6 ± 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-2.5). Total OBAS scores indicated greater satisfaction (GEE estimated marginal mean values, 1.8 ± 0.3 vs 3.3 ± 0.4 on total OBAS, respectively, with modest effect, difference, 1.4 ± 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-2.4). There were no differences in any of the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Liposome bupivacaine added to standard bupivacaine may lower pain and enhance patient's satisfaction in the first postoperative week even in the setting of multimodal analgesia for major shoulder surgery.This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02554357) on July 11, 2015, by Principal Investigator Catherine Vandepitte, MD.

Does Teriparatide Improve Femoral Neck Fracture Healing: Results From A Randomized Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a medical need for therapies that improve hip fracture healing. Teriparatide (Forteo(®)/ Forsteo(®), recombinant human parathyroid hormone) is a bone anabolic drug that is approved for treatment of osteoporosis and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in men and postmenopausal women at high fracture risk. Preclinical and preliminary clinical data also suggest that teriparatide may enhance bone healing. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We wished to test the hypotheses that treatment with teriparatide versus placebo would improve femoral neck fracture healing after internal fixation as measured by (1) frequency of revision surgery, (2) radiographic fracture healing, and (3) other outcomes including pain control, gait speed, and safety. METHODS: We initiated two separate, but identically designed, clinical trials to meet FDA requirements to provide substantial evidence to support approval of a new indication. The two prospective, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III studies were designed to evaluate the effect of subcutaneous teriparatide (20 µg/day) for 6 months versus placebo on fracture healing at 24 months. The trials were conducted concurrently with a planned enrollment of 1220 patients per trial. However, enrollment was stopped owing to very slow patient accrual, and an a priori decision was made to pool the results of those studies for statistical analyses before study completion; pooling was specified in both protocols. Randomization was stratified by fixation (sliding hip screw or multiple cancellous screws) and fracture type (displaced or nondisplaced). An independent Central Adjudication Committee reviewed revision surgical procedures and radiographs. A total of 159 patients were randomized in the two trials (81 placebo, 78 teriparatide). The combined program had very low power to detect the originally expected treatment effect but had approximately 80% power to detect a larger difference of 12% between treatment groups for risk of revision surgery. RESULTS: The proportion of patients undergoing revision surgery at 12 months was 14% (11 of 81) in the placebo group versus 17% (13 of 78) in the teriparatide group. Central Adjudication Committee review excluded two of these patients treated with placebo from the primary analysis. After exclusions, the proportion of patients who did not undergo revision surgery at 12 months (primary endpoint) was not different between the study and placebo groups, at 88% in the placebo group (90% CI, 0.79-0.93) versus 84% in the teriparatide group (90% CI, 0.75-0.90; p = 0.743). There also were no differences between groups in the proportion of patients achieving radiographic fracture healing at 12 months (75% [61 of 81] placebo versus 73% [57 of 78] teriparatide; odds ratio, 0.89; 90% CI, 0.46-1.72; p = 0.692) or in measures of pain control (such as pain during ambulation, 92% [55 of 62] placebo versus 91% [52 of 57] teriparatide; odds ratio, 0.91; 90% CI, 0.25-3.37; p = 0.681). The frequency of patients reporting adverse events was 49% [40 of 81] in the placebo group versus 45% [35 of 78] in the teriparatide group (p = 0.634) during the 6-month treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: The small sample size limited this study's power to detect potential differences, and the results are exploratory. With the patients available, teriparatide did not decrease the risk of revision surgery, improve radiographic signs of fracture healing, or decrease pain compared with the placebo. The adverse event data observed were consistent with the teriparatide safety profile. Functional and health outcome data from the studies may help improve our understanding of patients recovering from femoral neck fractures. Further large controlled studies are required to determine the effect of teriparatide on fracture healing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective study.

Fracture risk and zoledronic acid therapy in men with osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Fractures in men are a major health issue, and data on the antifracture efficacy of therapies for osteoporosis in men are limited. We studied the effect of zoledronic acid on fracture risk among men with osteoporosis. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 1199 men with primary or hypogonadism-associated osteoporosis who were 50 to 85 years of age to receive an intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid (5 mg) or placebo at baseline and at 12 months. Participants received daily calcium and vitamin D supplementation. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with one or more new morphometric vertebral fractures over a period of 24 months. RESULTS: The rate of any new morphometric vertebral fracture was 1.6% in the zoledronic acid group and 4.9% in the placebo group over the 24-month period, representing a 67% risk reduction with zoledronic acid (relative risk, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.70; P=0.002). As compared with men who received placebo, men who received zoledronic acid had fewer moderate-to-severe vertebral fractures (P=0.03) and less height loss (P=0.002). Fewer participants who received zoledronic acid had clinical vertebral or nonvertebral fractures, although this difference did not reach significance because of the small number of fractures. Bone mineral density was higher and bone-turnover markers were lower in the men who received zoledronic acid (P<0.05 for both comparisons). Results were similar in men with low serum levels of total testosterone. The zoledronic acid and placebo groups did not differ significantly with respect to the incidence of death (2.6% and 2.9%, respectively) or serious adverse events (25.3% and 25.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Zoledronic acid treatment was associated with a significantly reduced risk of vertebral fracture among men with osteoporosis. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00439647.).

Once-yearly zoledronic acid in older men compared with women with recent hip fracture.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of once-yearly zoledronic acid (ZOL) 5 mg in increasing bone mineral density (BMD) in men with a recent hip fracture participating in the Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once- Yearly Recurrent Fracture Trial and to compare the efficacy with that in women from the same study. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. SETTING: International multicenter. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred and eight men and 1,619 women within 90 days of surgical repair of low-trauma hip fracture in the same study (for comparison). INTERVENTION: Once-yearly intravenous (IV) ZOL 5 mg (n = 248) or placebo (n = 260), loading dose of vitamin D, daily calcium, and vitamin D supplements. MEASUREMENT: Changes in BMD. RESULTS: Percentage change from baseline in total hip BMD at Months 12 and 24 was significantly higher with ZOL than with placebo (between-group difference, 2.0%, P = .003, and 3.8%, P = .002, respectively). Percentage change from baseline in femoral neck BMD at Month 24 was significantly higher with ZOL than with placebo (3.8%, P = .003). The BMD benefit was comparable with that observed in women in this study. New clinical fractures occurred in 36 (7.1%) participants (ZOL, n = 16; placebo, n = 20; P = .64). The ZOL safety profile was comparable with that of placebo, with no significant differences in cardiovascular or long-term renal function and a trend toward lower mortality in ZOL-treated men. CONCLUSION: Once-yearly IV ZOL 5 mg increases bone mass at the hip and femoral neck in men within 90 days of repair of a low-trauma hip fracture. Increases were of a similar magnitude to those observed in women in the same study.