An empirical application of McPhee's formal theory of addiction.

W. O. Thompson,J. A. O'donnell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/10826087109062251

International Journal of the Addictions

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Sarah Davis,Emma Simpson,Jean Hamilton,Marrissa Martyn-St James,Andrew Rawdin,Ruth Wong,Edward Goka,Neil Gittoes,Peter Selby

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24290

Abstract:Background: Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture. Objectives: The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture. Data sources: For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018. Review methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty. Results: Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0-33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories. Limitations: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients. Conclusions: Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
The Efficacy and Safety of Bisphosphonate Therapy for Osteopenia/Osteoporosis in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trials

Reid Whitlock,Kerry MacDonald,Navdeep Tangri,Michael Walsh,David Collister

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581241283523

2024-10-08

Abstract:Background: The efficacy and safety of bisphosphonate therapy for the treatment of osteoporosis and osteopenia in the setting of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is unclear. Objective: To determine the effect of bisphosphonate therapy on fractures, bone mineral density (BMD), and adverse events in adults across the spectrum of CKD and dialysis. Design: Systematic review and individual patient-level meta-analysis. Setting: Searches of Ageline, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Medline from inception to August 25, 2016, supplemented with manual screening and clinicalstudydatarequest.com. Authors were contacted for individual patient-level data. Patients: Randomized, placebo-controlled trials with 100 or more participants that evaluated the treatment of primary osteoporosis/osteopenia in adult men and women with bisphosphonate therapy. Measurements: Study characteristics, quality, and data were assessed independently by 2 reviewers. Outcome measures were fractures, BMD, and adverse events including decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and hypocalcemia (calcium <2.00 mmol/L). Methods: Single-stage individual patient-level meta-analysis. Results: Of 39 eligible studies, individual patient-level data was available for 7 studies, all of which were studies of ibandronate. Of 7428 participants (5010 ibandronate, 2418 placebo), 100% were female, 98.6% were white, the mean body mass index was 25.7 kg/m2 (SD 3.9), 18.9% were smokers and there were 740 fracture events. The mean eGFR was 69.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 (SD 15.9) including 14.5%, 54.9%, 27.5%, 3.0%, and 0.2% stages G1, G2, G3A, G3B, and G4 CKD. Ibandronate increased hip and lumbar spine BMD and decreased the risk of fracture in the overall population (hazard ratio (HR) 0.871, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.746, 1.018) but in patients with stage G3B CKD, it increased the risk of fracture (HR 3.862, 95% CI 1.156, 12.903). Ibandronate did not impact eGFR over 12 months but increased the risk of hypocalcemia (HR 1.324, 95% CI 1.056, 1.660) with no evidence of any effect modification by CKD stage (all tests of interaction p > 0.05). Limitations: Clinically significant heterogeneity among studies, lack of long-term follow-up and bone biopsy results, limited representation of stage G4 and G5 CKD patients. Conclusions: Chronic kidney disease potentially modifies the efficacy but not the safety of bisphosphonate therapy in osteopenia and osteoporosis. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020145613.
A randomised trial comparing 6-monthly adjuvant zoledronate with a single one-time dose in patients with early breast cancer

Arif Ali Awan,Carol Stober,Gregory R Pond,Igor Machado,Lucas Clemons,Henry Conter,Demetrios Simos,Sukhbinder Dhesy-Thind,Mihaela Mates,Vikaash Kumar,John Hilton,Marie-France Savard,Dean Fergusson,Lisa Vandermeer,Mark Clemons,REaCT Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07443-2

Abstract:Purpose: While adjuvant bisphosphonate use in early breast cancer (EBC) is associated with improvements in breast cancer-specific outcomes, questions remain around optimal bisphosphonate type, dose and scheduling. We evaluated a single zoledronate infusion in a prospective randomised trial. Methods: Postmenopausal patients with EBC were randomised to receive a single infusion of zoledronate (4 mg IV) or 6-monthly treatment for 3 years. Outcomes measured were; Quality of Life (QoL; EQ-5D-5L), bisphosphonate-related toxicities, including acute phase reactions (APRs), recurrence-free survival (RFS), bone metastasis-free survival (BMFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: 211 patients were randomized to either a single infusion (n = 107) or six-monthly treatment (n = 104). After 3 years of follow up there were no significant differences between the arms for QoL and most toxicity endpoints. APRs following zoledronate occurred in 81% (171/211) of patients (77.6% in single infusion arm and 84.6% in the 6-monthly group). While the frequency of APRs decreased over 3 years in the 6-monthly arm, they still remain common. Of 34/104 (32.7%) patients who discontinued zoledronate early in the 6-monthly treatment group, the most common reason was APRs (16/34, 47%). At the 3 year follow up, there were no differences between arms for RFS, BMFS or OS. Conclusion: A single infusion of zoledronate was associated with increased patient convenience, less toxicity, and lower rates of treatment discontinuation. Despite the common clinical impression that APRs decrease with time, this was not observed when patients were specifically questioned. While the study is not powered for non-inferiority, longer-term follow-up for confirmation of RFS and OS rates is ongoing.
Three distinct lineages of mesenchymal cells in Ciona intestinalis embryos demonstrated by specific gene expression.

M. Tokuoka,K. Imai,Y. Satou,N. Satoh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.YDBIO.2004.07.007

IF: 3.148

2004-10-01

Developmental Biology

Abstract:
Comparative efficacy of bisphosphonates in short-term fracture prevention for primary osteoporosis: a systematic review with network meta-analyses

J. Zhou,X. Ma,T. Wang,S. Zhai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3654-z

2016-01-01

Osteoporosis International

Abstract:Summary Our network meta-analyses compared the efficacy of different bisphosphonates preventing fractures for primary osteoporosis. By including 36 studies, we found that zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing vertebral fracture, nonvertebral fracture, and any fracture, and alendronate or zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing hip fracture. Introduction This study was conducted in order to analyze the available evidence on the efficacy of bisphosphonates for preventing fractures. Methods We considered randomized trials comparing any bisphosphonate with other bisphosphonate or placebo. We searched Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed and manually searched reference list of relevant articles. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed. The primary outcome is vertebral fracture. Secondary outcomes include nonvertebral fracture, hip fracture, wrist fracture, and any fracture. Results Thirty-six studies were included. Significant difference was found between bisphosphonates for vertebral fracture and nonvertebral fracture ( P < 0.0001 and P = 0.04, respectively). Compared with placebo, alendronate, clodronate, ibandronate, minodronate, pamidronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid significantly prevented vertebral fracture. Zoledronic acid significantly reduced the risk of vertebral fracture, compared with alendronate, clodronate, etidronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and tiludronate (0.65 (0.46, 0.91), 0.53 (0.33, 0.86), 0.45 (0.27, 0.74), 0.52 (0.36, 0.75), 0.59 (0.42, 0.83), and 0.31 (0.21, 0.48), respectively). Compared with etidronate, clodronate and zoledronic acid significantly prevented nonvertebral fracture. Compared with alendronate, zoledronic acid significantly prevented any fracture. The possibility rankings showed that zoledronic ranked first in preventing vertebral fracture, hip fracture, and any fracture, and pamidronate ranked first in preventing nonvertebral fracture and wrist fracture. In the sensitivity analyses, zoledronic acid ranked first in preventing nonvertebral fracture, and alendronate ranked first in preventing hip fracture and wrist fracture. Conclusion Zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing vertebral fracture, nonvertebral fracture, and any fracture, and alendronate or zoledronic acid seemed the most effective in preventing hip fracture. Uncertainty still remains and future studies are needed to accurately evaluate the comparative efficacy of bisphosphonates.
Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials

Mina Nicole Händel,Isabel Cardoso,Cecilie von Bülow,Jeanett Friis Rohde,Anja Ussing,Sabrina Mai Nielsen,Robin Christensen,Jean-Jacques Body,Maria Luisa Brandi,Adolfo Diez-Perez,Peyman Hadji,Muhammad Kassim Javaid,Willem Frederik Lems,Xavier Nogues,Christian Roux,Salvatore Minisola,Andreas Kurth,Thierry Thomas,Daniel Prieto-Alhambra,Serge Livio Ferrari,Bente Langdahl,Bo Abrahamsen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068033

2023-05-02

BMJ

Abstract:Objective: To review the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments, including the bone anabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, on reducing the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women, and to characterise the effect of antiosteoporosis drug treatments on the risk of fractures according to baseline risk factors. Design: Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials. Data sources: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify randomised controlled trials published between 1 January 1996 and 24 November 2021 that examined the effect of bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo or active comparator. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Randomised controlled trials that included non-Asian postmenopausal women with no restriction on age, when interventions looked at bone quality in a broad perspective. The primary outcome was clinical fractures. Secondary outcomes were vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and major osteoporotic fractures, all cause mortality, adverse events, and serious cardiovascular adverse events. Results: The results were based on 69 trials (>80 000 patients). For clinical fractures, synthesis of the results showed a protective effect of bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo. Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, bisphosphonates were less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.00). Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and romosozumab, denosumab was less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.85, 1.18 to 2.92 for denosumab v parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and 1.56, 1.02 to 2.39 for denosumab v romosozumab). An effect of all treatments on vertebral fractures compared with placebo was found. In the active treatment comparisons, denosumab, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab were more effective than oral bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral fractures. The effect of all treatments was unaffected by baseline risk indicators, except for antiresorptive treatments that showed a greater reduction of clinical fractures compared with placebo with increasing mean age (number of studies=17; β=0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99). No harm outcomes were seen. The certainty in the effect estimates was moderate to low for all individual outcomes, mainly because of limitations in reporting, nominally indicating a serious risk of bias and imprecision. Conclusions: The evidence indicated a benefit of a range of treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women for clinical and vertebral fractures. Bone anabolic treatments were more effective than bisphosphonates in the prevention of clinical and vertebral fractures, irrespective of baseline risk indicators. Hence this analysis provided no clinical evidence for restricting the use of anabolic treatment to patients with a very high risk of fractures. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019128391.
Effect of Alendronic Acid on Fracture Healing: A Multicenter Randomized Placebo‐Controlled Trial

Andrew D Duckworth,Margaret M McQueen,Christopher E Tuck,Jonathan H Tobias,Jeremy Mark Wilkinson,Leela C Biant,Elizabeth Claire Pulford,Stephen Aldridge,Claire Edwards,Chris P Roberts,Manoj Ramachandran,Andrew Richard McAndrew,Kenneth CK Cheng,Phillip Johnston,Nasir H Shah,Philip Mathew,John Harvie,Birgit C Hanusch,Ronnie Harkess,Aryelly Rodriguez,Gordon D Murray,Stuart H Ralston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.3679

IF: 6.39

2019-03-07

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract:There is a concern that bisphosphonates may impair fracture healing because of their inhibitory effects on bone turnover. Here we evaluated the effects of early bisphosphonate therapy on fracture healing and functional outcome following a fracture of the distal radius. The fracture and bisphosphonates (FAB) trial was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving 15 trauma centers in the United Kingdom. We enrolled 421 bisphosphonate-naive patients aged ≥50 years with a radiographically confirmed fracture of the distal radius and randomized them in a 1:1 ratio to receive alendronic acid 70 mg once weekly (n = 215) or placebo (n = 206) within 14 days of the fracture. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of fractures that had radiologically united at 4 weeks as assessed by an observer, blinded to treatment allocation. Secondary outcomes included the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, range of wrist movement and grip strength, pain and analgesia requirements, and the rate of malunion. The mean ± SD age of participants was 63 ± 8.5 years and 362 (86%) were female. At 4 weeks, 48 of 202 (23.8%) fractures had united in the alendronic acid group compared with 52 of 187 (27.8%) in the placebo group (observed absolute proportion difference 4.0%; 95% CI, -4.7% to 12.8%; p = 0.36). The absolute proportion difference between groups based on imputed data was 4.5% (95% CI, -4.7% to 13.8%; p = 0.30). There was no significant difference in the proportion of fractures that had united at any other time point and no differences in the DASH score, pain at the fracture site, grip strength, or any other clinical outcome. We conclude that among patients aged 50 years and above with a distal radius fracture, early administration of alendronic acid does not adversely affect fracture union or clinical outcome. These findings suggest bisphosphonate therapy can be safely commenced early after fracture if clinically indicated. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

endocrinology & metabolism
Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety Between Denosumab and Alendronate in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis: a Meta-Analysis

T. Lin,C. Wang,X. -Z. Cai,X. Zhao,M. -M. Shi,Z. -M. Ying,F. -Z. Yuan,C. Guo,S. -G. Yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02806.x

IF: 2.6

2012-01-01

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Abstract:The aim of this study was to perform a head-to-head comparison of efficacy and safety profile between 60 mg denosumab (Den) subcutaneously (SC) per 6 months (Q6M) and 70 mg alendronate (Aln) orally per week (QW) for postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density. We searched electronic databases comparing efficacy and safety of Den SC Q6M and Aln QW in postmenopausal women. The primary outcomes of efficacy evaluation in included trials were incidence of clinical fracture in both groups and bone mineral density (BMD) at different skeletal sites. And adverse events (AEs), including incidence of neoplasms and infections, were considered as secondary outcomes. Following the instructions of ‘Cochrane Handbook for systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.0.2’, we identified eligible studies, evaluated the methodological quality and abstracted relevant data. Four heterogeneous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1942 women were identified. The results of review showed low evidence quality that supported the hypothesis the denosumab vs. alendronate could reduce risk of fracture [OR (95% CI) 1.42 (0.84 to 2.40), 11 more women per 1000 (from 4 fewer to 36 more), p = 0.19] but the moderate to high quality evidence suggesting treatment with 60 mg Den SC Q6M was more effective for postmenopausal women in increasing BMD [at distal radius (DR), total hip (TH), lumbar spine (LS), and femoral neck (FN)]. Hazards of neoplasms [OR (95% CI) 1.10 (0.65 to 1.86), 3 more per 1000 (from 10 fewer to 24 more), p = 0.62] or infections [OR (95% CI) 0.95 (0.79 to 1.15), 12 fewer per 1000 (from 53 fewer to 33 more,), p = 0.62] were appeared to be similar.Our review suggested within 1 year 60 mg Den SC Q6M treatment was more effective in increasing bone mass but could not reduce the fracture risk to a greater extent than 70 mg Aln QW therapy. Also the Den SC Q6M therapy did not increase the risks of neoplasms and infections compared with Aln QW.
A red pigment produced by aerobic sporeforming bacteria

E. Canale-Parola

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00408495

1963-12-01

Archiv für Mikrobiologie

Abstract:
Oral Bisphosphonate Therapy for Osteogenesis Imperfecta: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Six Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.

Zhi-Min Ying,Bin Hu,Shi-Gui Yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12611

2020-01-01

Orthopaedic Surgery

Abstract:Objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral bisphosphonates in increasing bone mineral density (BMD), reducing fractures, and improving clinical function in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI). Methods Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomized controlled trials of directly comparing oral bisphosphonate therapy with placebo-group in OI patients. Data synthesis regarding to bone mineral density as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), decreased fracture incidence, change in biochemical markers of bone and mineral metabolism, bone histology, growth, bone pain, quality of life, and others were assessed, and meta-analysis done when possible. Results From 98 potential references and six randomized controlled studies a total of 263 participants receiving oral bisphosphonates and 143 placebo treatments contributed data to meta-analysis. Pooled meta-analysis of three studies suggested that there was significant difference between bisphosphonate treated group and placebo in number of patients with at least one fracture (mean difference 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.89,P= 0.02). Pooled meta-analysis of two studies suggested that significant difference was noted between bisphosphonate treated group and placebo in mean percentage change in spine BMD (T-score) (mean difference 28.43, 95% confidence interval 7.09-49.77,P= 0.009). The similar effect was shown in the term of mean change (Z-score) in spine BMD. Conclusions Significant improvement in lumbar areal BMD in patients affected with OI has been shown when treated with oral bisphosphonates, even though only a small population was enrolled. We cannot draw a definite conclusion that the increase in BMD can be translated into fracture reduction and clinical functional improvement. The optimal method, dose, type, initiation, and duration of oral bisphosphonates therapy still remains unclear. Well-designed, adequately-powered, placebo-controlled RCTs investigating the effects of oral bisphosphonates on fractures reduction and improvement in quality of life in both children and adults are studied here.
1912 Reviewing the effect of COVID pandemic on changing clinical practice of administrating Zoledronic Acid to hip fracture patients

Z L Tun,R Melrose,R Saharia,U Tazeen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afad246.066

2024-01-01

Age and Ageing

Abstract:Abstract Introduction Reduction in outpatient appointments during the COVID-19 pandemic and patient concern surrounding risk of contracting COVID-19 by attending day-case settings, resulted in delayed or cancelled medical treatments including Zoledronic Acid infusions as management for Osteoporosis. This, alongside recent research concluding that these treatments can be given safely as early as 1-2 weeks post-fracture, lead to the adaptation of protocol at Hull University Teaching Hospitals Trust in 2021, to provide rapid loading of Cholecalciferol over 6 days, prior to administration of Zoledronic Acid on day 7. However, some concerns remain surrounding the potential interference with bone remodelling and healing. This completed audit cycle evaluates the logistics and safety of this new protocol. Methods All patients over 60, admitted with neck of femur fracture who received Zoledronic Acid infusion as inpatient or outpatient in 2019 and 2021 were included in the initial and repeat audit respectively. Electronic records for the following 12 months were analysed evaluating for further fragility fracture and mortality rate. Results There was an increase in patients receiving Zoledronic Acid as an inpatient treatment from 21% in the initial audit to 97% in the repeat audit. There was a slight increase in mortality rate at one year from 14% to 19%. The percentage of a further fragility fracture within one year, remained stable at 7%. Conclusion The increase in inpatient infusions suggests more patients with significant frailty who would otherwise not have been able to attend outpatient settings, have been able to receive treatment. The mortality results reflect this frailer audit population. The absence of a substantial increase in the rate of further fragility fracture at one year; supports the earlier administration of Zoledronic Acid as a management protocol.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Recommendations for the optimal use of bone forming agents in osteoporosis

Nicola Veronese,Karine Briot,Nuria Guañabens,Ben Hur Albergaria,Majed Alokail,Nasser Al-Daghri,Angie Botto-van Bemden,Olivier Bruyère,Nansa Burlet,Cyrus Cooper,Elizabeth M Curtis,Peter R Ebeling,Philippe Halbout,Eric Hesse,Mickaël Hiligsmann,Bruno Muzzi Camargos,Nicholas C Harvey,Adolfo Diez Perez,Régis Pierre Radermecker,Jean-Yves Reginster,René Rizzoli,Heide Siggelkow,Bernard Cortet,Maria Luisa Brandi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02826-3

2024-08-09

Abstract:Bone forming agents, also known as anabolic therapies, are essential in managing osteoporosis, particularly for patients at very high-risk of fractures. Identifying candidates who will benefit the most from these treatments is crucial. For example, this group might include individuals with severe osteoporosis, multiple vertebral fractures, a recent fragility fracture or those unresponsive to antiresorptive treatments. Definitions of patients with a very high fracture risk vary across nations, are often based on fracture history, bone mineral density (BMD), and/or fracture risk calculated by FRAX® or other algorithms. However, for very high-risk patients, anabolic agents such as teriparatide, abaloparatide, or romosozumab are commonly recommended as first-line therapies due to their ability to stimulate new bone formation and improve bone microarchitecture, offering significant benefits in rapid fracture reduction over antiresorptive therapies. The cost-effectiveness of these agents is a critical consideration for decision-makers. Despite their higher costs, their effectiveness in significantly reducing fracture risk and improving quality of life can justify the investment, especially when long-term savings from reduced fracture rates and associated healthcare costs are considered. Additionally, after completing a course of anabolic therapy, transitioning to antiresorptive agents like bisphosphonates or denosumab is crucial to maintain the gains in bone density and minimize subsequent fracture risks. This sequential treatment approach ensures sustained protection and optimal resource utilization. In summary, the effective use of bone forming agents in osteoporosis requires a comprehensive strategy that includes accurate patient identification, consideration of cost-effectiveness, and implementation of appropriate sequential treatments, ultimately maximizing patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.
Zoledronic Acid Does Not Retard Bone Union: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Fragility Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures

Ankit Gulia,Shakti Prasad Das,Suhas Sondur,Preethiv Rajendran,Anwesit Mohanty,Vishnu Prakash,Hari Gutta,Hirdyanshu P Pundhir,Santosh Rath

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.33948

2023-01-18

Cureus

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Fragility hip fracture is a leading cause of death in the elderly and is common in postmenopausal women and elderly people. In the treatment of osteoporosis, bisphosphonates (BPs) are often considered first-line medications. Zoledronic acid is the most potent and long-acting BP in clinical use and is administered as an intravenous infusion. In the context of acute fractures, the use of BPs has been controversial due to conflicting reports of their positive and negative effects on fracture healing. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of zoledronic acid on fracture healing in intertrochanteric (IT) fragility fractures.METHODS: The study was conducted in a tertiary healthcare center after receiving scientific and ethical approval. The study included 136 patients of either gender over the age of 50 who presented with an IT femur fracture after minor trauma between November 2020 and November 2022. The total number of patients had been classified into two groups, and grouping involved random sampling: Group T (test group, n = 68; zoledronic acid injections were given on postoperative day 3) and Group C (control group, n = 68; interventions were given after fracture healing). Patients were evaluated using the Radiographic Union Score for Hip (RUSH) and Singh Index for radiological outcomes and the Harris Hip Score (HHS) for functional outcomes. The patients were followed for six months.RESULTS: The overall mean age was 73.25 years; in Group T, it was 72.5 ± 11.9 years, and in Group C, it was 73.7 ± 11.8 years. Of 136 patients, 69 (51%) were males and 67 (49%) were females. The average fracture healing time in Group T was 12.2 ± 3.6 weeks, while it was 13.0 ± 2.8 weeks in Group C. Functional outcomes, including HHS, were found to be better in Group T than in Group C (p < 0.005). No significant difference was observed between the two groups with respect to the radiological union, the RUSH score, or Singh Index, implying no negative effect of zoledronic acid.CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that postoperative intravenous zoledronic acid therapy does not retard fracture healing. Osteoporosis management is frequently neglected because of a surgeon's fear of ZOL retarding fracture healing and a lack of awareness among patients, resulting in low compliance. Thus, opportunistic administration of zoledronic acid postoperatively can be beneficial and will increase compliance for osteoporosis management and fracture prevention to 100%.
Comparison of the Clinical Efficacy of Anabolic Agents and Bisphosphonates in the Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Ikchan Jeon,Sung Bae Park,Bong Ju Moon,Miyoung Choi,Sung Uk Kuh,Jongtae Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2347256.628

2024-06-30

Neurospine

Abstract:Objective: We investigated the clinical efficacy of anabolic agents compared with bisphosphonates (BPs) for the incidence of new osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) and fracture healing of OVF in the patients with OVF via meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Methods: Electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for published RCTs till December 2022. The RCTs that recruited participants with osteoporosis at high-/very high-risk of fracture (a history of osteoporotic vertebral or hip fracture) or fresh OVF were included in this study. We assessed the risk of bias on every included RCTs, estimated relative risk (RR) for the incidence of new OVF and fracture healing of OVF, and overall certainty of evidence. Meta-analyses were performed by Cochrane review manager (RevMan) ver. 5.3. Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 and GRADEpro/GDT were applied for evaluating methodological quality and overall certainty of evidence, respectively.Results: Five hundred eighteen studies were screened, and finally 6 eligible RCTs were included in the analysis. In the patients with prevalent OVF, anabolic agents significantly reduced the incidence of new OVF (teriparatide and romosozumab vs. alendronate and risedronate [RR, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.45–0.71; p < 0.00001; high-certainty of evidence]; teriparatide vs. risedronate [RR, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–0.68; p < 0.0001; high-certainty of evidence]). However, there was no evidence of teriparatide compared to alendronate in fracture healing of OVF (RR, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.95–1.60; p = 0.12; low-certainty of evidence).Conclusion: In the patients with prevalent OVF, anabolic agents showed a significant superiority for preventing new OVF than BPs, with no significant evidence for promoting fracture healing of OVF. However, considering small number of RCTs in this study, additional studies with large-scale data are required to obtain more robust evidences.

surgery,clinical neurology
In vitro fertilization, the Nobel Prize, and human embryonic stem cells.

J. Gearhart,C. Coutifaris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2010.12.015

IF: 23.9

2011-01-07

Cell Stem Cell

Abstract:
Influence of bisphosphonate treatment on bone substitute performance in osteoporotic conditions

Winston Adam Camargo,Jan Willem Hoekstra,John A Jansen,Jeroen J J P van den Beucken

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13203

Abstract:Objective: Considering the elevated number of osteoporotic patients in need of bone graft procedures, we here evaluated the effect of alendronate (ALN) treatment on the regeneration of bone defects in osteoporotic rats. Bone formation was histologically and histomorphometrically assessed in rat femoral condyle bone defects filled with bone graft (Bio-Oss®) or left empty. Methods: Male Wistar rats were induced osteoporotic through orchidectomy (ORX) and SHAM-operated. The animals were divided into three groups: osteoporotic (ORX), osteoporotic treated with ALN (ORX + ALN) and healthy (SHAM). Six weeks after ORX or SHAM surgeries, bone defects were created bilaterally in femoral condyles; one defect was filled with Bio-Oss® and the other one left empty. Bone regeneration within the defects was analyzed by histology and histomorphometry after 4 and 12 weeks. Results: Histological samples showed new bone surrounding Bio-Oss® particles from week 4 onward in all three groups. At week 12, the data further showed that ALN treatment of osteoporotic animals enhanced bone formation to a 10-fold increase compared to non-treated osteoporotic control. Bio-Oss® filling of the defects promoted bone formation at both implantation periods compared to empty controls. Conclusion: Our histological and histomorphometric results demonstrate that the enteral administration of alendronate under osteoporotic bone conditions leverages bone defect regeneration to a level comparable to that in healthy bone. Additionally, Bio-Oss® is an effective bone substitute, increasing bone formation, and acting as an osteoconductive scaffold guiding bone growth in both healthy and osteoporotic bone conditions. Significance: Based on the results of this study, enteral use of ALN mitigates adverse effects of an osteoporotic condition on bone defect regeneration.
Bisphosphonates Preserve Bone Mineral Density and Suppress Bone Turnover Markers in Early Menopausal Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Aria Ahadzadeh Ardebili,Timothy Fu,Nicole Dunnewold,Fariba Aghajafari,Emma O Billington

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm4.10748

2023-04-14

JBMR Plus

Abstract:Most women do not qualify for pharmacologic osteoporosis treatment until more than a decade after menopause, by which time they will have lost up to 30% of their bone mass and may have already sustained fractures. Short or intermittent courses of bisphosphonate therapy, initiated around the time of menopause, might prevent excessive bone loss and lower long-term fracture risk. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the effects of nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates on fracture incidence, bone mineral density (BMD), and bone turnover markers in early menopausal women (ie, perimenopausal or <5 years postmenopausal) over ≥12 months. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched in July 2022. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Random effect meta-analysis was undertaken using RevMan v5.3. In total, 12 trials were included (n = 1722 women); five evaluated alendronate, three risedronate, three ibandronate, and one zoledronate. Four were at low risk of bias; eight raised some concerns. Fractures were infrequent in the three studies that reported them. Compared with placebo, bisphosphonates improved BMD over 12 months (mean percentage difference, 95% confidence interval [CI]) at the spine (4.32%, 95% CI, 3.10%-5.54%, p < 0.0001, n = 8 studies), the femoral neck (2.56%, 95% CI, 1.85%-3.27%, p = 0.001, n = 6 studies), and the total hip (1.22%, 95% CI 0.16%-2.28%, p = 0.002, n = 4 studies). Over treatment durations of 24 to 72 months, bisphosphonates improved BMD at the spine (5.81%, 95% CI 4.71%-6.91%, p < 0.0001, n = 8 studies), femoral neck (3.89%, 95% CI 2.73%-5.05%, p = 0.0001, n = 5 studies) and total hip (4.09%, 95% CI 2.81%-5.37%, p < 0.0001, n = 4 studies). Bisphosphonates reduced urinary N-telopeptide (-52.2%, 95% CI -60.3% to -44.2%, p < 0.00001, n = 3 studies) and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (-34.2%, 95% CI -42.6% to -25.8%, p < 0.00001, n = 4 studies) more than placebo at 12 months. This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that bisphosphonates improve BMD and lower bone turnover markers in early menopause, warranting further investigation of these agents for osteoporosis prevention. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
Evaluation of comparative effectiveness and safety of bisphosphonates

Jun-wen ZHOU,Xiang MA,Suo-di ZHAI

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13699/j.cnki.1001-6821.2015.12.035

2015-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of bisphosphonates.Methods PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Review were electronically searched for Meta -analysis and network Meta-analysis about the effectiveness and safety of bisphospho-nates.The randomized controlled trials ( RCTs ) comparing different bi-sphosphonates were manually searched.We then complete the descriptive analysis about the direct and indirect comparison between bisphospho-nates.Results Seventeen Meta-analyses were included, including 1 Meta-analysis comparing different bisphosphonates, 10 Meta-analyses comparing bisphosphonates and placebo, and 6 network Meta-analyses. The results of direct comparison showed that there was no significant difference between different bisphosphonates in effectiveness and safety. The results of indirect comparison showed that zoledronic acid, alendr-onate or zoledronic acid, alendronate, risedronate ranked first in preven-ting vertebral fracture, hip fracture, wrist, non -hip -non -vertebral fracture among different bisphosphonates, respectively.Zoledronic acid, zoledronic acid, etidronate ranked highest in causing any gastrointestinal adverse events, nausea, and discontinuation due to adverse drug reactions among different bisphosphonates, respective-ly.Conclusion Bisphosphonates are effective and safe medications for treating osteoporosis.Although zoledronic acid ranked highest in preventing fracture, it was also more likely to cause gastrointestinal adverse events.However, the quality of a body of evidence comparing different bisphosphonates is low.More well -designed clinical studies are needed to support above conclusion.
The Effect of Effervescent and Buffered Alendronate Compared to Conventional Alendronate on Markers of Bone Turnover: A Randomized Non-inferiority Trial

Rawan Hikmet,Torben Harsløf,Bente Lomholt Langdahl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-023-01140-w

Abstract:Buffered and effervescent alendronate (ALN-EFF) increases gastric pH and is reported to decrease the risk of gastrointestinal side effects compared to conventional formulations of alendronate (ALN). The clinical effectiveness of ALN-EFF, however, has not been investigated. This study aims to investigate if ALN-EFF is non-inferior to ALN in suppressing bone turnover markers (BTM). We conducted a 16-week prospective, randomized, open-label study comprising 64 postmenopausal women with BMD T-score < -1 naïve to osteoporosis treatment. Participants were randomized 1:1 to ALN or ALN-EFF. We collected blood samples at 0, 4, 8, and 16 weeks. Non-inferiority margin was determined as 12% (80% of efficacy retained), and an SD of 15% on change in CTx. CTx decreased by 58.2% ± 24.1% in the ALN group and by 46.9% ± 23.3% (CI - 38.42:- 55.35) in the ALN-EFF group (p = 0.08). The non-inferiority limit was 46.6%. With ALN-EFF the CI crosses the non-inferiority limit thus the test for non-inferiority was indeterminate. PINP decreased by 45.7 ± 22.6% in the ALN group and by 35.1 ± 20.7% in the ALN-EFF group (p = 0.07). Changes over time in the BTMs were not significantly different between the groups, p > 0.10 for both CTx and PINP. There was no difference in frequency of AEs or compliance between the two groups, but rate of discontinuation was lower with ALN-EFF. In conclusion, suppression of BTMs was not significantly different between the groups but formal non-inferiority could not be established.
Reducing Re-fractures Post Percutaneous Kyphoplasty: The Impact of Zoledronic Acid with Calcium and Vitamin D3 in Osteoporotic Patients

Weiqian Wu,Wenbiao Zheng,Weiwei Pan,Fanghu Chen,Langqing Jiang

2024-03-22

Abstract:Background: Osteoporosis poses a significant health challenge characterized by reduced bone density and increased fracture risk. Percutaneous kyphoplasty, a common treatment, aims to stabilize vertebral fractures. However, adjunctive therapies like zoledronic acid remain underexplored in improving postoperative outcomes and bone health in these patients. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of zoledronic acid combined with calcium carbonate and vitamin D3 in treating osteoporosis, providing valuable clinical insights. Methods: A cohort of sixty-six osteoporosis patients who underwent percutaneous kyphoplasty and received subsequent treatment at our hospital between March 2020 and March 2022 were selected. Thirty-three patients received calcium carbonate and vitamin D3 (control group), while the remaining thirty-three patients were treated with zoledronic acid alongside calcium carbonate and vitamin D3 (research group). Pre- and post-treatment assessments included bone mineral density measurements, bone metabolism and turnover marker evaluations, symptom improvement assessments using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), monitoring of adverse reactions, and assessment of quality of life using the Core Quality of Life questionnaire (QOL-C30). A one-year follow-up was conducted to determine re-fracture incidence. Results: Post-treatment, the research group exhibited significantly lower VAS, ODI, tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-5b, and osteocalcin levels compared to the control group, while bone alkaline phosphatase levels were higher (P < .05). There was no significant difference in adverse reaction incidence between the groups (P > .05), but the research group demonstrated higher QOL-C30 scores (P < .05). Follow-up analysis revealed no notable difference in re-fracture rates between the groups (P > .05). Conclusions: Zoledronic acid in combination with calcium carbonate and vitamin D3 effectively enhances bone health in osteoporosis patients, warranting its clinical recommendation. This regimen shows promise for improving patient outcomes in osteoporosis management.

An empirical application of McPhee's formal theory of addiction.

Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation

The Efficacy and Safety of Bisphosphonate Therapy for Osteopenia/Osteoporosis in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trials

A randomised trial comparing 6-monthly adjuvant zoledronate with a single one-time dose in patients with early breast cancer

Three distinct lineages of mesenchymal cells in Ciona intestinalis embryos demonstrated by specific gene expression.

Comparative efficacy of bisphosphonates in short-term fracture prevention for primary osteoporosis: a systematic review with network meta-analyses

Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials

Effect of Alendronic Acid on Fracture Healing: A Multicenter Randomized Placebo‐Controlled Trial

Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety Between Denosumab and Alendronate in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis: a Meta-Analysis

A red pigment produced by aerobic sporeforming bacteria

Oral Bisphosphonate Therapy for Osteogenesis Imperfecta: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Six Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.

1912 Reviewing the effect of COVID pandemic on changing clinical practice of administrating Zoledronic Acid to hip fracture patients

Recommendations for the optimal use of bone forming agents in osteoporosis

Zoledronic Acid Does Not Retard Bone Union: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Fragility Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures

Comparison of the Clinical Efficacy of Anabolic Agents and Bisphosphonates in the Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

In vitro fertilization, the Nobel Prize, and human embryonic stem cells.

Influence of bisphosphonate treatment on bone substitute performance in osteoporotic conditions

Bisphosphonates Preserve Bone Mineral Density and Suppress Bone Turnover Markers in Early Menopausal Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Evaluation of comparative effectiveness and safety of bisphosphonates

The Effect of Effervescent and Buffered Alendronate Compared to Conventional Alendronate on Markers of Bone Turnover: A Randomized Non-inferiority Trial

Reducing Re-fractures Post Percutaneous Kyphoplasty: The Impact of Zoledronic Acid with Calcium and Vitamin D3 in Osteoporotic Patients