Search

The occurrence of multiple vertebral fractures after discontinuation of denosumab in the treatment of osteoporosis has reopened the debate on the optimal treatment duration and drug holidays.In principle, there is a difference in this regard between the discontinuation of medications such as bisphosphonates and substances without bone retention such as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), denosumab or teriparatide. Even after the end of application bisphosphonates have a very long half-life in the bones. After cessation of drug intake there is a slow, slight increase of bone turnover markers. Even after cessation of the SERM raloxifene, a decline in bone density can be observed, as with the termination of teriparatide. In contrast to these osteoporosis medications, after cessation of denosumab, a steep and rapid increase in markers of bone resorption above baseline levels ("rebound") and a reduction in bone mineral density to initial values can be observed.Osteoporosis is a disease that carries an increased risk of fracture, which is reduced for the duration of osteoporosis treatment. In certain situations, the fracture risk is only temporarily raised. In these situations, cessation of the osteoporosis treatment is possible. Beyond these special clinical situations, however, osteoporosis needs to be addressed as a chronic disease with a permanently increased fracture risk and the indication for therapy should be evaluated according to the extent of the risk of fracture.What happens after discontinuation of anti-osteoporosis drugs? The various effects on bone turnover markers, bone mineral density and fracture incidence of the individual drug groups are presented in detail, as are the resulting recommendations of the task forces of the American Society of Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) and the European Calcified Tissue Society (ECTS).

Background: 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., Objective: Epidemiology of male osteoporosis and current treatment situation, pathophysiological aspects at the hormonal level, risk factors, diagnostic work-up and therapeutic options., Material and Methods: Overview of data concerning male osteoporosis, recommendations for diagnostic work-up and presentation of the study situation on pharmaceutical therapies., Results: 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., Conclusion: 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.

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.

Unlabelled: Changes of the bone formation marker PINP correlated positively with improvements in vertebral strength in men with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) who received 18-month treatment with teriparatide, but not with risedronate. These results support the use of PINP as a surrogate marker of bone strength in GIO patients treated with teriparatide., Introduction: To investigate the correlations between biochemical markers of bone turnover and vertebral strength estimated by finite element analysis (FEA) in men with GIO., Methods: A total of 92 men with GIO were included in an 18-month, randomized, open-label trial of teriparatide (20 μg/day, n = 45) and risedronate (35 mg/week, n = 47). High-resolution quantitative computed tomography images of the 12th thoracic vertebra obtained at baseline, 6 and 18 months were converted into digital nonlinear FE models and subjected to anterior bending, axial compression and torsion. Stiffness and strength were computed for each model and loading mode. Serum biochemical markers of bone formation (amino-terminal-propeptide of type I collagen [PINP]) and bone resorption (type I collagen cross-linked C-telopeptide degradation fragments [CTx]) were measured at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 18 months. A mixed-model of repeated measures analysed changes from baseline and between-group differences. Spearman correlations assessed the relationship between changes from baseline of bone markers with FEA variables., Results: PINP and CTx levels increased in the teriparatide group and decreased in the risedronate group. FEA-derived parameters increased in both groups, but were significantly higher at 18 months in the teriparatide group. Significant positive correlations were found between changes from baseline of PINP at 3, 6 and 18 months with changes in FE strength in the teriparatide-treated group, but not in the risedronate group., Conclusions: Positive correlations between changes in a biochemical marker of bone formation and improvement of biomechanical properties support the use of PINP as a surrogate marker of bone strength in teriparatide-treated GIO patients.

Data on treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) in men are scarce. We performed a randomized, open-label trial in men who have taken glucocorticoids (GC) for ≥3 months, and had an areal bone mineral density (aBMD) T-score ≤ -1.5 standard deviations. Subjects received 20 μg/d teriparatide (n = 45) or 35 mg/week risedronate (n = 47) for 18 months. Primary objective was to compare lumbar spine (L1 -L3 ) BMD measured by quantitative computed tomography (QCT). Secondary outcomes included BMD and microstructure measured by high-resolution QCT (HRQCT) at the 12th thoracic vertebra, biomechanical effects for axial compression, anterior bending, and axial torsion evaluated by finite element (FE) analysis from HRQCT data, aBMD by dual X-ray absorptiometry, biochemical markers, and safety. Computed tomography scans were performed at 0, 6, and 18 months. A mixed model repeated measures analysis was performed to compare changes from baseline between groups. Mean age was 56.3 years. Median GC dose and duration were 8.8 mg/d and 6.4 years, respectively; 39.1% of subjects had a prevalent fracture, and 32.6% received prior bisphosphonate treatment. At 18 months, trabecular BMD had significantly increased for both treatments, with significantly greater increases with teriparatide (16.3% versus 3.8%; p = 0.004). HRQCT trabecular and cortical variables significantly increased for both treatments with significantly larger improvements for teriparatide for integral and trabecular BMD and bone surface to volume ratio (BS/BV) as a microstructural measure. Vertebral strength increases at 18 months were significant in both groups (teriparatide: 26.0% to 34.0%; risedronate: 4.2% to 6.7%), with significantly higher increases in the teriparatide group for all loading modes (0.005 < p < 0.015). Adverse events were similar between groups. None of the patients on teriparatide but five (10.6%) on risedronate developed new clinical fractures (p = 0.056). In conclusion, in this 18-month trial in men with GIO, teriparatide showed larger improvements in spinal BMD, microstructure, and FE-derived strength than risedronate., (Copyright © 2013 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

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.

In an open-label, prospective, controlled, 12-month study the effects of strontium ranelate (SR, CAS 135459-87-9) or alendronate (CAS 129318-43-0) on bone mineral density (BMD) were compared in 152 men with primary osteoporosis. Patients were randomized to SR 2 g/day (n = 76) or alendronate 70 mg/week (n = 76) supplemented daily with 1200 mg calcium and 800 IU vitamin D. The main outcome measure was percent change in lumbar spine and total hip BMD from baseline. Mean BMD (+/- SD) increased by 5.8 +/- 3.7% at the lumbar spine and 3.5 +/- 2.8% at the total hip with SR compared to increases of 4.5 +/- 3.4 % and 2.7 +/- 3.2%, respectively, with alendronate. Increases in BMD in the SR group are consistent with 1-year results from two pivotal fracture studies in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. SR was associated with a 22% greater increase in BMD at the lumbar spine (p = 0.033) and 23% greater increase at the total hip (p = 0.002) than alendronate. New fractures were observed in 7 SR and 10 alendronate patients. Height loss (-0.1 +/- 0.7 cm) was less with SR compared with alendronate (-0.5 +/- 0.8 cm) (p = 0.026). SR was also associated with significantly greater reductions in back pain and analgesic use scores. Adverse events were experienced by 28 (37%) patients in the SR group and 38 (50%) patients in the alendronate group, none of which were serious. In men with osteoporosis, SR produced significantly greater mean increases in BMD over 12 months compared with alendronate, an agent already approved for male osteoporosis. Mean increases in BMD with SR in men were similar to those previously documented for this agent in postmenopausal women, suggesting that similar benefits on anti-fracture efficacy may be expected.

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of treatment with risedronate 5 mg daily relative to control in men with primary or secondary osteoporosis over 2 years. Osteoporosis is a common condition in men that can have serious clinical consequences. In an earlier interim report, we found that 1 year of risedronate therapy resulted in significant increases in bone mineral density (BMD) and a significant reduction in vertebral fractures compared to control in men with osteoporosis. We conducted an open-label, prospective, match-control trial on men with primary or secondary osteoporosis in a single center, outpatient setting. Men with primary or secondary osteoporosis, as defined by a baseline lumbar spine BMD T-score < or = -2.5 and a baseline femoral neck BMD T-score < or = 2.0, were eligible for this study. Patients who had been treated with bisphosphonates or fluoride within the last 12 months were excluded. A total of 316 men were randomized to risedronate (n = 158) or control (n = 158). Patients were stratified by the presence of prevalent vertebral fractures at baseline and case by case allocated to either daily treatment with risedronate 5 mg daily plus calcium (1,000 mg) and vitamin D (800 IU) or to a control group (daily alfacalcidol (1 microg) plus calcium (500 mg) for those with prevalent vertebral fractures; daily vitamin D (800 IU) plus calcium (1,200 mg) for those without previous vertebral fractures). Primary study end points were identified prior to study initiation as the incidence of new vertebral fractures and changes in BMD at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip. Other end points included incidence of nonvertebral fractures and change in body height and back pain. Compared to control, the incidence of new vertebral fractures was significantly reduced in the risedronate 5 mg daily group at 2 years [14/152 (9.2%) for risedronate vs. 35/148 (23.6%) for control (61% risk reduction; P = 0.0026)]. Treatment with risedronate 5 mg daily also resulted in significant improvements in BMD at 2 years at all three skeletal sites (lumbar spine, 6.5 vs. 2.2%; femoral neck, 3.2 vs. 0.6%; total hip, 4.4 vs. 0.4% (P < 0.001 for all treatment comparisons). Significant reductions in the incidence of nonvertebral fractures (11.8 vs. 22.3%; P = 0.032), average loss in height, and back pain were also observed in risedronate-treated patients relative to control. In this 2-year study, daily 5 mg risedronate significantly reduced the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, improved BMD, decreased height loss, and reduced back pain in men with osteoporosis. Efficacy was sustained over 2 years; a consistent 60-61% risk reduction in vertebral fractures was observed at 1 and 2 years, respectively. These data demonstrate that daily risedronate is effective long-term therapy for men with primary or secondary osteoporosis.

Corticosteroids are widely used as anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive agents to treat a variety of chronic conditions. Long-term (>1 year) corticosteroid use can lead to bone loss, and therefore, osteopenia or osteoporosis. Corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIO) leads to increased bone fragility and subsequently fractures, which, in turn, lead to a loss of physical, emotional and social health for the patient and increased costs for healthcare providers. A wealth of data exists demonstrating the efficacy of the oral bisphosphonates, etidronate, alendronate and risedronate in increasing bone mineral density in patients with CIO or preventing bone loss in patients commencing corticosteroid therapy. Data regarding fracture prevention are less clear, as statistically significant reductions in the incidence of fractures have only been reported for patient subgroups or meta-analyses. However, many treatment guidelines recommend the use of oral bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of CIO. These guidelines are, however, not reflected in prescribing practice, and the majority of patients do not receive adequate concomitant therapy. This review summarizes the available data for bisphosphonates in CIO. Therapeutic adherence with oral bisphosphonates is an issue, with approximately 50% of patients discontinuing therapy within the first year. The primary reasons for this are poor gastrointestinal tolerability and the frequency with which complex dosing requirements must be followed. The inconvenience of taking daily or weekly bisphosphonate therapy is of particular importance in patients with CIO who may be regularly taking several other medications. Data obtained in studies with ibandronate indicate that bisphosphonate administration by rapid intravenous injection provides an effective, well-tolerated and practical alternative to current oral regimens in the management of patients with CIO.

Osteoporosis is prevalent in men with an estimated one in eight men older than 50 years suffering from osteoporotic fracture, and a higher mortality rate after fracture among men compared with women. There are few approved therapies for osteoporosis in men. This observational study assesses the efficacy and safety of risedronate in the treatment of men with primary and secondary osteoporosis. A single-center, open label, randomized, prospective 1-year study was conducted in men with primary or secondary osteoporosis. Patients were randomized to risedronate (risedronate 5 mg/day plus calcium 1,000 mg/day and vitamin D 800 IU/day) or control groups (alfacalcidol 1 mug/day plus calcium 500 mg/day or vitamin D 1,000 IU/day plus calcium 800 mg/day). Bone mineral density (BMD) measurements, X-rays of the spine, a medical history and physical exam, and patient self-assessments of back pain were performed at baseline and 12 months. Blinded semi-quantitative fracture assessment was conducted by a radiologist. A total of 316 men with osteoporosis were enrolled in the trial (risedronate, n=158; control, n=158). At 1 year lumbar spine BMD increased by 4.7% in the risedronate group versus an increase of 1.0% in the control group (P<0.001). Significant increases in BMD at the total hip and femoral neck were also observed with risedronate compared with the control group. The incidence of new vertebral fracture in the risedronate group was reduced by 60% versus the control group (P=0.028). Daily treatment with risedronate for 12 months significantly increased BMD at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip and significantly reduced the incidence of new vertebral fractures. This is the first prospective, randomized, controlled trial to demonstrate a significant reduction in vertebral fractures in 1 year in men with primary or secondary osteoporosis.