Search

Summary: In clinical practice, the frequency of patients achieving improved T-scores and the expected change in bone mineral density (BMD) according to osteoporosis drugs is unknown. We found that osteoporosis medications infrequently achieve improved femoral neck T-scores over 1.2 years. BMD increases were more often seen with IV bisphosphonates and denosumab.Purpose: To determine the frequency of osteoporosis patients achieving improvement in T-scores and quantify the change in bone mineral density (BMD) over time according to osteoporosis medication use.Methods: The study included all patients receiving clinical care at United Osteoporosis Centers, Gainesville, GA, 1995-2015, who had at least two measures of femoral neck BMD (N = 1232). We evaluated successive pairs of BMD tests to describe the distribution of transitions between T-score categories. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate %BMD change between successive pairs of BMD tests according to osteoporosis medication, adjusted for age, sex, height, weight, baseline BMD, previous fracture, and follow-up time.Results: Mean (±SD) age was 68 (±10) years, and 90% of patients were women. Mean baseline T-score was − 2.04 (± 0.85). In total, 1232 patients had 4918 pairs of successive BMD tests, with a mean 1.2 years (± 0.9) between assessments. Frequency of transition to an improved T-score category was 41% when prior T-score ≤ − 3.5, and 15% when prior T-score − 1.99 to − 1.50. Most individuals (69%) remained in the same T-score category. BMD increased 0.54% (95% CI 0.23-0.85%) with IV bisphosphonates and 1.23% (95% CI 0.56-1.90%) with denosumab, whereas no significant change was seen with oral bisphosphonates, teriparatide, or raloxifene.Conclusions: Osteoporosis patients are unlikely to improve femoral neck T-scores over 1.2 years. Additional studies are needed to determine the optimal time to repeat BMD testing while receiving osteoporosis treatment and to determine whether fracture risk is reduced in patients who achieve target T-scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anabolic therapies, recommended for patients at very high fracture risk, are administered subcutaneously (SC). The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the abaloparatide microstructured transdermal system (abaloparatide-sMTS) as an alternative to the SC formulation. This phase 3, noninferiority study (NCT04064411) randomly assigned postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N = 511) 1:1 to open-label abaloparatide administered daily via abaloparatide-sMTS or SC injection for 12 months. The primary comparison between treatment groups was the percentage change in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) at 12 months, with a noninferiority margin of 2.0%. Secondary endpoints included percentage change in total hip and femoral neck BMD, bone turnover markers, dermatologic safety, and new clinical fracture incidence. At 12 months, percentage increase from baseline in lumbar spine BMD was 7.14% (SE: 0.46%) for abaloparatide-sMTS and 10.86% (SE: 0.48%) for abaloparatide-SC (treatment difference: -3.72% [95% confidence interval: -5.01%, -2.43%]). Percentage change in total hip BMD was 1.97% for abaloparatide-sMTS and 3.70% for abaloparatide-SC. Median changes from baseline at 12 months in serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (s-PINP) were 52.6% for abaloparatide-sMTS and 74.5% for abaloparatide-SC. Administration site reactions were the most frequently reported adverse events (abaloparatide-sMTS, 94.4%; abaloparatide-SC, 70.5%). Incidence of serious adverse events was similar between groups. Mild or moderate skin reactions occurred with abaloparatide-sMTS with no identifiable risk factors for sensitization reactions. Few new clinical fractures occurred in either group. Noninferiority of abaloparatide-sMTS to abaloparatide-SC for percentage change in spine BMD at 12 months was not demonstrated; however, clinically meaningful increases from baseline in lumbar spine and total hip BMD were observed in both treatment groups. © 2023 Radius Health, Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2023 Radius Health, Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

Abaloparatide significantly increased bone mineral density (BMD) in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis and decreased risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, and clinical fractures compared with placebo. The Abaloparatide for the Treatment of Men with Osteoporosis (ATOM; NCT03512262) study evaluated the efficacy and safety of abaloparatide compared with placebo in men. Eligible men aged 40 to 85 years with osteoporosis were randomized 2:1 to daily subcutaneous injections of abaloparatide 80 μg or placebo for 12 months. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD. Key secondary endpoints included BMD change from baseline at the total hip and femoral neck. A total of 228 men were randomized (abaloparatide, n = 149; placebo, n = 79). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups (mean age, 68.3 years; mean lumbar spine BMD T-score, -2.1). At 12 months, BMD gains were greater with abaloparatide compared with placebo at the lumbar spine (least squares mean percentage change [standard error]: 8.48 [0.54] versus 1.17 [0.72]), total hip (2.14 [0.27] versus 0.01 [0.35]), and femoral neck (2.98 [0.34] versus 0.15 [0.45]) (all p < 0.0001). The most common (≥5%) treatment-emergent adverse events were injection site reaction, dizziness, nasopharyngitis, arthralgia, bronchitis, hypertension, and headache. During 12 months of abaloparatide treatment, men with osteoporosis exhibited rapid and significant improvements in BMD with a safety profile consistent with previous studies. These results suggest abaloparatide can be considered as an effective anabolic treatment option for men with osteoporosis. © 2022 Radius Health Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2022 Radius Health Inc and The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

In an exploratory trial treating "long COVID" with the CCR5-binding antibody leronlimab, we observed significantly increased blood cell surface CCR5 in treated symptomatic responders but not in nonresponders or placebo-treated participants. These findings suggest an unexpected mechanism of abnormal immune downmodulation in some persons that is normalized by leronlimab. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04678830., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. S. A. K., N. Z. P., and C. R. are officers of CytoDyn Inc and report stock options and consulting fees from CytoDyn, assistance with manuscript preparation (Medical Expressions, paid by CytoDyn), and other financial or nonfinancial interests as employees of CytoDyn. J. B. S., S. G. H., and O. O. Y. are paid consultants for CytoDyn Inc. J. B. S. reports stock options available for purchase from CytoDyn and assistance with manuscript preparation (Medical Expressions, paid by CytoDyn). S. G. H. reports stock options and receipt of leronlimab for CCR5 receptor occupancy assay from CytoDyn and assistance with manuscript preparation (Medical Expression, paid by CytoDyn). O. O. Y. reports assistance in writing the manuscript (paid by CytoDyn). M. T. reports assistance with manuscript preparation (Medical Expressions, paid by CytoDyn). N. B. G. was a principal investigator for this trial, serves on the CytoDyn Inc Scientific Advisory Board with stock options, and reports assistance with manuscript preparation (Medical Expressions, paid by CytoDyn). A. R. was a principal investigator for this trial and worked as an employee at the Center for Advanced Research & Education, Gainesville, Georgia, which is performing a clinical research trial for CytoDyn. A. R. reports assistance with manuscript preparation (Medical Expressions, paid by CytoDyn). All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Romosozumab monoclonal antibody treatment works by binding sclerostin and causing rapid stimulation of bone formation while decreasing bone resorption. The location and local magnitude of vertebral bone accrual by romosozumab and how it compares to teriparatide remains to be investigated. Here we analyzed the data from a study collecting lumbar computed tomography (CT) spine scans at enrollment and 12 months post-treatment with romosozumab (210 mg sc monthly, n = 17), open-label daily teriparatide (20 μg sc, n = 19), or placebo (sc monthly, n = 20). For each of the 56 women, cortical thickness (Ct.Th), endocortical thickness (Ec.Th), cortical bone mineral density (Ct.bone mineral density (BMD)), cancellous BMD (Cn.BMD), and cortical mass surface density (CMSD) were measured across the first lumbar vertebral surface. In addition, color maps of the changes in the lumbar vertebrae structure were statistically analyzed and then visualized on the bone surface. At 12 months, romosozumab improved all parameters significantly over placebo and resulted in a mean vertebral Ct.Th increase of 10.3% versus 4.3% for teriparatide, an Ec.Th increase of 137.6% versus 47.5% for teriparatide, a Ct.BMD increase of 2.1% versus a -0.1% decrease for teriparatide, and a CMSD increase of 12.4% versus 3.8% for teriparatide. For all these measurements, the differences between romosozumab and teriparatide were statistically significant (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the romosozumab-associated Cn.BMD gains of 22.2% versus 18.1% for teriparatide, but both were significantly greater compared with the change in the placebo group (-4.6%, p < 0.05). Cortical maps showed the topographical locations of the increase in bone in fracture-prone areas of the vertebral shell, walls, and endplates. This study confirms widespread vertebral bone accrual with romosozumab or teriparatide treatment and provides new insights into how the rapid prevention of vertebral fractures is achieved in women with osteoporosis using these anabolic agents. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

The Active-Controlled Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis at High Risk (ARCH) trial (NCT01631214; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01631214) showed that romosozumab for 1 year followed by alendronate led to larger areal bone mineral density (aBMD) gains and superior fracture risk reduction versus alendronate alone. aBMD correlates with bone strength but does not capture all determinants of bone strength that might be differentially affected by various osteoporosis therapeutic agents. We therefore used quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and finite element analysis (FEA) to assess changes in lumbar spine volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), bone volume, bone mineral content (BMC), and bone strength with romosozumab versus alendronate in a subset of ARCH patients. In ARCH, 4093 postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis received monthly romosozumab 210 mg sc or weekly oral alendronate 70 mg for 12 months, followed by open-label weekly oral alendronate 70 mg for ≥12 months. Of these, 90 (49 romosozumab, 41 alendronate) enrolled in the QCT/FEA imaging substudy. QCT scans at baseline and at months 6, 12, and 24 were assessed to determine changes in integral (total), cortical, and trabecular lumbar spine vBMD and corresponding bone strength by FEA. Additional outcomes assessed include changes in aBMD, bone volume, and BMC. Romosozumab caused greater gains in lumbar spine integral, cortical, and trabecular vBMD and BMC than alendronate at months 6 and 12, with the greater gains maintained upon transition to alendronate through month 24. These improvements were accompanied by significantly greater increases in FEA bone strength (p < 0.001 at all time points). Most newly formed bone was accrued in the cortical compartment, with romosozumab showing larger absolute BMC gains than alendronate (p < 0.001 at all time points). In conclusion, romosozumab significantly improved bone mass and bone strength parameters at the lumbar spine compared with alendronate. These results are consistent with greater vertebral fracture risk reduction observed with romosozumab versus alendronate in ARCH and provide insights into structural determinants of this differential treatment effect. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

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/m 2 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., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests LCH reports grants for clinical trials from Alexion, Amgen, Ascendis, Novartis, and Shire; and honoraria for participation in advisory boards for Amgen, Alexion, Shire, KKI, and UCB. LZA and LBT were employees of Novartis during the course of this study and own stocks in Novartis. CR has done studies for Novartis, Amgen, Roche, Eli Lilly, and CytoDyn. MC, DR, MA, NF, AAS-T, and DAP are employees of and own stock in Novartis. RW, ZV, and NS declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Anabolic osteoporosis drugs improve bone mineral density by increasing bone formation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the early effects of abaloparatide on indices of bone formation and to assess the effect of abaloparatide on modeling-based formation (MBF), remodeling-based formation (RBF), and overflow MBF (oMBF) in transiliac bone biopsies. In this open-label, single-arm study, 23 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were treated with 80 μg abaloparatide daily. Subjects received double fluorochrome labels before treatment and before biopsy collection at 3 months. Change in dynamic histomorphometry indices in four bone envelopes were assessed. Median mineralizing surface per unit of bone surface (MS/BS) increased to 24.7%, 48.7%, 21.4%, and 16.3% of total surface after 3 months of abaloparatide treatment, representing 5.5-, 5.2-, 2.8-, and 12.9-fold changes, on cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal surfaces (p < .001 versus baseline for all). Mineral apposition rate (MAR) was significantly increased only on intracortical surfaces. Bone formation rate (BFR/BS) was significantly increased on all four bone envelopes. Significant increases versus baseline were observed in MBF on cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal surfaces, for oMBF on cancellous and endocortical surfaces, and for RBF on cancellous, endocortical, and intracortical surfaces. Overall, modeling-based formation (MBF + oMBF) accounted for 37% and 23% of the increase in bone-forming surface on the endocortical and cancellous surfaces, respectively. Changes from baseline in serum biomarkers of bone turnover at either month 1 or month 3 were generally good surrogates for changes in histomorphometric endpoints. In conclusion, treatment with abaloparatide for 3 months stimulated bone formation on cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal envelopes in transiliac bone biopsies obtained from postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. These increases reflected stimulation of both remodeling- and modeling-based bone formation, further elucidating the mechanisms by which abaloparatide improves bone mass and lowers fracture risk. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

Importance: The potential benefit of novel skeletal muscle anabolic agents to improve physical function in people with sarcopenia and other muscle wasting diseases is unknown., Objective: To confirm the safety and efficacy of bimagrumab plus the new standard of care on skeletal muscle mass, strength, and physical function compared with standard of care alone in community-dwelling older adults with sarcopenia., Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 38 sites in 13 countries among community-dwelling men and women aged 70 years and older meeting gait speed and skeletal muscle criteria for sarcopenia. The study was conducted from December 2014 to June 2018, and analyses were conducted from August to November 2018., Interventions: Bimagrumab 700 mg or placebo monthly for 6 months with adequate diet and home-based exercise., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) score after 24 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes included 6-minute walk distance, usual gait speed, handgrip strength, lean body mass, fat body mass, and standard safety parameters., Results: A total of 180 participants were recruited, with 113 randomized to bimagrumab and 67 randomized to placebo. Among these, 159 participants (88.3%; mean [SD] age, 79.1 [5.3] years; 109 [60.6%] women) completed the study. The mean SPPB score increased by a mean of 1.34 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.77) with bimagrumab vs 1.03 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.52) with placebo (P = .13); 6-minute walk distance increased by a mean of 24.60 (95% CI, 7.65 to 41.56) m with bimagrumab vs 14.30 (95% CI, -4.64 to 33.23) m with placebo (P = .16); and gait speed increased by a mean of 0.14 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.18) m/s with bimagrumab vs 0.11 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.16) m/s with placebo (P = .16). Bimagrumab was safe and well-tolerated and increased lean body mass by 7% (95% CI, 6% to 8%) vs 1% (95% CI, 0% to 2%) with placebo, resulting in difference of 6% (95% CI, 4% to 7%) (P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found no significant difference between participants treated with bimagrumab vs placebo among older adults with sarcopenia who had 6 months of adequate nutrition and light exercise, with physical function improving in both groups. Bimagrumab treatment was safe, well-tolerated, increased lean body mass, and decreased fat body mass. The effects of sarcopenia, an increasing cause of disability in older adults, can be reduced with proper diet and exercise., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02333331; EudraCT number: 2014-003482-25.

Background: Denosumab treatment for up to 8 years in the FREEDOM study and Extension was associated with low fracture incidence. It was not clear whether subjects who discontinued during the study conduct had a higher risk of fracture than those who remained enrolled, thereby underestimating the true fracture risk for the entire trial cohort. Thus, we explored the influence of early withdrawals on nonvertebral fracture incidence during the Extension study., Methods: To understand the potential effect of depletion of susceptible subjects on fracture incidence, we first evaluated subject characteristics in patients who were enrolled in the Extension vs those who were not. We subsequently employed a Kaplan-Meier multiple imputation (KMMI) approach to consider subjects who discontinued as if they remained enrolled with a 0%, 20%, 50%, and 100% increase in fracture risk compared with participants remaining on study., Results: Extension enrollees were generally similar to nonparticipants in median age (71.9 and 73.1 years, respectively), mean total hip bone mineral density T-score (-1.9 and -2.0, respectively), and probability of fracture risk by Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX ® ) at FREEDOM baseline (16.9% and 17.7% for major osteoporotic fracture and 6.7% and 7.4% for hip fracture, respectively). When we assumed a doubled fracture risk (100% increase) after discontinuation in KMMI analyses, nonvertebral fracture rate estimates were only marginally higher than the observed rates for both the crossover group (10.32% vs 9.16%, respectively) and the long-term group (7.63% vs 6.63%, respectively)., Conclusion: The observation of continued denosumab efficacy over 8 years of treatment was robust and does not seem to be explained by depletion of susceptible subjects., Trial Registration: ClincalTrials.gov registration number NCT00523341 ; registered August 30, 2007.

Romosozumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds sclerostin, has a dual effect on bone by increasing bone formation and reducing bone resorption, and thus has favorable effects in both aspects of bone volume regulation. In a phase 2 study, romosozumab increased areal BMD at the lumbar spine and total hip as measured by DXA compared with placebo, alendronate, and teriparatide in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. In additional analyses from this international, randomized study, we now describe the effect of romosozumab on lumbar spine and hip volumetric BMD (vBMD) and BMC at month 12 as assessed by QCT in the subset of participants receiving placebo, s.c. teriparatide (20 µg once daily), and s.c. romosozumab (210 mg once monthly). QCT measurements were performed at the lumbar spine (mean of L 1 and L 2 entire vertebral bodies, excluding posterior processes) and hip. One year of treatment with romosozumab significantly increased integral vBMD and BMC at the lumbar spine and total hip from baseline, and compared with placebo and teriparatide (all p < 0.05). Trabecular vertebral vBMD improved significantly and similarly from baseline (p < 0.05) with both romosozumab (18.3%) and teriparatide (20.1%), whereas cortical vertebral vBMD gains were larger with romosozumab compared with teriparatide (13.7% versus 5.7%, p < 0.0001). Trabecular hip vBMD gains were significantly larger with romosozumab than with teriparatide (10.8% versus 4.2%, p = 0.01), but were similar for cortical vBMD (1.1% versus -0.9%, p = 0.12). Cortical BMC gains were larger with romosozumab compared with teriparatide at both the spine (23.3% versus 10.9%, p < 0.0001) and hip (3.4% versus 0.0%, p = 0.03). These improvements are expected to result in strength gains and support the continued clinical investigation of romosozumab as a potential therapy to rapidly reduce fracture risk in ongoing phase 3 studies. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Evolocumab has been shown to consistently reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) across populations. The phase 3 studies included administration in the home-use and in-clinic settings but did not specifically evaluate the feasibility of home-use administration. Two clinical studies enrolled patients with hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia on statin therapy and with/without ezetimibe received evolocumab in the home-use setting. Patients were randomized to self-administer evolocumab using one of two injection devices biweekly over 6 weeks (autoinjector or prefilled syringe; n = 149; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01849497) or monthly over 12 weeks (autoinjector or automated minidoser; n = 164; NCT01879319). The first self-administration occurred in the in-clinic setting, and two more were performed in the at-home setting. Patients were successful in self-administering evolocumab in the home-use setting in approximately 95 % of attempts and experienced LDL-C reductions from baseline to week 6 or the mean of weeks 10 and 12 of approximately 65 %. Rates of successful self-administration and LDL-C reduction were similar across dosing schedules and study devices. Adverse events were similar between randomized groups and generally mild in severity. In two clinical studies, therefore, patients were able to successfully self-administer evolocumab in both the in-clinic and at-home settings regardless of which dosing schedule or device they used.

Denosumab reduced the incidence of new fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis by 68% at the spine and 40% at the hip over 36 months compared with placebo in the FREEDOM study. This efficacy was supported by improvements from baseline in vertebral (18.2%) strength in axial compression and femoral (8.6%) strength in sideways fall configuration at 36 months, estimated in Newtons by an established voxel-based finite element (FE) methodology. Since FE analyses rely on the choice of meshes, material properties, and boundary conditions, the aim of this study was to independently confirm and compare the effects of denosumab on vertebral and femoral strength during the FREEDOM trial using an alternative smooth FE methodology. Unlike the previous FE study, effects on femoral strength in physiological stance configuration were also examined. QCT data for the proximal femur and two lumbar vertebrae were analyzed by smooth FE methodology at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months for 51 treated (denosumab) and 47 control (placebo) subjects. QCT images were segmented and converted into smooth FE models to compute bone strength. L1 and L2 vertebral bodies were virtually loaded in axial compression and the proximal femora in both fall and stance configurations. Denosumab increased vertebral body strength by 10.8%, 14.0%, and 17.4% from baseline at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively (p<0.0001). Denosumab also increased femoral strength in the fall configuration by 4.3%, 5.1%, and 7.2% from baseline at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively (p<0.0001). Similar improvements were observed in the stance configuration with increases of 4.2%, 5.2%, and 5.2% from baseline (p≤0.0007). Differences between the increasing strengths with denosumab and the decreasing strengths with placebo were significant starting at 12 months (vertebral and femoral fall) or 24 months (femoral stance). Using an alternative smooth FE methodology, we confirmed the significant improvements in vertebral body and proximal femur strength previously observed with denosumab. Estimated increases in strength with denosumab and decreases with placebo were highly consistent between both FE techniques., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Minimizing post-fracture bone loss is an important aspect of recovery from hip fracture, and determination of factors that affect bone mineral density (BMD) response to treatment after hip fracture may assist in the development of targeted therapeutic interventions. A post hoc analysis of the HORIZON Recurrent Fracture Trial was done to determine the effect of zoledronic acid (ZOL) on total hip (TH) and femoral neck (FN) BMD in subgroups with low-trauma hip fracture. A total of 2127 patients were randomized (1:1) to yearly infusions of ZOL 5 mg (n = 1065) or placebo (n = 1062) within 90 days of operation for low-trauma hip fracture. The 1486 patients with a baseline and at least one post-baseline BMD assessment at TH or FN (ZOL = 745, placebo = 741) were included in the analyses. Percentage change from baseline in TH and FN BMD was assessed at months 12 and 24 and compared across subgroups of hip fracture patients. Percentage change from baseline in TH and FN BMD at months 12 and 24 was greater (p < 0.05) in ZOL-treated patients compared with placebo in most subgroups. Treatment-by-subgroup interactions (p < 0.05) indicated that a greater effect on BMD was observed for TH BMD at month 12 in females, in patients in the lower tertile body mass index at baseline (≤22.6 kg/m(2) ), and in patients with baseline FN BMD T-score of ≤ -2.5; for FN BMD in patients who received ZOL for >6 weeks post-surgery; and for TH and FN BMD in patients with a history of one or more prior fractures. All interactions were limited to the first 12 months after treatment with none observed for the 24-month comparisons. (Clinical trial registration number NCT00046254.), (© 2014 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

In the randomized, placebo-controlled FREEDOM study of women aged 60 to 90 years with postmenopausal osteoporosis, treatment with denosumab once every 6 months for 36 months significantly reduced hip and new vertebral fracture risk by 40% and 68%, respectively. To gain further insight into this efficacy, we performed a nonlinear finite element analysis (FEA) of hip and spine quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scans to estimate hip and spine strength in a subset of FREEDOM subjects (n = 48 placebo; n = 51 denosumab) at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months. We found that, compared with baseline, the finite element estimates of hip strength increased from 12 months (5.3%; p < 0.0001) and through 36 months (8.6%; p < 0.0001) in the denosumab group. For the placebo group, hip strength did not change at 12 months and decreased at 36 months (-5.6%; p < 0.0001). Similar changes were observed at the spine: strength increased by 18.2% at 36 months for the denosumab group (p < 0.0001) and decreased by -4.2% for the placebo group (p = 0.002). At 36 months, hip and spine strength increased for the denosumab group compared with the placebo group by 14.3% (p < 0.0001) and 22.4% (p < 0.0001), respectively. Further analysis of the finite element models indicated that strength associated with the trabecular bone was lost at the hip and spine in the placebo group, whereas strength associated with both the trabecular and cortical bone improved in the denosumab group. In conclusion, treatment with denosumab increased hip and spine strength as estimated by FEA of QCT scans compared with both baseline and placebo owing to positive treatment effects in both the trabecular and cortical bone compartments. These findings provide insight into the mechanism by which denosumab reduces fracture risk for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis., (© 2014 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of denosumab to ibandronate in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density (BMD) previously treated with a bisphosphonate., Methods: In a randomized, open-label study, postmenopausal women received 60 mg denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months (n=417) or 150 mg ibandronate orally every month (n=416) for 12 months. End points included percentage change from baseline in total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine BMD at month 12 and percentage change from baseline in serum C-telopeptide at months 1 and 6 in a substudy., Results: At month 12, significantly greater BMD gains from baseline were observed with denosumab compared with ibandronate at the total hip (2.3% compared with 1.1%), femoral neck (1.7% compared with 0.7%), and lumbar spine (4.1% compared with 2.0%; treatment difference P<.001 at all sites). At month 1, median change in serum C-telopeptide from baseline was -81.1% with denosumab and -35.0% with ibandronate (P<.001); the treatment difference remained significant at month 6 (P<.001). Adverse events occurred in 245 (59.6%) denosumab-treated women and 230 (56.1%) ibandronate-treated women (P=.635). The incidence of serious adverse events was 9.5% for denosumab-treated women and 5.4% for ibandronate-treated women (P=.046). No clustering of events in any organ system accounted for the preponderance of these reports. The incidence rates of serious adverse events involving infection and malignancy were similar between treatment groups., Conclusion: In postmenopausal women previously treated with a bisphosphonate and low BMD, denosumab treatment resulted in greater BMD increases than ibandronate at all measured sites. No new safety risks with denosumab treatment were identified.

Osteoporosis is a chronic disease and requires long-term treatment with pharmacologic therapy to ensure sustained antifracture benefit. Denosumab reduced the risk for new vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 36 months in the Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis Every 6 Months (FREEDOM) trial. Whereas discontinuation of denosumab has been associated with transient increases in bone remodeling and declines in bone mineral density (BMD), the effect on fracture risk during treatment cessation is not as well characterized. To understand the fracture incidence between treatment groups after cessation of investigational product, we evaluated subjects in FREEDOM who discontinued treatment after receiving two to five doses of denosumab or placebo, and continued study participation for ≥7 months. The off-treatment observation period for each individual subject began 7 months after the last dose and lasted until the end of the study. This subgroup of 797 subjects (470 placebo, 327 denosumab), who were evaluable during the off-treatment period, showed similar baseline characteristics for age, prevalent fracture, and lumbar spine and total hip BMD T-scores. During treatment, more placebo-treated subjects as compared with denosumab-treated subjects sustained a fracture and had significant decreases in BMD. During the off-treatment period (median 0.8 years per subject), 42% versus 28% of placebo- and denosumab-treated subjects, respectively, initiated other therapy. Following discontinuation, similar percentages of subjects in both groups sustained a new fracture (9% placebo, 7% denosumab), resulting in a fracture rate per 100 subject-years of 13.5 for placebo and 9.7 for denosumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-1.38), adjusted for age and total hip BMD T-score at baseline. There was no apparent difference in fracture occurrence pattern between the groups during the off-treatment period. In summary, there does not appear to be an excess in fracture risk after treatment cessation with denosumab compared with placebo during the off-treatment period for up to 24 months., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

FREEDOM was a phase 3 trial in 7808 women aged 60-90yr with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Subjects received placebo or 60 mg denosumab subcutaneously every 6mo for 3yr in addition to daily calcium and vitamin D. Denosumab significantly decreased bone turnover; increased dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) areal bone mineral density (aBMD); and significantly reduced new vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures. In a subset of women (N=209), lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck volumetric BMD (vBMD) were assessed by quantitative computed tomography at baseline and months 12, 24, and 36. Significant improvement from placebo and baseline was observed in aBMD and vBMD in the denosumab-treated subjects at all sites and time points measured. The vBMD difference from placebo reached 21.8%, 7.8%, and 5.9%, respectively, for the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck at 36mo (all p≤0.0001). Compared with placebo and baseline, significant increases were also observed in bone mineral content (BMC) at the total hip (p<0.0001) largely related to significant BMC improvement in the cortical compartment (p<0.0001). These results supplement the data from DXA on the positive effect of denosumab on BMD in both the cortical and trabecular compartments., (Copyright © 2013 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to report the effects of denosumab on radius cortical and trabecular bone density, mass, and strength, and wrist fracture incidence in the FREEDOM (Fracture REduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis every 6 Months) study., Methods: In the FREEDOM study, postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N = 7,808) received placebo or 60 mg of denosumab every 6 months for 36 months. Radius bone mineral density (BMD), bone mineral content, and strength (polar moment of inertia) were evaluated in two prespecified substudies using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (placebo, n = 209; denosumab, n = 232) or quantitative CT (placebo, n = 48; denosumab, n = 62). Prespecified analysis assessed wrist fracture incidence in all FREEDOM participants (placebo, N = 3,906; denosumab, N = 3,902), and post hoc subgroup analyses evaluated those with higher fracture risk (baseline femoral neck T-score ≤-2.5; placebo, N = 1,406; denosumab, N = 1,384)., Results: Denosumab significantly increased areal BMD (assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry) and volumetric BMD, bone mineral content, and polar moment of inertia (assessed by quantitative CT), compared with placebo, in radius cortical and trabecular bone at all time points evaluated (all P < 0.05). Wrist fracture incidence was 2.9% for placebo and 2.5% for denosumab (relative risk reduction, 16%; P = 0.21) on month 36. Participants with a femoral neck T-score of -2.5 or lower were at increased risk for wrist fracture, and denosumab significantly reduced wrist fracture incidence compared with placebo (placebo, 4.0%; denosumab, 2.4%; relative risk reduction, 40%; absolute risk reduction, 1.6%; P = 0.03)., Conclusions: Denosumab significantly improves radius bone density, mass, and strength compared with placebo. In higher-risk women, denosumab significantly reduces wrist fracture risk.

Our purpose was to characterize the risks of osteoporosis-related subtrochanteric fractures in bisphosphonate-naive individuals. Baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the HORIZON-Recurrent Fracture Trial with a study-qualifying hip fracture were examined, comparing those who sustained incident subtrochanteric fractures with those sustaining other hip fractures. Subjects were bisphosphonate-naive or had a bisphosphonate washout period of 6-24 months and subsequently received an annual infusion of zoledronic acid 5 mg or placebo after low-trauma hip-fracture repair. In total, 2,127 men and women were included. Of the qualifying hip fractures, 5.2% were subtrochanteric, 54.8% femoral neck, 33.0% intertrochanteric, and 7.1% other (generally complex fractures of mixed type). Significant baseline (pre-hip fracture) differences were seen between index hip-fracture types, with the percentage of patients with extreme mobility problems being twofold higher in patients with index subtrochanteric fracture (9.9%) compared to other patients. The distribution of hip-fracture types was similar between the treatment groups at baseline. No patients with index subtrochanteric fractures and six patients with other qualifying hip fractures reported prior bisphosphonate use. Only one further subtrochanteric fracture occurred in each treatment group over an average 2-year patient follow-up. Subtrochanteric fractures are not uncommon in bisphosphonate-naive patients. Extreme difficulties with mobility may be a unique risk factor predisposing to development of incident subtrochanteric fractures rather than other types of hip fracture. In patients with recent hip fracture who received zoledronic acid therapy, the incidence of new subtrochanteric fractures was too small to draw any meaningful conclusions.

Osteoporosis-related fractures are associated with reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQL). We examined the benefits of zoledronic acid (ZOL) on HRQL in patients sustaining vertebral and clinical fractures from HORIZON-Pivotal Fracture Trial using mini-Osteoporosis quality of life Questionnaire (OQLQ). In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 1434 patients from a cohort of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (mean age 73years) were randomized to receive annual infusions of ZOL 5mg or placebo for 3years. Baseline HRQL scores were comparable between ZOL and placebo groups based on the presence or absence of fractures, with exception of prevalent vertebral fractures where patients (irrespective of the treatment group) had lower baseline HRQL scores than those without prevalent vertebral fractures. Greater number of prevalent vertebral fractures was associated with lower baseline HRQL (p<0.001). No significant difference between ZOL and placebo in the overall summary score was observed but a significant benefit was noted in certain domains with ZOL, especially in patients sustaining incident clinical fractures. Improvements in HRQL were marked at first assessment after a morphometric vertebral fracture with significant differences favouring ZOL in pain (p=0.0115), standing pain (p=0.0125)), physical (lifting, p=0.0333) and emotional function (fear of fractures, p=0.0243; fear of falls, p=0.0075) but not for activities of daily living or leisure domains. HRQL is reduced in patients with vertebral fractures. Treatment with ZOL over 3years was associated with improvements in specific domains of quality of life vs. placebo, particularly in patients sustaining incident fractures., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Osteoporosis (OP) is associated with a high risk of fracture and disability and with substantial medical costs. This paper is a review of the intravenous (i.v.) bisphosphonate zoledronic acid 5 mg (ZOL), used in the treatment and prevention of OP., Areas Covered: This is a review of the scientific literature, between 2003 and 2010, on the use of ZOL in patients with low bone mass or OP., Expert Opinion: ZOL, given as a single infusion once yearly, has proven efficacy in reducing risk of vertebral and hip fractures in postmenopausal women with OP. In men and women with a recent hip fracture, ZOL has been shown to reduce the incidence of future clinical fractures. Data also demonstrate an increase in bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteopenia, in men with OP, and in patients at risk for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. The ZOL clinical program has shown this agent to be safe and generally well tolerated. Acute flu-like symptoms may occur following the first infusion of ZOL, but these are generally mild and transient, and decrease in frequency with subsequent infusions. Patients must have adequate renal function (creatinine clearance ≥ 35 ml/min) and be adequately hydrated prior to infusion. With orally administered bisphosphonates, patient compliance and persistence with weekly or monthly dosing are frequently suboptimal. The ability to administer i.v. ZOL once yearly over 15 min for the treatment of OP provides the advantage of guaranteeing medication compliance for the duration of the dosing interval.

Clinical data suggest concomitant therapy with bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone (PTH) may blunt the anabolic effect of PTH; rodent models suggest that infrequently administered bisphosphonates may interact differently. To evaluate the effects of combination therapy with an intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid 5 mg and daily subcutaneous recombinant human (rh)PTH(1-34) (teriparatide) 20 µg versus either agent alone on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers, we conducted a 1-year multicenter, multinational, randomized, partial double-blinded, controlled trial. 412 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (mean age 65 ± 9 years) were randomized to a single infusion of zoledronic acid 5 mg plus daily subcutaneous teriparatide 20 µg (n = 137), zoledronic acid alone (n = 137), or teriparatide alone (n = 138). The primary endpoint was percentage increase in lumbar spine BMD (assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) at 52 weeks versus baseline. Secondary endpoints included change in BMD at the spine at earlier time points and at the total hip, trochanter, and femoral neck at all time points. At week 52, lumbar spine BMD had increased 7.5%, 7.0%, and 4.4% in the combination, teriparatide, and zoledronic acid groups, respectively (p < .001 for combination and teriparatide versus zoledronic acid). In the combination group, spine BMD increased more rapidly than with either agent alone (p < .001 versus both teriparatide and zoledronic acid at 13 and 26 weeks). Combination therapy increased total-hip BMD more than teriparatide alone at all times (all p < .01) and more than zoledronic acid at 13 weeks (p < .05), with final 52-week increments of 2.3%, 1.1%, and 2.2% in the combination, teriparatide, and zoledronic acid groups, respectively. With combination therapy, bone formation (assessed by serum N-terminal propeptide of type I collagen [PINP]) increased from 0 to 4 weeks, declined minimally from 4 to 8 weeks, and then rose throughout the trial, with levels above baseline from 6 to 12 months. Bone resorption (assessed by serum β-C-telopeptide of type I collagen [β-CTX]) was markedly reduced with combination therapy from 0 to 8 weeks (a reduction of similar magnitude to that seen with zoledronic acid alone), followed by a gradual increase after week 8, with levels remaining above baseline for the latter half of the year. Levels for both markers were significantly lower with combination therapy versus teriparatide alone (p < .002). Limitations of the study included its short duration, lack of endpoints beyond DXA-based BMD (e.g., quantitative computed tomography and finite-element modeling for bone strength), lack of teriparatide placebo, and insufficient power for fracture outcomes. We conclude that while teriparatide increases spine BMD more than zoledronic acid and zoledronic acid increases hip BMD more than teriparatide, combination therapy provides the largest, most rapid increments when both spine and hip sites are considered., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Objective: This post-hoc analysis studied the effect of baseline glucocorticoid dose on the 18-month bone mineral density (BMD) response to teriparatide 20 microg/day or alendronate 10 mg/day in 387 patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) from a randomized, double-blind trial., Methods: Lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN), and total hip (TH) BMD were measured at baseline and 18 months. Mean baseline glucocorticoid dose was categorized as low (< or = 5 mg/day), medium (> 5 and < 15 mg/day), or high (> or = 15 mg/day)., Results: Baseline LS, FN, and TH BMD were similar between groups, and between glucocorticoid dose categories within each group. LS BMD increases at the low, medium, and high glucocorticoid doses were 8.1%, 6.6%, and 4.6%, respectively, with teriparatide, and 3.6%, 2.8%, and 2.3% with alendronate. Analyzed as a continuous variable, higher glucocorticoid doses had a negative, but non-significant, effect on the percentage increase in LS BMD in both groups. Glucocorticoid dose did not significantly affect FN or TH BMD increases in either group. Across the 3 glucocorticoid dose categories, the overall LS BMD increases were different for both treatments combined (p = 0.033), but the relative differences between the treatment groups were not different (interaction, p = 0.52)., Conclusion: Teriparatide and alendronate increased LS and hip BMD across a range of baseline glucocorticoid doses. LS BMD increases with teriparatide were greater in the low-dose category than in the high-dose category. Overall LS BMD increases were significantly greater with teriparatide compared with alendronate, which may reflect the respective anabolic and antiresorptive mechanisms of action. Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT00051558.