Search

Osteoporosis in men is an important public health problem with more than 1 million cases in Germany. Although osteoporotic fractures have a much higher mortality in men than in women, male patients are still underdiagnosed and undertreated.Epidemiology of male osteoporosis and current treatment situation, pathophysiological aspects at the hormonal level, risk factors, diagnostic work-up and therapeutic options.Overview of data concerning male osteoporosis, recommendations for diagnostic work-up and presentation of the study situation on pharmaceutical therapies.As risk factors for osteoporosis are present in 50-70 % of male patients, a detailed patient history is necessary for assessment of the risk factors. Radiological imaging of the spine is primarily recommended to identify individuals with prevalent vertebral fractures, as approximately 10 % of males above the age of 50 years have suffered a vertebral fracture. Laboratory testing of relevant parameters helps to rule out other metabolic bone diseases. In Germany, specific medications available for the treatment of male osteoporosis comprise the active vitamin D analogue alfacalcidol, the oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate, the intravenous biphosphonate zoledronic acid, the anti- receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL) antibody denosumab, which can be given as intravenous injection and strontium ranelate, a drug with a complex mode of action. Teriparatide, a recombinant form of the 34 N-terminal amino acid sequence of parathyroid hormone is the only anabolic agent approved for male osteoporosis.Osteoporosis in men is increasingly being recognized as an important public health problem and affected patients need to be adequately diagnosed and treated. Nowadays, a broad spectrum of well-proven therapeutic options with different modes of action allow individual treatment strategies for male osteoporosis patients.

Due to pleiotropic-synergistic actions on bone, muscle, gut, brain and different other non-skeletal tissues, alfacalcidol is an interesting drug for treating osteoporosis. In studies on glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, men have always been treated with calcitriol or this active D-hormone prodrug, but there is no study of male patients only in the literature. The AIM-Trial (Alfacalcidol In Men) is an extension of the control group (n = 158) of our former risedronate study in male osteoporosis (Ringe et al. in Rheumatol Int 29:311-315, 2009). In that study, we treated daily those controls with prevalent vertebral fractures with 1 μg alfacalcidol + 500 mg calcium (group A) and those without prevalent vertebral fractures with 1,000 IU plain vitamin D (Vit. D) + 1,000 mg calcium (group B). Subsequently, we added an additional 56 pairs of patients to these two groups: 28 with and 28 without prevalent vertebral fractures, reaching a total of 214 cases. That means with this design, we are comparing two groups with a different risk at onset. Due to the prevalent vertebral fractures and lower average bone mineral density (BMD) values, there was a higher risk of incident fractures in group A. After 2 years, we found significantly higher increases in lumbar spine BMD (+3.2 vs. +0.8 %) and total hip BMD (+1.9 vs. -0.9 %) in group A and B, respectively. Eighteen incident falls were recorded in the alfacalcidol group and 38 in the group treated with Vit. D (p = 0.041). There were significantly lower rates of patients with new vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in group A than in group B. Back pain was significantly reduced only with alfacalcidol. Concerning the incidence of new non-vertebral fractures, we found that there was a relation to renal function in the two groups. The advantage for alfacalcidol was mainly due to a higher non-vertebral fracture-reducing potency in patients with a creatinine clearance (CrCl) below 60 ml/min (p = 0.0019). There were no serious adverse events (SAE), and the numbers of mild-to-moderate adverse events (AE) were not different between groups. Despite the higher initial fracture risk in the alfacalcidol group, 2-year treatment with this active D-hormone prodrug showed a higher therapeutic efficacy in terms of BMD, falls and fractures. One important advantage of alfacalcidol may be that it is effective even in patients with mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency.

While in other chronic diseases combined treatment regimens are the rule there is a lack of reported experience or study data on combining different specific drugs to treat osteoporosis. Significant differences in the mode of action (MOA) of the substances to be combined may be important for achieving optimal therapeutic results. Recognising that today bisphosphonates are the leading therapy for osteoporosis we suggest that the active D-hormone analog alfacalcidol with its completely different mechanisms of action could be an interesting combination to improve the therapeutic outcome of the pure antiresoptive action of bisphosphonates. Alfacalcidol is activated by the enzyme 25-hydroxylase in the liver for systemic and in osteoblasts for local D-hormone actions. It possesses a unique pattern of pleiotropic effects on, e.g. gut, bone, pararthyroids, muscle and brain. Alfacalcidol is superior to plain vitamin D (cholecalciferol) because the final kidney activation of the latter is regulated by a negative feedback mechanism. In vitamin D replete patients or patients with impaired kidney function no increased D-hormone action at the target tissues can be achieved. Animal studies and several trials in humans with alendronate plus calcitriol or alfacalcidol proved that the combination induced significantly higher increases of bone mineral density (BMD) than the respective mono-therapies. The results of the 2-year AAC-trial from our group indicate that the combination alendronate and alfacalcidol is also superior in terms of falls, fractures and back pain. From the review of the literature and the own new results we conclude that this combined therapeutic regimen is a very promising option for treating established osteoporosis and propose a differentiated use of alfacalcidol alone or the combination with alendronate in different stages and clinical situations of osteoporosis.

A combined therapy with the strongly antiresorptive Alendronate and the pleiotropically acting D-hormone analogue Alfacalcidol may have additive effects on bone quality, falls and fracture risk in established osteoporosis. The aim of this study (Alfacalcidol Alendronate Combined-AAC) was to compare the efficacy and safety of a combined parallel therapy with Alendronate and Alfacalcidol to the treatment with either Alendronate in combination with plain vitamin D or Alfacalcidol alone in patients with established postmenopausal or male osteoporosis. Ninety patients were included as matched triplets to receive randomly either 1 microg Alfacalcidol daily + 500 mg calcium (group A, n = 30) or 70 mg Alendronate weekly + 1,000 mg calcium + 1,000 IU vitamin D daily (group B, n = 30) or 1 microg Alfacalcidol daily + 70 mg Alendronate weekly + 500 mg calcium daily (group C, n = 30). Patients were recruited in one centre and were followed up for 24 months. Analysis was intention-to-treat and the primary outcome was lumbar spine and total hip bone mineral density (measured observer blind). BMD was measured at the lumbar spine and at the proximal femur with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (LUNAR Prodigy, GE, USA) at the beginning and after 12 and 24 months. During the 2-year-study we observed descriptively significant increases at the lumbar spine of 3.0% in group A compared to baseline, of 5.4% in group B and of 9.6% in group C, respectively. The superiority of the Alendronate + Alfacalcidol treatment group over Alfacalcidol alone and over Alendronate + vitamin D was of more than large rele-vance (both tests: MW0.71; CI-LB0.64; P0.001). We also observed median increases of the BMD at the total hip of 1.5% in group A, of 2.4% in group B and of 3.8% in group C, respectively. The superiority of group C over group A and over group B again was relevant and statistically significant in a descriptive sense. After 2 years there was a tendency towards higher rates of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in group A and B as compared to C. Taking both fracture types together we observed 9, 10 and 2 "osteoporotic fractures" in groups A, B and C, respectively. The comparison of group C with pooled groups A and B and with each single group gave a relevantly lower fracture rate for the combination of Alendronate and Alfacalcidol. Furthermore a lower rate of falls was observed for the combination Alendronate plus Alfacalcidol versus Alendronate + vitamin D, but not versus Alfacalcidol alone. We found 80% of the patients in the Alendronate + Alfacalcidol group free from back pain at month 24, compared to 30% in the Alendronate + vitamin D and 43% in the Alfacalcidol monotherapy group. The superiority is relevant (both tests: MW0.64; CI-LB0.56; P0.003). Pain decrease also occurred more rapidly in the Alendronate + Alfacalcidol group than in the other groups. In general side effects in all groups were mild, and only four cases of moderate hypercalcuria in group A and one in group C were reported, but no case of hypercalcemia was documented. In conclusion, the combination therapy with Alendronate and Alfacalcidol exhibited superiority in terms of BMD, overall fractures, rate of falls and back pain over either Alendronate in combination with plain vitamin D or Alfacalcidol alone. The overall safety profiles of the three treatment regimens were found to be not different in this study.

Osteoporosis accounts for about 3 % of total European health-care spending. The low proportion of costs for the pharmacological prevention of osteoporotic fracture means that it is highly cost saving, especially in patient with severe osteoporosis or patients who cannot take certain osteoporosis medications due to issues of contraindications or tolerability. Following recent regulatory changes, strontium ranelate is now indicated in patients with severe osteoporosis for whom treatment with other osteoporosis treatments is not possible, and without contraindications including uncontrolled hypertension, established, current or past history of ischaemic heart disease, peripheral arterial disease, and/or cerebrovascular disease. We review here today's evidence for the safety and efficacy of strontium ranelate. The efficacy of strontium ranelate in patients complying with the new prescribing information (i.e. severe osteoporosis without contraindications) has been explored in a multivariate analysis of clinical trial data, which concluded that the antifracture efficacy of strontium ranelate is maintained in patients with severe osteoporosis without contraindications and also demonstrated how the new target population mitigates risk. Strontium ranelate is therefore an important alternative in today's management of osteoporosis, with a positive benefit-risk balance, provided that the revised indication and contraindications are followed and cardiovascular risk is monitored. The bone community should be reassured that there remain viable alternatives in patients in whom treatment with other agents is not possible and protection against the debilitating effects of fracture is still feasible in patients with severe osteoporosis.

Our trial was a 3-year, open-label, prospective, comparative, clinical study comparing the effects of oral alendronate (ALN), 10 mg daily, and alfacalcidol (AC), 1 microg daily, on bone mineral density (BMD), fracture events, height, back pain, safety and tolerability in 134 men with established primary osteoporosis. All men received 500 mg calcium daily. BMD was measured at the lumbar spine and femoral neck using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Spine radiographs were obtained at baseline and every 12 months thereafter, and were evaluated by a radiologist blinded to treatment assignment. At 3 years, AC-treated patients showed a significant mean increase of 3.5% in lumbar spine BMD, compared with a mean increase of 11.5% in men receiving ALN ( p0.0001 between groups). The corresponding increases in femoral neck BMD were 2.3% and 5.8% for the AC and ALN groups, respectively ( p=0.0015 between groups). Over 3 years, new vertebral fractures occurred in 24.2% of the AC-treated patients and in 10.3% of the ALN-treated patients ( p=0.040). ALN-treated patients also had a significantly lower height loss. There were no between-group differences regarding nonvertebral fractures or changes in back pain. Both therapies were well tolerated, with a compliance rate90%. We conclude that although AC has significant effects on BMD, ALN has greater effects on BMD and fracture efficacy.

Despite its well-known benefits, chronic corticosteroid therapy causes osteoporotic fractures in approximately 30-50% of patients treated. To prevent the occurrence of these fractures, treatment with oral bisphosphonates is recommended. However, current oral bisphosphonates, which are given either daily or weekly, are associated with stringent, inconvenient dosing guidelines. Less frequent dosing may provide greater acceptability. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of ibandronate, a highly potent nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate, when given by intravenous (i.v.) injection every 3 months in men and women with established corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIO; lumbar spine [L2-L4] bone mineral density [BMD] T-scoreor =-2.5). A total of 115 participants were assigned to receive daily calcium supplements (500 mg) plus either ibandronate (2 mg) injections every 3 months or daily oral alfacalcidol (1 microg), for 3 years. Intermittent i.v. ibandronate injections produced significantly greater increases in mean BMD at the lumbar spine (13.3% versus 2.6%, respectively; p0.001), and femoral neck (5.2% versus 1.9%, respectively; p0.001) versus daily oral alfacalcidol, after 3 years, relative to baseline. This study was not statistically powered to show a difference between the groups with respect to fracture incidence. Nevertheless, after 36 months, the frequency of patients with new vertebral fractures was significantly lower in the patients receiving ibandronate relative to those taking alfacalcidol (8.6% versus 22.8%, respectively; p=0.043). This is the first time that significant vertebral fracture reduction has been demonstrated with an i.v. bisphosphonate in CIO. Patients treated with i.v. ibandronate injections also experienced less back pain (p0.001) and less height loss (p=0.001) than those receiving oral alfacalcidol. Both regimens were well tolerated. In conclusion, intermittent i.v. ibandronate injections are efficacious, well-tolerated, and convenient, and promise to offer physicians an important therapeutic advance in the management of osteoporosis.

Summary: This consensus article reviews the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in geriatric populations. Specifically, it reviews the risk assessment and intervention thresholds, the impact of nutritional deficiencies, fall prevention strategies, pharmacological treatments and their safety considerations, the risks of sub-optimal treatment adherence and strategies for its improvement. Introduction: This consensus article reviews the therapeutic strategies and management options for the treatment of osteoporosis of the oldest old. This vulnerable segment (persons over 80years of age) stands to gain substantially from effective anti-osteoporosis treatment, but the under-prescription of these treatments is frequent. Methods: This report is the result of an ESCEO (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis) expert working group, which explores some of the reasons for this and presents the arguments to counter these beliefs. The risk assessment of older individuals is briefly reviewed along with the differences between some intervention guidelines. The current evidence on the impact of nutritional deficiencies (i.e. calcium, protein and vitamin D) is presented, as are strategies to prevent falls. One possible reason for the under-prescription of pharmacological treatments for osteoporosis in the oldest old is the perception that anti-fracture efficacy requires long-term treatment. However, a review of the data shows convincing anti-fracture efficacy already by 12months. Results: The safety profiles of these pharmacological agents are generally satisfactory in this patient segment provided a few precautions are followed. Conclusion: These patients should be considered for particular consultation/follow-up procedures in the effort to convince on the benefits of treatment and to allay fears of adverse drug reactions, since poor adherence is a major problem for the success of a strategy for osteoporosis and limits cost-effectiveness.

Vitamin D/calcium substitution is generally regarded as an effective first step treatment for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of the active vitamin D metabolite alfacalcidol (1alpha) compared with the native vitamin D(3) in patients with established GIOP with or without vertebral fractures. Patients on long-term corticoid therapy were given either 1 microg alfacalcidol plus 500 mg calcium per day (group A, n = 43) or 1000 IU vitamin D(3) plus 500 mg calcium (group B, n = 42). The two groups were alike in age range, sex ratio, percentages of underlying diseases, average initial bone density values (lumbar spine: mean T-score -3.28 and -3.25, respectively), and rates of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. During the 3-year study we found a small but significant increase of lumbar spine density in group 1alpha (+2.0%, P0.0001) and no significant changes at the femoral neck. In the D(3) group, there were no significant changes at both sites. At the end of the study, 12 new vertebral fractures had occurred in 10 patients of the group 1alpha and 21 in 17 patients of the D(3) group. In accordance with the observed fracture rates, the alfacalcidol group showed a significant decrease in back pain (P0.0001) whereas no change was seen in the vitamin D group. We conclude that with the doses used in this trial, alfacalcidol is superior to vitamin D in the treatment of established GIOP.

Vitamin D regulates the calcium-phosphate metabolism and thereby plays an important role for the integrity and functioning of bone, muscle and nerves. Studies have shown furthermore an influence on certain types of cancer, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Vitamin D is mainly produced by the skin. During exposure to sunlightthe precursor7-dehydrocholesterol is transformed to colecalciferol (vitamin D3). Smaller amounts are supplied by nutrition. In our latitude vitamin D synthesis takes only place during summertime. The vitamin stored in fat tissue in generally is not sufficient for the whole winter period and accordingly insufficiency is very frequent. In a cross-sectional study all over Germany (DeViD, 2007) only about 8% of the population was vitamin D sufficient in spring time.Two prospective studies (2008) proved a correlation between vitamin D supply and overall mortality. An amelioration of vitamin D supply can be achieved either by increasing sun exposure or daily oral intake of 800-2000 IU (=20-50 microg) colecalciferol.

The therapeutic strategy for the reduction of fracture risk in osteoporosis should not only aim to increase bone strength, but should also improve muscle function and reduce falls without increasing the risk of significant side effects. Since 2008 a combination therapy of the antiresorptive active bisphosphonatealendronate and the pleiotropic active D-hormone-prodrug alfacalcidol is licensed in Germanyfor treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis (Tevabone).In the review the results of numerous preclinical and clinical studies are reported, showing the efficacy of the combination of alendronate plus alfacalcidol.In preclinical trials with ovariectomized rats the combination has shown a significantly better effect on increased bone turnover in comparison with bisphosphonate monotherapy. Presumably the "oversuppression" of bone remodeling and the resulting risk of reduced microfracture healing, which is known to occur after long-term therapy with bisphosphonates, will be reduced by the combination. Clinical studies have shown better efficacy of the combination in the increase of bone density and reduction of fracture rate (vertebral and non-vertebral fractures). Less falls were reported compared to alendronate plus genuine vitamin D. The reduction of increased parathormone levels by the alendronate plus alfacalcidol combination compared to alendronate alone was proven to increase the responder rate of the alendronate therapy. The potential risks of alendronate-induced hypocalcemia as well as alfacalcidol-induced hypercalcemia or hypercalcuria are reduced due to the contrasting mode of action of both compounds.Treatment with the alendronate plus alfacalcidol combination meets the demands of an optimized therapy for osteoporosis.With the especially developed, self-explanatory combination package better compliance and less dispensing mistakes can be expected.

Almost 50 % of osteoporosis (OP) patients discontinue bisphosphonate (BP) therapy within 1-2 years after the start of their treatment. Denosumab's longer dosing interval with its administration every 6 months (Q6M) as a subcutaneous (sc) injection might result in a better real-life treatment adherence and persistence than weekly or monthly oral BP treatment regimen. The objectives of this open, investigator-initiated, prospective, observational, single-center study were to evaluate adherence with denosumab 60 mg sc every 6 months (Q6M) (Prolia(®)) injections in osteoporotic patients in a routine clinical care setting and to describe whether positive feedback to OP patients based on measured bone mineral density (BMD) increases and good safety profile have an impact on patients' real-life adherence. Results indicate that the rarity of adverse events and reduced dosage frequency together with the consistency of rapid and highly significant increases in BMD already after 6 months of denosumab therapy used as a positive reinforcement during doctor-patient interactions had a significant, positive impact on osteoporotic patient's adherence to continue with the 6-monthly sc denosumab injections.

This study aims to estimate bisphosphonate effectiveness by comparing fracture incidence over time on therapy in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO). From this observational study, alendronate and risedronate decreased clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures over time. The effectiveness of each bisphosphonate is consistent with their efficacies demonstrated on surrogate markers in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study aims to estimate bisphosphonate effectiveness by comparing fracture incidence over time on therapy with fracture incidence during a short period after starting a therapy. The study population was a subgroup of a larger cohort study comprising two cohorts of women aged ≥65 years, prescribed with alendronate or risedronate. Within the two study cohorts, 11,007 women were identified as having received glucocorticoids. Within each cohort, the baseline incidence of clinical fractures at nonvertebral and vertebral sites was defined by the initial 3-month period after starting therapy. Relative to these baseline data, we then compared the fracture incidence during the subsequent 12 months on therapy. The baseline incidence of clinical nonvertebral and vertebral fractures was similar in the alendronate cohort (5.22 and 5.79/100 person-years, respectively) and in the risedronate cohort (5.51 and 5.68/100 person-years, respectively). Relative to the baseline incidence, fracture incidence was significantly lower in the subsequent 12 months in both cohorts of alendronate (33 % lower at nonvertebral sites and 59 % at vertebral sites) and risedronate (28 % lower at nonvertebral sites and 54 % at vertebral sites). From this observational study not designed to compare drugs, both alendronate and risedronate decreased clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures over time. The reductions observed in fracture incidence, within each cohort, suggest that the effectiveness of each bisphosphonate in clinical practice is consistent with their efficacies demonstrated on surrogate markers in randomized controlled trials.

Osteoporosis is listed by the WHO among the ten most frequent and socio-economically important, chronic diseases of mankind. The term osteoporosis however comprises a number of different pathophysiological conditions and clinical situations of weakened bones with increased risk of fragility fractures. A modern anti-osteoporotic drug should provide qualified study results proving therapeutic efficacy over this broad range of daily clinical appearances of osteoporosis. The decision for treatment in the individual patients depends no longer only on bone mineral density. Today, the major criterion for decision making is the prospective 10-year risk for fractures. Since this risk is calculated on the basis of age, sex, bone mineral density, prevalent fractures, and a number of other contributing risk factors (Kanis et al., Osteoporos Int 12:989-995, 2001; Kanis et al., Osteoporos Int 19:385-397, 2008), it seems to be of interest to have a look whether the fracture-reducing potency of a drug is influenced by these risk factors. The purpose of this review is to analyze whether the fracture-reducing efficacy of strontium ranelate in patients with osteoporosis can be achieved independently of sex, etiology of osteoporosis, and the major diagnostically relevant risk factors.

It has been investigated whether calcium- and verapamil-dependent sensitivities of carotis baroreceptors also exist in man. To answer this question, we pre- and postoperatively measured changes in heart rate during carotid sinus stimulation before and after intravenous administration of 5 mg verapamil in 23 patients with primary hyperparathyroidism. Findings during hypercalcemia were as expected: a more pronounced reduction of heart rate at comparatively low calcium levels. During normocalcemia, we found an opposite effect: a more pronounced reduction at relatively high calcium levels, which was statistically significant. This fact could be explained according to our interpretation. In previous reports, local effects on baroreceptors were examined, whereas we measured the combined effect of several calcium actions. As expected, verapamil attenuated the decrease in heart rate which, however, was not statistically significant.

There are no general accepted strategies for combined drug treatments in osteoporosis, while in other important chronic diseases combinations of different medications are used as a rule to improve therapeutic results and reduce the risk of adverse events. It is suggested that the success of combined treatments is related to the different modes of action of the respective single therapies. On the other hand it was shown that a strong antiresorptive bisphosphonate is able to blunt at least in part the effects of anabolic parathyroid hormone peptides Calcitriol, the active vitamin D-hormone and its prodrug alfacalcidol lead to pleiotropic effects on bone remodelling (antiresorptive, anabolic and enhancing mineralization) and in addition to effects on other important target tissues (e.g. gut, parathyroid glands, muscle). With active D-analogs significant improvements in the therapeutic outcome of osteoporosis can be achieved by the resulting improvements of bone quality, calcium absorption and risk reduction of falling. The same beneficial effects cannot be achieved with plain vitamin D due to feedback controlled, limited renal activation or insufficient conversion in the elderly with impairment of renal function. Accordingly alfacalcidol, approved as a treatment for different forms of osteoporosis, is besides adoption as a mono-therapy an interesting candidate for combined therapies. There are interesting preclinical trials and clinical pilote studies in the literature proving that a parallel therapy with selectively anti-osteoclastic bisphophonates and pleiotropically acting D-analogs is able to optimize therapeutic results in osteoporosis. In the AAC-Trial (Alfacalcidol-Alendronate-Combined) we studied 90 patients with established osteoporosis (57 women, 33 men) over two years after alternate allocation to three treatment arms (alfacalcidol plus calcium, alendronate plus plain vitamin D and Ca, and alendronate plus alfacalcidol and Ca). During the 2-year-study we observed the significantly highest lumbar spine and hip BMD increases in the combined treatment group (p < 0.001). The number of patients with new vertebral and non-vertebral fractures after 2 years was 9 with alfacalcidol alone, 10 with alfacalcidol and plain vitamin D and 2 in the group receiving alendronate plus alfacalidol (p < 0.02). Furthermore there was a lower rate of falls and an earlier reduction in back pain in the patients treated with the active combination. This trial confirms the demonstrated highly significant advantages of this combined treatment regimen used in the pilote studies. Especially in patients with severe osteoporosis this interesting combination of two substances with complete different mechanisms of action should be taken into consideration.

Several disorders of increased bone turnover and low bone mineral density (BMD) are associated with severe pain that is refractory to treatment with conventional and even opioid analgesics. Because of their ability to effectively improve the underlying pathogenesis of these disorders (i.e., reduce bone resorption and increase BMD), bisphosphonates are considered part of the palliative care of malignant bone-related pain and also appear to have some analgesic efficacy in other, non-malignant conditions. Ibandronate, a potent, nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate that can be given orally and intravenously, has demonstrated robust effects in relieving the pain associated with several malignant disorders. Unlike other available intravenous (i.v.) bisphosphonates, i.v. ibandronate is not associated with renal side effects, even at high doses such as 6 mg every 3 weeks. In addition, oral ibandronate (50 mg daily) is currently the only oral bisphosphonate proven to reduce and maintain bone pain scores below baseline for 2 years in patients with metastatic bone disease. Lower dose, less intense dosing regimens of ibandronate relieve bone pain in non-malignant conditions: i.v. ibandronate (2 mg every 3 months with or without an initial 4 mg injection) provides pain relief for patients with corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis, localised transient osteoporosis (bone marrow oedema) and sternocostoclavicular hyperostosis. Both oral and i.v. ibandronate are well tolerated. In conclusion, ibandronate offers an effective and convenient choice for the relief of bone pain in a wide variety of underlying bone conditions.

Localized transient osteoporosis (LTO; bone marrow edema syndrome) is a rare disorder of generally unknown etiology that is characterized by acute onset of disabling bone pain. Treatment options are currently limited and largely ineffective. The locally increased bone turnover and low bone mineral density (BMD) typical of LTO indicate a potential role for bisphosphonate therapy. Ibandronate, a potent nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate, has proven efficacy in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis and corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis when administered as a convenient intermittent intravenous (i.v.) injection with a between-dose interval of 2 or 3 months. In a study of 12 patients with LTO, ibandronate was administered as an initial 4-mg i.v. dose with a second, optional injection of 2 mg at 3 months. Daily calcium and vitamin D supplements were provided. Pain was measured at baseline and at 1, 2, 3, and 6 months using a visual analog scale (VAS) of 1-10, and BMD was measured at baseline and 6 months. I.v. ibandronate provided rapid and substantial pain relief. The mean (SD) VAS score decreased from 8.4 (1.3) at baseline to 0.5 (0.7) at 6 months, at which time seven patients had achieved complete pain relief. At 6 months, mean lumbar spine BMD had increased by 4.0% (range -0.8 to 7.7%) in the overall population. I.v. ibandronate injection affords advantages over currently available oral and i.v. bisphosphonates and thus offers a promising therapeutic advance in the treatment of LTO.

The leading subjective symptom of osteoporosis is severe or intolerable back pain. Resulting partial or complete immobilization increases the risk of muscular atrophy and bone loss, and thus the risk of fractures. Pain management in osteoporotic patients is either not applied at all, or only inadequately. When pain and immobility are pronounced, primary treatment with opioids and individually adapted co-analgesics is called for. Initial experience with opioid therapy in osteoporosis reveals rapid amelioration and improved mobility. Concern about addiction, development of tolerance and problems on discontinuation are unjustified.

Supplementation therapy with plain vitamin D plus calcium is in general regarded as effective prevention or first-step treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). The aim of our study was to compare the therapeutic efficacy of the D-hormone analog alfacalcidol with plain vitamin D in patients with established GIOP with or without vertebral fractures. Patients on long-term glucocorticoid (GC) therapy were included as matched pairs to receive randomly either 1 microg alfacalcidol plus 500 mg calcium per day (group A, n=103) or 1000 IU vitamin D3 plus 500 mg calcium (group B, n=101). The two groups were well matched in terms of mean age, sex ratio, mean height and weight, daily dosage, and duration of GC therapy, and the percentages of the three underlying diseases included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, rheumatoid arthritis, and polymyalgia rheumatica. The baseline mean bone mineral density (BMD) values at the lumbar spine for the two groups were -3.26 (alfacalcidol) and -3.25 (vitamin D(3)) and, at the femoral neck, -2.81 and -2.84, respectively (T scores). Rates of prevalent vertebral and nonvertebral fractures did not differ between groups. During the 3-year study, we observed a median percentage increase of BMD at the lumbar spine of 2.4% in group A and a loss of 0.8% in group B ( P0.0001). There also was a larger median increase at the femoral neck in group A (1.2%) than in group B (0.8%) ( P0.006). The 3-year rates of patients with at least one new vertebral fracture were 9.7% among those assigned to the alfacalcidol group and 24.8% in the vitamin D group (risk reduction 0.61, 95% CI 0.24-0.81, P=0.005). The 3-year rates of patients with at least one new nonvertebral fracture were 15% in the alfacalcidol group and 25% in the vitamin D group (risk reduction 0.41, 95% CI 0.06-0.68, P=0.081). The 3-year rates of patients with at least one new fracture of any kind were 19.4% among those treated with alfacalcidol and 40.65% with vitamin D (risk reduction 0.52, 95% CI 0.25-0.71, P=0.001). In accordance with the observed fracture rates, the alfacalcidol group showed a substantially larger decrease in back pain than the plain vitamin D group ( P0.0001). Generally, side effects in both groups were mild, and only three patients in the alfacalcidol group and two in the vitamin D group had moderate hypercalcemia. We conclude that alfacalcidol plus calcium is highly superior to plain vitamin D3 plus calcium in the treatment of established GIOP.

Alendronate has been approved as a first antiresorptive drug for treatment of osteoporosis in men. Except for fluoride, in some countries so far there has been no approved anabolic substance for the treatment of male osteoporosis. From small studies in men and male patients included in studies on postmenopausal osteoporosis there is sufficient evidence that fluoride has the same osteoblast-stimulating potency in men and women. In our own study on 64 men with idiopathic osteoporosis without prevalent fractures, a low-dose intermittent fluoride regimen (15 mg fluoride ions 3 months on, 1 month off) resulted in an average gain of lumbar spine BMD of 3% per year and a lower rate of incident fractures as compared with patients treated with calcium only. A combination of fluoride with an antiresorptive drug may improve the therapeutic results in terms of pattern of biochemical marker response and gain in BMD. This was shown for postemopausal osteoporosis in several studies using fluoride and hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Encouraged by a Dutch study using etidronate/fluoride in corticoid-induced osteoporosis, we performed a pilot study in 33 men with severe established primary osteoporosis giving cyclically etidronate for 14 days followed by fluoride plus calcium/vitamin D for 76 days. This combined regimen resulted in significantly higher increases of BMD than fluoride or etidronate alone. In an ongoing trial we are studying a continuous, combined treatment of alendronate and fluoride plus calcium/vitamin D in established idiopathic osteoporosis in men. The results of a preliminary evaluation look very promising. A large study with a bisphosphonate plus fluoride, taking fractures as the primary endpoint and bone biopsies to assess safety, would be very valuable.

Vitamin D deficiency in immigrant adults eventually leads to an osteomalacia syndrome with its characteristic clinical features of bone pain, muscle weakness and difficulty in walking (waddling gait).We report on 2 female immigrants from Ethiopia and Eritrea who developed the typical clinical signs of osteomalacia such as generalized bone pain and muscle weakness. Also in osteomalacia there is a significant decrease in bone density but more relevant for diagnosis are low serum levels of 25-OH-vitamin D and as radiological features pseudofractures (Looser's zones). Bone biopsy definitely proves the diagnosis. Simple treatment with vitamin D and calcium is highly effective.Since there is an increasing number of immigrants into northern European countries osteomalacia should always be taken into consideration if such patients develop skeletal pain syndrome and muscle weakness.

Osteoporotic fractures occur frequently also in men. Epidemiologic data from Germany indicate that more than 900,000 men are affected by osteoporotic fractures. Diagnosis and therapy of male osteoporosis are hampered by a lack of clinical studies.Risk factor analysis, conventional spine X-rays, bone densitometry and a limited number of serum and urine analyses contribute to the diagnosis of osteoporosis and the assessment of future fracture risk. Bone densitometry at the femoral neck is superior to measurements at the lumbar spine because of the high prevalence of degenerative changes at the lumbar spine in elderly men. Major risk factors for osteoporosis are hypogonadism, glucocorticoid therapy, hypercalciuria, gastrointestinal disease, and high alcohol consumption. In individual cases, bone histology or additional biochemical studies are needed to establish the cause of osteoporosis.Calcium and vitamin D deficits should be substituted both in prevention and treatment of male osteoporosis. Testosterone replacement therapy is effective in hypogonadism. In primary osteoporosis and in corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis, bisphosphonates (cyclical etidronate, alendronate) and fluorides are therapeutic options.Important principles in the care of men with osteoporosis are the transfer of knowledge established for postmenopausal osteoporosis and the rigorous search for secondary osteoporosis aiming at treatment of the underlying cause. Large prospective randomized trials aiming at the reduction of fracture rate in male osteoporosis are missing. They are urgently needed.

Calcium/vitamin D supplementation is generally used as a first step treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). The aim of this trial was to compare the efficacy of the D-hormone alfacalcidol with plain vitamin D in patients with established GIOP with or without vertebral fractures. Patients on long-term glucocorticoid-therapy were treated either with 1 microgram alfacalcidol plus 5000 mg calcium (group A: n = 43) or with 1000 IU vitamin D plus 500 mg calcium (group B: n = 42). The two groups were not different in respect to initial characteristics such as age, sex distribution, concomittant diseases, bone mineral density (mean T-score values at lumbar spine and femoral neck: -3.29 and -3.25 resp.), and in the number of prevalent vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. During the 3 years of treatment we found a significant increase in lumbar spine density in group A (+2.0%, p0.0001), while no significant changes could be documented in group B at both measuring sites. After 3 years 12 new vertebral fractures had occurred in 10 patients of group A and 21 in 17 patients in group B (ns). Correspondingly we registered a significant decrease of back pain only in group A (p0.0001). We conclude that alfacalcidol treatment in superior to plain vitamin D in GIOP.

Recent experience from different groups suggests that low fluoride doses resulting in moderate increases in bone mineral density (BMD) may be advantageous in terms of fracture-reducing potency. In a randomized prospective 3-year study we examined the therapeutic efficacy of different dosages of monofluorophosphate (MFP) plus calcium in comparison with calcium alone in 134 women with established postmenopausal osteoporosis (mean age 64.0 years, average vertebral fractures per patient 3.6). Group A received 1000 mg calcium/day and a low-dose intermittent MFP regimen (3 months on, 1 month off) corresponding to an average daily fluoride ion dose of 11.2 mg. Group B received 1000 mg calcium/day plus continuous MFP corresponding to 20 mg fluoride ions per day. Group C was treated with 1000 mg calcium alone throughout the study period. Bone density was measured with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at L2-4 and three proximal femur areas and with single photon absorptiometry at two radius sites. New vertebral fractures were identified from annual lateral radiographs of the spine. A significant reduction in subjective complaints as measured by a combined pain-mobility score (CPMS) was found in both fluoride groups in comparison with the calcium monotherapy group. Group A showed increases in BMD at all six measuring sites, reaching +12.6% at the spine after 3 years. In group B we found significant increases at the spine, Ward's triangle and distal radius, but slight decreases at the femoral neck and radius shaft. For the spine the average change amounted to +19.5% after 3 years. In group C losses of BMD were observed at all six sites, with an average loss of 1.6% for the spine at the end of the study. The incidence of new vertebral fractures per 100 patient-years was 8.6, 17.0 and 31.6 in groups A, B and C, respectively. In conclusion, both calcium-MFP regimens resulted in significantly lower vertebral fracture rates than calcium monotherapy. However, the low intermittent MFP regimen, leading to a mean annual increase in spinal BMD of only 4.2%, showed a clear trend to greater effectiveness in reducing vertebral fracture than the higher fluoride dosage that was followed by an average spinal BMD increase of 6.5% per year. Furthermore the rate of fluoride-specific side effects (lower-extremity pain syndrome) was 50% lower in patients receiving the lower fluoride dosage.

The prevalence of osteoporosis in men has been underestimated in the past. Vertebral fractures were found in about 10% in men of age 50 and over 20 to 30% of all hip fractures in advanced age occur in men. Lower life expectancy of men but also differences in bone geometry and remodeling contribute to the lower rate of fractures in comparison to the female gender. In men with suspected osteoporosis a thorough history, physical and clinical examination is mandatory to exclude other localized or generalized osteopathies and to differentiate in primary and secondary osteoporosis. Only some small studies have been published so far on treatment of osteoporosis in men, i.e. therapeutic decisions are mainly based on existing results in postmenopausal osteoporosis. The basis of treatment is calcium and vitamin D supplementation and individually adapted recommendations on life style and risk factor avoidance. In established osteoporosis in adequate analgesic therapy is very important. In cases with secondary osteoporosis, if possible, etiological therapy should be started. Antiresorptive therapy (e.g. calcitonin, bisphosphonates) or osteoanabolic therapy (e.g. fluoride) can later be added, while in idiopathic osteoporosis this is the first option. According to the existing experiences there is in general a good chance to ameliorate the condition in men. There is however an urgent need for further data on therapy of osteoporosis in men.

There are currently no trial-based recommendations for the treatment of idiopathic osteoporosis in men. A prospective, controlled, randomized 3-year study was conducted to evaluate the effects of intermittent, low-dose fluoride combined with continuous calcium supplementation on bone mass and future fracture events in men with this disease. Sixty-four men with idiopathic osteoporosis (mean age 53 years; mean T-score at L2-4, -2.75) and no previous vertebral fractures were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. Group A received intermittent (3 months on, 1 month off) treatment with monofluorophosphate 114 mg/day (i.e. 15 mg fluoride ions) plus continuous calcium supplementation (950-1000 mg/day). Group B received continuous calcium (1000 mg/day) alone. Bone mineral density was measured at the lumbar spine, hip and radius at 6-months intervals; thoracic and lumbar spine radiographs were obtained every 12 months. In group A bone density increased at all sites (by between +1.2% and +8.8%), while group B showed moderate decreases (by between -1.4% and -5.2%). After 36 months, bone densities at all sites in group A were significantly higher than those of group B. Three patients (10%) in group A suffered a total of 4 vertebral fractures versus 12 patients (40%) with 17 fractures in group B (p = 0.008). Non-vertebral fractures occurred in 3 patients in group A versus 11 in group B, though this difference was not significant. Back pain was significantly reduced in group A and unchanged in group B (after 3 years p = 0.0003). All side-effects were mild and transient. Early treatment of idiopathic osteoporosis in the male using the fluoride-calcium regimen we tested can improve cancellous and cortical bone density, reduce the incidence of vertebral fractures and attenuate back pain.

A 67-year-old woman has a 20-year history of recurrent abdominal pain, diarrhea and diffuse bone pain. During the course of numerous hospitalisations the diagnoses "iron deficiency anemia", "iron absorption disorder", "osteoporosis" and "hyperparathyroidism" had been made. Despite treatment with vitamin D3, calcium, fluorides and iron, the patient's condition deteriorated to such a degree that she became in need of constant care. After 20 years of illness, nontropical sprue (celiac disease) with secondary intestinal osteopathy was identified. High-dose parenteral treatment with vitamin D3, oral calcium supplementation and a gluten-free diet resulted in an improvement of the patient's condition within three months, and the patient can now largely look after herself again.

Fluoride salts are the currently most effective stimulators of the osteoblasts. Since the therapeutic effect depends on the concentration of fluoride ions achieved in the plasma, differences in fluoride content and bioavailability must be taken into account when using sodium fluoride or sodium monofluorophosphate. The optimal therapeutic range is assumed to be 10 to 20 mg bioavailable fluoride ions daily. The classical indication for fluoride is manifest osteoporosis in the elderly woman with fractures of the vertebrae. Available data, however, suggest that its early use in both men and women, as also in corticoid-induced osteoporosis, is justified. Under long-term treatment with fluoride, the bone mass of the vertebrae increases dose-dependently and linearly. At very high doses of fluoride, the quality of the newly formed bone-which is often excessive is presumably initially inadequate. A moderate increase in bony substance of about 4 to 6% a year is the therapeutic objective. Regular physical exercise and gymnastics, together with requirement-related supplementation with calcium and vitamin D ensures an improvement in the mechanical stability of the bone, and thus the desired reduction in the fracture risk.

Paget's disease is a localized mono- or polyostotic progressive bone disease of possibly viral etiology characterized by increased bone remodeling, leading to pain, fractures, and skeletal deformities with the risk of osseous, articular and neurological complications. Appropriate treatment should be given to any patient with symptoms and any patient with a pagetic lesion in a high risk location, even if the patient is asymptomatic. First choice of treatment are now potent new bisphosphonates of second generation. These substances are captured in pagetic bone at high concentrations giving a continuing therapeutic effect after application has ceased. Monitoring the course of biochemical markers of bone turnover allows individual decisions about duration and frequency of treatment courses.

Juxtaarticular osteoporosis is a typical x-ray symptom of rheumatoid arthritis and is an early radiological criterion of the disease before destructive changes of joints can be seen. A systemic osteoporosis, independent from corticoid treatment, will develop significantly later. Nevertheless both conditions have some pathogenetic mechanisms in common. The risk of generalized osteoporosis in rheumatoid arthritis correlates with the degree of inflammatory activity. Different cytokines originating from the affected joints can be measured in plasma at increased levels and augment osteoclastic activity in bone tissue. During the early phase of disease the best prevention of osteoporosis is therefore adequate suppression of inflammation. Taking into account these mechanisms, corticoid treatment may be osteoprotective. Clinical manifestation of systemic osteoporosis in rheumatic patients depends on bone mass at onset of disease, on the activity of inflammation, and on additional negative effects on bone mass due to corticoids and immobility.

Low peak bone mass and increased bone loss within the process of bone remodelling are the most important determinants for the manifestation of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Both are influenced during lifetime by a large number of risk factors additively leading to a critical low bone mass. Loss of bone substance and deterioration of architecture of bone tissue lead to an increased fragility of the skeleton. In this complex interactions menopausal decrease of endogenous estrogen secretion is of special importance. Decrease of estrogen induces by effects on calcitropic hormones and different local growth factors a high bone turnover with a high rate of bone loss. The resulting slight increase of serum calcium and the consequent decrease in the secretion of parathyroid hormones and activation of vitamin D in the kidneys lead to a decreased intestinal calcium absorption. In peri- and early postmenopausal women there is a large range of different degrees of bone turnover. It is unclear however, whether there are really two distinct groups of so-called rapid and slow bone losers. It remains to clarify which intrinsic mechanisms besides the risk factors are responsible for the individually different answer of calcium and bone metabolism to estrogen deficiency, which is the same in every women.