Explore the vast range of titles available.

Among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and a high risk of fracture, treatment with the monoclonal antibody romosozumab for 12 months followed by alendronate resulted in a significantly lower risk of fracture than alendronate for 12 months followed by alendronate.

This study shows that in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density, the monoclonal antibody romosozumab, which binds to sclerostin, an osteoblast-activity inhibitor, was associated with increased bone mineral density and bone formation and decreased bone resorption. Osteoporosis is characterized by low bone mass and defects in microarchitecture that are responsible for decreased bone strength and increased risk of fracture. 1 Antiresorptive drugs for osteoporosis increase bone mineral density and prevent the progression of structural damage but may not restore bone structure. Stimulation of bone formation is necessary to achieve improvements in bone mass, architecture, and strength. Sclerostin, encoded by the gene SOST, is an osteocyte-secreted glycoprotein that has been identified as a pivotal regulator of bone formation. By inhibiting the Wnt and bone morphogenetic protein signaling pathways, sclerostin impedes osteoblast proliferation and function, thereby decreasing bone formation. . . .

Summary This 78-week (18-month) study conducted in 479 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis evaluated the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 relative to US reference denosumab. CT-P41 had equivalent efficacy and pharmacodynamics to US-denosumab, with similar pharmacokinetics and comparable safety and immunogenicity profiles. Purpose To demonstrate equivalence of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 and US reference denosumab (US-denosumab) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Methods This 78-week (18-month), double-blind, randomized, active-controlled Phase 3 study (NCT04757376) comprised two treatment periods (TPs). In TPI, patients ( N  = 479) were randomized 1:1 to 60 mg subcutaneous CT-P41 or US-denosumab. At Week 52, those who had received CT-P41 in TPI continued to do so. Those who had received US-denosumab were randomized (1:1) to continue treatment or switch to CT-P41 in TPII. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density at Week 52. Efficacy equivalence was concluded if associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) for least squares (LS) mean group differences fell within ± 1.503%. The primary pharmacodynamic (PD) endpoint was area under the effect curve for serum carboxy-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen through the first 26 weeks, with an equivalence margin of 80–125% (for 95% CIs associated with geometric LS mean ratios). Results Equivalence was demonstrated for CT-P41 and US-denosumab with respect to primary efficacy (LS mean difference [95% CI]: − 0.139 [− 0.826, 0.548] in the full analysis set and − 0.280 [− 0.973, 0.414] in the per-protocol set) and PD (geometric LS mean ratio [95% CI]: 94.94 [90.75, 99.32]) endpoints. Secondary efficacy, PD, pharmacokinetics, and safety results were comparable among all groups up to Week 78, including after transitioning to CT-P41 from US-denosumab. Conclusions CT-P41 was equivalent to US-denosumab in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, with respect to primary efficacy and PD endpoints.

SummaryRomosozumab is a therapy that stimulates bone formation and reduces bone resorption. In this study of postmenopausal women with low BMD, a second course of romosozumab following a period off treatment or on denosumab increased or maintained BMD, respectively, and was well tolerated, providing insight into treatment sequence options.IntroductionIn patients with high fracture risk, therapies that stimulate bone formation provide rapid BMD gains; currently available agents, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, are limited to a 2-year lifetime exposure and generally used for a single treatment course. However, for long-term osteoporosis management, a second treatment course may be appropriate. Romosozumab, a therapy with the dual effect of increasing bone formation and decreasing bone resorption, reduces fracture risk within 12 months. Here, we report efficacy and safety of a second romosozumab course.MethodsIn this phase 2, dose-finding study, postmenopausal women with low bone mass (T-score ≤ − 2.0 and ≥ − 3.5) received romosozumab or placebo (month 0–24) followed by placebo or denosumab (month 24–36); participants then received a year of romosozumab (month 36–48).ResultsOf 167 participants who entered the month 36–48 period, 35 had been initially randomized to romosozumab 210 mg monthly. In participants who received romosozumab 210 mg monthly followed by placebo, a second romosozumab course (n = 19) increased BMD by amounts similar to their initial treatment (month 0–12) at the lumbar spine (12.4%; 12.0%, respectively) and total hip (6.0%; 5.5%, respectively). Following denosumab, a second romosozumab course (n = 16) increased BMD at the lumbar spine (2.3%) and maintained BMD at the total hip. Safety profiles were similar between first and second romosozumab courses.ConclusionsAfter 12 months off-treatment, a second romosozumab course again led to rapid and large BMD gains. Following denosumab, BMD gains with romosozumab were smaller than with initial treatment. No new safety findings were observed during the second course.

Unlike most chronic diseases, osteoporosis treatments are generally limited to a single drug at a fixed dose and frequency. Nonetheless, no approved therapy is able to restore skeletal integrity in most osteoporotic patients and the long-term use of osteoporosis drugs is controversial. Thus, many patients are treated with the sequential use of two or more therapies. The DATA study showed that combined teriparatide and denosumab increased bone mineral density more than either drug alone. Discontinuing teriparatide and denosumab, however, results in rapidly declining bone mineral density. In this DATA-Switch study, we aimed to assess the changes in bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporotic women who transitioned between treatments. This randomised controlled trial (DATA-Switch) is a preplanned extension of the denosumab and teriparatide administration study (DATA), in which 94 postmenopausal osteoporotic women were randomly assigned to receive 24 months of teriparatide (20 mg daily), denosumab (60 mg every 6 months), or both drugs. In DATA-Switch, women originally assigned to teriparatide received denosumab (teriparatide to denosumab group), those originally assigned to denosumab received teriparatide (denosumab to teriparatide group), and those originally assigned to both received an additional 24 months of denosumab alone (combination to denosumab group). Bone mineral density at the spine, hip, and wrist were measured 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months after the drug transitions as were biochemical markers of bone turnover. The primary endpoint was the percent change in posterior-anterior spine bone mineral density over 4 years. Between-group changes were assessed by one-way analysis of variance in our modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00926380. Between Sept 27, 2011, and Jan 28, 2013, eligible women from the DATA study were enrolled into DATA-Switch. Of 83 potential enrollees from the DATA study, 77 completed at least one post-baseline visit. After 48 months, the primary outcome of mean spine bone mineral density increased by 18·3% (95% CI 14·9–21·8) in 27 women in the teriparatide to denosumab group, 14·0% (10·9–17·2) in 27 women the denosumab to teriparatide group, and 16·0% (14·0–18·0) in 23 women in the combination to denosumab group, although this increase did not differ significantly between groups (for between-group comparisons, p=0·13 for the teriparatide to denosumab group vs the denosumab to teriparatide group, p=0·30 for the teriparatide to denosumab group vs the combination to denosumab group, and p=0·41 for the denosumab to teriparatide group vs the combination to denosumab group). For the bone mineral density secondary outcomes, total hip bone mineral density increased more in the teriparatide to denosumab group (6·6% [95% CI 5·3–7·9]) than in the denosumab to teriparatide group (2·8% [1·3–4·2], p=0·0002), but had the greatest increase in the combination to denosumab group (8·6% [7·1–10·0]; p=0·0446 vs the teriparatide to denosumab group, p<0·0001 vs the denosumab to teriparatide group). Similarly, femoral neck bone mineral density increased more in the teriparatide to denosumab group (8·3% [95% CI 6·1–10·5]) and the combination to denosumab group (9·1% [6·1–12·0]) than in the denosumab to teriparatide group (4·9% [2·2–7·5]; p=0·0447 for teriparatide to denosumab vs denosumab to teriparatide, p=0·0336 for combination to denosumab vs denosumab to teriparatide). Differences between the combination to denosumab group and the teriparatide to denosumab group did not differ significantly (p=0·67). After 48 months, radius bone mineral density was unchanged in the teriparatide to denosumab group (0·0% [95% CI −1·3 to 1·4]), whereas it decreased by −1·8% (−5·0 to 1·3) in the denosumab to teriparatide group, and increased by 2·8% (1·2–4·4) in the combination to denosumab group (p=0·0075 for the teriparatide to denosumab group vs the combination to denosumab group; p=0·0099 for the denosumab to teriparatide group vs the combination to denosumab group). One participant in the denosumab to teriparatide group had nephrolithiasis, classified as being possibly related to treatment. In postmenopausal osteoporotic women switching from teriparatide to denosumab, bone mineral density continued to increase, whereas switching from denosumab to teriparatide results in progressive or transient bone loss. These results should be considered when choosing the initial and subsequent management of postmenopausal osteoporotic patients. Amgen, Eli Lilly, and National Institutes of Health.

Summary Thyrotoxicosis leads to loss of bone mass. Vitamin D is important to bone health. In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we showed that bone restoration did not improve when adding vitamin D supplementation to standard care of Graves’ disease thyrotoxicosis. Bone density and microarchitecture improved markedly with treatment of thyrotoxicosis. Purpose Vitamin D is important to skeletal health and ensuring a replete vitamin D status is recommended. In thyrotoxicosis, bone turnover is increased and bone mass density (BMD) reduced. We examined whether vitamin D supplementation improves bone recovery in thyrotoxicosis caused by Graves’ disease (GD). Methods Using a double-blinded design, hyperthyroid patients with GD were randomized to vitamin D3 70 µg/day (2800 IU) or similar placebo as add-on to antithyroid drugs (ATD). At baseline and 9 months, we measured BMD and bone architecture using DXA and high resolution peripheral quantitative computerized tomography. Bone turnover markers (BTM) were measured at 3 months also. Effect of vitamin D versus placebo and the response to ATD treatment were analyzed using linear mixed modelling. Results Eighty-six GD patients were included (age 41 ± 14 years, 86% females). Compared to placebo, vitamin D3 did not improve BMD or microarchitecture. In response to ATD, BMD increased in the hip by 2% (95%CI: 1–4%). Cortical porosity decreased in tibia (− 7% [95%CI: − 12 to − 2%]) and radius [− 14% [95%CI: − 24 to − 3%]), and trabecular thickness increased (tibia (5% [95%CI: 2 − 9%]) and radius (4% [95%CI: 1–7%]). Changes in BTM, but not thyroid hormones, were associated with changes in BMD by DXA and with changes in the cortical compartment. Conclusion In newly diagnosed GD, 9 months of high dose vitamin D3 supplementation does not offer benefit by improving skeletal health. Treatment of thyrotoxicosis is associated with the recovery of BMD and microarchitecture. Clinicaltrial.gov identifier NCT02384668

Summary We used bone turnover markers to identify women who responded to bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis. Response was more likely with alendronate and ibandronate than risedronate. There was a greater decrease in bone markers if baseline bone turnover markers were higher and if the patient took more than 80 % of her medication. Introduction Biochemical response to bisphosphonate therapy can be assessed using either a decrease in bone turnover marker beyond the least significant change (LSC) or a reduction to within a reference interval (RI). We compared the performance of these target responses and determined whether response was related to the type of bisphosphonate, compliance and baseline bone turnover markers. Methods Biochemical responses to three oral bisphosphonates were assessed in an open, controlled trial comprising 172 postmenopausal osteoporotic women (age 53–84 years), randomised to alendronate, ibandronate or risedronate, plus calcium and vitamin D supplementation for 2 years. The LSC for each marker was derived within the study population, whereas RIs were obtained from a control group of healthy premenopausal women (age 35–40 years). Results Over 70 % of women achieved a target response for serum CTX and PINP, irrespective of the approach used. The percentage decrease at 12 weeks was greater for women with baseline PINP above the RI −63 % (difference 13 %, 95 % CI 0 to 27.1, P  = 0.049) and good compliance −67 % (difference 15.9 %, 95 % CI 6.3 to 25.5, P  = 0.001). Responders had a greater increase in spine bone density compared to nonresponders; for example 6.2 vs. 2.3 % (difference 3.9 %, 95 % CI 1.6 to 6.3, P  = 0.0011) for PINP LSC. The magnitude of change in bone markers was greater with ibandronate and alendronate than risedronate. Conclusions Both approaches to response identified similar proportions of women as responders. Nonresponders had smaller increases in BMD, and we suggest that biochemical assessment of response is a useful tool for the management of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Romosozumab binds sclerostin, increases bone formation, and decreases bone resorption. Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were assigned to romosozumab or placebo for 1 year, followed by 1 year of denosumab. Romosozumab was associated with lower vertebral and clinical fracture risk. Osteoporosis can lead to fragility fractures, which result in clinical burden and increased mortality. 1 , 2 Even after a fracture, fewer than 25% of patients receive pharmacologic treatment for osteoporosis. 3 – 5 After the discovery that sclerostin deficiency causes rare genetic conditions that are characterized by high bone mass and resistance to fracture, 6 , 7 sclerostin became a therapeutic target for the treatment of osteoporosis. Sclerostin, a negative regulator of bone formation that is secreted by osteocytes, 8 inhibits Wnt signaling, down-regulating this stimulus for osteoblast development and function. 9 Romosozumab (Amgen and UCB Pharma) is a monoclonal antibody that binds and inhibits sclerostin, with . . .

In this randomized trial, women 65 years of age or older who had osteopenia received four infusions of zoledronate or normal saline at 18-month intervals. Zoledronate was associated with a significantly lower risk of fragility fractures than placebo.

Summary The FREEDOM study and its Extension provide long-term information about the effects of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Treatment for up to 8 years was associated with persistent reduction of bone turnover, continued increases in bone mineral density, low fracture incidence, and a favorable benefit/risk profile. Introduction This study aims to report the results through year 5 of the FREEDOM Extension study, representing up to 8 years of continued denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Methods Women who completed the 3-year FREEDOM study were eligible to enter the 7-year open-label FREEDOM Extension in which all participants are scheduled to receive denosumab, since placebo assignment was discontinued for ethical reasons. A total of 4550 women enrolled in the Extension (2343 long-term; 2207 cross-over). In this analysis, women in the long-term and cross-over groups received denosumab for up to 8 and 5 years, respectively. Results Throughout the Extension, sustained reduction of bone turnover markers (BTMs) was observed in both groups. In the long-term group, mean bone mineral density (BMD) continued to increase significantly at each time point measured, for cumulative 8-year gains of 18.4 and 8.3 % at the lumbar spine and total hip, respectively. In the cross-over group, mean BMD increased significantly from the Extension baseline for 5-year cumulative gains of 13.1 and 6.2 % at the lumbar spine and total hip, respectively. The yearly incidence of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures remained low in both groups. The incidence of adverse and serious adverse events did not increase over time. Through Extension year 5, eight events of osteonecrosis of the jaw and two events of atypical femoral fracture were confirmed. Conclusions Denosumab treatment for up to 8 years was associated with persistent reductions of BTMs, continued BMD gains, low fracture incidence, and a consistent safety profile.