Explore the vast range of titles available.

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.

No clinical trials have compared osteoporosis drugs with incident fractures as the primary outcome. We compared the anti-fracture efficacy of teriparatide with risedronate in patients with severe osteoporosis. In this double-blind, double-dummy trial, we enrolled post-menopausal women with at least two moderate or one severe vertebral fracture and a bone mineral density T score of less than or equal to −1·50. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 20 μg of teriparatide once daily plus oral weekly placebo or 35 mg of oral risedronate once weekly plus daily injections of placebo for 24 months. The primary outcome was new radiographic vertebral fractures. Secondary, gated outcomes included new and worsened radiographic vertebral fractures, clinical fractures (a composite of non-vertebral and symptomatic vertebral), and non-vertebral fractures. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01709110) and EudraCT (2012-000123-41). We enrolled 680 patients in each group. At 24 months, new vertebral fractures occurred in 28 (5·4%) of 680 patients in the teriparatide group and 64 (12·0%) of 680 patients in the risedronate group (risk ratio 0·44, 95% CI 0·29–0·68; p<0·0001). Clinical fractures occurred in 30 (4·8%) of 680 patients in the teriparatide group compared with 61 (9·8%) of 680 in the risedronate group (hazard ratio 0·48, 95% CI 0·32–0·74; p=0·0009). Non-vertebral fragility fractures occurred in 25 (4·0%) patients in the teriparatide group and 38 (6·1%) in the risedronate group (hazard ratio 0·66; 95% CI 0·39–1·10; p=0·10). Among post-menopausal women with severe osteoporosis, the risk of new vertebral and clinical fractures is significantly lower in patients receiving teriparatide than in those receiving risedronate. Lilly.

SummaryThe antiresorptive potency varies between different bisphosphonates. We investigated the effect of stopping oral bisphosphonate treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis (ibandronate, alendronate, risedronate) on BTMs and BMD. After stopping treatment, all three groups showed an increase in BTMs and a decrease in hip BMD; however, none returned to pre-treatment baseline values.IntroductionBisphosphonates (BPs) continue to suppress bone turnover markers (BTMs) after treatment has stopped, leading to the suggestion that a pause in treatment could be considered for low-risk patients. Indirect comparisons suggest that after cessation of treatment, the effects on bone may differ between drugs. We investigated the effects of stopping oral BP treatments for postmenopausal osteoporosis on BTMs and bone mineral density (BMD).MethodsWe studied postmenopausal osteoporotic women who had previously taken part in a 2-year randomised study of three oral BPs (ibandronate, alendronate, or risedronate). At the end of the study, women with hip BMD T-score > − 2.5 and considered clinically appropriate to discontinue treatment were invited to participate in a further 2-year observational study. Biochemical response was assessed using BTMs, and BMD was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.ResultsAll BTMs increased after treatment withdrawal but remained below the pre-treatment baseline with less suppression of BTMs for the risedronate group compared to alendronate and ibandronate up to 48 weeks. There was no difference between the BP groups 96 weeks after stopping treatment. The change in BMD during the 96 weeks after stopping treatment was − 1.6% (95% CI − 1.9 to − 1.2, P < 0.001) for the total hip and − 0.6% (95% CI − 1.1 to − 0.2, P = 0.17) at the lumbar spine with no difference between the three BP groups (P = 0.85 and P = 0.48, respectively).ConclusionFor all treatment groups, there was an increase in BTMs and a decrease in hip BMD after stopping BPs for 2 years; however, none returned to pre-treatment baseline values.

Summary We compared the effects of oral alendronate, ibandronate and risedronate on the central and peripheral skeleton over 2 years. We report differences in effect on the central skeleton but not on the peripheral skeleton. Greater effects were observed for ibandronate (and alendronate) than risedronate at the spine but not the hip. Introduction Generally, comparative clinical trials of bisphosphonates have examined changes in bone within central skeletal regions. We have examined the effects of bisphosphonate treatment on the peripheral skeleton. Methods We conducted a 2-year, open-label, parallel randomised control trial of three orally administered bisphosphonates, at their licensed dose, to examine and compare their effects on the peripheral skeleton using multiple modes of measurement. We studied 172 postmenopausal women (53–84 years) who had either a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score of  ≤ −2.5 at the spine and/or total hip or  < −1.0 at either site plus a previous low trauma fracture. Participants were randomised to receive either (i) ibandronate 150 mg/month, (ii) alendronate 70 mg/week or (iii) risedronate 35 mg/week, plus calcium (1,200 mg/day) and vitamin D (800 IU/day), for 2 years. Premenopausal women (33–40 years, n  = 226) were studied to monitor device stability. Results We measured central BMD of the lumbar spine, total hip, total body and forearm using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. We measured calcaneus BMD (using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry plus laser), radius and tibia BMD (using peripheral quantitative computed tomography), finger BMD (using radiographic absorptiometry), and phalangeal and calcaneal ultrasound variables (using quantitative ultrasound). Mixed effects regression models were used to evaluate effects of time and treatment allocation on BMD change. By 2 years, there were significant increases ( p  < 0.05) in central BMD sites (lumbar spine, total hip). In the peripheral skeleton, only significant changes in calcaneus BMD, 33 % total radius BMD and quantitative ultrasound (QUS)-2 broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) were evident for women receiving oral bisphosphonates. Conclusions The increases in lumbar spine and total body BMD were greater with ibandronate and alendronate than with risedronate. Treatment effects on peripheral measurements did not differ between the three bisphosphonates.

The irradiated tumor itself represents an opportunity to establish endogenous in situ vaccines. However, such in situ cancer vaccination (ISCV) triggered by radiation therapy (RT) alone is very weak and hardly elicits systemic anticancer immunity. In this study, we develop two-dimensional risedronate-manganese nanobelts (RMn-NBs) as an adjuvant for RT to address this issue. RMn-NBs exhibit good T 2 magnetic resonance imaging performance and enhanced Fenton-like catalytic activity, which induces immunogenic cell death. RMn-NBs can inhibit the HIF-1α/VEGF axis to empower RT and synchronously activate the cGAS/STING pathway for promoting the secretion of type I interferon, thereby boosting RT-triggered ISCV and immune checkpoint blockade therapy against primary and metastatic tumors. RMn-NBs as a nano-adjuvant for RT show good biocompatibility and therapeutic efficacy, presenting a promising prospect for cancer radiotherapy and immunotherapy. Radiation therapy (RT) can induce immunogenic cell death and elicit anti-tumor immune responses. Here the authors report the design and characterization of a risedronate-manganese-based nanosystem for in situ vaccination, amplifying RT-mediated anti-tumor immunity in preclinical models.

Limited data are available on the safety and efficacy of anti-resorptive agents, particularly once-monthly bisphosphonates, for use in osteoporotic patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We conducted a post hoc analysis of data from a 12-month, randomized, double-blind, phase III study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of once-monthly risedronate (RIS-OM) 75 mg tablets in Japanese osteoporosis patients with mild-to-moderate CKD. Patients who received RIS-OM 75 mg were stratified by baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; ≥ 90, ≥ 60 to < 90, or ≥ 30 to < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2). Safety endpoints were incidence of adverse events (AEs) and percent change from baseline in eGFR, serum creatinine, calcium, and phosphorus. Efficacy endpoints were percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers (BTMs). In 420 patients included (age 67.7 ± 6.7 years, women 98.8%), the incidence of all AEs, gastrointestinal disorders, acute phase reaction, non-vertebral fractures, and renal and urinary disorders was not significantly different among subgroups. Interaction between subgroups and time was significant for eGFR (p = 0.010) and serum creatinine (p = 0.001) but considered to be regression to the mean and clinically insignificant. BMD significantly increased while BTMs significantly decreased from baseline with a similar degree of change among the subgroups. In conclusion, RIS-OM 75 mg showed consistent safety and efficacy in suppressing bone turnover and increasing BMD in Japanese primary osteoporosis patients with mild-to-moderate CKD. These results should, however, be interpreted with caution because the number of patients with moderate CKD was limited.

Absorption of oral immediate-release (IR) risedronate tablets is reduced by food intake, thus a delayed-release (DR) tablet has been developed to overcome the necessity of taking IR tablets under fasting conditions. This randomized, double-blind, phase II/III study compared efficacy and safety of risedronate IR once-daily (QD) and DR once-monthly (QM) tablets in Japanese patients with involutional osteoporosis. Patients received 2.5 mg IR on awakening QD, or 25 or 37.5 mg DR on awakening, following breakfast, or 30 min after breakfast, QM for 12 months. Primary endpoint was non-inferiority in mean percent change from baseline to end of study (month 12, last observation carried forward [M12, LOCF]) in mean lumbar spine (L2–L4) bone mineral density (BMD) between risedronate IR on awakening and DR following breakfast. Mean percent changes in (L2–L4) BMD at M12, LOCF were 5.07% (IR at awakening, n = 190), 3.36% (25 mg DR following breakfast, n = 194), and 4.11% (37.5 mg DR following breakfast, n = 181). Mean percent change in (L2–L4) BMD was numerically lower in the DR following breakfast groups versus the respective on awakening and 30 min after breakfast DR groups. Overall incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were comparable between groups. In the DR groups, 1.5–4.0% of patients reported TEAEs potentially associated with acute-phase reactions versus 0% in the IR group. In this study, non-inferiority could not be declared for 37.5 or 25 mg DR following breakfast QM (p = 0.1346 or p = 0.6711, respectively) versus 2.5 mg IR on awakening QD.

Summary In postmenopausal women with low bone mass and hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer on an aromatase inhibitor, risedronate maintained skeletal health assessed by bone density and turnover markers. Women with the greatest decreases in bone turnover markers at 12 months had the greatest increases in bone density at 24 months. Introduction Aromatase inhibitors (AIs), adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer, are associated with bone loss and fractures. Our objectives were to determine if (1) oral bisphosphonate therapy can prevent bone loss in women on an AI and (2) early changes in bone turnover markers (BTM) can predict later changes in bone mineral density (BMD). Methods We conducted a 2-year double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial in 109 postmenopausal women with low bone mass on an AI (anastrozole, letrozole, or exemestane) for hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Participants were randomized to once weekly risedronate 35 mg or placebo, and all received calcium plus vitamin D. The main outcome measures included BMD, BTM [carboxy-terminal collagen crosslinks (CTX) and N-terminal propeptide of type 1 procollagen (P1NP)], and safety. Results Eighty-seven percent completed 24 months. BMD increased more in the active treatment group compared to placebo with an adjusted difference at 24 months of 3.9 ± 0.7 percentage points at the spine and 3.2 ± 0.5 percentage points at the hip (both p  < 0.05). The adjusted difference between the active treatment and placebo groups were 0.09 ± 0.04 nmol/LBCE for CTX and 23.3 ± 4.8 μg/mL for P1NP (both p  < 0.05). Women with greater 12-month decreases in CTX and P1NP in the active treatment group had a greater 24-month increase in spinal BMD ( p  < 0.05). The oral therapy was safe and well tolerated. Conclusion In postmenopausal women with low bone mass and breast cancer on an AI, the oral bisphosphonate risedronate maintained skeletal health.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is a severe adverse effect associated with anti-resorptive medications like nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates (N-BPs), particularly zoledronate (ZOL). This study aimed to investigate whether a BP analog with high bone affinity but minimal anti-resorptive activity, NE-58051, could induce MRONJ-like lesions in a mouse model. Female C57BL/6J mice (n=6 per group) were administered ZOL (250 μg/kg intravenously, twice weekly) for one or two weeks, or NE-58051 (250 μg/kg intravenously, twice weekly) for two weeks. Two weeks after initiation of study, the bilateral first molars were extracted. Mice were euthanized after a total duration of four weeks. Histological assessments evaluated necrotic bone area and osteoclast activity at extraction sites. Serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase isoform 5b (TRAcP-5b) levels were measured. Mice treated with ZOL for two weeks exhibited significant increases in empty osteocytic lacunae and necrotic bone area compared to the saline group, indicating the development of MRONJ-like lesions. NE-58051-treated mice did not show significant differences in necrotic bone area or osteoclast activity compared to controls. No significant differences were observed in serum TRAcP-5b levels among all groups. High bone affinity without potent inhibition of bone resorption does not induce MRONJ-like lesions in mice. These findings suggest that the potent anti-resorptive activity of N-BPs is a key factor in MRONJ development, highlighting the importance of bone turnover suppression in the pathogenesis of this condition.

Romosozumab and denosumab are monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of osteoporosis. Both have a rapid offset of effect resulting in loss of bone density (BMD) gained on-treatment and, in some cases, multiple vertebral fractures following treatment cessation. We recently reported disappointing results from transitioning patients from denosumab to intravenous zoledronate at the time the next denosumab injection is due. The present report re-assesses the role of bisphosphonates following the use of denosumab. In the FRAME trial, osteoporotic women were randomized to romosozumab or placebo for 1 year, then both groups were provided with open-label denosumab for the subsequent 2 years. In women completing this study at our center, we offered treatment with either oral or intravenous bisphosphonates. In the eleven women opting for intravenous treatment, zoledronate was given after a median delay of 65 days from trial-end, in the hope that this might increase skeletal uptake of the drug and, thereby, its efficacy to maintain bone density. In these women, spine BMD was 17.3% above baseline at trial-end, and still 12.3% above baseline a year later, a 73% (CI: 61%, 85%) retention of the treatment benefit. The comparable BMD figures for the total hip were 10.7 and 9.2% above baseline, a 87% (CI: 77%, 98%) retention of treatment effect. In contrast, those not receiving treatment after the conclusion of the FRAME trial lost 80–90% of the BMD gained on-trial in the following 12 months. Women treated with risedronate showed an intermediate response. In the zoledronate group, mean PINP 6 months post-FRAME was 23 ± 4 µg/L and at 12 months it was 47 ± 8 µg/L, suggesting that repeat zoledronate dosing is needed at 1 year to maintain the BMD gains. In conclusion, delaying administration of intravenous bisphosphonate when transitioning from short-term denosumab appears to increase the extent to which the gains in BMD are maintained.