An adjudication algorithm for respiratory-related hospitalisation in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Background: There is no standard definition of respiratory-related hospitalisation, a common end-point in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) clinical trials. As diverse aetiologies and complicating comorbidities can present similarly, external adjudication is sometimes employed to achieve standardisation of these events. Methods: An algorithm for respiratory-related hospitalisation was developed through a literature review of IPF clinical trials with respiratory-related hospitalisation as an end-point. Experts reviewed the algorithm until a consensus was reached. The algorithm was validated using data from the phase 3 ISABELA trials (clinicaltrials.gov identifiers NCT03711162 and NCT03733444), by assessing concordance between nonadjudicated, investigator-defined, respiratory-related hospitalisations and those defined by the adjudication committee using the algorithm. Results: The algorithm classifies respiratory-related hospitalisation according to cause: extraparenchymal (worsening respiratory symptoms due to left heart failure, volume overload, pulmonary embolism, pneumothorax or trauma); other (respiratory tract infection, right heart failure or exacerbation of COPD); "definite" acute exacerbation of IPF (AEIPF) (worsening respiratory symptoms within 1 month, with radiological or histological evidence of diffuse alveolar damage); or "suspected" AEIPF (as for "definite" AEIPF, but with no radiological or histological evidence of diffuse alveolar damage). Exacerbations ("definite" or "suspected") with identified triggers (infective, post-procedural or traumatic, drug toxicity- or aspiration-related) are classed as "known AEIPF"; "idiopathic AEIPF" refers to exacerbations with no identified trigger. In the ISABELA programme, there was 94% concordance between investigator- and adjudication committee-determined causes of respiratory-related hospitalisation. Conclusion: The algorithm could help to ensure consistency in the reporting of respiratory-related hospitalisation in IPF trials, optimising its utility as an end-point.

Ziritaxestat, a Novel Autotaxin Inhibitor, and Lung Function in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: The ISABELA 1 and 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: There is a major need for effective, well-tolerated treatments for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the autotaxin inhibitor ziritaxestat in patients with IPF. Design, Setting, and Participants: The 2 identically designed, phase 3, randomized clinical trials, ISABELA 1 and ISABELA 2, were conducted in Africa, Asia-Pacific region, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, and North America (26 countries). A total of 1306 patients with IPF were randomized (525 patients at 106 sites in ISABELA 1 and 781 patients at 121 sites in ISABELA 2). Enrollment began in November 2018 in both trials and follow-up was completed early due to study termination on April 12, 2021, for ISABELA 1 and on March 30, 2021, for ISABELA 2. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 600 mg of oral ziritaxestat, 200 mg of ziritaxestat, or placebo once daily in addition to local standard of care (pirfenidone, nintedanib, or neither) for at least 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the annual rate of decline for forced vital capacity (FVC) at week 52. The key secondary outcomes were disease progression, time to first respiratory-related hospitalization, and change from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score (range, 0 to 100; higher scores indicate poorer health-related quality of life). Results: At the time of study termination, 525 patients were randomized in ISABELA 1 and 781 patients in ISABELA 2 (mean age: 70.0 [SD, 7.2] years in ISABELA 1 and 69.8 [SD, 7.1] years in ISABELA 2; male: 82.4% and 81.2%, respectively). The trials were terminated early after an independent data and safety monitoring committee concluded that the benefit to risk profile of ziritaxestat no longer supported their continuation. Ziritaxestat did not improve the annual rate of FVC decline vs placebo in either study. In ISABELA 1, the least-squares mean annual rate of FVC decline was -124.6 mL (95% CI, -178.0 to -71.2 mL) with 600 mg of ziritaxestat vs -147.3 mL (95% CI, -199.8 to -94.7 mL) with placebo (between-group difference, 22.7 mL [95% CI, -52.3 to 97.6 mL]), and -173.9 mL (95% CI, -225.7 to -122.2 mL) with 200 mg of ziritaxestat (between-group difference vs placebo, -26.7 mL [95% CI, -100.5 to 47.1 mL]). In ISABELA 2, the least-squares mean annual rate of FVC decline was -173.8 mL (95% CI, -209.2 to -138.4 mL) with 600 mg of ziritaxestat vs -176.6 mL (95% CI, -211.4 to -141.8 mL) with placebo (between-group difference, 2.8 mL [95% CI, -46.9 to 52.4 mL]) and -174.9 mL (95% CI, -209.5 to -140.2 mL) with 200 mg of ziritaxestat (between-group difference vs placebo, 1.7 mL [95% CI, -47.4 to 50.8 mL]). There was no benefit with ziritaxestat vs placebo for the key secondary outcomes. In ISABELA 1, all-cause mortality was 8.0% with 600 mg of ziritaxestat, 4.6% with 200 mg of ziritaxestat, and 6.3% with placebo; in ISABELA 2, it was 9.3% with 600 mg of ziritaxestat, 8.5% with 200 mg of ziritaxestat, and 4.7% with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Ziritaxestat did not improve clinical outcomes compared with placebo in patients with IPF receiving standard of care treatment with pirfenidone or nintedanib or in those not receiving standard of care treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03711162 and NCT03733444.

Nonhuman primate to human immunobridging to infer the protective effect of an Ebola virus vaccine candidate.

It has been proven challenging to conduct traditional efficacy trials for Ebola virus (EBOV) vaccines. In the absence of efficacy data, immunobridging is an approach to infer the likelihood of a vaccine protective effect, by translating vaccine immunogenicity in humans to a protective effect, using the relationship between vaccine immunogenicity and the desired outcome in a suitable animal model. We here propose to infer the protective effect of the Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen with an 8-week interval in humans by immunobridging. Immunogenicity and protective efficacy data were obtained for Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimens using a fully lethal EBOV Kikwit challenge model in cynomolgus monkeys (nonhuman primates [NHP]). The association between EBOV neutralizing antibodies, glycoprotein (GP)-binding antibodies, and GP-reactive T cells and survival in NHP was assessed by logistic regression analysis. Binding antibodies against the EBOV surface GP were identified as the immune parameter with the strongest correlation to survival post EBOV challenge, and used to infer the predicted protective effect of the vaccine in humans using published data from phase I studies. The human vaccine-elicited EBOV GP-binding antibody levels are in a range associated with significant protection against mortality in NHP. Based on this immunobridging analysis, the EBOV GP-specific-binding antibody levels elicited by the Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen in humans will likely provide protection against EBOV disease.

Odanacatib for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: results of the LOFT multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and LOFT Extension study.

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.

Modelling Forced Vital Capacity in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Optimising Trial Design.

INTRODUCTION: Forced vital capacity is the only registrational endpoint in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis clinical trials. As most new treatments will be administered on top of standard of care, estimating treatment response will become more challenging. We developed a simulation model to quantify variability associated with forced vital capacity decline. METHODS: The model is based on publicly available clinical trial summary and home spirometry data. A single, illustrative trial setting is reported. Model assumptions are 400 subjects randomised 1:1 to investigational drug or placebo over 52 weeks, 50% of each group receiving standard of care (all-comer population), and a 90-mL treatment difference in annual forced vital capacity decline. Longitudinal profiles were simulated and the impact of varying clinical scenarios evaluated. RESULTS: Power to detect a significant treatment difference was 87-97%, depending on the analysis method. Repeated measures analysis generally outperformed analysis of covariance and mixed linear models, particularly with missing data (as simulated data were non-linear). A 15% yearly random dropout rate led to 0.6-5% power loss. Forced vital capacity decline-related dropout introduced greater power loss (up to 12%), as did subjects starting/stopping standard of care or investigational drug. Power was substantially lower for a 26-week trial due to the smaller assumed treatment effect at week 26 (sample size would need doubling to reach a power similar to that of a 52-week trial). CONCLUSIONS: Our model quantifies forced vital capacity decline and associated variability, with all the caveats of background therapy, permitting robust power calculations to inform future idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis clinical trial design. FUNDING: Galapagos NV (Mechelen, Belgium).

Rationale, design and objectives of two phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled studies of GLPG1690, a novel autotaxin inhibitor, in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (ISABELA 1 and 2).

Introduction: While current standard of care (SOC) for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) slows disease progression, prognosis remains poor. Therefore, an unmet need exists for novel, well-tolerated agents that reduce lung function decline and improve quality of life. Here we report the design of two phase III studies of the novel IPF therapy, GLPG1690. Methods and analysis: Two identically designed, phase III, international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre studies (ISABELA 1 and 2) were initiated in November 2018. It is planned that, in each study, 750 subjects with IPF will be randomised 1:1:1 to receive oral GLPG1690 600 mg, GLPG1690 200 mg or placebo, once daily, on top of local SOC, for at least 52 weeks. The primary endpoint is rate of decline of forced vital capacity (FVC) over 52 weeks. Key secondary endpoints are week 52 composite endpoint of disease progression or all-cause mortality (defined as composite endpoint of first occurrence of ≥10% absolute decline in per cent predicted FVC or all-cause mortality at week 52); time to first respiratory-related hospitalisation until end of study; and week 52 change from baseline in the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score (a quality-of-life measure). Ethics and dissemination: Studies will be conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice guidelines, Declaration of Helsinki principles, and local ethical and legal requirements. Results will be reported in a peer-reviewed publication. Trial registration numbers: NCT03711162; NCT03733444.

Effects of odanacatib on the radius and tibia of postmenopausal women: improvements in bone geometry, microarchitecture, and estimated bone strength.

The cathepsin K inhibitor odanacatib (ODN), currently in phase 3 development for postmenopausal osteoporosis, has a novel mechanism of action that reduces bone resorption while maintaining bone formation. In phase 2 studies, odanacatib increased areal bone mineral density (aBMD) at the lumbar spine and total hip progressively over 5 years. To determine the effects of ODN on cortical and trabecular bone and estimate changes in bone strength, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, using both quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and high-resolution peripheral (HR-p)QCT. In previously published results, odanacatib was superior to placebo with respect to increases in trabecular volumetric BMD (vBMD) and estimated compressive strength at the spine, and integral and trabecular vBMD and estimated strength at the hip. Here, we report the results of HR-pQCT assessment. A total of 214 postmenopausal women (mean age 64.0 ± 6.8 years and baseline lumbar spine T-score -1.81 ± 0.83) were randomized to oral ODN 50 mg or placebo, weekly for 2 years. With ODN, significant increases from baseline in total vBMD occurred at the distal radius and tibia. Treatment differences from placebo were also significant (3.84% and 2.63% for radius and tibia, respectively). At both sites, significant differences from placebo were also found in trabecular vBMD, cortical vBMD, cortical thickness, cortical area, and strength (failure load) estimated using finite element analysis of HR-pQCT scans (treatment differences at radius and tibia = 2.64% and 2.66%). At the distal radius, odanacatib significantly improved trabecular thickness and bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) versus placebo. At a more proximal radial site, odanacatib attenuated the increase in cortical porosity found with placebo (treatment difference = -7.7%, p = 0.066). At the distal tibia, odanacatib significantly improved trabecular number, separation, and BV/TV versus placebo. Safety and tolerability were similar between treatment groups. In conclusion, odanacatib increased cortical and trabecular density, cortical thickness, aspects of trabecular microarchitecture, and estimated strength at the distal radius and distal tibia compared with placebo.

Bone density, turnover, and estimated strength in postmenopausal women treated with odanacatib: a randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Odanacatib, a cathepsin K inhibitor, increases spine and hip areal bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women with low BMD and cortical thickness in ovariectomized monkeys. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to examine the impact of odanacatib on the trabecular and cortical bone compartments and estimated strength at the hip and spine. DESIGN: This was a randomized, double-blind, 2-year trial. SETTING: The study was conducted at a private or institutional practice. PARTICIPANTS: PARTICIPANTS included 214 postmenopausal women with low areal BMD. INTERVENTION: The intervention included odanacatib 50 mg or placebo weekly. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in areal BMD by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (primary end point, 1 year areal BMD change at lumbar spine), bone turnover markers, volumetric BMD by quantitative computed tomography (QCT), and bone strength estimated by finite element analysis were measured. RESULTS: Year 1 lumbar spine areal BMD percent change from baseline was 3.5% greater with odanacatib than placebo (P < .001). Bone-resorption marker C-telopeptide of type 1 collagen was significantly lower with odanacatib vs placebo at 6 months and 2 years (P < .001). Bone-formation marker procollagen I N-terminal peptide initially decreased with odanacatib but by 2 years did not differ from placebo. After 6 months, odanacatib-treated women had greater increases in trabecular volumetric BMD and estimated compressive strength at the spine and integral and trabecular volumetric BMD and estimated strength at the hip (P < .001). At the cortical envelope of the femoral neck, bone mineral content, thickness, volume, and cross-sectional area also increased from baseline with odanacatib vs placebo (P < .001 at 24 months). Adverse experiences were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Over 2 years, odanacatib decreased bone resorption, maintained bone formation, increased areal and volumetric BMD, and increased estimated bone strength at both the hip and spine.

Intermittent or daily montelukast versus placebo for episodic asthma in children.

BACKGROUND: No standard, optimal treatment exists for severe intermittent (ie, episodic) asthma in children. However, evidence suggests that both daily and episode-driven montelukast are effective for this phenotype. OBJECTIVE: To assess the regimen-related efficacy of montelukast in treating pediatric episodic asthma. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, 52-week study was performed in children 6 months to 5 years of age comparing placebo with two regimens of montelukast 4 mg: (1) daily; or (2) episode-driven for 12 days beginning with signs/symptoms consistent with imminent cold or breathing problem. The main outcome measure was the number of asthma episodes (symptoms requiring treatment) culminating in an asthma attack (symptoms requiring physician visit, emergency room visit, corticosteroids, or hospitalization). RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized to daily montelukast, 591 to intermittent montelukast, and 591 to placebo. Compared with placebo, no significant difference was seen between daily montelukast (P = .510) or intermittent montelukast (P = .884) in the number of asthma episodes culminating in an asthma attack over 1 year. Daily montelukast reduced symptoms over the 12-day treatment period of asthma episodes compared with placebo (P = .045). Beta-agonist use was reduced with both daily (P = .048) and intermittent montelukast (P = .028) compared with placebo. However, because of prespecified rules for multiplicity adjustments (requiring a positive primary endpoint), statistical significance for secondary endpoints cannot be concluded. All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast did not reduce the number of asthma episodes culminating in an asthma attack over 1 year in children 6 months to 5 years of age, although numerical improvements occurred in some endpoints.

Odanacatib in the treatment of postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density: three-year continued therapy and resolution of effect.

The selective cathepsin K inhibitor odanacatib (ODN) progressively increased bone mineral density (BMD) and decreased bone-resorption markers during 2 years of treatment in postmenopausal women with low BMD. A 1-year extension study further assessed ODN efficacy and safety and the effects of discontinuing therapy. In the base study, postmenopausal women with BMD T-scores between -2.0 and -3.5 at the lumbar spine or femur received placebo or ODN 3, 10, 25, or 50 mg weekly. After 2 years, patients (n = 189) were rerandomized to ODN 50 mg weekly or placebo for an additional year. Endpoints included BMD at the lumbar spine (primary), total hip, and hip subregions; levels of bone turnover markers; and safety assessments. Continued treatment with 50 mg of ODN for 3 years produced significant increases from baseline and from year 2 in BMD at the spine (7.9% and 2.3%) and total hip (5.8% and 2.4%). Urine cross-linked N-telopeptide of type I collagen (NTx) remained suppressed at year 3 (-50.5%), but bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP) was relatively unchanged from baseline. Treatment discontinuation resulted in bone loss at all sites, but BMD remained at or above baseline. After ODN discontinuation at month 24, bone turnover markers increased transiently above baseline, but this increase largely resolved by month 36. There were similar overall adverse-event rates in both treatment groups. It is concluded that 3 years of ODN treatment resulted in progressive increases in BMD and was generally well tolerated. Bone-resorption markers remained suppressed, whereas bone-formation markers returned to near baseline. ODN effects were reversible: bone resorption increased transiently and BMD decreased following treatment discontinuation.

Odanacatib, a cathepsin-K inhibitor for osteoporosis: a two-year study in postmenopausal women with low bone density.

Cathepsin K, a cysteine protease expressed in osteoclasts, degrades type 1 collagen. Odanacatib selectively and reversibly inhibited cathepsin K and rapidly decreased bone resorption in preclinical and phase I studies. A 1-year dose-finding trial with a 1-year extension on the same treatment assignment was performed in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density (BMD) to evaluate the safety and efficacy of weekly doses of placebo or 3, 10, 25, or 50 mg of odanacatib on BMD and biomarkers of skeletal remodeling. Women with BMD T-scores of -2.0 or less but not less than -3.5 at the lumbar spine or femoral sites were randomly assigned to receive placebo or one of four doses of odanacatib; all received vitamin D with calcium supplementation as needed. The primary endpoint was percentage change from baseline lumbar spine BMD. Other endpoints included percentage change in BMD at hip and forearm sites, as well as changes in biomarkers of skeletal remodeling. Twenty-four months of treatment produced progressive dose-related increases in BMD. With the 50-mg dose of odanacatib, lumbar spine and total-hip BMD increased 5.5% and 3.2%, respectively, whereas BMD at these sites was essentially unchanged with placebo (-0.2% and -0.9%). Biochemical markers of bone turnover exhibited dose-related changes. The safety and tolerability of odanacatib generally were similar to those of placebo, with no dose-related trends in any adverse experiences. In summary, 2 years of weekly odanacatib treatment was generally well-tolerated and increased lumbar spine and total-hip BMD in a dose-related manner in postmenopausal women with low BMD.

Once-weekly oral alendronate 70 mg in patients with glucocorticoid-induced bone loss: a 12-month randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is the most common iatrogenic form of osteoporosis. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of once-weekly bisphosphonate therapy for prevention and treatment of bone loss in patients on glucocorticoid therapy. METHODS: We conducted a 12-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 114 and 59 patients in the treatment and placebo arms, respectively. Participants were stratified according to the duration of prior oral glucocorticoid therapy at randomization. Participants received alendronate 70 mg once weekly (ALN OW) or placebo; all received supplemental daily calcium (1000 mg) and 400 IU vitamin D. Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, there was a significant mean percentage increase from baseline in the ALN OW group for lumbar spine (2.45%), trochanter (1.27%), total hip (0.75%), and total body (1.70%) bone mineral density (BMD). Comparing ALN OW versus placebo at 12 months, a significant treatment difference for the mean percentage change from baseline was observed for lumbar spine (treatment difference of 2.92%; p

Alendronic acid produces greater effects than risedronic acid on bone density and turnover in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis : results of FACTS -international.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of alendronic acid once weekly relative to risedronic acid once weekly on bone mineral density (BMD), markers of bone turnover and tolerability in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. METHODS: This was a randomised, double-masked, double-dummy multicentre international study (75 centres in 27 countries in Europe, the Americas and Asia-Pacific). A total of 1303 women were screened and 936 with low bone density (T-score < or = -2.0 at the spine, hip trochanter, total hip or femoral neck) were randomised; 91% (n = 854) completed the study. Patients were randomised to treatment with either active alendronic acid 70 mg weekly (Fosamax) and placebo identical to risedronic acid weekly or active risedronic acid 35 mg weekly (Actonel) and placebo identical to alendronic acid weekly for 12 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage change from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included the percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck BMD; biochemical markers of bone turnover (including serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [BSAP] and urinary type I collagen N-telopeptides [NTx]); and safety and tolerability as assessed by reporting of adverse experiences. RESULTS: Alendronic acid produced greater increases in BMD than did risedronic acid at 12 months at all sites measured. Mean percentage increases from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at month 12 were 3.56% and 2.71% in the alendronic acid and risedronic acid groups, respectively (treatment difference [95% CI]: 0.83% [0.22, 1.45; p = 0.008]). Mean percentage increases from baseline were greater with alendronic acid than risedronic acid at the lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck BMD at month 12 (p = 0.002, p < 0.001, p = 0.039, respectively). Increases in BMD with alendronic acid compared with risedronic acid were also significantly greater at 6 months at the trochanter and total hip. There was a greater reduction in bone turnover with alendronic acid compared with risedronic acid: NTx decreased 58% with alendronic acid compared with 47% with risedronic acid at 12 months (p < 0.001); and BSAP decreased 45% with alendronic acid compared with 34% with risedronic acid at 12 months (p < 0.001). Overall tolerability and upper gastrointestinal tolerability were similar for both agents. CONCLUSIONS: Alendronic acid once weekly produced greater BMD increases at both hip and spine sites and greater reductions in bone turnover relative to risedronic acid once weekly. Both agents were well tolerated with no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal adverse experiences. Clinicians should consider these results when making treatment decisions for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Patients with osteoporosis prefer once weekly to once daily dosing with alendronate.

OBJECTIVES: Once weekly dosing of alendronate has been shown to provide equivalent efficacy to once daily dosing for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Whether patients will prefer weekly dosing to daily dosing for a chronic condition such as osteoporosis has not been studied. The aim of this international study was to assess preference for the weekly or daily dosing regimen of alendronate among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. METHODS: This randomised open-label crossover study was conducted at 45 study sites in 19 countries. Four hundred and six postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were assigned randomly to treatment with either alendronate 70 mg once weekly for 4 weeks followed by alendronate 10 mg once daily for 4 weeks or vice versa. The main outcome was the responses of the participants to the Dosing Regimen Questionnaire administered at the end of the study. RESULTS: Of the participants expressing a preference, 84% preferred the once weekly dosing regimen with alendronate to the once daily dosing regimen. In addition, the once weekly regimen was considered by 87% of the participants to be more convenient and was the regimen most of the participants (84%) would be more willing to take for a long period of time (P < 0.001 for each parameter). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis preferred the once weekly to the once daily dosing regimen of alendronate. Physicians should consider patient preference for dosing regimen when selecting the appropriate treatment for osteoporosis.

Changes in bone mineral density following discontinuation or continuation of alendronate therapy in glucocorticoid-treated patients: a retrospective, observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of discontinuing or continuing alendronate (ALN) therapy on bone mineral density (BMD) after patients on a long-term regimen of glucocorticoids (GCs) completed a 1-year treatment period with ALN. METHODS: Eligible patients were individuals with GC-induced osteoporosis who had received ALN (5 or 10 mg) for 1 year in a prior clinical trial and, at the end of the year, were still taking GCs at an average daily dose of > or =7.5 mg of prednisone or equivalent. Patients were contacted 3-5 years after completion of the prior ALN trial for followup measurements of the lumbar spine BMD and hip BMD, and retrospective information was collected about serious or drug-related adverse experiences and concomitant medication use. Some patients remained on GCs, and some remained on ALN, either alone or in combination with other drugs. The primary response parameter was the percentage change in lumbar spine BMD from the end of year 1 to the followup visit. Change in BMD at the hip was a secondary response parameter. RESULTS: Ninety (49.2%) of the eligible 183 patients participated in the retrospective study. The followup period, which began at the end of year 1 of the original clinical trial, ranged from 3.3 years to 4.6 years. The mean number of days of treatment with ALN was 507. Fifty patients were included in the analysis because they had received supraphysiologic doses of GCs (doses above the lowest tertile of GC use for the study population; that is, higher than approximately 6 mg/day), and they had not taken (defined as <6 months of use) other bone-affecting agents except ALN. Eleven of the 50 patients discontinued taking ALN (duration of use <90 days), 8 took ALN between 90 days and 300 days, and 31 continued to take ALN for >300 days after year 1 of the clinical trial. GC users who discontinued treatment with ALN (<90 days of therapy) had numerically greater decreases in BMD at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip from the end of year 1 (mean change -5.1%, -9.2%, and -6.6%, respectively), compared with patients who continued to take ALN for >300 days (mean change 0.1%, -0.9%, and 1.8%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Substantial loss of BMD in the lumbar spine and hip was seen in patients who discontinued treatment with ALN but who continued to take >6 mg/day of GCs. However, patients receiving GCs who remained on the ALN regimen appeared to benefit from continued ALN treatment, since BMD was maintained in this latter group.