-
The New England Journal of Medicine Oct 2017Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to and inhibits sclerostin, increases bone formation, and decreases bone resorption. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to and inhibits sclerostin, increases bone formation, and decreases bone resorption.
METHODS
We enrolled 4093 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and a fragility fracture and randomly assigned them in a 1:1 ratio to receive monthly subcutaneous romosozumab (210 mg) or weekly oral alendronate (70 mg) in a blinded fashion for 12 months, followed by open-label alendronate in both groups. The primary end points were the cumulative incidence of new vertebral fracture at 24 months and the cumulative incidence of clinical fracture (nonvertebral and symptomatic vertebral fracture) at the time of the primary analysis (after clinical fractures had been confirmed in ≥330 patients). Secondary end points included the incidences of nonvertebral and hip fracture at the time of the primary analysis. Serious cardiovascular adverse events, osteonecrosis of the jaw, and atypical femoral fractures were adjudicated.
RESULTS
Over a period of 24 months, a 48% lower risk of new vertebral fractures was observed in the romosozumab-to-alendronate group (6.2% [127 of 2046 patients]) than in the alendronate-to-alendronate group (11.9% [243 of 2047 patients]) (P<0.001). Clinical fractures occurred in 198 of 2046 patients (9.7%) in the romosozumab-to-alendronate group versus 266 of 2047 patients (13.0%) in the alendronate-to-alendronate group, representing a 27% lower risk with romosozumab (P<0.001). The risk of nonvertebral fractures was lower by 19% in the romosozumab-to-alendronate group than in the alendronate-to-alendronate group (178 of 2046 patients [8.7%] vs. 217 of 2047 patients [10.6%]; P=0.04), and the risk of hip fracture was lower by 38% (41 of 2046 patients [2.0%] vs. 66 of 2047 patients [3.2%]; P=0.02). Overall adverse events and serious adverse events were balanced between the two groups. During year 1, positively adjudicated serious cardiovascular adverse events were observed more often with romosozumab than with alendronate (50 of 2040 patients [2.5%] vs. 38 of 2014 patients [1.9%]). During the open-label alendronate period, adjudicated events of osteonecrosis of the jaw (1 event each in the romosozumab-to-alendronate and alendronate-to-alendronate groups) and atypical femoral fracture (2 events and 4 events, respectively) were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who were at high risk for fracture, romosozumab treatment for 12 months followed by alendronate resulted in a significantly lower risk of fracture than alendronate alone. (Funded by Amgen and others; ARCH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01631214 .).
Topics: Aged; Alendronate; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Remodeling; Cardiovascular Diseases; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Incidence; Least-Squares Analysis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Risk; Spinal Fractures
PubMed: 28892457
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1708322 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Jun 2022To evaluate whether treatment sequence affects romosozumab response, this analysis reviewed studies where romosozumab was administered before or following an...
UNLABELLED
To evaluate whether treatment sequence affects romosozumab response, this analysis reviewed studies where romosozumab was administered before or following an antiresorptive (alendronate or denosumab). Initial treatment with romosozumab followed by an antiresorptive resulted in larger increases in bone mineral density of both hip and spine compared with the reverse sequence.
INTRODUCTION
Teriparatide followed by an antiresorptive increases bone mineral density (BMD) more than using an antiresorptive first. To evaluate whether treatment sequence affects romosozumab response, we reviewed randomized clinical trials where romosozumab was administered before (ARCH, FRAME) or following (STRUCTURE, Phase 2 extension) an antiresorptive (alendronate or denosumab, respectively).
METHODS
We evaluated BMD percentage change for total hip (TH) and lumbar spine (LS) and response rates (BMD gains ≥ 3% and ≥ 6%) at years 1 and 2 (except STRUCTURE with only 1-year data available).
RESULTS
With 1-year romosozumab initial therapy in ARCH and FRAME, TH BMD increased 6.2% and 6.0%, and LS BMD increased 13.7% and 13.1%, respectively. When romosozumab was administered for 1 year after alendronate (STRUCTURE) or denosumab (Phase 2 extension), TH BMD increased 2.9% and 0.9%, respectively, and LS BMD increased 9.8% and 5.3%, respectively. Over 2 years, TH and LS BMD increased 7.1% and 15.2% with romosozumab/alendronate, 8.5% and 16.6% with romosozumab/denosumab, and 3.8% and 11.5% with denosumab/romosozumab, respectively. A greater proportion of patients achieved BMD gains ≥ 6% when romosozumab was used first, particularly for TH, versus the reverse sequence (69% after romosozumab/denosumab; 15% after denosumab/romosozumab).
CONCLUSION
In this study, larger mean BMD increases and greater BMD responder rates were achieved when romosozumab was used before, versus after, an antiresorptive agent. Since BMD on treatment is a strong surrogate for bone strength and fracture risk, this analysis supports the thesis that initial treatment with romosozumab followed by an antiresorptive will result in greater efficacy versus the reverse sequence.
Topics: Alendronate; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Denosumab; Female; Humans; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Teriparatide
PubMed: 35165774
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-06174-0 -
Women's Health (London, England) 2022Increased understanding of the Wnt signaling pathway has led to the development of romosozumab, one of the most potent osteoanabolic agents to date for osteoporosis... (Review)
Review
Increased understanding of the Wnt signaling pathway has led to the development of romosozumab, one of the most potent osteoanabolic agents to date for osteoporosis treatment. Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits sclerostin, a natural inhibitor of the Wnt signaling pathway. Romosozumab, by inhibiting sclerostin activates the Wnt signaling pathway, leading to increased bone formation and decreased bone resorption. The pivotal ARCH and FRAME studies established romosozumab's fracture reduction efficacy. Romosozumab was superior to alendronate in fracture reduction and bone mineral density gain in the ARCH study. Romosozumab treatment should be followed sequentially with a potent antiresorptive agent. The antifracture efficacy gained from romosozumab is maintained or improved after transitioning to an antiresorptive agent. As one of the most potent osteoanabolic agents, the introduction of romosozumab has significantly increased our ability to treat osteoporosis. Studies have provided important information on using romosozumab with other osteoporosis medications to optimize osteoporosis treatment. Romosozumab used before antiresorptive medications is associated with more significant bone mineral density increases than when an antiresorptive agent is used before romosozumab. Romosozumab is recommended for osteoporosis treatment in patients at very high risk for fracture with low cardiovascular risk. Romosozumab is generally well tolerated, with 4%-5% of patients having injection site reactions. The ARCH trial showed a higher risk of cardiovascular events in patients receiving romosozumab. Romosozumab carries a black box warning that romosozumab should not be initiated in patients with myocardial infarction or stroke in the preceding year. However, the information on romosozumab and increased cardiovascular risk is conflicting. The risk of cardiovascular disease with romosozumab is unclear. While romosozumab has demonstrated significant osteoanabolic effect and antifracture efficacy and will benefit high fracture risk patients, further studies are needed to investigate the cardiovascular safety of romosozumab.
Topics: Alendronate; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Cardiovascular Diseases; Female; Heart Disease Risk Factors; Humans; Osteoporosis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36154750
DOI: 10.1177/17455057221125577 -
Bone Aug 2020Alendronate was synthesized in 1970s in a search for inhibitors of calcification. Istituto Gentili investigators identified it as a potent inhibitor of bone resorption...
Alendronate was synthesized in 1970s in a search for inhibitors of calcification. Istituto Gentili investigators identified it as a potent inhibitor of bone resorption and obtained a patent covering its use in the treatment of osteoporosis and other disorders of excessive bone resorption in the 1980s. Merck licensed alendronate in 1988 and its pharmaceutical chemists reformulated it as a sodium salt with good solubility in a tablet that reduced its potential for esophageal irritation. Clinical trials proved that it reduced bone turnover, increased BMD and reduced the risk of vertebral fractures in postmenopausal osteoporotic women. Merck sponsored a large clinical trials that won FDA approval for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and showed that it reduced the risk of spine and hip fractures. Its approval in the US in 1995 spurred sales of bone densitometers and BMD testing to screen for low bone mineral density and identify osteoporosis. Bone mass measurement was supported by medical society guidelines and reimbursement by Medicare and other insurers in the USA. A 70 mg weekly instead of 10 mg daily dose of alendronate produced the same effect on BMD and biochemical markers of bone remodelling with greater convenience and reduced potential for upper GI adverse events. Consequently, by 2006, about 30 million prescriptions for alendronate were written annually in the U.S. for about 15% of postmenopausal women in the U.S. Thereafter, publicity about rare but concerning atypical femoral fractures (AFF) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) along with the expiry of Merck's patent (in 2008) and cessation of their promotion of alendronate, and a decline in use of densitometry led to a steady slide in its use even among patients for whom the benefits of alendronate far outweigh its potential risks. Nevertheless, in 25 years since its regulatory approval, alendronate has undoubtedly prevented millions of fractures world-wide.
Topics: Aged; Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Remodeling; Female; Humans; Medicare; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; United States
PubMed: 32437874
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115411 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Jun 2020To evaluate the effects of two fall-prevention and anti-osteoporotic protocols in elderly patients with osteopenia (OPA). (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
UNLABELLED
To evaluate the effects of two fall-prevention and anti-osteoporotic protocols in elderly patients with osteopenia (OPA).
METHODS
The present randomized controlled study included patients with OPA (n =123). The age of these patients was ≥80 years old, with the mean age of 83.54 ± 2.99 years, and the male-to-female ratio was 2.97:1.00. Fall-prevention guidance was given to all patients. Patients in the experiment group (n = 62) orally received 600 mg/d of calcium carbonate, 0.5 μg/d of alfacalcidol, and 70 mg/week of alendronate, while patients in the control group (n = 61) orally received 600 mg/d of calcium carbonate and 0.5 μg/d of alfacalcidol for 18 months. The grip strength, gait speed, bone turnover markers, serum calcium, serum phosphorus, parathyroid hormone (PTH), and bone mineral density were measured, and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test and the chair rising test (CRT) were performed. Falls, fragility fractures, medication compliance, and side effects of the drugs were recorded.
RESULTS
The serum levels of bone turnover markers (type I procollagen amino-terminal peptide [P1NP], type I collagen carboxyl terminal peptide [β-CTx], and osteocalcin [OC]) decreased, while the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine and bilateral femoral neck increased after treatment in the experiment group (P < 0.05, P < 0.01). The rate of change in bone mineral density of the bilateral femoral neck was higher in the experiment group than the control group (3.43% vs 0.03%, P < 0.05; 2.86% vs -0.02%, P < 0.01). After treatment, the proportion of patients with increased hip T scores in the experiment group (66.1%, 41/62) was significantly higher than the proportion (35.0%, 21/60) in the control group (P = 0.001). The incidence of fall decreased in both groups after treatment compared to that before treatment (54.8% vs 33.9% and 54.1% vs 36.7%, respectively; P < 0.05). The incidence of fragility fractures was lower in the experiment group than the control group (8.1% vs 20.0%, P = 0.057). During the intervention period, the incidence of fragility fractures in patients who did not fall (3.8%, 3/79) was significantly lower than that in patients who fell (32.6%, 14/43) (P = 0.000). The risk of fragility fractures was significantly lower in patients who did not fall compared to patients who fell (relative risk: 0.117, 95% confidence interval: 0.035-0.384).
CONCLUSION
The combination of alendronate sodium with alfacalcidol and calcium can significantly improve the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine and femoral neck. For older patients with OPA, subjectively paying attention to avoiding falls can significantly reduce the risk of fragility fractures.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Aged, 80 and over; Alendronate; Biomarkers; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Diseases, Metabolic; Calcium Carbonate; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Gait; Hand Strength; Humans; Hydroxycholecalciferols; Male; Osteoporosis
PubMed: 32495521
DOI: 10.1111/os.12701 -
Journal of Women's Health (2002) Mar 2020
Topics: Alendronate; Anorexia Nervosa; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone and Bones; Contraceptives, Oral; Disease Management; Humans; Osteoporosis; Parathyroid Hormone-Related Protein
PubMed: 31834855
DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2019.8195 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023With adequate blood transfusion and iron chelation, thalassemia patients have a longer life expectancy and experience long-term metabolic complications, including... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
With adequate blood transfusion and iron chelation, thalassemia patients have a longer life expectancy and experience long-term metabolic complications, including osteoporosis, fractures, and bone pain. Alendronate, an oral bisphosphonate, is currently used to treat various types of osteoporosis. However, the efficacy for the treatment of thalassemia-associated osteoporosis remains unclear.
METHODS
We conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of alendronate for the treatment of osteoporosis in thalassemia patients. Patients were included if they were males (18-50 years) or premenopausal females with low bone mineral density (BMD) (Z-score < -2.0 SD) or positive vertebral deformities from vertebral fracture analysis (VFA). Stratified randomization was performed according to sex and transfusion status. Patients were 1:1 allocated to receive once weekly alendronate 70 mg orally or placebo for a total duration of 12 months. BMD and VFA were re-evaluated at 12 months. Markers of bone resorption (C-terminal crosslinking telopeptide of type I collagen; CTX) and bone formation (Procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide; P1NP), and pain scores were measured at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. The primary outcome was the change of BMD. The secondary endpoints were changes in bone turnover markers (BTM) and pain scores.
RESULTS
A total of 51 patients received the study drug, 28 patients were assigned to receive alendronate and 23 patients to receive placebo. At 12 months, patients in the alendronate group had significant improvement of BMD at L1-L4 compared to their baseline (0.72 ± 0.11 vs 0.69 ± 0.11 g/cm, p = 0.004), while there was no change in the placebo group (0.69 ± 0.09 vs 0.70 ± 0.06 g/cm, p = 0.814). There was no significant change of BMD at femoral neck in both groups. Serum BTMs were significantly decreased among patients receiving alendronate at 6 and 12 months. The mean back pain score was significantly reduced compared to the baseline in both groups (p = 0.003). Side effects were rarely found and led to a discontinuation of the study drug in 1 patient (grade 3 fatigue).
CONCLUSION
Alendronate 70 mg orally once weekly for 12 months effectively improves BMD at L-spine, reduces serum BTMs, and alleviates back pain in thalassemia patients with osteoporosis. The treatment was well tolerated and had a good safety profile.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Alendronate; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Density; Osteoporosis; Thalassemia; Spinal Fractures; Pain
PubMed: 37251676
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1178761 -
Praxis Jan 2018
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Topics: Adaptor Proteins, Signal Transducing; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alendronate; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Morphogenetic Proteins; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Genetic Markers; Humans; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures
PubMed: 29338631
DOI: 10.1024/1661-8157/a002866 -
Archives of Osteoporosis Jul 2022The efficacy of generic teriparatide in improving BMD at lumbar spine in patients with osteoporosis was similar to that of alendronate. It provided a new choice for... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
UNLABELLED
The efficacy of generic teriparatide in improving BMD at lumbar spine in patients with osteoporosis was similar to that of alendronate. It provided a new choice for osteoporosis treatment in Chinese population.
INTRODUCTION
To determine whether the efficacy of generic teriparatide is noninferior to alendronate for Chinese postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
METHODS
Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) in a 48-week, open-label design to receive 20 µg sc daily teriparatide or 70 mg oral weekly alendronate. Primary outcome was percentage change in BMD at the lumbar spine from baseline to 48 weeks and was assessed for non-inferiority. The same outcome was further assessed for superiority as a secondary endpoint.
RESULTS
Three hundred ninety-one and 196 participants were randomly assigned to the teriparatide or alendronate group, of whom 379 and 194 receiving at least one dose of teriparatide and alendronate treatment were eligible for the efficacy analysis. Teriparatide was non-inferior to alendronate for BMD change at lumbar spine (treatment difference: 0.7%, 95% CI: - 0.3 to 1.7%), which excluded the predefined non-inferiority margin of - 1.5%. However, teriparatide was not statistically superior to alendronate in improving BMD at lumbar spine (P = 0.169). At 48 weeks, changes in BMD at total hip were - 1.0% and 2.2% in teriparatide and alendronate group, respectively (P < 0.001). The incidence of new fracture showed no statistical difference between groups (P = 0.128). Serum P1NP and β-CTX levels significantly increased in the teriparatide group and markedly decreased in alendronate group (all P < 0.001 vs baseline). The adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were more common in the teriparatide group than in the alendronate group, which were mainly teriparatide-related hypercalcemia, elevated alkaline phosphatase or parathyroid hormone, dizziness, and arthralgia.
CONCLUSIONS
Teriparatide was not inferior to alendronate in increasing BMD at lumbar spine in Chinese postmenopausal women, and they achieved these effects through different mechanisms.
Topics: Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; China; Female; Humans; Osteoporosis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Postmenopause; Prospective Studies; Teriparatide
PubMed: 35900607
DOI: 10.1007/s11657-022-01131-8 -
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research Aug 2017To evaluate orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) in rats treated with two types of bisphosphonates (BPs), alendronate sodium (A) and zoledronic acid (Z).
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) in rats treated with two types of bisphosphonates (BPs), alendronate sodium (A) and zoledronic acid (Z).
DESIGN
In all, 15 male Wistar rats were randomly divided into three groups. Group OTM+A: orthodontic tooth movement and subcutaneous administration of alendronate sodium (2.5 mg/kg); Group OTM+Z: orthodontic tooth movement and subcutaneous administration of zoledronic acid (0.02 mg/kg), and Group OTM: orthodontic tooth movement and subcutaneous injection of saline. The BPs were administered once a day during 25 days before OTM started and during 10 days of OTM. The left upper first molar was moved with a stainless-steel closed coil spring which delivered an initial force of 0.4N. OTM was measured with a digital caliper comparing the moved and the contralateral side. The histomorphometric analysis counted the number of osteoclasts, inflammatory cells, blood vessels and fibroblasts (n/10 m ) in periodontal ligament (PDL) of the distobuccal root.
RESULTS
A reduction of 58.3% of OTM was found in Group OTM+A and 99.6% in Group OTM+Z, when compared with Group OTM. There was a significant decrease of osteoclasts and inflammatory cells in BP-treated groups. Blood vessels and fibroblastic cells decreased mainly in Group OTM+Z.
CONCLUSION
Alendronate sodium and zoledronic acid have similar effects on the periodontal tissue during orthodontic treatment in rats. Especially, zoledronic acid can affect orthodontic tooth movement.
Topics: Alendronate; Animals; Bone Density; Bone Remodeling; Diphosphonates; Imidazoles; Male; Rats; Rats, Wistar; Tooth Movement Techniques; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 28653350
DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12192