PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-25 (1042526)

Clipboard (0)
None

Related Articles

1.  Safety of drugs used in the treatment of osteoporosis 
A number of drug classes are licensed for the treatment of osteoporosis including bisphosphonates, recombinant human parathyroid hormone (PTH), strontium, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMS) and denosumab. This review discusses the safety of osteoporosis treatments and their efficacies. Recent concerns about the safety of calcium and high-dose vitamin D are discussed. Bisphosphonates have substantial postmarketing experience and a clearer picture of safety issues is emerging. Along with the well recognized effects on the gastrointestinal tract and kidney function, recently described adverse effects such as osteonecrosis of the jaw, oesophageal cancer, atrial fibrillation, subtrochanteric femur fractures and ocular complications of bisphosphonate therapy are discussed. Therapy with PTH is limited to two years’ duration because of the development of osteogenic sarcomas in animal studies, which appeared related to dose, duration and timing of therapy. Strontium should be used with caution in patients with renal impairment and its use has been associated with venous thromboembolism. The role of HRT and SERMs in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis is restricted as a result of an increased risk of stroke, venous thromboembolism and breast cancer. Postmarketing experience with denusomab is limited but a number of potential safety concerns including osteonecrosis of the jaw are emerging. All of these drugs have been proven to reduce fractures. The decision to use a drug to reduce fracture risk should be based on risk–benefit analysis of the drug and its suitability for individual patients.
doi:10.1177/2042098611411012
PMCID: PMC4110860  PMID: 25083210
adverse effects; bisphosphonates; drug safety; osteoporosis; recombinant human parathyroid hormone; strontium; vitamin D
2.  Cutaneous Side Effects of Antiosteoporosis Treatments 
Cutaneous adverse reactions are reported for many therapeutic agents and, in general, are observed in between 0% and 8% of treated patients depending on the drug. Antiosteoporotic agents are considered to be safe in terms of cutaneous effects, however there have been a number of case reports of cutaneous adverse reactions which warrant consideration. This was the subject of a working group meeting of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis in April 2009, which focused on the impact of cutaneous adverse reactions and drug-induced hypersensitivity in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This position paper was drafted following these discussions and includes a flowchart for their recognition. Cutaneous adverse reactions observed with antiosteoporotic agents were reviewed and included information from case reports, regulatory documents and pharmacovigilance. These reactions ranged from benign effects including exanthematous or maculopapular eruption (drug rash), photosensitivity and urticaria, to the severe and potentially life-threatening reactions of angioedema, drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), Stevens Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. A review of the available evidence demonstrates that cutaneous adverse reactions occur with all commonly used antiosteoporotic treatments. Notably, there are reports of Stevens Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis for bisphosphonates, and of DRESS and toxic epidermal necrolysis for strontium ranelate. These severe reactions remain very rare (<1 in 10,000 cases). In general, with proper management and early recognition, including immediate and permanent withdrawal of the culprit agent, accompanied by hospitalization, rehydration and systemic corticosteroids if necessary, the prognosis is positive.
doi:10.1177/1759720X10387202
PMCID: PMC3383534  PMID: 22870464
antiosteoporosis treatments; cutaneous adverse reactions; hypersensitivity reactions; osteoporosis
3.  Fracture prevention in postmenopausal women 
Clinical Evidence  2011;2011:1109.
Introduction
The lifetime risk of fracture in white women is 20% for the spine, 15% for the wrist, and 18% for the hip, with an exponential increase in risk beyond the age of 50 years.
Methods and outcomes
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of bisphosphonates to prevent fractures in postmenopausal women? What are the effects of pharmacological treatments other than bisphosphonates to prevent fractures in postmenopausal women? What are the effects of non-pharmacological treatments to prevent fractures in postmenopausal women? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
Results
We found 71 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
Conclusions
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: alendronate, calcium, calcium plus vitamin D, clodronate, denosumab, etidronate, exercise, hip protectors, hormone replacement therapy, ibandronate, multifactorial non-pharmacological interventions, pamidronate, parathyroid hormone, raloxifene, risedronate, strontium ranelate, vitamin D, vitamin D analogues, and zoledronate.dfsg
Key Points
The lifetime risk of fracture in white women is 20% for the spine, 15% for the wrist, and 18% for the hip, with an exponential increase in risk beyond the age of 50 years. About 13% of people die in the year after a hip fracture, and most survivors lose some or all of their previous independence.
Alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, denosumab, and parathyroid hormone reduce vertebral and non-vertebral fractures compared with placebo. Etidronate, ibandronate, pamidronate, and raloxifene reduce vertebral fractures, but have not been shown to reduce non-vertebral fractures.Raloxifene protects against breast cancer, but increases venous thromboembolic events and stroke compared with placebo. Strontium ranelate reduces vertebral and, to some extent, non-vertebral fractures. Clodronate may reduce non-vertebral fractures at 3 years, but its effects on rate of vertebral fracture are unclear.
CAUTION: Hormone replacement therapy may reduce fractures, but it increases the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular events. The risks of adverse effects of treatment are thought to outweigh the beneficial effects of hormone replacement therapy in prevention of fractures.
Combined calcium plus vitamin D or vitamin D analogues alone may reduce vertebral and non-vertebral fractures, but trials have given inconclusive results. Monotherapy with calcium or vitamin D has not been shown to reduce fractures, and calcium alone may potentially be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular adverse effects.
We don't know whether multifactorial non-pharmacological interventions including environmental manipulation or regular exercise reduce the risk of fractures. Hip protectors may reduce the risk of hip fractures in nursing-home residents, but compliance tends to be low.
Calcitonin was included in an earlier version of this review. However, in light of a drug alert (http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/) it was removed from this version because of new harms data. It will be covered in the next update of this review when these new harms data can be incorporated.
PMCID: PMC3217780  PMID: 21542947
4.  A comparison of adverse event and fracture efficacy data for strontium ranelate in regulatory documents and the publication record 
BMJ Open  2014;4(10):e005787.
Objective
Recently, the European Medicines Agency reported that strontium ranelate increases myocardial infarction risk in postmenopausal women, 8.5 years after it was registered for use in osteoporosis. Unreported serious adverse events in clinical trials for other pharmaceuticals have been described in recent years. We assessed reporting of adverse events and fracture efficacy of strontium.
Methods
We compared data on adverse effects (myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism) and fracture efficacy of strontium in publicly available regulatory documents with data in publications retrieved from searching PubMed.
Results
We identified 5 regulatory documents and 9 primary publications of 7 randomised, placebo-controlled trials of strontium that reported relevant data. We identified several areas of concern in these reports: the increased risk of myocardial infarction with strontium was not identified in a pivotal phase 3 clinical trial despite specific regulatory review of cardiovascular events; data on myocardial infarction were not included in any primary publication; increased risks of venous thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism with strontium were not reported in either of the phase 3 clinical trials; data on venous thromboembolism were reported in only 5 of 9 primary publications, data on pulmonary embolism in only 2 of 9 primary publications, and either was discussed in <50% of subsequent review articles. There were differences in participant numbers, fracture cases and venous thromboembolism cases between regulatory documents and primary publications. Based on all available data from primary publications and regulatory documents, the number of fractures prevented by strontium use is similar to the number of extra cases of venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction caused by strontium use.
Conclusions
The risks of strontium use are similar to the benefits. Full disclosure of the clinical trial data and regulatory documents would allow clinicians and their patients to decide whether use of the drug is worthwhile.
doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005787
PMCID: PMC4187454  PMID: 25293384
GERIATRIC MEDICINE; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS
5.  Treatment of primary osteoporosis in men 
With the aging of the population worldwide, osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures are becoming a serious health care issue in the Western world. Although less frequent than in women, osteoporosis in men is a relatively common problem. Hip and vertebral fractures are particularly relevant, being associated with significant mortality and disability. Since bone loss and fragility fractures in men have been recognized as serious medical conditions, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been undertaken in males with osteoporosis to investigate the anti-fracture efficacy of the pharmacological agents commonly used to treat postmenopausal osteoporosis. Overall, treatments for osteoporosis in men are less defined than in women, mainly due to the fact that there are fewer RCTs performed in male populations, to the relatively smaller sample sizes, and to the lack of long-term extension studies. However, the key question is whether men are expected to respond differently to osteoporosis therapies than women. The pharmacological properties of bisphosphonates, teriparatide, denosumab, and strontium ranelate make such differentiation unlikely, and available clinical data support their efficacy in men with primary osteoporosis as well as in women. In a series of well-designed RCTs, alendronate, risedronate, zoledronic acid, and teriparatide were demonstrated to reduce the risk of new vertebral fractures in men presenting with primary osteoporosis (including osteoporosis associated with low testosterone levels) and to improve the bone mineral density (BMD). In preliminary studies, ibandronate, denosumab, and strontium ranelate also showed their beneficial effects on surrogate outcomes (BMD and markers of bone turnover) in men with osteoporosis. Although direct evidence about their non-vertebral anti-fracture efficacy are lacking, the effects of bisphosphonates, denosumab, teriparatide, and strontium ranelate on surrogate outcomes (BMD and markers of bone turnover) were similar to those reported in pivotal RCTs undertaken in postmenopausal women, in which vertebral and non-vertebral anti-fracture efficacy have been clearly demonstrated. In conclusion, sufficient data exist to support the use of these pharmacological agents in men with primary osteoporosis. Further RCTs are warranted to establish their long-term efficacy and safety.
doi:10.2147/CIA.S44057
PMCID: PMC4283986  PMID: 25565793
bisphosphonates; teriparatide; denosumab; strontium ranelate
6.  Results of Indirect and Mixed Treatment Comparison of Fracture Efficacy for Osteoporosis Treatments: a Meta-Analysis 
Purpose
This study illustrates how network meta-analysis techniques (meta-analysis, adjusted indirect comparison, mixed treatment comparison [MTC]) can provide comparisons of the relative efficacy of postmenopausal osteoporosis therapies in the absence of comprehensive head-to-head trials.
Methods
Source articles were identified in MEDLINE; EMBASE; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via Wiley Interscience; and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) between April 28, 2009 and November 4, 2009. Two reviewers identified English-language articles reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with on-label dosing of marketed osteoporosis agents and fracture endpoints. Trial design, population characteristics, intervention and comparator, fracture outcomes and adverse events were abstracted for analysis. Primary analyses included data from RCTs with fracture endpoints. Sensitivity analyses also included studies with fractures reported through adverse event reports. Meta-analysis compared fracture outcomes for pharmacologic therapies versus placebo (fixed and random effects models); adjusted indirect comparisons and MTC assessed fracture risk in postmenopausal women treated with denosumab versus other agents.
Results
Using data from 33 studies, random effects meta-analysis showed that all agents except etidronate significantly reduced risk of new vertebral fractures compared with placebo; denosumab, risedronate, and zoledronic acid significantly reduced non-vertebral and hip fracture while alendronate, strontium ranelate, and teriparatide significantly reduced risk for non-vertebral fractures. MTC showed denosumab as more effective than strontium ranelate, raloxifene, alendronate, and risedronate in preventing new vertebral fractures.
Conclusions
The conditional estimates of relative treatment efficacy indicate that there are important differences in fracture risk reduction profiles for marketed pharmacologic therapies for postmenopausal osteoporosis.
doi:10.1007/s00198-012-2068-9
PMCID: PMC3662000  PMID: 22832638
osteoporosis; treatment efficacy; postmenopausal women; meta-analysis; mixed treatment comparison
7.  Extraskeletal benefits and risks of calcium, vitamin D and anti-osteoporosis medications 
Osteoporosis International  2012;23(Suppl 1):S1-S23.
Summary
Drugs used for the prevention and the treatment of osteoporosis exert various favourable and unfavourable extra-skeletal effects whose importance is increasingly recognized notably for treatment selection.
Introduction
The therapeutic armamentarium for the prevention and the treatment of osteoporosis is increasingly large, and possible extra-skeletal effects of available drugs could influence the choice of a particular compound.
Methods
The present document is the result of a national consensus, based on a systematic and critical review of the literature.
Results
Observational research has suggested an inverse relationship between calcium intake and cardiovascular diseases, notably through an effect on blood pressure, but recent data suggest a possible deleterious effect of calcium supplements on cardiovascular risk. Many diverse studies have implicated vitamin D in the pathogenesis of clinically important non-skeletal functions or diseases, especially muscle function, cardiovascular disease, autoimmune diseases and common cancers. The possible effects of oral or intravenous bisphosphonates are well-known. They have been associated with an increased risk of oesophageal cancer or atrial fibrillation, but large-scale studies have not found any association with bisphosphonate use. Selective oestrogen receptor modulators have demonstrated favourable or unfavourable extra-skeletal effects that vary between compounds. Strontium ranelate has a limited number of non-skeletal effects. A reported increase in the risk of venous thromboembolism is not found in observational studies, and very rare cases of cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions have been reported. Denosumab has been introduced recently, and its extra-skeletal effects still have to be assessed.
Conclusion
Several non-skeletal effects of bone drugs are well demonstrated and influence treatment choices.
doi:10.1007/s00198-011-1891-8
PMCID: PMC3273686  PMID: 22311111
Bisphosphonate; Calcium; Denosumab; Osteoporosis; SERM; Strontium ranelate; Vitamin D
8.  Effects of long-term strontium ranelate treatment on vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis 
Osteoporosis International  2009;20(10):1663-1673.
Summary
Vertebral fractures are a major adverse consequence of osteoporosis. In a large placebo-controlled trial in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, strontium ranelate reduced vertebral fracture risk by 33% over 4 years, confirming the role of strontium ranelate as an effective long-term treatment in osteoporosis.
Introduction
Osteoporotic vertebral fractures are associated with increased mortality, morbidity, and loss of quality-of-life (QoL). Strontium ranelate (2 g/day) was shown to prevent bone loss, increase bone strength, and reduce vertebral and peripheral fractures. The preplanned aim of this study was to evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate.
Methods
A total of 1,649 postmenopausal osteoporotic women were randomized to strontium ranelate or placebo for 4 years, followed by a 1-year treatment-switch period for half of the patients. Primary efficacy criterion was incidence of patients with new vertebral fractures over 4 years. Lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) and QoL were also evaluated.
Results
Over 4 years, risk of vertebral fracture was reduced by 33% with strontium ranelate (risk reduction = 0.67, p < 0.001). Among patients with two or more prevalent vertebral fractures, risk reduction was 36% (p < 0.001). QoL, assessed by the QUALIOST®, was significantly better (p = 0.025), and patients without back pain were greater (p = 0.005) with strontium ranelate than placebo over 4 years. Lumbar BMD increased over 5 years in patients who continued with strontium ranelate, while it decreased in patients who switched to placebo. Emergent adverse events were similar between groups.
Conclusion
In this 4- and 5-year study, strontium ranelate is an effective and safe treatment for long-term treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.
doi:10.1007/s00198-008-0825-6
PMCID: PMC2744775  PMID: 19153678
Bone densitometry; Menopause; Osteoporotic fracture; Osteoporosis treatment; Strontium ranelate
9.  Strontium Ranelate: The Pathophysiological Rationale 
Skeletal metabolism and the replacement of damaged tissue with the same amount of intact bone depends on the correct balance between bone formation and bone resorption.
The existence of an imbalance between bone formation and resorption is a concept central to understanding of the pathophysiology of osteoporosis and the reduction of fracture risk.
With aging, the volume of bone that is formed during the bone remodelling process and after injury is less than the volume absorbed during the bone resorption phase; this results in bone loss and increased bone fragility. In addition to bone mineral density, many other properties of bone are determined by the balance between bone formation and bone resorption. A bone that is biomechanically more fragile is also a bone that consolidates more slowly after a fracture event. Although the fracture healing stages are the same even in the presence of osteoporosis, recent studies have shown a slowdown in the process of consolidation when osteoporosis is present. In particular, strategies to reduce fracture risk and facilitate the process of consolidation of the fracture may be a primary criterion for selection.
The ability to modulate anabolic and catabolic phenomena in the skeleton, both locally and systemically, opens up a new horizon for the reduction of fracture risk and the enhancement of bone healing, particularly when the bone is qualitatively and/or quantitatively compromised.
Clinical research has recently allowed the development of therapies, such as treatment with strontium ranelate, able to increase production of bone matrix by osteoblasts and to act positively on the distribution of the skeletal microarchitecture. Strontium ranelate is able to rebalance bone turnover in favour of the formation of more resistant and elastic bone, by stimulating osteoblasts and inhibiting the resorptive activity of osteoclasts, thereby ensuring rapid and lasting protection against the risk of fractures. In vitro studies have shown that the drug is able to promote replication of the first pre-osteoblasts and their differentiation into mature osteoblasts and osteocytes interacting with the receptor CaSR and through the increased synthesis of OPG. Thanks, again, to the participation of the CaSR receptor, but also by reducing the production of RANKL, strontium ranelate decreases the resorptive activity of osteoclasts. The anabolic action of strontium ranelate in terms of mineral apposition rate in both cortical and trabecular bone was demonstrated on bone biopsies analysed by three-dimensional micro-CT. The drug was shown to increase the number of trabeculae, the cortical thickness, and the total bone volume. The bone-forming activity of strontium ranelate was also demonstrated in comparative studies versus teriparatide and antiresorptive agents. In experimental studies the bone-forming effect of strontium ranelate leads to an increase in the bone callus volume and its maturation and, in turn, to an acceleration of the consolidation of the fracture and better implant osteointegration.
In conclusion, the mechanism of action of strontium ranelate, which inhibits bone resorption in favour of new bone formation, is able to counteract, in a physiological manner, the bone loss associated with advancing age. The net effect is an increase in bone mass, trabecular and cortical bone, which explains its anti-fracture efficacy. The drug’s ability to stimulate bone formation seems to unfold at the level of the callus allowing improved fracture healing and in the case of implants potential improvement of implant osteointegration.
PMCID: PMC3213810
10.  Persistence at 12 months with denosumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: interim results from a prospective observational study 
Osteoporosis International  2014;26:361-372.
Summary
To determine persistence with subcutaneous denosumab every 6 months in women being treated for osteoporosis, we conducted a single-arm prospective, observational study in the United States and Canada. Among 935 patients enrolled, 12-month persistence was 82 %, with 66 patients (7 %) reporting serious adverse events and 19 patients (2 %) reporting fractures.
Introduction
Increased persistence with osteoporosis therapy is associated with reduced fracture risk. Denosumab reduced fracture risk in clinical trials; persistence in community settings is undetermined. This study evaluates persistence with denosumab in community practice in the United States (US) and Canada.
Methods
In a 24-month multicenter, prospective, single-arm, observational study, women being treated for osteoporosis were enrolled ≤4 weeks after the first subcutaneous injection of denosumab. For this 12-month prespecified interim analysis, endpoints include persistence (one injection at study entry and another within 6 months + 8 weeks), attributes associated with persistence (univariate analysis), and serious adverse events (SAEs).
Results
Among 935 patients (mean age 71 years), mean baseline T-scores were −2.18 (femoral neck) and −2.00 (lumbar spine); 50 % of patients had experienced osteoporotic fracture(s). At 12 months, 82 % of patients were persistent with denosumab. Baseline factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with higher persistence included use of osteoporosis medications >5 years previously, lumbar spine T-score > −2.5, and treatment by female physicians (US). Lower persistence was associated (p < 0.05) with psychiatric diagnoses including depression, southern US residence, being divorced, separated, or widowed (US), and prior hip fracture (Canada). SAEs were reported in 66 patients (7 %); no SAEs of osteonecrosis of the jaw, atypical femoral fracture, fracture healing complications, hypocalcemia, eczema, or hypersensitivity were reported. Nineteen patients (2 %) reported osteoporotic fractures.
Conclusions
The 12-month persistence observed in this single-arm open-label study of US and Canadian community practice extends the evidence regarding denosumab’s potential role in reducing fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00198-014-2871-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
doi:10.1007/s00198-014-2871-6
PMCID: PMC4286624  PMID: 25236877
Adherence; Compliance; Denosumab; Observational study; Osteoporosis; Persistence
11.  Fracture prevention in postmenopausal women 
Clinical Evidence  2010;2010:1109.
Introduction
The lifetime risk of fracture in white women is 20% for the spine, 15% for the wrist, and 18% for the hip, with an exponential increase in risk beyond the age of 50 years.
Methods and outcomes
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of bisphosphonates to prevent fractures in postmenopausal women? What are the effects of pharmacological treatments other than bisphosphonates to prevent fractures in postmenopausal women? What are the effects of non-pharmacological treatments to prevent fractures in postmenopausal women? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
Results
We found 78 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
Conclusions
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: alendronate, calcitonin, calcium, calcium plus vitamin D, clodronate, etidronate, exercise, hip protectors, hormone replacement therapy, ibandronate, multifactorial non-pharmacological interventions, pamidronate, parathyroid hormone, raloxifene, risedronate, strontium ranelate, vitamin D, vitamin D analogues, and zoledronate.
Key Points
The lifetime risk of fracture in white women is 20% for the spine, 15% for the wrist, and 18% for the hip, with an exponential increase in risk beyond the age of 50 years. About 13% of people die in the year after a hip fracture, and most survivors lose some or all of their previous independence.
Alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, and parathyroid hormone reduce vertebral and non-vertebral fractures compared with placebo. Etidronate, ibandronate, pamidronate, and raloxifene reduce vertebral fractures, but have not been shown to reduce non-vertebral fractures. Raloxifene protects against breast cancer, but increases venous thromboembolic events and stroke compared with placebo. Strontium ranelate reduces vertebral and, to some extent, non-vertebral fractures. Calcitonin may reduce vertebral fractures over 1 to 5 years, but has not been shown to reduce non-vertebral fractures. Clodronate may reduce non-vertebral fractures at 3 years, but its effects on rate of vertebral fracture are unclear.
CAUTION: Hormone replacement therapy may reduce fractures, but it increases the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular events. The risks of adverse effects of treatment are thought to outweigh the beneficial effects of hormone replacement therapy in prevention of fractures.
Combined calcium plus vitamin D, or vitamin D analogues alone, may reduce vertebral and non-vertebral fractures, but studies have given inconclusive results. Monotherapy with calcium or vitamin D has not been shown to reduce fractures.
We don't know whether multifactorial non-pharmacological interventions including environmental manipulation, or regular exercise, reduce the risk of fractures. Hip protectors may reduce the risk of hip fractures in nursing-home residents, but compliance tends to be low.
PMCID: PMC2907603
12.  New strategies for osteoporosis patients previously managed with strontium ranelate 
The aim of this article is to describe potential alternatives to patients no longer eligible for management with strontium ranelate for osteoporosis according to the recommendations by the European Medicines Agency. A systematic search of Pubmed was done for papers on fracture efficacy of various treatments for osteoporosis, and potential harms especially in terms of cardiovascular events and stroke. The results showed that drugs more efficacious in terms of relative risk reduction of fractures than strontium ranelate were alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, and denosumab. Raloxifene, as for strontium, may be associated with an increased risk of deep venous thromboembolism and fatal stroke. In terms of cardiovascular events special attention may be given to calcium supplements. Thus, patients at risk of stroke and ischemic cardiac events such as acute myocardial infarction should not use strontium ranelate. Ideally more efficacious drugs in terms of fracture reduction should be used such as alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate or denosumab. Raloxifene may pose a special problem as this too may be associated with an increased risk of fatal strokes. Other less-potent drugs in terms of fracture reduction should only be used if no alternatives are available (ibandronate, pamidronate, clodronate). Parathyroid hormone or analogs may be used for a limited time interval in specially selected patients and needs to be followed up with antiresorptive treatment to prevent loss of the bone gained. However, it should be remembered that no head-to-head comparison studies exist.
doi:10.1177/1759720X14552070
PMCID: PMC4239150  PMID: 25435924
alendronate; bisphosphonate; cardiovascular; denosumab; raloxifene; stroke; strontium ranelate; teriparatide
13.  Updated Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis: A Local Perspective 
Annals of Saudi Medicine  2011;31(2):111-128.
Postmenopausal osteoporosis and osteoporosis in elderly men are major health problems, with a significant medical and economic burden. Although osteopenia and osteoporosis are more common locally than in the West, fracture rates are generally less than in Western countries. Vitamin D deficiency is common in the region and contributes adversely to bone health. Vitamin D deficiency should be suspected and treated in all subjects with ostopenia or osteoporosis. The use of risk factors to determine fracture risk has been adopted by the World Health Organization and many international societies. Absolute fracture risk methodology improves the use of resources by targeting subjects at higher risk of fractures for screening and management. The King Faisal Specialist Hospital Osteoporosis Working Group recommends screening for women 65 years and older and for men 70 years and older. Younger subjects with clinical risk factors and persons with clinical evidence of osteoporosis or diseases leading to osteoporosis should also be screened. These guidelines provide recommendations for treatment for postmenopausal women and men older than 50 years presenting with osteoporotic fractures for persons having osteoporosis—after excluding secondary causes—or for persons having low bone mass and a high risk for fracture. The Working Group has suggested an algorithm to use at King Faisal Specialist Hospital that is based on the availability, cost, and level of evidence of various therapeutic modalities. Adequate calcium and vitamin D supplement are recommended for all. Weekly alendronate (in the absence of contraindications) is recommended as first-line therapy. Alternatives to alendronate are raloxifene or strontium ranelate. Second-line therapies are zoledronic acid intravenously once yearly, when oral therapy is not feasible or complicated by side effects, or teriparatide in established osteoporosis with fractures.
doi:10.4103/0256-4947.77502
PMCID: PMC3102469  PMID: 21403406
14.  Strontium ranelate: a novel treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis: a review of safety and efficacy 
Clinical Interventions in Aging  2006;1(4):367-375.
Strontium ranelate is a new orally administered agent for the treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis that reduces the risk of vertebral and hip fractures. Evidence for the safety and efficacy of strontium ranelate comes from two large multinational trials, the SOTI (Spinal Osteoporosis Therapeutic Intervention) and TROPOS (Treatment Of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis) studies. The SOTI study evaluated vertebral fracture prevention in 1649 postmenopausal women with a mean age of 69 y. The subjects all had at least one previous vertebral fracture and a low spine bone mineral density (BMD) (equivalent to a Hologic spine T-score below −1.9). The strontium ranelate group had a 41% lower risk of a new vertebral fracture than the placebo group over the three-year study period (relative risk [RR]=0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48–0.73; p<0.001). The TROPOS study evaluated non-vertebral fracture prevention in 5091 postmenopausal women with a mean age of 77 y. The subjects were aged 74 y and over (or 70–74 y with one additional risk factor) and a low femoral neck BMD (equivalent to an NHANES III [Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey] T-score below −2.2). Over the three-year study period there was a 16% reduction in all non-vertebral fractures (RR=0.84; 95% CI 0.702–0.995; p=0.04) and a 19% reduction at the principal sites for non-vertebral fractures. The TROPOS study was not powered to investigate hip fracture risk. However, in a high risk group of women aged 74 y and over and with an NHANES III femoral neck T-score less than −2.4 there was a 36% reduction in hip fracture risk (RR=0.64; 95% CI: 0.412–0.997; p=0.046). The overall incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly from placebo and were generally mild and transient, the most common being nausea and diarrhea. Strontium ranelate is a useful addition to the range of anti-fracture treatments available for treating postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and is the only treatment proven to be effective at preventing both vertebral and hip fractures in women aged 80 y and over.
PMCID: PMC2699648  PMID: 18046914
Strontium ranelate; osteoporosis treatment; postmenopausal women; vertebral fracture prevention; hip fracture prevention
15.  A review on strontium ranelate long-term antifracture efficacy in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis 
Osteoporotic fractures are one of the major causes of increased morbidity and mortality in postmenopausal women and the overall aging population. One of the major issues in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis is to find a safe and effective treatment in the long term (>3 years) to achieve and maintain a reduction in the risk of fracture. Strontium ranelate (PROTELOS®) is a relatively novel drug, currently approved in Europe for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Strontium ranelate is the first agent of a new therapeutic class in osteoporosis, capable of both promoting bone formation and, to a lesser extent, inhibiting bone resorption. This uncoupling in bone turnover results in a net gain in bone mineral density (BMD), bone quality improvement and reduction in risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, as initially demonstrated in the preplanned long-term registrative trials SOTI (Spinal Osteoporosis Therapeutic Intervention) and TROPOS (Treatment of Peripheral Osteoporosis) at 5 years. Recently, open-label extensions of the SOTI and TROPOS trials up to 8 and, recently, 10 years have confirmed the sustained efficacy of strontium ranelate in increasing BMD, the long-term safety profile and the high compliance to treatment, independently from baseline BMD or other risk factors for osteoporotic fractures. Recent economic impact analyses have proved that long-term treatment with strontium ranelate is highly cost effective, especially in women older than 70 years of age. Histomorphometric analyses in animals and humans participating in the phase III trials have proved that the quality of mineralization is preserved in the long term and bone microarchitecture is ameliorated, with increased bone strength. Thus, strontium ranelate has been confirmed to be an effective compound for the long-term, chronic treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.
doi:10.1177/1759720X13483187
PMCID: PMC3707343  PMID: 23858336
anabolic; antiresorptive; bone formation; bone mineral density; bone resorption; mineralization; safety; tolerability
16.  Design and methods of a postmarketing pharmacoepidemiology study assessing long-term safety of Prolia® (denosumab) for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis‡ 
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety  2013;22(10):1107-1114.
Purpose
To describe the rationale and methods for a prospective, open-cohort study assessing the long-term safety of Prolia® for treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) in postmarketing settings.
Methods
Data will be derived from United States Medicare, United Healthcare, and Nordic (Denmark, Sweden, Norway) national registries. Observation will begin on the date of first Prolia® regulatory approval (May 26, 2010) and continue for 10 years. Women with PMO will be identified by postmenopausal age, osteoporosis diagnosis, osteoporotic fracture, or osteoporosis treatment. Exposure to Prolia® and bisphosphonates will be updated during follow-up; exposure cohorts will be defined based on patient-years during which patients are on- or post-treatment. Nine adverse events (AEs) will be assessed based on diagnosis codes: osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), atypical femoral fracture (AFF), fracture healing complications, hypocalcemia, infection, dermatologic AEs, acute pancreatitis, hypersensitivity, and new primary malignancy. Medical review will confirm selected potential cases of ONJ and AFF. Incidence rates (IRs) of AEs will be described overall and for exposure cohorts; multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models will compare IRs of AEs across exposure cohorts. Utilization patterns of Prolia® for approved, and unapproved indications will be described.
Conclusion
This study is based on comprehensive preliminary research and considers methodological challenges specific to the study population. The integrated data systems used in this regulatory committed program can serve as a powerful data resource to assess diverse and rare AEs over time. © 2013 Amgen Inc. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
doi:10.1002/pds.3477
PMCID: PMC4230463  PMID: 23857864
postmenopausal osteoporosis; Prolia® (denosumab); postmarketing drug safety; pharmacovigilance; database; pharmacoepidemiology methods; pharmacoepidemiology
17.  Efficacy of Strontium Ranelate in Combination with a D-Hormone Analog for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis 
Drugs in R&D  2014;14(4):315-324.
Background
Vitamin D supplements are recommended in individuals with vitamin D insufficiency and established osteoporosis to reduce risk of fracture and falling. Active vitamin D metabolites have been found to be more effective for fall prevention than native vitamin D.
Objectives
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of strontium ranelate in combination with alfacalcidol and strontium ranelate alone on bone mineral density (BMD) and fall risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
Methods
A total of 48 women (mean age 62.4 years) with postmenopausal osteoporosis were randomized to strontium ranelate monotherapy 2 g/day (n = 16), strontium ranelate 2 g/day plus alfacalcidol 1 μg (n = 16) or control (n = 16) and followed for 6 months. All women received calcium and vitamin D3 supplements. BMD was measured at the lumbar spine and proximal femora at the beginning and end of therapy. Patients performed functional tests such as the “up and go” and chair rising tests to estimate risk of fall status. Biochemical markers of bone turnover were also assessed.
Results
Statistically significant increases in BMD compared with baseline values and the control group were observed in both strontium ranelate treatment groups. Increases were also statistically significant in the strontium ranelate combination group compared with strontium ranelate alone. Strontium ranelate combination therapy for 6 months improved patients’ ability to perform functional tests as well as increasing the number of women capable of performing the tests. No significant changes were observed in women receiving strontium ranelate monotherapy or in the control group. Serum levels of β-CrossLaps, a marker of bone resorption, were significantly reduced compared with control in both strontium ranelate groups. A significantly greater reduction was observed in the strontium ranelate combination group compared with strontium ranelate alone (24.0 %; P = 0.008). Increases in type 1 procollagen total N-terminal propeptide (TP1NP), a marker of bone formation, reached statistical significance in both strontium ranelate groups compared with baseline.
Conclusion
Strontium ranelate and alfacalcidol combination therapy improves bone quality, fall risk and markers of bone turnover to a greater extent than strontium ranelate alone in patients with established osteoporosis.
doi:10.1007/s40268-014-0069-1
PMCID: PMC4269821  PMID: 25480348
18.  Updates on mechanism of action and clinical efficacy of risedronate in osteoporosis 
Summary
Risedronate is a heterocyclic orally active aminobisphosphonate and it belongs to the bisphosphonate category: these drugs are powerful bone resorption inhibitors, thanks to their affinity for hydroxyapatite crystals at bone mineral matrix level and to their inhibiting effects on osteoclast activity, using the ability of inhibiting enzyme FPPS. Recent observations have reported that risedronate can decrease resorption entity, not only of the trabecular bone, but also of the cortical bone, modifying therefore the (bone compact) thickness and the cortical porosity entity, which is largely responsible of femoral fracture especially among elderly patients. Various controlled studies have proved the efficacy of risedronate in reducing fragility fracture risk significantly. In particular, it is able to lower in a very significant way the incidence of vertebral, non-vertebral and femoral fractures, with precocity of effects after only six months of therapy. The extension of protocols, moreover, has marked its efficacy even after seven years of treatment. Under the metabolic profile, these studies have also shown that risedronate activity can reduce bone resorption markers and increase bone density values at lumbar and femoral level. Results emerged from a group of women aged over 80 are relevant: risedronate has proved capable of decreasing femoral fracture risk. Also in male and steroidal osteoporosis, clinical controlled studies have shown that risedronate is effective in decreasing vertebral fracture incidence. Lastly, tolerability: the main side effects concern the gastrointestinal tract and they are usually rare, of minor entity and can be solved by sospending the treatment. Acute phase reaction is rare, due to risedronate oral administration; it is also valid for osteonecrosis of the jaw and atypical fractures.
PMCID: PMC4269145  PMID: 25568655
osteoporosis; bisphosphonates; risedronate; fractures; osteoclasts
19.  Vitamin K Supplementation in Postmenopausal Women with Osteopenia (ECKO Trial): A Randomized Controlled Trial 
PLoS Medicine  2008;5(10):1-12.
Background
Vitamin K has been widely promoted as a supplement for decreasing bone loss in postmenopausal women, but the long-term benefits and potential harms are unknown. This study was conducted to determine whether daily high-dose vitamin K1 supplementation safely reduces bone loss, bone turnover, and fractures.
Methods and Findings
This single-center study was designed as a 2-y randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, extended for earlier participants for up to an additional 2 y because of interest in long-term safety and fractures. A total of 440 postmenopausal women with osteopenia were randomized to either 5 mg of vitamin K1 or placebo daily. Primary outcomes were changes in BMD at the lumbar spine and total hip at 2 y. Secondary outcomes included changes in BMD at other sites and other time points, bone turnover markers, height, fractures, adverse effects, and health-related quality of life. This study has a power of 90% to detect 3% differences in BMD between the two groups. The women in this study were vitamin D replete, with a mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level of 77 nmol/l at baseline. Over 2 y, BMD decreased by −1.28% and −1.22% (p = 0.84) (difference of −0.06%; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.67% to 0.54%) at the lumbar spine and −0.69% and −0.88% (p = 0.51) (difference of 0.19%; 95% CI −0.37% to 0.75%) at the total hip in the vitamin K and placebo groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in changes in BMD at any site between the two groups over the 2- to 4-y period. Daily vitamin K1 supplementation increased serum vitamin K1 levels by 10-fold, and decreased the percentage of undercarboxylated osteocalcin and total osteocalcin levels (bone formation marker). However, C-telopeptide levels (bone resorption marker) were not significantly different between the two groups. Fewer women in the vitamin K group had clinical fractures (nine versus 20, p = 0.04) and fewer had cancers (three versus 12, p = 0.02). Vitamin K supplements were well-tolerated over the 4-y period. There were no significant differences in adverse effects or health-related quality of life between the two groups. The study was not powered to examine fractures or cancers, and their numbers were small.
Conclusions
Daily 5 mg of vitamin K1 supplementation for 2 to 4 y does not protect against age-related decline in BMD, but may protect against fractures and cancers in postmenopausal women with osteopenia. More studies are needed to further examine the effect of vitamin K on fractures and cancers.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT00150969) and Current Controlled Trials (#ISRCTN61708241)
Angela Cheung and colleagues investigate whether vitamin K1 can prevent bone loss among postmenopausal women with osteopenia.
Editors' Summary
Background.
Osteoporosis is a bone disease in which the bones gradually become less dense and more likely to break. In the US, 10 million people have osteoporosis and 18 million have osteopenia, a milder condition that precedes osteoporosis. In both conditions, insufficient new bone is made and/or too much old bone is absorbed. Although bone appears solid and unchanging, very little bone in the human body is more than 10 y old. Old bone is continually absorbed and new bone built using calcium, phosphorous, and proteins. Because the sex hormones control calcium and phosphorous deposition in the bones and thus bone strength, the leading cause of osteoporosis in women is reduced estrogen levels after menopause. In men, an age-related decline in testosterone levels can cause osteoporosis. Most people discover they have osteoporosis only when they break a bone, but the condition can be diagnosed and monitored using bone mineral density (BMD) scans. Treatments can slow down or reverse bone loss (antiresorptive therapies) and some (bone formation therapies) can even make bone and build bone tissue.
Why Was This Study Done?
Although regular exercise and a healthy diet can help to keep bones strong, other ways of preventing osteoporosis are badly needed. Recently, the lay media has promoted vitamin K supplements as a way to reduce bone loss in postmenopausal women. Vitamin K (which is found mainly in leafy green vegetables) is required for a chemical modification of proteins called carboxylation. This modification is essential for the activity of three bone-building proteins. In addition, there is some evidence that low bone density and fractures are associated with a low vitamin K intake. However, little is known about the long-term benefits or harms of vitamin K supplements. In this study, the researchers investigate whether a high-dose daily vitamin K supplement can safely reduce bone loss, bone turnover, and fractures in postmenopausal women with osteopenia in a randomized controlled trial called the “Evaluation of the Clinical Use of Vitamin K Supplementation in Post-Menopausal Women With Osteopenia” (ECKO) trial.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
In the study, 440 postmenopausal women with osteopenia were randomized to receive 5mg of vitamin K1 (the type of vitamin K in North American food; the recommended daily adult intake of vitamin K1 is about 0.1 mg) or an inactive tablet (placebo) daily for 2 y; 261 of the women continued their treatment for 2 y to gather information about the long-term effects of vitamin K1 supplementation. All the women had regular bone density scans of their lower back and hips and were examined for fractures and for changes in bone turnover. After 2 y and after 4 y, lower back and hip bone density measurements had decreased by similar amounts in both treatment groups. The women who took vitamin K1 had 10-fold higher amounts of vitamin K1 in their blood than the women who took placebo and lower amounts of a bone formation marker; the levels of a bone resorption marker were similar in both groups. Over the 4-y period, fewer women in the vitamin K group had fractures (nine versus 20 women in the placebo group), and fewer had cancer (three versus 12). Finally, vitamin K supplementation was well tolerated over the 4-y period and adverse health effects were similar in the two treatment groups.
What Do These Findings Mean?
These findings indicate that a high daily dose of vitamin K1 provides no protection against the age-related decline in bone density in postmenopausal women with osteopenia, but that vitamin K1 supplementation may protect against fractures and cancers in these women. The apparent contradiction between the effects of vitamin K1 on bone density and on fractures could mean that vitamin K1 supplements strengthen bone by changing factors other than bone density, e.g., by changing its fine structure rather than making it denser. However, because so few study participants had fractures, the difference in the fracture rate between the two treatment groups might have occurred by chance. Larger studies are therefore needed to examine the effect of vitamin K1 on fractures (and on cancer) and, until these are done, high-dose vitamin K1 supplementation should not be recommended for the prevention of osteoporosis.
Additional Information.
Please access these Web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050196.
The US National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases provides detailed information about osteoporosis (in English and Spanish) and links to other resources, including an interactive web tool called Check Up On Your Bones
MedlinePlus provides links to additional information about osteoporosis (in English and Spanish)
The MedlinePlus Encyclopedia has a page about vitamin K
The UK Food Standards Agency provides information about vitamin K
Full details about the ECKO trial are available on the ClinicalTrials.gov Web site
The Canadian Task Force for Preventive Health Care provides recommendations on the prevention of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women
Osteoporosis Canada provides information on current topics related to osteoporosis
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050196
PMCID: PMC2566998  PMID: 18922041
20.  Five Years of Cenosumab Exposure in Women With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: Results From the First Two Years of the FREEDOM Extension 
The 3-year FREEDOM trial assessed the efficacy and safety of 60 mg denosumab every 6 months for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Participants who completed the FREEDOM trial were eligible to enter an extension to continue the evaluation of denosumab efficacy and safety for up to 10 years. For the extension results presented here, women from the FREEDOM denosumab group had 2 more years of denosumab treatment (long-term group) and those from the FREEDOM placebo group had 2 years of denosumab exposure (cross-over group). We report results for bone turnover markers (BTMs), bone mineral density (BMD), fracture rates, and safety. A total of 4550 women enrolled in the extension (2343 long-term; 2207 cross-over). Reductions in BTMs were maintained (long-term group) or occurred rapidly (cross-over group) following denosumab administration. In the long-term group, lumbar spine and total hip BMD increased further, resulting in 5-year gains of 13.7% and 7.0%, respectively. In the cross-over group, BMD increased at the lumbar spine (7.7%) and total hip (4.0%) during the 2-year denosumab treatment. Yearly fracture incidences for both groups were below rates observed in the FREEDOM placebo group and below rates projected for a “virtual untreated twin” cohort. Adverse events did not increase with long-term denosumab administration. Two adverse events in the cross-over group were adjudicated as consistent with osteonecrosis of the jaw. Five-year denosumab treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis maintained BTM reduction and increased BMD, and was associated with low fracture rates and a favorable risk/benefit profile. © 2012 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research
doi:10.1002/jbmr.1479
PMCID: PMC3415620  PMID: 22113951
BONE MINERAL DENSITY; BONE TURNOVER MARKERS; DENOSUMAB; FRACTURE; PIVOTAL FRACTURE TRIAL EXTENSION
21.  Systematic review of raloxifene in postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or low bone mass (osteopenia) 
Purpose
To systematically review the literature describing the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of raloxifene for postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or low bone mass (osteopenia).
Materials and methods
Medline via PubMed and Embase was systematically searched using prespecified terms. Retrieved publications were screened and included if they described randomized controlled trials or observational studies of postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or osteopenia treated with raloxifene and reported one or more outcome measures (change in bone mineral density [BMD]; fracture incidence; change in bone-turnover markers, hip structural geometry, or blood–lipid profile; occurrence of adverse events; and change in quality of life or pain). Excluded publications were case studies, editorials, letters to the editor, narrative reviews, or publications from non-peer-reviewed journals; multidrug, multicountry, or multidisease studies with no drug-, country-, or disease-level analysis; or studies of participants on dialysis.
Results
Of the 292 publications retrieved, 15 publications (seven randomized controlled trials, eight observational studies) were included for review. Overall findings were statistically significant increases in BMD of the lumbar spine (nine publications), but not the hip region (eight publications), a low incidence of vertebral fracture (three publications), decreases in markers of bone turnover (eleven publications), improved hip structural geometry (two publications), improved blood–lipid profiles (five publications), a low incidence of hot flushes, leg cramps, venous thromboembolism, and stroke (12 publications), and improved quality of life and pain relief (one publication).
Conclusion
Findings support raloxifene for reducing vertebral fracture risk by improving BMD and reducing bone turnover in postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or osteopenia. Careful consideration of fracture risk and the risk–benefit profile of antiosteoporosis medications is required when managing patients with osteoporosis.
doi:10.2147/CIA.S70307
PMCID: PMC4226459  PMID: 25395843
bone density; fractures; osteoporotic; Japan; osteoporosis; raloxifene
22.  Reduction in Fracture Rate and Back Pain and Increased Quality of Life in Postmenopausal Women Treated with Teriparatide: 18-Month Data from the European Forsteo Observational Study (EFOS) 
Calcified Tissue International  2009;85(6):484-493.
The European Forsteo Observational Study was designed to examine the effectiveness of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated for up to 18 months in normal clinical practice in eight European countries. The incidence of clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fragility fractures, back pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL, EQ-5D) were assessed. Spontaneous reports of adverse events were collected. All 1,648 enrolled women were teriparatide treatment-naive, 91.0% of them had previously received other anti-osteoporosis drugs, and 72.8% completed the 18-month study. A total of 168 incident clinical fractures were sustained by 138 (8.8%) women (821 fractures/10,000 patient-years). A 47% decrease in the odds of fracture in the last 6-month period compared to the first 6-month period was observed (P < 0.005). Mean back pain VAS was reduced by 25.8 mm at end point (P < 0.001). Mean change from baseline in EQ-VAS was 13 mm by 18 months. The largest improvements were reported in the EQ-5D subdomains of usual activities and pain/discomfort. There were 365 adverse events spontaneously reported, of which 48.0% were considered related to teriparatide; adverse events were the reason for discontinuation for 79 (5.8%) patients. In conclusion, postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis who were prescribed teriparatide in standard clinical practice had a significant reduction in the incidence of fragility fractures and a reduction in back pain over an 18-month treatment period. This was associated with a clinically significant improvement in HRQoL. Safety was consistent with current prescribing information. These results should be interpreted in the context of the open-label, noncontrolled design of the study.
doi:10.1007/s00223-009-9299-6
PMCID: PMC2788127  PMID: 19823760
Osteoporosis; Teriparatide; Fracture; Back pain; Quality of life
23.  Inflammatory eye reactions with bisphosphonates and other osteoporosis medications: what are the risks? 
Inflammatory eye reactions (IERs) are rare but have been associated with medications to treat osteoporosis. The aim of this review is to summarize the current literature on the association between IERs and specific medications to treat osteoporosis (bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, strontium, denosumab and teriparatide). We cover the known epidemiology, potential pathogenic mechanisms and a resume of unanswered questions. Briefly, this review highlights that none of the existing randomized clinical trials were powered to identify these rare adverse events, and the majority of the information available is from spontaneous case reports and case series reporting associations between bisphosphonates and IERs. No case reports describe IERs after other anti-osteoporosis medications. Importantly, some case reports describe recurrence of the IER after affected patients were rechallenged with the same or another bisphosphonate, and that no reported cases resolved without discontinuation of the bisphosphonate. However, three large population-based cohort studies have shown conflicting results between osteoporosis treatments and IERs, but overall these studies suggest that IERs may actually be part of underlying inflammatory disease processes that also cause osteoporosis, rather than due to the medications used to treat osteoporosis themselves. There are no clear pathogenic mechanisms for how bisphosphonates could potentially cause IERs. However, the drug is secreted into the tears by the lacrimal gland and could cause irritation to the mucous membranes with subsequent release of inflammatory mediators, similar to the systemic response typically seen after infusion of bisphosphonates. However, in summary it is still not known whether there is a true causal association between bisphosphonates or other anti-osteoporosis medications and IERs, or whether it is confounding by indication and is actually due to underlying inflammatory diseases that cause both osteoporosis and IERs.
doi:10.1177/1759720X14566424
PMCID: PMC4314301  PMID: 25650170
adverse events; anti-osteoporosis medications; bisphosphonates; inflammatory eye reactions; osteoporosis; pathogenesis
24.  Pharmacological management of osteogenesis 
Clinics  2014;69(6):438-446.
Osteogenesis and bone remodeling are complex biological processes that are essential for the formation of new bone tissue and its correct functioning. When the balance between bone resorption and formation is disrupted, bone diseases and disorders such as Paget's disease, fibrous dysplasia, osteoporosis and fragility fractures may result. Recent advances in bone cell biology have revealed new specific targets for the treatment of bone loss that are based on the inhibition of bone resorption by osteoclasts or the stimulation of bone formation by osteoblasts. Bisphosphonates, antiresorptive agents that reduce bone resorption, are usually recommended as first-line therapy in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Numerous studies have shown that bisphosphonates are able to significantly reduce the risk of femoral and vertebral fractures. Other antiresorptive agents indicated for the treatment of osteoporosis include selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as raloxifene. Denosumab, a human monoclonal antibody, is another antiresorptive agent that has been approved in Europe and the USA. This agent blocks the RANK/RANKL/OPG system, which is responsible for osteoclastic activation, thus reducing bone resorption. Other approved agents include bone anabolic agents, such as teriparatide, a recombinant parathyroid hormone that improves bone microarchitecture and strength, and strontium ranelate, considered to be a dual-action drug that acts by both osteoclastic inhibition and osteoblastic stimulation. Currently, anti-catabolic drugs that act through the Wnt-β catenin signaling pathway, serving as Dickkopf-related protein 1 inhibitors and sclerostin antagonists, are also in development. This concise review provides an overview of the drugs most commonly used for the control of osteogenesis in bone diseases.
doi:10.6061/clinics/2014(06)12
PMCID: PMC4050321  PMID: 24964310
Antiresorptive Drugs; Bone Formation; Osteoblasts; Osteogenesis; RANKL Inhibitors
25.  Strontium ranelate in postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment: a critical appraisal 
Osteoporosis is a progressive and debilitating disease characterized by a massive bone loss with a deterioration of bone tissues, and a propensity for a fragility fracture. Strontium ranelate is the first antiosteoporotic treatment that has dual mode of action and simultaneously increases bone formation, while decreasing bone resorption, thus rebalancing bone turnover formation. Strontium ranelate rebalances bone turnover in favor of improved bone geometry, cortical thickness, trabecular bone morphology and intrinsic bone tissue quality, which translates into enhanced bone strength. This review describes the mechanism of the strontium ranelate action and its effects on bone mineral density, bone turnover, and osteoporotic fractures. The efficacy of strontium ranelate in postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment to reduce the risk of vertebral and hip fractures has been highlighted in several randomized, controlled trials. Treatment efficacy with strontium ranelate has been documented across a wide range of patient profiles: age, number of prevalent vertebral fractures, body mass index, and a family history of osteoporosis. Because strontium ranelate has a large spectrum of efficacy, it can be used to treat different subgroups of patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Strontium ranelate was shown to be relatively well tolerated and the safety aspects were good. Strontium ranelate should be considered as a first-line treatment for postmenopausal osteoporotic patients.
PMCID: PMC2971725  PMID: 21072291
osteoporosis; strontium ranelate; therapy

Results 1-25 (1042526)