Search

In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, denosumab (DMAb) therapy through 10 years resulted in significantly higher degree of mineralization of bone, with a subsequent increase from years 2-3 to year 5 and no further difference between years 5 and 10. Our aim was to assess the variables reflecting the quality of bone mineral and organic matrix (Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopy), and the microhardness of bone (Vickers microindentation). Cross-sectional assessments were performed in blinded fashion on iliac bone biopsies from osteoporotic women (72 from FREEDOM trial, 49 from FREEDOM Extension trial), separately in cortical and cancellous compartments. After 2-3 years of DMAb, mineral/matrix ratio and microhardness of cortical bone were significantly higher compared with placebo, whereas mineral maturity, mineral crystallinity, mineral carbonation, and collagen maturity were not different in both bone compartments. Through 5 years of DMAb, mineral carbonation was significantly lower and mineral/matrix ratio, mineral maturity, and crystallinity were significantly higher versus 2-3 years and were not different between 5 and 10 years, with the exception of mineral maturity in cancellous bone. These data support a transition of mineral to more mature crystals (within physiological range) and the completeness of secondary mineralization within 5 years of DMAb treatment. Microhardness in cortical and cancellous compartments was significantly lower at 5 years of DMAb versus 2-3 years and was not different from years 5 to 10. The lower microhardness at years 5 and 10 is likely the result of maturation of the organic matrix in a persistently low state of bone remodeling over 5 and 10 years. © 2022 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

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background: Many health plans have outreach programs aimed at appropriately screening, evaluating, and treating women experiencing fragility fractures; however, few programs exist for men. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop, implement, and evaluate an osteoporosis outreach program for men with a recent fragility fracture and their physicians. Research Design and Subjects: A total of 10,934 male patients enrolled in a Medicare Advantage with Prescription Drug Plan with a recent fragility fracture were randomized to a program or control group. Patients and their physicians received letters followed by phone calls on osteoporosis and the importance of screening and treatment. The evaluation compared bone mineral density (BMD) test utilization and osteoporosis medication treatment (OPT) among patients who received the outreach versus no outreach at 12 months. The effect of the program was estimated through univariate and multivariable logistic regressions. Results: The program had a significant impact on BMD evaluation and OPT initiation. At 12 months, 10.7% of participants and 4.9% of nonparticipants received a BMD evaluation. The odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval) was 2.31 (1.94, 2.76), and the number needed to outreach to receive a BMD test was 18. OPT was initiated in 4.0% of participants and 2.5% of nonparticipants. The OR (95% confidence interval) of receiving OPT was 1.60 (1.24, 2.07), and the number needed to outreach was 69. Adjusted ORs were similar in magnitude and significance. Conclusion: The program was highly effective by more than doubling the rate of BMD evaluation; however, more intensive interventions may yield an even higher screening rate.

Few analyses of antiresorptive (AR) treatment trials relate short-term changes in bone turnover markers (BTMs) to subsequent fracture reduction seeking to estimate the proportion of treatment effect explained (PTE) by BTMs. Pooling such information would be useful to assess new ARs or novel dosing regimens. In the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Bone Quality project, we analyzed individual-level data from up to 62,000 participants enrolled in 12 bisphosphonate (BP) and four selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) placebo-controlled fracture endpoint trials. Using BTM results for two bone formation markers (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [bone ALP] and pro-collagen I N-propeptide [PINP]) and one bone resorption marker (C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen [CTX]) and incident fracture outcome data, we estimated the PTE using two different models. Separate analyses were performed for incident morphometric vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 1 to 5 years of follow-up. For vertebral fracture, the results showed that changes in all three BTMs at 6 months explained a large proportion of the treatment effect of ARs (57 to >100%), but not for and non-vertebral or hip fracture. We conclude that short-term AR treatment-related changes in bone ALP, PINP, and CTX account for a large proportion of the treatment effect for vertebral fracture. Change in BTMs is a useful surrogate marker to study the anti-fracture efficacy of new AR compounds or novel dosing regiments with approved AR drugs. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Recent studies suggest that the RANK/RANKL system impacts muscle function and/or mass. In the pivotal placebo-controlled fracture trial of the RANKL inhibitor denosumab in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, treatment was associated with a lower incidence of non-fracture-related falls (p = 0.02). This ad hoc exploratory analysis pooled data from five placebo-controlled trials of denosumab to determine consistency across trials, if any, of the reduction of fall incidence. The analysis included trials in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis and low bone mass, men with osteoporosis, women receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitors for breast cancer, and men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. The analysis was stratified by trial, and only included data from the placebo-controlled period of each trial. A time-to-event analysis of first fall and exposure-adjusted subject incidence rates of falls were analyzed. Falls were reported and captured as adverse events. The analysis comprised 10,036 individuals; 5030 received denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously once every 6 months for 12 to 36 months and 5006 received placebo. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed an occurrence of falls in 6.5% of subjects in the placebo group compared with 5.2% of subjects in the denosumab group (hazard ratio = 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.93; p = 0.0061). Heterogeneity in study designs did not permit overall assessment of association with fracture outcomes. In conclusion, denosumab may reduce the risk of falls in addition to its established fracture risk reduction by reducing bone resorption and increasing bone mass. These observations require further exploration and confirmation in studies with muscle function or falls as the primary outcome. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.. ispartof: JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH vol:35 issue:6 pages:1014-1021 ispartof: location:United States status: published

In a randomized clinical trial in patients initiating glucocorticoid therapy (GC-I) or on long-term therapy (GC-C), denosumab every 6 months increased spine and hip bone mineral density at 12 and 24 months significantly more than daily risedronate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of denosumab compared with risedronate on bone strength and microarchitecture measured by high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) in GC-I and GC-C. A subset of 110 patients had high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) scans of the distal radius and tibia at baseline and at 12 and 24 months. Cortical and trabecular microarchitecture were assessed with standard analyses and failure load (FL) with micro-finite element analysis. At the radius at 24 months, FL remained unchanged with denosumab and significantly decreased with risedronate in GC-I (-4.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.4, -1.8) and, in GC-C, it significantly increased with denosumab (4.3%, 95% CI 2.1, 6.4) and remained unchanged with risedronate. Consequently, FL was significantly higher with denosumab than with risedronate in GC-I (5.6%, 95% CI 2.4, 8.7, p < 0.001) and in GC-C (4.1%, 95% CI 1.1, 7.2, p = 0.011). We also found significant differences between denosumab and risedronate in percentage changes in cortical and trabecular microarchitectural parameters in GC-I and GC-C. Similar results were found at the tibia. To conclude, this HR-pQCT study shows that denosumab is superior to risedronate in terms of preventing FL loss at the distal radius and tibia in GC-I and in increasing FL at the radius in GC-C, based on significant differences in changes in the cortical and trabecular bone compartments between treatment groups in GC-I and GC-C. These results suggest that denosumab could be a useful therapeutic option in patients initiating GC therapy or on long-term GC therapy and may contribute to treatment decisions in this patient population. (c) 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR). PG reports grants from Amgen, grants and other from AbbVie, grants from Celgene, grants from Lilly, grants from Merck, grants from Pfizer, grants from Roche, grants from UCB, grants from Fresenius, grants from Mylan, and grants from Sandoz outside the submitted work. BR reports personal fees from Scanco Medical AG outside the submitted work. EL reports personal fees from Amgen; personal fees from Lilly; grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Celgene; personal fees from Expanscience; personal fees from AbbVie; personal fees from Sublimed; grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from UCB; and grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from MSD outside the submitted work. BO reports personal fees from Raffo, personal fees from Baliarda, personal fees from Shire, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Gador, personal fees from Amgen, and personal fees from Ultragenyx outside the submitted work. RC reports grants from Amgen during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from UCB; personal fees from Lilly; personal fees from BMS; personal fees from AbbVie; personal fees from Pfizer; grants and personal fees from Chugai; personal fees from Sanofi; personal fees from Novartis; and grants and other from Fresenius Kiabi outside the submitted work. AC is employed by Amgen and has equity in Amgen. SH is an employee of and has equity in Amgen. KGS reports grants from Amgen, Horizon Pharma, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB, Shanton Pharma Co. LTD, Dyve Bioscience, and LG Chem outside the submitted work. JPB reports grants from Amgen, grants from UCB, and grants from Lilly the outside the submitted work. All authors had full access to the data, and there were no restrictions regarding content to include in the manuscript. This study was funded by Amgen Inc. Authors’ roles: Investigation: PG, OM, EL, BO, RC, and KGS. Formal analysis: KE, AC, and SH. Writing—original draft: PG and MB. Writing—review & editing: PG, MB, BR, OM, EL, BO, RC, KE, AC, SH, KGS, and JPB.

The surrogate threshold effect (STE) is defined as the minimum treatment effect on a surrogate that is reliably predictive of a treatment effect on the clinical outcome. It provides a framework for implementing a clinical trial with a surrogate endpoint. The aim of this study was to update our previous analysis by validating the STE for change in total hip (TH) BMD as a surrogate for fracture risk reduction; the novelty of this study was this validation. To do so, we used individual patient data from 61,415 participants in 16 RCTs that evaluated bisphosphonates (nine trials), selective estrogen receptor modulators (four trials), denosumab (one trial), odanacatib (one trial), and teriparatide (one trial) to estimate trial-specific treatment effects on TH BMD and all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures. We then conducted a random effects meta-regression of the log relative fracture risk reduction against 24-month change in TH BMD, and computed the STE as the intersection of the upper 95% prediction limit of this regression with the line of no fracture reduction. We validated the STE by checking whether the number of fractures in each trial provided 80% power and determining what proportion of trials with BMD changes ≥ STE reported significant reductions in fracture risk. We applied this analysis to (i) the trials on which we estimated the STE; and (ii) trials on which we did not estimate the STE. We found that the STEs for all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures were 1.83%, 1.42%, 3.18%, and 2.13%, respectively. Among trials used to estimate STE, 27 of 28 were adequately powered, showed BMD effects exceeding the STE, and showed significant reductions in fracture risk. Among the validation set of 11 trials, 10 met these criteria. Thus STE differs by fracture type and has been validated in trials not used to develop the approach. © 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).

Romosozumab, a monoclonal anti‐sclerostin antibody that has the dual effect of increasing bone formation and decreasing bone resorption, reduces fracture risk within 12 months. In a post hoc, exploratory analysis, we evaluated the effects of romosozumab after 12 months of denosumab in postmenopausal women with low bone mass who had not received previous osteoporosis therapy. This phase 2 trial ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00896532","term_id":"NCT00896532"}}NCT00896532) enrolled postmenopausal women with a lumbar spine, total hip, or femoral neck T‐score ≤ −2.0 and ≥ −3.5. Individuals were randomized to placebo or various romosozumab dosing regimens from baseline to month 24, were re‐randomized to 12 months of denosumab or placebo (months 24–36), and then all received romosozumab 210 mg monthly for 12 months (months 36–48). Results for the overall population have been previously published. Here, we present results for changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and levels of procollagen type I N‐terminal propeptide (P1NP) and β‐isomer of the C‐terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (β‐CTX) from a subset of women who were randomized to placebo for 24 months, were re‐randomized to receive denosumab (n = 16) or placebo (n = 12) for 12 months, and then received romosozumab for 12 months. In women who were randomized to placebo followed by denosumab, romosozumab treatment for 12 months maintained BMD gained during denosumab treatment at the total hip (mean change from end of denosumab treatment of 0.9%) and further increased BMD gains at the lumbar spine (mean change from end of denosumab treatment of 5.3%). Upon transition to romosozumab (months 36–48), P1NP and β‐CTX levels gradually returned to baseline from their reduced values during denosumab administration. Transitioning to romosozumab after 12 months of denosumab appears to improve lumbar spine BMD and maintain total hip BMD while possibly preventing the rapid increase in levels of bone turnover markers above baseline expected upon denosumab discontinuation. © 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Summary Upper limb fractures (including wrist, forearm, and humerus) represent a significant burden among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Up to 7 years of treatment with denosumab resulted in an increase in bone mineral density and decrease in fractures in upper limb sites. Introduction Upper limb (wrist, forearm, and humerus) fractures are a significant burden in osteoporosis, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Denosumab, a monoclonal antibody against RANK ligand, increases bone mineral density (BMD) and decreases vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures. Here, we evaluated the long-term effect of denosumab treatment on upper limb fracture risk and BMD. Methods In the FREEDOM trial, subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive every-6-month denosumab 60 mg or placebo subcutaneously for 3 years, after which all subjects could receive denosumab for up to 7 years (Extension). Among placebo subjects who completed FREEDOM and enrolled in the Extension, wrist, forearm, humerus, and upper limb fracture rates and rate ratios between different time periods (FREEDOM years 1–3, Extension years 1–3, and Extension years 4–7) were computed. BMD at the ultradistal radius, 1/3 radius, and total radius was analyzed in a subset of subjects in a BMD substudy. Results This analysis included 2207 subjects (116 in the BMD substudy). Fracture rates decreased over the 7-year Extension; fracture rate ratios between Extension years 4–7 (denosumab) and FREEDOM years 1–3 (placebo) reduced significantly for the wrist (0.57), forearm (0.57), humerus (0.42), and upper limb (0.52; p

Background Age-related trabecular microstructural deterioration and conversion from plate-like trabeculae to rod-like trabeculae occur because of unbalanced rapid remodeling. As denosumab achieves greater remodeling suppression and lower cortical porosity than alendronate, we hypothesized that denosumab might also preserve trabecular plate microstructure, bone stiffness and strength more effectively than alendronate. Methods In this post hoc analysis of a phase 2 study, postmenopausal women randomized to placebo (P, n = 74), denosumab (D, n = 72), or alendronate (A, n = 68). HR-pQCT scans of the distal radius and tibia were performed at baseline and Month-12 (M12). Trabecular compartment was subjected to Individual Trabecula Segmentation while finite element analysis was performed to estimate stiffness and strength. Percent change from baseline at M12 of each parameter was compared between patient groups. Results At the distal tibia, in the placebo group, plate surface area (pTb.S, −1.3%) decreased while rod bone volume fraction (rBV/TV, +4.5%) and number (rTb.N, +2.1%) increased. These changes were prevented by denosumab but persisted despite alendronate therapy (pTb.S: −1.7%; rBV/TV: +6.9%; rTb.N: +3.0%). Both treatments improved whole bone stiffness (D: +3.1%; A: +1.8%) and failure load (D: +3.0%; A: +2.2%); improvements using denosumab was significant compared to placebo (stiffness: p = 0.004; failure load: p = 0.003). At the distal radius, denosumab increased total trabecular bone volume fraction (BV/TV, +3.4%) and whole bone failure load (+4.0%), significantly different from placebo (BV/TV: p = 0.044; failure load: p = 0.046). Significantly different effects of either drug on plate and rod microstructure were not detected. Conclusions Denosumab preserved trabecular plate microstructure. Alendronate did not. However, estimated strength did not differ between denosumab and alendronate treated groups.

Background: Romosozumab is an antibody that binds and inhibits sclerostin, thereby increasing bone formation and decreasing bone resorption. A double-blinded, randomized, phase-2, dose-finding trial was performed to evaluate the effect of romosozumab on the radiographic and clinical outcomes of surgical fixation of tibial diaphyseal fractures. Methods: Patients (18 to 82 years old) were randomized 3:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 to a placebo or 1 of 9 romosozumab treatment groups. Patients received subcutaneous injections of romosozumab or the placebo postoperatively on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12. The primary outcome was the time to radiographic evidence of healing ("radiographic healing") analyzed after the week-24 assessments had been completed for all patients. Results: A total of 402 patients were randomized: 299 to the romosozumab group and 103 to the placebo group. The median time to radiographic healing (the primary outcome) ranged from 14.4 to 18.6 weeks in the romosozumab groups and was 16.4 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6 to 18.0 weeks) in the placebo group, which was not a significant difference. There was also no significant difference in the median time to clinical healing, no relationship between romosozumab dose/frequency and unplanned revision surgery, and no apparent treatment benefit in terms of physical function. The safety and tolerability profile of romosozumab was comparable with that of the placebo. Conclusions: Romosozumab did not accelerate tibial fracture-healing in this patient population. Additional studies of patients at higher risk for delayed healing are needed to explore the potential of romosozumab to accelerate tibial fracture-healing. Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Author(s): Schemitsch, Emil H; Miclau, Theodore; Karachalios, Theofilos; Nowak, Lauren L; Sancheti, Parag; Poolman, Rudolf W; Caminis, John; Daizadeh, Nadia; Dent-Acosta, Ricardo E; Egbuna, Ogo; Chines, Arkadi; Maddox, Judy; Grauer, Andreas; Bhandari, Mohit | Abstract: BackgroundRomosozumab is a bone-forming antibody that increases bone formation and decreases bone resorption. We conducted a double-blinded, randomized, phase-2, dose-finding trial to evaluate the effect of romosozumab on the clinical outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation of intertrochanteric or femoral neck hip fractures.MethodsPatients (55 to 94 years old) were randomized 2:3:3:3 to receive 3 subcutaneous injections of romosozumab (70, 140, or 210 mg) or a placebo postoperatively on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12. The primary end point was the difference in the mean timed "Up a Go" (TUG) score over weeks 6 to 20 for romosozumab versus placebo. Additional end points included the time to radiographic evidence of healing and the score on the Radiographic Union Scale for Hip (RUSH).ResultsA total of 332 patients were randomized: 243 to receive romosozumab (70 mg, n = 60; 140 mg, n = 93; and 210 mg, n = 90) and 89 to receive a placebo. Although TUG scores improved during the study, they did not differ significantly between the romosozumab and placebo groups over weeks 6 to 20 (p = 0.198). The median time to radiographic evidence of healing was 16.4 to 16.9 weeks across treatment groups. The RUSH scores improved over time across treatment groups but did not differ significantly between the romosozumab and placebo groups. The overall safety and tolerability profile of romosozumab was comparable with that of the placebo.ConclusionsRomosozumab did not improve the fracture-healing-related clinical and radiographic outcomes in the study population.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Context The effects of long-term exposure to denosumab in individuals with renal insufficiency are unknown. Objective This post hoc analysis evaluates the long-term safety and efficacy of denosumab in individuals with mild-to-moderate chronic kidney disease (CKD) (stages 2 and 3) using data from the pivotal phase 3, double-blind, 3-year FREEDOM (NCT00089791) and open-label, 7-year extension (NCT00523341) studies. Participants and Methods Women age 60 to 90 years with a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score of less than –2.5 to greater than –4.0 at the total hip or lumbar spine were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months (long-term arm) or placebo (cross-over arm) in FREEDOM; eligible participants could enroll in the extension to receive denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months. Change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from study baseline and annualized rates of fracture and adverse events (AEs) were the main outcome measures. Results Most participants (1259/1969 [64%] long-term arm; 1173/1781 [66%] crossover arm) with baseline CKD stage 2 or 3 remained within the same CKD subgroup at study completion; less than 3% progressed to CKD stage 4. Participants in all eGFR subgroups showed similar, persistent BMD gains over time and a low incidence of fractures. The percentage of participants reporting serious AEs was similar among renal subgroups (normal, CKD stage 2, CKD stage 3a, CKD stage 3b) both for the long-term (54% vs 52% vs 57% vs 58%) and crossover (43% vs 42% vs 43% vs 68%) arms, except CKD stage 3b subgroup, crossover arm. Conclusion The safety and efficacy of denosumab did not differ among participants with mild to moderate CKD.

Summary: Transitioning postmenopausal women with osteoporosis from a bisphosphonate to denosumab appears to be safe and more effective at improving BMD than continuing treatment with a bisphosphonate. Introduction: We conducted a patient-level pooled analysis of four studies to estimate the efficacy and safety of transitioning to denosumab vs. continuing bisphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal women who previously received oral bisphosphonates. Methods: Patients received 60 mg denosumab once every 6 months or a bisphosphonate (oral alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, or intravenous zoledronic acid). Endpoints were change from baseline in lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, and 1/3 radius BMD at month 12, change from baseline in serum CTX-1 and P1NP, and incidence of adverse events. Results: A total of 2850 randomized patients (1424 bisphosphonate:1426 denosumab) were included in the analysis. Percentage change in BMD was significantly greater (p < 0.001) for denosumab vs. bisphosphonate at each skeletal site; differences in BMD changes ranged from 0.6 to 2.0%. Percentage decrease in serum CTX-1 and P1NP was significantly greater (p < 0.0001) for denosumab vs. bisphosphonate at months 1, 6, and 12; in the denosumab group only, percentage change in serum CTX-1 at month 1 was significantly correlated with percentage change in lumbar spine and total hip BMD at month 12. The incidences of adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Three patients (one bisphosphonate and two denosumab) had atypical femoral fractures, all from the denosumab vs. zoledronic acid study. Conclusion: Postmenopausal women can safely transition from a bisphosphonate to denosumab, which is more effective at improving BMD than continuing with a bisphosphonate. Clinical trials registration: NCT00377819, NCT00919711, NCT00936897, NCT01732770.

Denosumab is associated with continued gains in hip and spine BMD with up to 10 years of treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Despite potent inhibition of bone remodeling, findings in nonhuman primates suggest modeling-based bone formation (MBBF) may persist during denosumab treatment. This study assessed whether MBBF in the femoral neck (FN) is preserved in the context of inhibited remodeling in subjects receiving denosumab. This open-label study enrolled postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who had received two or more doses of denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months [Q6M]) per standard of care and were planning elective total hip replacement (THR) owing to osteoarthritis of the hip. Transverse sections of the FN were obtained after THR and analyzed histomorphometrically. MBBF, based on fluorochrome labeling and presence of smooth cement lines, was evaluated in cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal envelopes of the FN. Histomorphometric parameters were used to assess MBBF and remodeling-based bone formation (RBBF) in denosumab-treated subjects (n = 4; mean age = 73.5 years; range, 70 to 78 years) and historical female controls (n = 11; mean age = 67.8 years; range, 62 to 80 years) obtained from the placebo group of a prior study and not treated with denosumab. All analyses were descriptive. All subjects in both groups exhibited MBBF in the periosteal envelope; in cancellous and endocortical envelopes, all denosumab-treated subjects and 81.8% of controls showed evidence of MBBF. Compared with controls, denosumab-treated subjects showed 9.4-fold and 2.0-fold higher mean values of MBBF in cancellous and endocortical envelopes, respectively, whereas RBBF mean values were 5.0-fold and 5.3-fold lower. In the periosteal envelope, MBBF and RBBF rates were similar between subjects and controls. These results demonstrate the occurrence of MBBF in the human FN and suggest that denosumab preserves MBBF while inhibiting remodeling, which may contribute to the observed continued gains in BMD over time after remodeling is maximally inhibited. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Context There are few studies on patients transitioning from denosumab to bisphosphonates. Objective To investigate patient characteristics and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) after transitioning from denosumab to alendronate. Design Randomized, open-label, 2-year crossover Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction (DAPS) study (NCT00518531). Setting 25 study centers in the US and Canada. Patients Treatment-naïve postmenopausal women with BMD T-scores from −2.0 to −4.0. Interventions This post hoc analysis evaluated women randomized to subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg every 6 months in year 1 followed by once-weekly oral alendronate 70 mg in year 2. Main Outcome Measure A 3% BMD threshold identified participants who lost, maintained, or gained BMD in year 2 on alendronate. Results Of 126 participants randomized to denosumab, 115 (91%) transitioned to alendronate in year 2. BMD increased by 3% to 6% with denosumab in year 1 and by 0% to 1% with alendronate in year 2. After transitioning to alendronate, most participants maintained or increased BMD; 15.9%, 7.6%, and 21.7% lost BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck, respectively. Few participants fell below their pretreatment baseline BMD value; this occurred most often in those who lost BMD in year 2. Women who lost BMD with alendronate in year 2 also showed a greater percent change in BMD with denosumab in year 1. The BMD change in year 2 was similar regardless of baseline characteristics or adherence to oral alendronate. Conclusion Alendronate can effectively maintain the BMD gains accrued after 1 year of denosumab in most patients, regardless of baseline characteristics.

Background:Osteoporosis and renal insufficiency are coexisting disease states in a substantial proportion of postmenopausal women. Since bisphosphonates are generally contraindicated in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) Objectives:To determine if baseline renal function affects the efficacy and safety of romosozumab.Methods:We performed post hoc analyses of two clinical trials of romosozumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. In ARCH (NCT01631214), 4,093 patients were randomised 1:1 to romosozumab 210 mg monthly or alendronate 70 mg weekly for 12 months (mean age: 74.3 years; 96.1% with prevalent vertebral fractures [VFx]). In FRAME (NCT01575834), 7,180 patients were randomised 1:1 to romosozumab 210 mg or placebo monthly for 12 months (mean age: 70.9 years; 18.3% with prevalent VFx). For these analyses, patients were categorised by baseline eGFR (mL/min/1.73m2): normal renal function (eGFR ≥90), mild renal insufficiency (eGFR 60–89), or moderate renal insufficiency (eGFR 30–59). Least squares mean (LSM) percent change from baseline in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck; incidence of new VFx and adverse events (AEs); and changes in renal function were assessed for each eGFR category at Month 12 of the double-blind treatment period.Results:At baseline, most patients had mild/moderate renal insufficiency: 84% in ARCH, 88% in FRAME. In both studies, change from baseline in BMD was significantly higher in the romosozumab group across baseline eGFR categories (Figure). There was an interaction between BMD increase and renal function, and although BMD increase was not as large in women with impaired renal function, differences between romosozumab and control groups remained significant (Figure). In ARCH, among patients with eGFR ≥90, 60–89, and 30–59, the incidence of new VFx (romosozumab vs alendronate) at Month 12 was 3.3% vs 7.3%, 3.2% vs 3.9%, and 3.4% vs 6.2% in ARCH. In FRAME, the incidence of new VFx (romosozumab vs placebo) at Month 12 was 0.5% vs 3.0%, 0.4% vs 1.5%, and 0.6% vs 2.1%.In both studies, the incidences of AEs and serious AEs were similar in both treatment groups within and across eGFR categories. AEs of mild-to-moderate hypocalcaemia (investigator reported) occurred in two patients in ARCH (one romosozumab [eGFR 60–89] and one alendronate [eGFR ≥90]), and one patient in FRAME (romosozumab [eGFR 60–89]). Five patients in ARCH (all in the alendronate group) and 19 patients in FRAME (14 romosozumab, 5 placebo) had decreases in serum Ca levels (albumin adjusted); in the romosozumab group all were mild (Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of romosozumab vs alendronate or placebo was similar among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and different levels of renal function.Acknowledgments:This study was funded by Amgen, Astellas and UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical.Disclosure of Interests:Paul Miller Grant/research support from: Amgen, Radius Health, Ultragenyx, Consultant of: Amgen, Radius Health, Jonathan Adachi Consultant of: Amgen, Speakers bureau: Amgen, Ben-Hur Albergaria Consultant of: Amgen Inc., Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Amgen Inc., Eli Lilly, Angela M Cheung Consultant of: Amgen, Eli Lilly, Arkadi Chines Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Evelien Gielen Consultant of: Amgen Inc., Takeda, Sandoz and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: Amgen Inc., Takeda, Sandoz and UCB Pharma, Bente Langdahl Grant/research support from: Amgen, NovoNordisk, Consultant of: Amgen Inc., Eli Lilly, UCB Pharma, Akimitsu Miyauchi Consultant of: Amgen Inc., Astellas BioPharma K.K., Teijin Pharma, Mary Oates Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Ian Reid Consultant of: Amgen Inc., Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Amgen Inc., Eli Lilly, Norma Ruiz Santiago Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Mark Vanderkelen Employee of: UCB Pharma, Wenjing Yang Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Zhigang Yu Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc.

Purpose Diabetes and osteoporosis occur frequently in older adults and are both associated with increased fracture risk. Denosumab treatment reduced new vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 3 years, with continued low fracture incidence for up to 10 years in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. However, its effects in diabetic subjects with osteoporosis have not yet been investigated. Methods Post hoc analysis of the 3-year, placebo-controlled FREEDOM study and 7-year Extension included postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and diabetes. Effects on BMD, vertebral, and nonvertebral fracture incidence were evaluated. Results Of 7808 subjects in FREEDOM, 508 with diabetes received denosumab (n = 266) or placebo (n = 242). Among those, BMD increased significantly with denosumab versus placebo in FREEDOM, and continued to increase during the Extension in long-term (continuing denosumab) and crossover (placebo to denosumab) denosumab subjects. In FREEDOM, denosumab-treated subjects with diabetes had significantly lower new vertebral fracture rates (1.6%) versus placebo (8.0%) (RR: 0.20 [95% CI 0.07–0.61]; p = .001). Nonvertebral fracture incidence was higher with denosumab (11.7%) versus placebo (5.9%) (HR: 1.94 [95% CI 1.00–3.77]; p = .046), although there were fewer hip fractures with denosumab (World Health Organization, 2017 [ 1 ]) than placebo (4; nonsignificant). During the first 3 years in FREEDOM Extension, new vertebral and nonvertebral fracture incidences were low in long-term and crossover denosumab diabetic groups (≤6%), consistent with the overall Extension population; yearly nonvertebral fracture incidence was comparable to the FREEDOM placebo group. Conclusion Denosumab significantly increased BMD and decreased vertebral fracture risk in subjects with osteoporosis and diabetes. No reduction in nonvertebral fractures was observed.

Summary This post-hoc analysis queried whether women experiencing fracture on denosumab indicates inadequate treatment response or whether the risk of subsequent fracture remains low with continuing denosumab. Results showed that denosumab decreases the risk of subsequent fracture and fracture sustained while on denosumab is not necessarily indicative of inadequate treatment response. Introduction This analysis assessed whether a fracture sustained during denosumab therapy indicates inadequate treatment response and if the risk of a subsequent fracture decreases with continuing denosumab treatment. Methods In FREEDOM, a clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of denosumab, postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were randomized to placebo or denosumab for 3 years. In the 7-year FREEDOM Extension, all participants were allocated to receive denosumab. Here we compare subsequent osteoporotic fracture rates between denosumab-treated subjects during FREEDOM or the Extension and placebo-treated subjects in FREEDOM. Results During FREEDOM, 438 placebo- and 272 denosumab-treated subjects had an osteoporotic fracture. Exposure-adjusted subject incidence per 100 subject-years was lower for denosumab (6.7) vs placebo (10.1). Combining all subjects on denosumab from FREEDOM and the Extension for up to 10 years (combined denosumab), 794 (13.7%) had an osteoporotic fracture while on denosumab. Of these, one or more subsequent fractures occurred in 144 (18.1%) subjects, with an exposure-adjusted incidence of 5.8 per 100 subject-years, similar to FREEDOM denosumab (6.7 per 100 subject-years) and lower than FREEDOM placebo (10.1 per 100 subject-years). Adjusting for prior fracture, the risk of having a subsequent on-study osteoporotic fracture was lower in the combined denosumab group vs placebo (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.59 [0.43–0.81]; P = 0.0012). Conclusions These data demonstrate that denosumab decreases the risk of subsequent fracture and a fracture sustained while on denosumab is not necessarily indicative of inadequate treatment response. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00198-018-4687-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Bazedoxifene (BZA) is a selective estrogen receptor modulator that has been shown to prevent and treat postmenopausal osteoporosis. Hip structure analysis (HSA) can be used to extract bone structural properties related to strength from hip bone mineral density (BMD) scans. This exploratory analysis used HSA to evaluate changes in hip structural geometry in postmenopausal women enrolled in a phase 3 osteoporosis treatment study who were treated with BZA 20mg or placebo for 2 years. This analysis cohort included women at increased fracture risk based on known skeletal risk factors (n = 521); 1 or more moderate or severe fractures or 2 or more mild vertebral fractures and/or femoral neck BMD T-score ≤ -3.0 at baseline combined with additional women from the overall study population (n = 475); a subgroup analysis included just those women at increased fracture risk. HSA was applied to duplicate hip dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans acquired at screening and 24 months. Percent change from baseline was evaluated using an analysis of covariance for BMD and geometric parameters including section modulus (SM), cross-sectional area (CSA), outer diameter (OD), and buckling ratio (BR). In all regions, BZA was associated with increased BMD and improvements in hip structural geometry. In the narrow neck, BZA 20mg significantly increased SM, CSA, OD, and BMD compared with placebo (P < 0.05 for all). In the intertrochanter region, BZA 20mg significantly increased CSA and BMD and decreased BR compared with placebo (P < 0.05 for all). Other than BMD (P < 0.05), effects of BZA 20mg at the shaft did not reach statistical significance. Similar trends toward improvement in structural geometry with BZA 20mg were observed in all three regions of the hip for the subgroup of women at increased fracture risk. Overall, BZA was associated with geometry-related improvements in bone strength with regard to resistance to bending and compressive forces and to local buckling. These improvements were evident at common fracture locations such as the femoral neck and intertrochanter regions, and are consistent with the significant treatment effect reported for BZA on nonvertebral fractures in higher-risk postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of bazedoxifene and oral bisphosphonates for the prevention of nonvertebral fractures (NVFs) in women with higher risk of postmenopausal osteoporosis (i.e., the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool [FRAX] score ≥ 20%), based on currently available evidence from randomized controlled trials.MethodsRandomized controlled trials evaluating the NVF relative risk reduction (RRR) with oral bisphosphonates or bazedoxifene were identified by a systematic literature review and combined by means of a network meta-analysis. A subgroup of patients with a FRAX score of 20% or more in the bazedoxifene phase III osteoporosis study was selected as the population of interest on the basis of the bazedoxifene label. In one analysis (analysis 1), the placebo response of the subgroup with a FRAX score of 20% or more was the benchmark to select comparable bisphosphonate trials. Additional analyses incorporated the aggregate data from the bisphosphonate trials with all the FRAX subgroups (analysis 2) or with the individual patient data from the bazedoxifene trial (analysis 3).ResultsNine identified bisphosphonate trials (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate; N = 23,440 patients) with a similar placebo response as observed for the subgroup of high risk patients in the bazedoxifene trial were included in analysis 1. The results of the network meta-analysis of this study set suggest that bazedoxifene is expected to have an RRR of 0.43 (95% credible interval [CrI] −0.19 to 0.72) versus alendronate, 0.58 (95% CrI 0.05–0.81) versus ibandronate, and 0.39 (95% CrI −0.29 to 0.70) versus risedronate. Analyses in which treatment effects with bisphosphonates were projected to a population with a FRAX score of 20% or more with meta-regression approaches (analysis 2 and analysis 3) provide similar findings.ConclusionBased on an indirect comparison of randomized trials, bazedoxifene is expected to have at least a comparable RRR of NVF as alendronate, ibandronate, and risedronate in women with higher risk of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

This study examined whether the global clinical data for bazedoxifene could be extrapolated to a Japanese population by evaluating the results of a phase 2 study in postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis as compared to those of a pivotal, phase 3 study. The efficacy of bazedoxifene 20 and 40 mg versus placebo on lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD), bone turnover markers, lipid profile, incidence of fractures, and safety parameters was compared between the Japanese phase 2 study (N = 429) and the global phase 3 study (N = 7,492) during a 2-year period. In the primary population for assessment of bridging, differences in the mean percent change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD at 2 years relative to placebo were greater for women treated with bazedoxifene 20 and 40 mg in the phase 2 study than in the phase 3 study. BMD changes in the bazedoxifene groups were confirmed to be similar between the phase 2 study population and a subset of the phase 3 study population with similar baseline characteristics. The effects of bazedoxifene on incidence of fractures, bone turnover markers, and lipid metabolism were similar between studies. There were no major differences in safety parameters between studies. The greater improvement in lumbar spine BMD and similar results in bone turnover markers, fracture incidence, and safety profile observed with bazedoxifene in the phase 2 study compared with the phase 3 study confirmed the feasibility of extrapolating the global clinical data to a Japanese population.

Bazedoxifene is a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator in clinical development for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This phase 1, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (N = 107) of healthy postmenopausal women examined the pharmacokinetics and safety/tolerability profile of multiple doses of bazedoxifene (1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 80 mg) administered orally once daily for 30 days. Bazedoxifene demonstrated a half-life of 25 to 30 hours, reached steady state within 7 days, and exhibited linear pharmacokinetics over a dose range of 5-80 mg. Fibrinogen levels decreased with bazedoxifene doses of 5 mg and greater; these changes were significant for bazedoxifene 20, 40, and 80 mg (P ≤ .05 vs placebo), but were not dose dependent. Bazedoxifene was associated with increased levels of sex hormone-binding globulin, thyroxine-binding globulin, and cortisol-binding globulin (CBG); only increases in the levels of CBG appeared to be dose related. Bazedoxifene was safe and well tolerated within the tested dose range. Bazedoxifene showed no differences from placebo in adverse event reports, vital sign measurements, or electrocardiogram findings.

Bazedoxifene/conjugated estrogens (BZA/CE), a novel tissue-selective estrogen complex (TSEC), has been evaluated in the Selective estrogens, Menopause And Response to Therapy (SMART) trials. Secondary outcomes from these trials were evaluated to determine whether the effects of BZA/CE are influenced by years since menopause (YSM).SMART-1 and SMART-2 were randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled phase 3 trials in nonhysterectomized postmenopausal women. Outcomes were evaluated for women5 or ≥5 YSM in SMART-1 (BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, n=433; BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, n=414; PBO, n=427) and SMART-2 (BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, n=127; BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, n=128; PBO, n=63). Hot-flush frequency and severity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), sleep, treatment satisfaction, cumulative amenorrhea, and breast pain were assessed for each study individually, using defined statistical analysis protocols.For5 and ≥5 YSM subgroups, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 and 0.625 mg showed significant decreases in hot-flush frequency and severity at 3 months compared with PBO (p0.05 for both). Both BZA/CE doses showed significant improvements compared with PBO in HRQoL scores, sleep parameters, and satisfaction with treatment at 3 months irrespective of YSM (p≤0.05 vs. PBO for all). Similar to PBO, BZA/CE showed high proportions of cumulative amenorrhea (SMART-1) and low incidences of breast pain (SMART-1 and SMART-2) for women5 and ≥5 YSM.The positive effects of BZA/CE on secondary outcomes were consistent among women5 or ≥5 YSM.

OBJECTIVE A post hoc exploratory analysis was conducted to examine correlations between changes in bone density, bone markers, and hot flushes after the treatment of postmenopausal women with bazedoxifene (BZA)/conjugated estrogens (CE). METHODS In a 2-year phase 3 study, 3,397 postmenopausal women were randomized to BZA 10 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 40 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 10 mg/CE 0.625 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, BZA 40 mg/CE 0.625 mg, raloxifene 60 mg, or placebo. In this analysis, bone density changes at 2 years were compared with baseline levels of the bone markers serum C-telopeptide and osteocalcin. Correlations between changes in bone density and changes in 12-week hot flush composite scores in symptomatic women were also analyzed. RESULTS Treatment with BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg or BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg increased lumbar spine bone density more in women with higher bone resorption and formation, categorized by baseline levels of C-telopeptide and osteocalcin (P < 0.001, both BZA/CE doses). With placebo, larger decreases in lumbar spine bone density were seen in the highest tertile of serum C-telopeptide. There was no correlation between changes in total hip bone density and baseline bone markers. There were significant correlations between percent change in hot flush score at week 12 and percent changes in lumbar spine (r = -0.31, P = 0.006) and total hip (r = -0.23, P = 0.044) bone densities at month 24. CONCLUSIONS With 2-year BZA/CE treatment, women with larger increases in lumbar spine and total hip densities also have higher baseline bone markers. Early reductions in hot flush score (12 wk) are predictive of long-term increases in bone density (24 mo).

Objective Breast density is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. This study assessed changes in mammographic breast density after 24 months of treatment with bazedoxifene (BZA)/conjugated estrogens (CE) in postmenopausal women. Methods This was an ancillary study in a subset of nonhysterectomized postmenopausal women enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and active-controlled phase 3 study. Treatments evaluated were BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, raloxifene 60 mg, and placebo. Women who were eligible for participation in the ancillary study must have completed 24 months of treatment and have mammograms at baseline and 24 months. The left craniocaudal views from each mammogram pair were digitized and analyzed by a radiologist who was blinded to treatment arm and mammogram date. The percent breast density was determined using validated software. Results Mammogram pairs were obtained from 507 evaluable participants (mean age range, 55.2-56.3 y). The mean changes (95% CI) in mammographic breast density from baseline to 24 months were comparable among groups (-0.39% [-0.69 to -0.08], -0.05% [-0.38 to 0.27], -0.23% [-0.54 to 0.08], and -0.42% [-0.72 to -0.11] for BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, raloxifene 60 mg, and placebo, respectively). These reductions from baseline were statistically significant for BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg and placebo. The effect of both BZA/CE doses on breast density was generally consistent among subgroups based on age, body mass index, and years since menopause. Conclusions Treatment with BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg or BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg for 24 months did not affect mammographic breast density in this population of postmenopausal women.

Bazedoxifene/conjugated estrogens (BZA/CE) has demonstrated efficacy in improving vasomotor and vulvar/vaginal atrophy symptoms in postmenopausal women. This study evaluated the endometrial safety of BZA/CE and effects on bone mineral density (BMD) compared with CE/medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) and placebo.The Selective estrogens, Menopause, And Response to Therapy (SMART)-4 trial was a 1-year, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, phase-3 study in non-hysterectomized, postmenopausal women (n = 1061; aged 40 -65 years). Subjects received BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 or 0.625 mg, CE 0.45 mg/MPA 1.5 mg, or placebo daily. Primary endpoints were the incidence of endometrial hyperplasia and the change in lumbar spine BMD at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included the change in total hip BMD and rates of amenorrhea and breast pain.At 1 year, no cases of endometrial hyperplasia were identified in the BZA 20-mg/CE 0.45-mg group, while three cases (1.1%) were confirmed for the BZA 20-mg/CE 0.625-mg group (95% one-sided confidence interval upper limit4%). Both BZA/CE doses significantly increased lumbar spine and total hip BMD versus placebo (p ≤ 0.001) and showed low incidences of bleeding and breast tenderness, similar to placebo and significantly lower than for CE 0.45 mg/MPA 1.5 mg (p0.05). BZA/CE treatment was generally safe and well tolerated.BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 and 0.625 mg significantly improved BMD while maintaining endometrial safety and showed a favorable safety/tolerability profile over 1 year. BZA/CE may be a promising therapy for treating menopausal symptoms and preventing osteoporosis in non-hysterectomized, postmenopausal women.

Background/Aims Bone mass density values have been related with risk of vertebral fractures in post-menopausal women. However, bone mass density is not perfectly accurate in predicting risk of fracture, which decreases its usefulness as a surrogate in clinical trials. We propose a modeling framework with three interconnected parts to improve the evaluation of bone mass density accuracy in forecasting fractures after treatment. Methods The modeling framework includes: (1) a piecewise regression to describe non-linear temporal BMD changes more accurately than crude percent changes, (2) a structural equation model to analyze interdependencies among vertebral fractures and their potential risk factors in preference to regression techniques that consider only directional associations, and (3) a counterfactual causal interpretation of the direct and indirect relationships between treatment and occurrence of vertebral fractures. We apply the methods to BMD repeated measurements from a study of the effect of bazedoxifene acetate on incident vertebral fractures in three different geographical regions. Results We made four observations: (1) bone mass density changes varied largely across participants, (2) baseline age and body mass index influenced baseline bone mass density that, in turn, had an effect on prevalent fractures, (3) direct and/or indirect effects of bazedoxifene acetate on incident fractures were different across regions, and (4) estimates of indirect effects were sensible to the presence of post-treatment unmeasured confounders. In one region, around 40% of the bazedoxifene acetate effect on the occurrence of fracture is explained by its effect on bone mass density. Under the counterfactual approach, these 40% represent the average difference in the occurrence of fracture observed for untreated individuals when their bone mass density values are set at the value under bazedoxifene acetate versus under placebo. Conclusions Computational methods are available to evaluate and interpret the surrogacytic capability of a biomarker of a primary outcome.

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response late phase 2 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bazedoxifene in postmenopausal Japanese women 85 years of age or younger with osteoporosis. Eligible subjects received daily treatment with oral doses of bazedoxifene 20 or 40 mg or placebo for 2 years. Efficacy assessments included bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and other skeletal sites, bone turnover marker levels, lipid parameters, and incidence of new fractures. Of 429 randomized subjects, 387 were evaluable for efficacy, and 423 were included in the safety analyses (mean age, 64 years). At 2 years, the mean percent changes from baseline in lumbar spine BMD were significantly greater with bazedoxifene 20 and 40 mg (2.43% and 2.74%, respectively) than with placebo (−0.65%, p

Summary: Findings from this 5-year phase 3 study of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis showed that bazedoxifene was associated with an overall favorable safety and tolerability profile, with no evidence of endometrial or breast stimulation. Overall, the results at 5 years were consistent with those seen at 3 years. Introduction: We report safety and tolerability findings from a 5-year randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of bazedoxifene in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Methods: In the core study, healthy postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N=7,492; mean age, 66.4 years) were randomized to daily doses of bazedoxifene 20 or 40 mg, raloxifene 60 mg, or placebo for 3 years. During the 2-year study extension, the raloxifene 60-mg treatment arm was discontinued after the 3-year database was finalized, and subjects receiving bazedoxifene 40 mg were transitioned in a blinded manner to bazedoxifene 20 mg (bazedoxifene 40-/20-mg group) after 4 years. Safety and tolerability data are reported for subjects in the bazedoxifene 20- and 40-/20-mg and placebo groups; efficacy findings are reported elsewhere. Results: A total of 3,146 subjects in the bazedoxifene 20- and 40-mg and placebo groups were enrolled in the extension study (years 4 and 5). Overall, the 5-year incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs were similar among groups. The incidence of hot flushes and leg cramps was higher with bazedoxifene compared with placebo. Venous thromboembolic events, primarily deep vein thrombosis, were more frequently reported in the bazedoxifene groups compared with the placebo group. Reports of cardiac disorders and cerebrovascular events were few and evenly distributed among groups. Bazedoxifene showed a neutral effect on the breast and endometrium. Conclusion: Bazedoxifene was associated with an overall favorable safety and tolerability profile in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis over 5 years of therapy, consistent with findings at 3 years. © 2010 International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation.

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the endometrial, ovarian, and breast safety of bazedoxifene, a novel selective estrogen-receptor modulator, in postmenopausal women at risk for osteoporosis. Methods: Healthy postmenopausal women (N = 1,583; mean age, 57.6 y) with lumbar spine or femoral neck bone mineral density T scores between -1 and -2.5 and/or other clinical risk factors for osteoporosis were enrolled in a 24-month, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial. They received daily treatment with bazedoxifene 10, 20, or 40 mg; placebo; or raloxifene 60 mg. Reproductive safety assessments included periodic transvaginal ultrasound measurements of endometrial thickness, ovarian volume, and presence of ovarian cysts; periodic endometrial biopsies; and adverse event reporting. Results: Bazedoxifene was not associated with a significant change from baseline in mean endometrial thickness at month 24. The percentage of participants with a change from baseline in endometrial thickness or endometrial thickness greater than 5 mm at month 24 was similar among groups. There was no consensus diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia or malignancy in the bazedoxifene or raloxifene groups; the rates of other histologic findings, including endometrial polyps, were low (

OBJECTIVE: To determine the trend in incidence of fractures among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women during the periods immediately before and after publication of the Women's Health Initiative and Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) II data. DESIGN: This was an ecological study using a claims database for multiple healthcare plans. The cohort of women aged 40 to 69 years was included. Diagnostic codes for fractures likely to be osteoporosis related and prescriptions for hormone therapy and other bone-modifying medications were identified. Annual incidence rates and trends in incidence over time for fractures and prescriptions were determined for the period 2000 through 2005. RESULTS: Enrollment among women aged 40 to 69 years increased from 919,389 in 2000 to 2,872,372 in 2005. A total of 43,017 new fractures were identified. There was a significant increasing trend in age-adjusted rates of radius and ulna, vertebra, ribs, hip, pelvis, multiple, and pathologic fractures during the period from 2003 through 2005 (P < 0.03). The incidence of each fracture type was significantly greater during 2004 to 2005 than 2000 to 2001 (P < 0.04). The use of estrogen, estrogen plus progestin, and other hormones declined over the period from 2000 to 2003, whereas the use of other bone-modifying drugs increased from 2003 through 2005. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of fractures among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women increased significantly in the 3 years after publication of Women's Health Initiative and Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study II results. This trend followed a decline in the use of hormone therapy, concurrent with an increase in the use of other bone-modifying agents.

In this 3-yr, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study, healthy postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (55–85 yr of age) were treated with bazedoxifene 20 or 40 mg/d, raloxifene 60 mg/d, or placebo. The primary endpoint was incidence of new vertebral fractures after 36 mo; secondary endpoints included nonvertebral fractures, BMD, and bone turnover markers. Among 6847 subjects in the intent-to-treat population, the incidence of new vertebral fractures was significantly lower (p < 0.05) with bazedoxifene 20 mg (2.3%), bazedoxifene 40 mg (2.5%), and raloxifene 60 mg (2.3%) compared with placebo (4.1%), with relative risk reductions of 42%, 37%, and 42%, respectively. The treatment effect was similar among subjects with or without prevalent vertebral fracture (p = 0.89 for treatment by baseline fracture status interaction). The incidence of nonvertebral fractures with bazedoxifene or raloxifene was not significantly different from placebo. In a posthoc analysis of a subgroup of women at higher fracture risk (femoral neck T-score ≤ –3.0 and/or ≥1 moderate or severe vertebral fracture or multiple mild vertebral fractures; n = 1772), bazedoxifene 20 mg showed a 50% and 44% reduction in nonvertebral fracture risk relative to placebo (p = 0.02) and raloxifene 60 mg (p = 0.05), respectively. Bazedoxifene significantly improved BMD and reduced bone marker levels (p < 0.001 versus placebo). The incidence of vasodilatation, leg cramps, and venous thromboembolic events was higher with bazedoxifene and raloxifene compared with placebo. In conclusion, bazedoxifene significantly reduced the risk of new vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and decreased the risk of nonvertebral fracture in subjects at higher fracture risk.

Menopausal lipid profile changes may increase cardiovascular risk. The effects of conjugated estrogens (CE)/bazedoxifene (BZA), an approved menopausal therapy, on lipids have not been fully characterized.The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of CE/BZA on lipids in the Selective estrogens, Menopause, And Response to Therapy (SMART) trials for ≥ 1 year.This was a pooled analysis of 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled phase 3 trials (SMART-1, -4, and -5).The study was conducted in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific Region, and Latin America.Participants were nonhysterectomized postmenopausal women aged 40 to 75 years, not taking lipid-lowering medications (N = 2796).Treatments were CE 0.45 mg/BZA 20 mg, CE 0.625 mg/BZA 20 mg, and PBO.The adjusted mean percentage changes from baseline in total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, and the LDL-C/HDL-C ratio at 12 and 24 months were measured.At 12 months, CE 0.45 mg/BZA 20 mg and CE 0.625 mg/BZA 20 mg produced significant (P.001) improvements vs PBO in TC (-4.20% and -4.37% vs -0.88%), LDL-C (-9.33% and -10.78% vs -1.08%), HDL-C (4.59% and 6.21% vs 1.30%), and the LDL-C/HDL-C ratio (-11.59% and -14.00% vs -0.84%). Triglycerides were significantly (P.001) increased from baseline with both doses vs PBO (15.13% and 15.74% vs 4.43%). Similar trends (all P.001) were seen at 24 months when SMART-1 and SMART-4 were pooled (TC: -3.25% and -3.13% vs 0.95%; LDL-C: -7.47% and -8.08% vs 2.95%; HDL-C: 5.91% and 7.19% vs 1.72%; triglycerides: 18.87% and 18.82% vs 6.49%; and the LDL-C/HDL-C ratio: -10.05% and -12.82% vs 2.56%).CE/BZA was associated with mostly favorable changes in lipid parameters for up to 2 years in nonhysterectomized postmenopausal women.

This phase 3 study evaluated the endometrial safety of bazedoxifene (BZA)/conjugated estrogens (CE) and bone mineral density (BMD) effects vs BZA alone, hormone therapy, and placebo (PBO).The Selective estrogens, Menopause, And Response to Therapy (SMART)-5 trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, PBO- and active-controlled study in postmenopausal women with an intact uterus (N = 1843; aged 40-65 years) seeking treatment for menopausal symptoms. Subjects received daily oral BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 or 0.625 mg, BZA 20 mg, CE 0.45 mg/medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) 1.5 mg, or PBO. Primary endpoints were incidence of endometrial hyperplasia and percent change in lumbar spine BMD at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included additional osteoporosis parameters and assessments of tolerability and safety.At 12 months, endometrial hyperplasia incidence was low (1%) and similar among groups. The BZA/CE group showed significantly greater increases in lumbar spine and total hip BMD vs decreases with PBO (P.001); the CE/MPA group had increased lumbar spine BMD compared with that in the BZA/CE group. The BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 and 0.625 mg groups had cumulative amenorrhea rates similar to those with PBO and BZA and significantly higher than those with CE 0.45 mg/MPA 1.5 mg (P.001). The incidence of breast tenderness with BZA/CE was similar to that with PBO and BZA and significantly lower than with that with CE/MPA (P.01). Although adverse event (AE) rates were similar among the groups, the incidence of serious AEs overall and AE-related discontinuation rates were higher with CE/MPA than with BZA/CE, BZA, or PBO.BZA/CE showed low rates of endometrial hyperplasia and improved lumbar spine and total hip BMD and was generally safe and well tolerated.

The effects of bazedoxifene (BZA)/conjugated estrogens (CE) on sleep and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were evaluated in nonhysterectomized postmenopausal women who were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled phase 3 trial.The sleep/HRQoL substudy enrolled 459 women with bothersome moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms who were randomized to BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, BZA 20 mg, CE 0.45 mg/medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) 1.5 mg, or placebo for 1 year. On months 3 and 12, sleep parameters were evaluated using the Medical Outcomes Study sleep scale, and HRQoL was assessed using the Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) questionnaire.BZA/CE and CE/MPA significantly improved sleep and HRQoL compared with placebo. On month 3, most Medical Outcomes Study sleep parameter improvements with BZA/CE and CE/MPA versus placebo were not significant. On month 12, both BZA/CE doses and CE/MPA significantly improved time to fall asleep and sleep disturbance (P0.05 vs. placebo); BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg and CE/MPA also showed significant improvements in sleep adequacy and sleep problem indices I and II (P0.01 vs placebo). Both BZA/CE doses and CE/MPA significantly improved MENQOL vasomotor function score versus placebo at 3 and 12 months (P0.001). At 3 months, total MENQOL score was significantly improved with BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg and CE/MPA versus placebo (P0.05); at 12 months, both BZA/CE doses and CE/MPA showed significant improvements (P0.001).Symptomatic postmenopausal women who are treated with BZA/CE for 1 year demonstrate significant improvements in sleep and HRQoL, similar to women treated with CE/MPA.

OBJECTIVE Mediation modeling was used to evaluate the direct effects of bazedoxifene (BZA)/conjugated estrogens (CE) on sleep, compared with its indirect effects via improvements in hot flushes, in postmenopausal women enrolled in the SMART (Selective estrogens, Menopause, And Response to Therapy)-2 and SMART-5 trials. METHODS Statistical mediation modeling estimated the direct effects of BZA/CE on sleep disturbance (Medical Outcomes Study sleep scale) and its indirect effects via hot flush improvement (item 1 of the Menopause-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire). In SMART-2, a total of 318 women with moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) received BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, or placebo; in SMART-5, a total of 1,843 women seeking menopausal symptom treatment received BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, CE 0.45 mg/medroxyprogesterone acetate 1.5 mg, BZA 20 mg, or placebo. The SMART-5 sleep substudy enrolled 459 women with bothersome VMS and sleep disturbances. RESULTS In SMART-2, BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg and BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg had a primarily direct effect on sleep in symptomatic women (64% and 66%, respectively; P < 0.001). Conversely, in the overall SMART-5 population, effects were primarily indirect (82% and 75% for BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg and BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg, respectively; P < 0.01), suggesting that sleep improvement was largely mediated via hot flush improvements. In a subpopulation of SMART-5 (participants with bothersome VMS), BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg and BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg affected sleep disturbance directly (82% and 76%, respectively; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS BZA/CE improves sleep in postmenopausal women with moderate to severe and milder VMS. This study suggests that improvements occur directly in women with moderate to severe VMS and indirectly in less symptomatic women.

Objective To evaluate the clinical safety of bazedoxifene (BZA) on the reproductive tract in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis over 7 years. Study design This was a second, blinded, 2-year extension of a 3-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)- and active-controlled phase 3 trial. In the core study, subjects were randomized to receive BZA 20 or 40 mg, raloxifene 60 mg, or PBO. During years 4–5, the raloxifene arm was discontinued and subjects receiving BZA 40 mg were transitioned to BZA 20 mg. Subjects continued to receive BZA 20 mg or PBO during years 6–7. Main outcome measures The primary endpoint was the incidence of new vertebral fractures at 7 years (reported separately). Reproductive tract safety findings at 7 years are reported here. Endometrial thickness was assessed by transvaginal ultrasonography for subjects in the endometrial safety substudy. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout the study. Results At 7 years, the adjusted mean (±standard error) change in endometrial thickness was similar with BZA and PBO (−0.11 ± 0.21 and 0.07 ± 0.32 mm, respectively). The incidence of endometrial hyperplasia was low (0.1% for both groups). BZA showed significantly lower rates than PBO of endometrial carcinoma (0.1% vs. 0.4%; P = 0.020) and vaginitis (6.1% vs. 7.6%; P = 0.035). There were more cases of ovarian carcinoma with BZA (n = 4 [0.1%]) than PBO (n = 0); the difference was not statistically significant. Rates of breast-related and other gynecologic AEs were similar among groups. Conclusions BZA was associated with a favorable reproductive safety profile in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis over 7 years.

The reduced muscle mass and impaired muscle performance that define sarcopenia in older individuals are associated with increased risk of physical limitation and a variety of chronic diseases. They may also contribute to clinical frailty. A gradual erosion of quality of life (QoL) has been evidenced in these individuals, although much of this research has been done using generic QoL instruments, particularly the SF-36, which may not be ideal in older populations with significant comorbidities. This review and report of an expert meeting presents the current definitions of these geriatric syndromes (sarcopenia and frailty). It then briefly summarizes QoL concepts and specificities in older populations and examines the relevant domains of QoL and what is known concerning QoL decline with these conditions. It calls for a clearer definition of the construct of disability, argues that a disease-specific QoL instrument for sarcopenia/frailty would be an asset for future research, and discusses whether there are available and validated components that could be used to this end and whether the psychometric properties of these instruments are sufficiently tested. It calls also for an approach using utility weighting to provide some cost estimates and suggests that a time trade-off study could be appropriate. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York.

The aim of this study was to examine the number of hot flush symptom-free days in symptomatic postmenopausal women treated with bazedoxifene/conjugated estrogens (BZA/CE).In this 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase-3 study, 322 postmenopausal women aged 40-65 years with an intact uterus who had ≥ seven moderate-to-severe daily hot flushes (or ≥ 50 per week) were randomized to BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 or 0.625 mg or placebo. Subjects recorded the incidence and severity of hot flushes on daily diary cards. In this secondary analysis, the number of days per week without hot flushes from baseline to week 12 was determined. The percentage of women who experienced no hot flushes at week 12 was also evaluated.From baseline to week 12, the number of days per week without moderate-to-severe hot flushes or without any hot flushes steadily increased for women treated with BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 or 0.625 mg versus placebo. In addition, the rate of increase in days per week without any hot flushes was significantly greater with either BZA/CE dose than with placebo (p0.0001). Compared with placebo, the percentage of women who experienced no moderate-to-severe hot flushes or no severe hot flushes at week 12 was greater with BZA 20 mg/CE 0.45 mg (p0.01 and p0.05, respectively) and BZA 20 mg/CE 0.625 mg (p0.001 for both).BZA/CE increased the number of hot flush symptom-free days and the proportion of women without hot flushes over 12 weeks of therapy.

The relationship between baseline Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®) and treatment efficacy was evaluated using data from a pivotal phase 3 study. Relative risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, and all clinical fractures decreased with increasing probability of fracture for bazedoxifene (BZA) versus placebo but remained generally constant for raloxifene (RLX). To determine whether the FRAX® predicts osteoporosis treatment efficacy, we evaluated reductions in fracture incidence associated with BZA and RLX according to baseline fracture risk determined by FRAX® using data from a phase 3 osteoporosis treatment study. Hazard ratios (HRs) for effects of BZA and RLX versus placebo on incidence of vertebral, nonvertebral, and all clinical fractures were calculated using a Cox regression model. Cox regression analyses were performed in subgroups at or above 10-year fracture probability thresholds determined by FRAX®. HRs for the risk of vertebral, nonvertebral, and all clinical fractures versus placebo decreased with increasing 10-year fracture probability for BZA, while those for RLX remained stable. In all 10-year fracture probability subgroups, all BZA doses significantly reduced vertebral fracture risk versus placebo (HR = 0.22–0.66). BZA at 20, 40, and 20/40 mg significantly reduced risk of nonvertebral fractures (HR = 0.45, 0.44, and 0.45, respectively) and all clinical fractures (HR = 0.38, 0.41, and 0.40, respectively) for ≥20.0 % fracture probability. Vertebral fracture risk reductions for RLX 60 mg versus placebo were significant in subgroups at lower fracture probabilities (≥2.5– ≥ 10.0 %), but not higher (≥12.5 %), and in no subgroups for nonvertebral or all clinical fractures. The antifracture efficacy of BZA increased with increasing baseline FRAX® score, but there was no clear relationship between RLX and baseline FRAX®. These findings provide independent confirmation of current literature, suggesting that the relationship between FRAX® and treatment efficacy varies for different agents.

Osteoporosis is a significant public health concern, particularly for postmenopausal women. Current treatment options may not be appropriate for all women. Selective estrogen-receptor modulators (SERMs) are a class of molecules with tissue-selective activity. Bazedoxifene is currently in clinical development for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. In a 2-year, phase III, osteoporosis prevention study ( N = 1583), bazedoxifene 10, 20, and 40 mg was shown to preserve bone mineral density and decrease biochemical markers of bone turnover compared with placebo in postmenopausal women at risk for osteoporosis. In a pivotal 3-year, phase III, osteoporosis treatment study ( N = 7492), bazedoxifene 20 and 40 mg significantly reduced the incidence of new vertebral fractures compared with placebo ( p

We analyzed the relationships between bone mineral density (BMD) or bone turnover marker (BTM) changes and vertebral fracture incidence in women treated with bazedoxifene using a post hoc analysis from a 3-year randomized, placebo-controlled study evaluating the effect of bazedoxifene (20 or 40 mg) on fracture risk reduction. BMD was assessed at baseline and every 6 months for 3 years. Osteocalcin and C-telopeptide of type I collagen were assessed at baseline and at 3, 12, and 36 months. Vertebral fractures were assessed with a semiquantitative visual assessment. Data were available for 5,244 women, of whom 3,476 were treated with bazedoxifene. Using a logistic regression analysis and the classical Li approach, the proportion of fracture incidence explained by BMD change after 3 years of bazedoxifene treatment was 29 % for the total hip and 44 % for the femoral neck. The proportion of treatment explained by lumbar BMD change could not be quantified accurately because of the significant interaction between treatment and change in BMD. With the same model, the 12-month BTM changes explained up to 29 % of the fracture risk reduction observed with the two forms of bazedoxifene. In women treated with bazedoxifene, changes in femoral neck BMD, hip BMD, or BTMs explained a moderate proportion of the fracture risk reduction observed during the 3 years of follow-up. However, BMD or BTM changes cannot be recommended for individual monitoring of women treated with bazedoxifene.

Several selective estrogen receptor modulators are in clinical development for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bazedoxifene has shown significant reductions in vertebral and non-vertebral (in higher-risk women) fracture risk, with no evidence of breast or endometrial stimulation. Lasofoxifene has demonstrated significant reductions in vertebral and non-vertebral fracture risk, but has been associated with endometrial/uterine effects. Both selective estrogen receptor modulators were generally safe and well tolerated but have been associated with some "class effects" (e.g., hot flushes, venous thromboembolic events). A tissue selective estrogen complex partnering bazedoxifene with conjugated estrogens is under clinical investigation for the treatment of menopausal symptoms and osteoporosis prevention. Future directions in selective estrogen receptor modulator research include ospemifene and RAD 1901.