Twelve-month resistance and impact exercise program or risedronate provides a relative benefit to hip bone structure in postmenopausal women: results from a randomized controlled trial.

Bone strength estimates are important for fracture prevention. This study compared bone strength changes in postmenopausal women with low bone mass who were assigned to 12 months of exercise, a bone medication, or control. Exercise and bone medications benefited structure at the hip. Structure should be considered in fracture prevention research. PURPOSE: Exercise and bisphosphonates reduce fracture risk, but their impact on estimates of bone strength remains uncertain. This study compared changes in tibial bone strength using peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) and hip structure analysis (HSA) outcomes from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans in postmenopausal women with low bone mass assigned to 12 months of exercise, risedronate, or control. METHODS: In this RCT, 276 postmenopausal women within 6 years of menopause were randomly assigned to three groups: exercise (92), risedronate (91), or control (93). Exercise included weighted jogging and progressive resistance exercises; risedronate treatment was 150 mg monthly; all groups received calcium and vitamin D. pQCT and DXA images were obtained at baseline and 6 and 12 months and compared between groups over time. RESULTS: Participants had a mean (± SD) age of 54.5 (± 3.2) years with an average of 36.7 (± 40.7) months postmenopause. No significant differences were found between groups for the change in pQCT outcomes (volumetric bone mineral density, area, and strength estimates). At 12 months, mean percent differences (95% CI) in HSA measures between exercise and controls were as follows: intertrochanteric, cross-sectional area 2.25% (0.28, 4.12) (p = .03), cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI) 5.67% (1.47, 9.87) (p < .01), and section modulus (SM) 4.38% (1.02, 7.74) (p = .01), and narrow neck, average cortical thickness 2.37% (-0.08, 4.83) (p = .031). Mean percent differences (95% CI) in HSA measures between risedronate and control were as follows: intertrochanteric, CSMI 4.28% (-0.24, 8.81) (p = .03) and SM 3.35% (-0.21, 6.91) (p = .03), and shaft, subperiosteal width 0.82% (0.05, 1.58) (p = .047), CSMI 2.53% (0.88, 4.18) (p = .004), and SM 1.57% (0.34, 2.8) (p = .008). Exercise maintained neck-shaft angle compared to both control 1.27% (0.13, 2.41) (p = .04) and risedronate 1.31% (0.23, 2.39) (p = .03). All other differences for changes in HSA outcomes over time were not significantly different between the exercise and risedronate groups. CONCLUSION: Exercise and bisphosphonates may influence structural and strength estimates at the hip, but not at peripheral sites (tibia). Neither exercise nor bisphosphonates were found to be superior in improving estimates of hip bone strength.

Safety and effectiveness of risedronate in Paget's disease of bone: postmarketing surveillance study in Japan.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted an all-case postmarketing surveillance study between 2008 and 2017 to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of risedronate for Paget's disease of bone (PDB) in Japan. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study registered all patients who received once-daily risedronate 17.5 mg for the treatment of PDB and collected data over a 48-week follow-up period per treatment cycle for each patient. RESULTS: The safety analysis set included 184 patients (mean age, 63.7 years), 81 (44.0%) of whom previously received a bisphosphonate. Of them, 41 (22.3%) experienced 72 adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and 8 (4.3%) experienced 14 serious ADRs. Common ADRs included gastrointestinal disorders (20 patients, 10.9%) and hypocalcemia (6 patients, 3.3%). The effectiveness analysis set included 182 patients, 124 of whom completed only one treatment cycle and 58 of whom completed multiple treatment cycles. The proportions of patients who normalized serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) concentration were 71.1% (113/159 patients) and 67.3% (33/49 patients) for the first and second treatment cycles, respectively. The relapse rate according to ALP levels after the end of treatment for the first cycle was 5.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.1-11.5) at 24 weeks and 12.9% (95% CI = 7.5-21.7) at 40 weeks. Regarding pain relief, the achievement rates were 70.0% (49/70 patients) and 30.8% (4/13 patients) for the first and second treatment cycles, respectively. CONCLUSION: To conclude, risedronate 17.5 mg/day is safe and effective for treating patients with PDB in daily practice.

Risedronate-functionalized manganese-hydroxyapatite amorphous particles: A potent adjuvant for subunit vaccines and cancer immunotherapy.

The cGAS-STING pathway and the Mevalonate Pathway are druggable targets for vaccine adjuvant discovery. Manganese (Mn) and bisphosphonates are known to exert adjuvant effects by targeting these two pathways, respectively. This study found the synergistic potential of the two pathways in enhancing immune response. Risedronate (Ris) significantly amplified the Mn adjuvant early antibody response by 166-fold and fortified its cellular immunity. However, direct combination of Mn2+ and Ris resulted in increased adjuvant toxicity (40% mouse mortality). By the combination of doping property of hydroxyapatite (HA) and its high affinity for Ris, we designed Ris-functionalized Mn-HA micro-nanoparticles as an organic-inorganic hybrid adjuvant, named MnHARis. MnHARis alleviated adjuvant toxicity (100% vs. 60% survival rate) and exhibited good long-term stability. When formulated with the varicella-zoster virus glycoprotein E (gE) antigen, MnHARis triggered a 274.3-fold increase in IgG titers and a 61.3-fold surge in neutralization titers while maintaining a better long-term humoral immunity compared to the aluminum adjuvant. Its efficacy spanned other antigens, including ovalbumin, HPV18 VLP, and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Notably, the cellular immunity elicited by the group of gE + MnHARis was comparable to the renowned Shingrix®. Moreover, intratumoral co-administration with an anti-trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 nanobody revealed synergistic antitumor capabilities. These findings underscore the potential of MnHARis as a potent adjuvant for augmenting vaccine immune responses and improving cancer immunotherapy outcomes.

Influence of risedronate on orthodontic tooth movement in rodents: a systematic review and case report.

INTRODUCTION: Bisphosphonates have an inhibitory impact on osteoclastic activity, reducing bone resorption. However, the influence of risedronate on tooth movement is not well-defined. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review assessed the effect of risedronate intake on orthodontic tooth movement. A case report was also provided. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched six databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, Lilacs, Scopus, and Open Grey). The searches were carried out in April/2020, and an update was set in place in June/2023. Therefore, the searches considered a timeline from the databases' inception date until June/2023, with no publication date and/or language restrictions. The clinical question focused on evaluating the orthodontic tooth movement and relapse movement (Outcome) in animals (Population) exposed to risedronate (Exposure), compared to control groups (Comparison). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were applied, and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020168581). The risk of bias was determined using the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation protocol (SYRCLE). RESULTS: Two studies in rats and one in guinea pigs were included in the systematic review. The studies reported a decrease in orthodontic tooth movement, a reduction in the relapse movement, and a reduced number of positive tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) cells, with a significantly reduced number of bone gaps after the administration of risedronate in rats. A case report illustrated the effects of risedronate administration in one patient. CONCLUSION: Based on the systematic review, risedronate seems to impair orthodontic tooth movement and relapse due to a decrease in bone resorption cells.

Micronanoparticled risedronate exhibits potent vaccine adjuvant effects.

Micro/Nano-scale particles are widely used as vaccine adjuvants to enhance immune response and improve antigen stability. While aluminum salt is one of the most common adjuvants approved for human use, its immunostimulatory capacity is suboptimal. In this study, we modified risedronate, an immunostimulant and anti-osteoporotic drug, to create zinc salt particle-based risedronate (Zn-RS), also termed particulate risedronate. Compared to soluble risedronate, micronanoparticled Zn-RS adjuvant demonstrated increased recruitment of innate cells, enhanced antigen uptake locally, and a similar antigen depot effect as aluminum salt. Furthermore, Zn-RS adjuvant directly and quickly stimulated immune cells, accelerated the formulation of germinal centers in lymph nodes, and facilitated the rapid production of antibodies. Importantly, Zn-RS adjuvant exhibited superior performance in both young and aged mice, effectively protecting against respiratory diseases such as SARS-CoV-2 challenge. Consequently, particulate risedronate showed great potential as an immune-enhancing vaccine adjuvant, particularly beneficial for vaccines targeting the susceptible elderly.

The effectiveness of ibandronate in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Ibandronate is effective in reducing the risk of vertebral fractures, but experimental evidence offers conflicting results regarding nonvertebral fractures. Real-world evidence has been published evaluating the anti-nonvertebral fracture effect of ibandronate. AIM: This meta-analysis of observational studies assessed the effectiveness of ibandronate in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis. METHOD: Pubmed/Embase databases were searched for observational studies. Risks of nonvertebral fractures and hip fractures were the outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed pooling rate ratios (RRs), using random-effects models. Data were reanalysed in sensitivity analyses considering Knapp-Hartung method and Bayesian random-effects. RESULTS: Six cohort studies were included. Overall, once-monthly 150 mg oral ibandronate reduced the risk of nonvertebral fractures (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76-0.94). Similar results were obtained when the comparison was restricted to once-monthly 150 mg risedronate, but no differences were found when the comparator was other oral bisphosphonates (weekly alendronate/risedronate). Ibandronate didn't significantly change the risk of hip fractures (RR 1.25; 95% CI 0.89-1.76). The risk of hip fracture was comparable between once monthly, 150 mg oral ibandronate and other oral bisphosphonates. Intravenous ibandronate was not effective in reducing hip fractures comparing to intravenous zoledronate. The low number of studies diminished the robustness of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that once-monthly 150 mg oral ibandronate may be as effective as other oral bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures. However, uncertainty associated to the small number of included studies, which are characterized by heterogeneous demographics and methodologies, precluded definitive conclusions.

Synergic Action of Systemic Risedronate and Local Rutherpy in Peri-implantar Repair of Ovariectomized Rats: Biomechanical and Molecular Analysis.

Postmenopausal osteoporosis and poor dietary habits can lead to overweightness and obesity. Bisphosphonates are the first-line treatment for osteoporosis. However, some studies show that they may increase the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw. Considering the antimicrobial, angiogenic and vasodilatory potential of nitric oxide, this study aims to evaluate the local activity of this substance during the placement of surface-treated implants. Seventy-two Wistar rats were divided into three groups: SHAM (SHAM surgery), OVX + HD (ovariectomy + cafeteria diet), and OVX + HD + RIS (ovariectomy + cafeteria diet + sodium risedronate treatment), which were further subdivided according to the surface treatment of the future implant: CONV (conventional), TE10, or TE100 (TERPY at 10 or 100 µM concentration); n = 8 per subgroup. The animals underwent surgery for implant installation in the proximal tibia metaphysis and were euthanized after 28 days. Data obtained from removal torque and RT-PCR (OPG, RANKL, ALP, IBSP and VEGF expression) were subjected to statistical analysis at 5% significance level. For biomechanical analysis, TE10 produced better results in the OVX + HD group (7.4 N/cm, SD = 0.6819). Molecular analysis showed: (1) significant increase in OPG gene expression in OVX groups with TE10; (2) decreased RANKL expression in OVX + HD + RIS compared to OVX + HD; (3) significantly increased expressions of IBSP and VEGF for OVX + HD + RIS TE10. At its lowest concentration, TERPY has the potential to improve peri-implant conditions.

Cost-effectiveness of weekly gastro-resistant risedronate 35 mg, compared with weekly alendronate 70 mg tablets, in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in Spain.

Aim: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of treating postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) with weekly gastro-resistant risedronate 35 mg gastro-resistant tablets (RIS-GR), compared with weekly alendronate 70 mg tablets (ALN) in Spain. Methods: A probabilistic analysis (second-order Monte Carlo simulation) was performed with a time horizon of 5 years, from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. The bone fracture probabilities were obtained from a cohort study of 3614 women from USA with PMO treated with RIS-GR (1807) or ALN (1807) (Thomasius, 2022). The pharmacological cost and the cost of fractures were obtained from Spanish sources (€ 2022). The utilities of patients with and without fracture (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) were obtained from the medical literature. Results: Compared with ALN, treatment with RIS-GR can avoid 79 fractures (between 75 and 82) every 1000 patients treated, and 0.0119 QALYs would be gained (between 0.0098 and 0.0140) per patient. Additionally, GR-RIS would generate a cost saving per patient of €1994 (€1437-2904) with a probability of 99.7%. The scenario analyses confirmed the stability of the base case results. Conclusion: According to this study, RIS-GR would be the dominant treatment (lower costs with QALY gain) compared with ALN.

Dissolving microneedle transdermal patch loaded with Risedronate sodium and Ursolic acid bipartite nanotransfersomes to combat osteoporosis: Optimization, characterization, in vitro and ex vivo assessment.

Osteoporosis is a fatal bone-wearing malady and a substantial reason behind the impermanence of human life and economic burden. Risedronate Sodium along with Ursolic acid has been studied to ameliorate osteoporosis. To bypass problems associated with bioavailability, we have developed a microneedle transdermal patch loaded with optimized formulation nanotransfersomes. It was optimized using three factor, three-level Central composite design with independent variables namely, the concentration of phospholipid, surfactant, and sonication time on dependent variables (vesicle size, entrapment efficiency and Polydispersity index). Vesicles of size 271.9 ± 8.45 nm with PDI 0.184 ± 0.01, having entrapment efficiency of 86.12 ± 5.20% and 85.65 ± 4.88% for RIS and UA respectively were observed. In vitro release study showed the sustained release pattern with 78.16 ± 1.12% and 75.72 ± 1.01% release of RIS and UA respectively. Dissolving MN patch prepared from gelatin was found to have good strength and folding endurance with uniform drug content (98.68 ± 0.004%). Ex vivo permeation study revealed that up to 80% of the drug can be permeated within 24 h. CLSM analysis was also performed to show penetration of RU-NTRs. From the results obtained, we can conclude that dissolving MN patch loaded with RU-NTRs has great potential than its conventional counterpart.

Can locally applied risedronate be an effective agent when combined with xenografts? An animal study.

BACKGROUND: To examine the effects of local risedronate application with xenografts on healing of rabbit skull defects using histological, histomorphometric, immunohistochemical, and three-dimensional radiological methods. METHODS: Two critical-sized defects with a diameter of 10 mm were created in 16 rabbits and filled with xenogenic bone graft and xenogenic bone graft + 5 mg risedronate in the control I and risedronate (RIS) groups, respectively. Residual graft, new bone, soft tissue areas, and bone volume were evaluated in the 4- and 8-week study groups. RESULTS: In both the 4- and 8-week samples, the RIS group samples had significantly higher mean new bone area values than the C group (p < 0.05). In both groups, the values for the new bone area were significantly higher in the 8-week-old samples than in the 4-week-old samples (p < 0.05). The h scores obtained for sialoprotein and osteopontin did not differ significantly between the groups at either time point (p > 0.05). The results of radiological evaluation showed that the bone density value was significantly higher in the C group than in the RIS group at either time point (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although this study aimed to demonstrate the effect of risedronate on the osteoconductive properties of xenografts when applied locally, targeted results could not be achieved.

Atypical femur fracture associated with common anti-osteoporosis drugs in FDA adverse event reporting system.

Atypical femur fracture (AFF) is a rare but catastrophic adverse event first reported in the long-term use of alendronate, one of the most commonly used drugs for osteoporosis currently. However, further evidence is needed to learn more regarding other common anti-osteoporosis drugs and the risk for AFF. In this study, reports of AFF were identified from Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database. Disproportionality analyses were performed to examine the reporting odds ratio (ROR), information component (IC) and adjusted ROR (adj. ROR) signals for AFF for common anti-osteoporosis drugs. A total of 1692 unique AFF reports were identified. The disproportionality signals (the lower bound of 95% confidence interval > 1 for ROR and adjusted ROR, and > 0 for IC) were detected for alendronate, denosumab, pamidronate, risedronate, zoledronate, ibandronate, and teriparatide while no signal was detected for raloxifene, abaloparatide, and romosozumab. When restricted in patients with osteoporosis, the disproportionality signals were still detected for alendronate, pamidronate, risedronate, denosumab, and ibandronate. Our results suggest that alendronate has the largest risk signal, while the risks varied among different bisphosphonates. In addition, denosumab was found statistically associated with AFF in both the entire database and patients with osteoporosis.

Zoledronate and osteonecrosis of the jaw in osteoporosis: incidence and risk factors. Analysis of the French Pharmacovigilance Database.

INTRODUCTION: Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) have been characterized with the use of oral bisphosphonates in osteoporosis and zoledronate in oncology. Uncertainties remain, though, with the occurrence of BRONJ related to the use of zoledronate in osteoporosis. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to estimate the incidence and characterize the risk factors of zoledronate-associated BRONJ in osteoporosis as compared with oral bisphosphonates in real life setting. METHODS: Cases of BRONJ associated with zoledronate, alendronate or risedronate were extracted from the French pharmacovigilance database up to 2020. The incidence of BRONJ was estimated as their respective numbers related to cases of BRONJ in patients treated with bisphosphonates for osteoporosis, over the same period, according to the Medic'AM database. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, BRONJ incidence with zoledronate was 9.6/100,000 patient-year (PY), significantly higher than with alendronate (5.1/100,000 PY, P<0.001), and risedronate (2.0/100,000 PY, P<0.001). The number of patients treated with bisphosphonates has steadily decreased by 44.5% over 10 years. Meanwhile, the incidence of BRONJ decreased (5.8/100,000 PY in 2011; 1.5/100,000 in 2020), although a rebound was observed in 2018, including 47.6% of BRONJ following denosumab. Apart from classical risk factors, recent dental cares stood out in more than 40% of BRONJ, and zoledronate had a shorter exposure time than oral bisphosphonates. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-life setting, our data confirm that zoledronate-associated BRONJ in osteoporosis is scarce, seeming slightly more common compared with oral bisphosphonates. We also raise awareness of dental care guidelines and greater vigilance when using bisphosphonates in patients with previous exposure to denosumab.

The Clinical Effectiveness of Denosumab (Prolia®) for the Treatment of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women, Compared to Bisphosphonates, Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators (SERM), and Placebo: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

To assess the effectiveness and safety of denosumab (Prolia®) compared to bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, zoledronate), selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs; bazedoxifene, raloxifene) or placebo, for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women (PMW). Systematic searches were run in PubMed, Embase & Cochrane Library on 27-April-2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included osteoporotic PMW allocated to denosumab, SERMs, bisphosphonates, or placebo were eligible for inclusion. RCTs were appraised using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Bayesian network and/or pairwise meta-analyses were conducted on predetermined outcomes (i.e. vertebral/nonvertebral fractures, bone mineral density [BMD], mortality, adverse events [AEs], serious AEs (SAEs), withdrawals due to AEs, AEs caused by denosumab discontinuation). A total of 12 RCTs (k = 22 publications; n = 25,879 participants) were included in the analyses. Denosumab, reported a statistically significant increase in lumbar spine (LS) and total hip (TH) BMD, compared to placebo. Similarly, denosumab also resulted in a statistically significant increase in TH BMD compared to the raloxifene and bazedoxifene. However, relative to denosumab, alendronate, ibandronate and risedronate resulted in significant improvements in both femoral neck (FN) and LS BMD. With regards to vertebral fractures and all safety outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between denosumab and any of the comparator. Relative to placebo, denosumab was associated with significant benefits in both LS and TH BMD. Additionally, denosumab (compared to placebo) was not associated with reductions in vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Finally, denosumab was not associated with improvement in safety outcomes, compared to placebo. These findings should be interpreted with caution as some analyses suffered from statistical imprecision.

Screening for the primary prevention of fragility fractures among adults aged 40 years and older in primary care: systematic reviews of the effects and acceptability of screening and treatment, and the accuracy of risk prediction tools.

BACKGROUND: To inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, we reviewed evidence on the benefits, harms, and acceptability of screening and treatment, and on the accuracy of risk prediction tools for the primary prevention of fragility fractures among adults aged 40 years and older in primary care. METHODS: For screening effectiveness, accuracy of risk prediction tools, and treatment benefits, our search methods involved integrating studies published up to 2016 from an existing systematic review. Then, to locate more recent studies and any evidence relating to acceptability and treatment harms, we searched online databases (2016 to April 4, 2022 [screening] or to June 1, 2021 [predictive accuracy]; 1995 to June 1, 2021, for acceptability; 2016 to March 2, 2020, for treatment benefits; 2015 to June 24, 2020, for treatment harms), trial registries and gray literature, and hand-searched reviews, guidelines, and the included studies. Two reviewers selected studies, extracted results, and appraised risk of bias, with disagreements resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. The overview of reviews on treatment harms relied on one reviewer, with verification of data by another reviewer to correct errors and omissions. When appropriate, study results were pooled using random effects meta-analysis; otherwise, findings were described narratively. Evidence certainty was rated according to the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We included 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 controlled clinical trial (CCT) for the benefits and harms of screening, 1 RCT for comparative benefits and harms of different screening strategies, 32 validation cohort studies for the calibration of risk prediction tools (26 of these reporting on the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool without [i.e., clinical FRAX], or with the inclusion of bone mineral density (BMD) results [i.e., FRAX + BMD]), 27 RCTs for the benefits of treatment, 10 systematic reviews for the harms of treatment, and 12 studies for the acceptability of screening or initiating treatment. In females aged 65 years and older who are willing to independently complete a mailed fracture risk questionnaire (referred to as "selected population"), 2-step screening using a risk assessment tool with or without measurement of BMD probably (moderate certainty) reduces the risk of hip fractures (3 RCTs and 1 CCT, n = 43,736, absolute risk reduction [ARD] = 6.2 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 9.0-2.8 fewer, number needed to screen [NNS] = 161) and clinical fragility fractures (3 RCTs, n = 42,009, ARD = 5.9 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 10.9-0.8 fewer, NNS = 169). It probably does not reduce all-cause mortality (2 RCTs and 1 CCT, n = 26,511, ARD = no difference in 1000, 95% CI 7.1 fewer to 5.3 more) and may (low certainty) not affect health-related quality of life. Benefits for fracture outcomes were not replicated in an offer-to-screen population where the rate of response to mailed screening questionnaires was low. For females aged 68-80 years, population screening may not reduce the risk of hip fractures (1 RCT, n = 34,229, ARD = 0.3 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 4.2 fewer to 3.9 more) or clinical fragility fractures (1 RCT, n = 34,229, ARD = 1.0 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 8.0 fewer to 6.0 more) over 5 years of follow-up. The evidence for serious adverse events among all patients and for all outcomes among males and younger females (<65 years) is very uncertain. We defined overdiagnosis as the identification of high risk in individuals who, if not screened, would never have known that they were at risk and would never have experienced a fragility fracture. This was not directly reported in any of the trials. Estimates using data available in the trials suggest that among "selected" females offered screening, 12% of those meeting age-specific treatment thresholds based on clinical FRAX 10-year hip fracture risk, and 19% of those meeting thresholds based on clinical FRAX 10-year major osteoporotic fracture risk, may be overdiagnosed as being at high risk of fracture. Of those identified as being at high clinical FRAX 10-year hip fracture risk and who were referred for BMD assessment, 24% may be overdiagnosed. One RCT (n = 9268) provided evidence comparing 1-step to 2-step screening among postmenopausal females, but the evidence from this trial was very uncertain. For the calibration of risk prediction tools, evidence from three Canadian studies (n = 67,611) without serious risk of bias concerns indicates that clinical FRAX-Canada may be well calibrated for the 10-year prediction of hip fractures (observed-to-expected fracture ratio [O:E] = 1.13, 95% CI 0.74-1.72, I2 = 89.2%), and is probably well calibrated for the 10-year prediction of clinical fragility fractures (O:E = 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20, I2 = 50.4%), both leading to some underestimation of the observed risk. Data from these same studies (n = 61,156) showed that FRAX-Canada with BMD may perform poorly to estimate 10-year hip fracture risk (O:E = 1.31, 95% CI 0.91-2.13, I2 = 92.7%), but is probably well calibrated for the 10-year prediction of clinical fragility fractures, with some underestimation of the observed risk (O:E 1.16, 95% CI 1.12-1.20, I2 = 0%). The Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada Risk Assessment (CAROC) tool may be well calibrated to predict a category of risk for 10-year clinical fractures (low, moderate, or high risk; 1 study, n = 34,060). The evidence for most other tools was limited, or in the case of FRAX tools calibrated for countries other than Canada, very uncertain due to serious risk of bias concerns and large inconsistency in findings across studies. Postmenopausal females in a primary prevention population defined as <50% prevalence of prior fragility fracture (median 16.9%, range 0 to 48% when reported in the trials) and at risk of fragility fracture, treatment with bisphosphonates as a class (median 2 years, range 1-6 years) probably reduces the risk of clinical fragility fractures (19 RCTs, n = 22,482, ARD = 11.1 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 15.0-6.6 fewer, [number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome] NNT = 90), and may reduce the risk of hip fractures (14 RCTs, n = 21,038, ARD = 2.9 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 4.6-0.9 fewer, NNT = 345) and clinical vertebral fractures (11 RCTs, n = 8921, ARD = 10.0 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 14.0-3.9 fewer, NNT = 100); it may not reduce all-cause mortality. There is low certainty evidence of little-to-no reduction in hip fractures with any individual bisphosphonate, but all provided evidence of decreased risk of clinical fragility fractures (moderate certainty for alendronate [NNT=68] and zoledronic acid [NNT=50], low certainty for risedronate [NNT=128]) among postmenopausal females. Evidence for an impact on risk of clinical vertebral fractures is very uncertain for alendronate and risedronate; zoledronic acid may reduce the risk of this outcome (4 RCTs, n = 2367, ARD = 18.7 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 25.6-6.6 fewer, NNT = 54) for postmenopausal females. Denosumab probably reduces the risk of clinical fragility fractures (6 RCTs, n = 9473, ARD = 9.1 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 12.1-5.6 fewer, NNT = 110) and clinical vertebral fractures (4 RCTs, n = 8639, ARD = 16.0 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 18.6-12.1 fewer, NNT=62), but may make little-to-no difference in the risk of hip fractures among postmenopausal females. Denosumab probably makes little-to-no difference in the risk of all-cause mortality or health-related quality of life among postmenopausal females. Evidence in males is limited to two trials (1 zoledronic acid, 1 denosumab); in this population, zoledronic acid may make little-to-no difference in the risk of hip or clinical fragility fractures, and evidence for all-cause mortality is very uncertain. The evidence for treatment with denosumab in males is very uncertain for all fracture outcomes (hip, clinical fragility, clinical vertebral) and all-cause mortality. There is moderate certainty evidence that treatment causes a small number of patients to experience a non-serious adverse event, notably non-serious gastrointestinal events (e.g., abdominal pain, reflux) with alendronate (50 RCTs, n = 22,549, ARD = 16.3 more in 1000, 95% CI 2.4-31.3 more, [number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome] NNH = 61) but not with risedronate; influenza-like symptoms with zoledronic acid (5 RCTs, n = 10,695, ARD = 142.5 more in 1000, 95% CI 105.5-188.5 more, NNH = 7); and non-serious gastrointestinal adverse events (3 RCTs, n = 8454, ARD = 64.5 more in 1000, 95% CI 26.4-13.3 more, NNH = 16), dermatologic adverse events (3 RCTs, n = 8454, ARD = 15.6 more in 1000, 95% CI 7.6-27.0 more, NNH = 64), and infections (any severity; 4 RCTs, n = 8691, ARD = 1.8 more in 1000, 95% CI 0.1-4.0 more, NNH = 556) with denosumab. For serious adverse events overall and specific to stroke and myocardial infarction, treatment with bisphosphonates probably makes little-to-no difference; evidence for other specific serious harms was less certain or not available. There was low certainty evidence for an increased risk for the rare occurrence of atypical femoral fractures (0.06 to 0.08 more in 1000) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (0.22 more in 1000) with bisphosphonates (most evidence for alendronate). The evidence for these rare outcomes and for rebound fractures with denosumab was very uncertain. Younger (lower risk) females have high willingness to be screened. A minority of postmenopausal females at increased risk for fracture may accept treatment. Further, there is large heterogeneity in the level of risk at which patients may be accepting of initiating treatment, and treatment effects appear to be overestimated. CONCLUSION: An offer of 2-step screening with risk assessment and BMD measurement to selected postmenopausal females with low prevalence of prior fracture probably results in a small reduction in the risk of clinical fragilityfracture and hip fracture compared to no screening. These findings were most applicable to the use of clinical FRAX for risk assessment and were not replicated in the offer-to-screen population where the rate of response to mailed screening questionnaires was low. Limited direct evidence on harms of screening were available; using study data to provide estimates, there may be a moderate degree of overdiagnosis of high risk for fracture to consider. The evidence for younger females and males is very limited. The benefits of screening and treatment need to be weighed against the potential for harm; patient views on the acceptability of treatment are highly variable. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42019123767.

Fracture risk in women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant risedronate versus immediate release risedronate or alendronate: a claims data analysis in the USA.

The study results indicate that women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant risedronate have a lower risk of fracture than those initiated on immediate release risedronate or alendronate. A large proportion of women discontinued all oral bisphosphonate therapies within 1 year of treatment start. PURPOSE: Using a US claims database (2009-2019), we compared risk of fractures between women with osteoporosis initiated on gastro-resistant (GR) risedronate and those initiated on (a) immediate release (IR) risedronate or (b) immediate release alendronate. METHODS: Women aged ≥ 60 years with osteoporosis who had ≥ 2 oral bisphosphonate prescription fills were followed for ≥ 1 year after the first observed bisphosphonates dispensing (index date). Fracture risk was compared between the GR risedronate and IR risedronate/alendronate cohorts using adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs), both overall and in subgroups with high fracture risk due to older age or comorbidity/medications. Site-specific fractures were identified based on diagnosis codes recorded on medical claims using a claims-based algorithm. Persistence on bisphosphonate therapy was evaluated for all groups. RESULTS: aIRRs generally indicated lower fracture risk for GR risedronate than IR risedronate and alendronate. When comparing GR risedronate to IR risedronate, statistically significant aIRRs (p < 0.05) were observed for pelvic fractures in the full cohorts (aIRRs = 0.37), for any fracture and pelvic fractures among women aged ≥ 65 years (aIRRs = 0.63 and 0.41), for any fracture and pelvic fractures among women aged ≥ 70 years (aIRRs = 0.69 and 0.24), and for pelvic fracture among high-risk women due to comorbidity/medications (aIRR = 0.34). When comparing GR risedronate to alendronate, statistically significant aIRRs were observed for pelvic fractures in the full cohorts (aIRR = 0.54), for any fracture and wrist/arm fractures among women aged ≥ 65 years (aIRRs = 0.73 and 0.63), and for any fracture, pelvic, and wrist/arm fractures among women aged ≥ 70 years (aIRRs = 0.72, 0.36, and 0.58). In all cohorts, ~ 40% completely discontinued oral bisphosphonates within 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation rates of oral bisphosphonate therapy were high. However, women initiated on GR risedronate had a significantly lower risk of fracture for several skeletal sites than women initiated on IR risedronate/alendronate, particularly those aged ≥ 70 years.

Denosumab prevented periprosthetic bone resorption better than risedronate after total hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fracture caused by periprosthetic bone loss is an important concern in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Denosumab has been approved for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who are at high risk of fracture. In this randomized controlled trial, we compared the effects of denosumab and risedronate on periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) after THA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current study analyzed 108 patients who were scheduled to have THA. For 2 years, the patients were randomly assigned to the following two treatment groups: denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months) or risedronate (17.5 mg oral weekly). The BMD changes in all Gruen zones and bone turnover markers were measured at the 5th postoperative day (baseline) and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The mean BMD in zones 1, 2, 6, and 7 was significantly higher with denosumab all administration at all postoperative time points compared to the risedronate group. The mean percentage changes in the BMD in these zones from baseline to 24 months postoperatively were + 11.9, + 2.9, + 8.1, and + 5.9% with denosumab group and - 9.6% -3.6, - 2.3, and - 19.2% with risedronate, respectively. The osteoclastic marker, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-5b (TRACP-5b), was significantly lower in the denosumab group compared to the risedronate group by 2 months. CONCLUSION: Denosumab is more effective in preventing periprosthetic bone resorption than risedronate in the proximal femur. It also increased BMD around the stem implant following THA.

Effects of a locally administered risedronate/autogenous bone graft combination on bone healing in a critical-size rabbit defect model.

BACKGROUND: Risedronate is a bisphosphonate with poor oral absorption. An extremely hydrophilic molecule that has a high affinity for bone, risedronate also inhibits the farnesyl diphosphate synthase enzyme, inhibiting osteoclastic activity and reducing bone turnover and resorption. Autogenous bone grafts contain osteogenic cells and osteoinductive factors that are essential for bone regeneration and are therefore considered the gold standard. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the impact of local risedronate administered with autogenous bone grafts on the healing of defects in rabbit skulls using histological, histomorphometric, immunohistochemical, and three-dimensional radiological methods. METHODS: Two 10-mm-diameter critical-size defects were created in 16 rabbits and filled with autogenous bone graft and autogenous bone graft + 5 mg risedronate in the control (C) and risedronate (RIS) groups, respectively. Residual graft, new bone, soft tissue areas, and bone volume were evaluated in the 4- and 8-week study groups. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in bone graft, new bone, or soft tissue area between the groups at 4 weeks (p > 0.05). At 8 weeks, the new bone area was significantly higher in the RIS group than in the C group (p < 0.05). The h scores obtained from sialoprotein and osteopontin did not differ significantly between the groups (p > 0.05). The radiologically measured total bone volume was significantly higher in the RIS group than in the C group at both time points (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, risedronate enhanced the osteoconductive properties of autogenous bone grafts and rapidly created better-quality bone. This could improve future patient outcomes.