Denosumab rapidly increases cortical bone in key locations of the femur: a 3D bone mapping study in women with osteoporosis.

Women with osteoporosis treated for 36 months with twice-yearly injections of denosumab sustained fewer hip fractures compared with placebo. Treatment might improve femoral bone at locations where fractures typically occur. To test this hypothesis, we used 3D cortical bone mapping of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis to investigate the timing and precise location of denosumab versus placebo effects in the hips. We analyzed clinical computed tomography scans from 80 female participants in FREEDOM, a randomized trial, wherein half of the study participants received subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg twice yearly and the others received placebo. Cortical 3D bone thickness maps of both hips were created from scans at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months. Cortical mass surface density maps were also created for each visit. After registration of each bone to an average femur shape model followed by statistical parametric mapping, we visualized and quantified statistically significant treatment effects. The technique allowed us to pinpoint systematic differences between denosumab and control and to display the results on a 3D average femur model. Denosumab treatment led to an increase in femoral cortical mass surface density and thickness, already evident by the third injection (12 months). Overall, treatment with denosumab increased femoral cortical mass surface density by 5.4% over 3 years. One-third of the increase came from increasing cortical density, and two-thirds from increasing cortical thickness, relative to placebo. After 36 months, cortical mass surface density and thickness had increased by up to 12% at key locations such as the lateral femoral trochanter versus placebo. Most of the femoral cortex displayed a statistically significant relative difference by 36 months. Osteoporotic cortical bone responds rapidly to denosumab therapy, particularly in the hip trochanteric region. This mechanism may be involved in the robust decrease in hip fractures observed in denosumab-treated women at increased risk of fracture.This study was funded by Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. Cambridge Bone Group is supported by Arthritis Research UK, The Evelyn Trust, and Cambridge NIHR Biomedical Research Centre.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Wiley via http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.232

Secular trends in the initiation of therapy in secondary fracture prevention in Europe : a multi-national cohort study including data from Denmark, Catalonia, and the United Kingdom

Altres ajuts: UCB funded this study. All analyses were conducted independently by the academic researchers involved. MKJ is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).This paper demonstrates a large post-fracture anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in the period 2005 to 2015. The gap was stable in Denmark at around 88-90%, increased in Catalonia from 80 to 88%, and started to increase in the UK towards the end of our study. Improved post-fracture care is needed. Patients experiencing a fragility fracture are at high risk of subsequent fractures, particularly within the first 2 years after the fracture. Previous studies have demonstrated that only a small proportion of fracture patients initiate therapy with an anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM), despite the proven fracture risk reduction of such therapies. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the changes in this post-fracture treatment gap across three different countries from 2005 to 2015. This analysis, which is part of a multinational cohort study, included men and women, aged 50 years or older, sustaining a first incident fragility fracture. Using routinely collected patient data from three administrative health databases covering Catalonia, Denmark, and the United Kingdom, we estimated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients not treated with AOM within 1 year of their first incident fracture. A total of 648,369 fracture patients were included. Mean age 70.2-78.9 years; 22.2-31.7% were men. In Denmark, the treatment gap was stable at approximately 88-90% throughout the 2005 to 2015 time period. In Catalonia, the treatment gap increased from 80 to 88%. In the UK, an initially decreasing treatment gap-though never smaller than 63%-was replaced by an increasing gap towards the end of our study. The gap was more pronounced in men than in women. Despite repeated calls for improved secondary fracture prevention, an unacceptably large treatment gap remains, with time trends indicating that the problem may be getting worse in recent years. The online version of this article (10.1007/s00198-020-05358-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Femoral and vertebral strength improvements in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with denosumab

In the randomized, placebo-controlled FREEDOM study of women aged 60 to 90 years with postmenopausal osteoporosis, treatment with denosumab once every 6 months for 36 months significantly reduced hip and new vertebral fracture risk by 40% and 68%, respectively. To gain further insight into this efficacy, we performed a nonlinear finite element analysis (FEA) of hip and spine quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scans to estimate hip and spine strength in a subset of FREEDOM subjects (n=48 placebo; n=51 denosumab) at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months. We found that, compared with baseline, the finite element estimates of hip strength increased from 12 months (5.3%; p<0.0001) and through 36 months (8.6%; p<0.0001) in the denosumab group. For the placebo group, hip strength did not change at 12 months and decreased at 36 months (-5.6%; p<0.0001). Similar changes were observed at the spine: strength increased by 18.2% at 36 months for the denosumab group (p<0.0001) and decreased by -4.2% for the placebo group (p=0.002). At 36 months, hip and spine strength increased for the denosumab group compared with the placebo group by 14.3% (p<0.0001) and 22.4% (p<0.0001), respectively. Further analysis of the finite element models indicated that strength associated with the trabecular bone was lost at the hip and spine in the placebo group, whereas strength associated with both the trabecular and cortical bone improved in the denosumab group. In conclusion, treatment with denosumab increased hip and spine strength as estimated by FEA of QCT scans compared with both baseline and placebo owing to positive treatment effects in both the trabecular and cortical bone compartments. These findings provide insight into the mechanism by which denosumab reduces fracture risk for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

The effect of 8 or 5 years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the FREEDOM Extension study

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

Romosozumab (sclerostin monoclonal antibody) versus teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis transitioning from oral bisphosphonate therapy : a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

Background: Previous bisphosphonate treatment attenuates the bone-forming effect of teriparatide. We compared the effects of 12 months of romosozumab (AMG 785), a sclerostin monoclonal antibody, versus teriparatide on bone mineral density (BMD) in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis transitioning from bisphosphonate therapy. Methods: This randomised, phase 3, open-label, active-controlled study was done at 46 sites in North America, Latin America, and Europe. We enrolled women (aged >= 55 to <= 90 years) with postmenopausal osteoporosis who had taken an oral bisphosphonate for at least 3 years before screening and alendronate the year before screening; an areal BMD T score of -2.5 or lower at the total hip, femoral neck, or lumbar spine; and a history of fracture. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive subcutaneous romosozumab (210 mg once monthly) or subcutaneous teriparatide (20 mu g once daily). The primary endpoint was percentage change from baseline in areal BMD by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at the total hip through month 12 (mean of months 6 and 12), which used a linear mixed effects model for repeated measures and represented the mean treatment effect at months 6 and 12. All randomised patients with a baseline measurement and at least one post-baseline measurement were included in the efficacy analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01796301. Findings: Between Jan 31, 2013, and April 29, 2014, 436 patients were randomly assigned to romosozumab (n=218) or teriparatide (n=218). 206 patients in the romosozumab group and 209 in the teriparatide group were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Through 12 months, the mean percentage change from baseline in total hip areal BMD was 2.6% (95% CI 2.2 to 3.0) in the romosozumab group and -0.6% (-1.0 to -0.2) in the teriparatide group; difference 3.2% (95% CI 2.7 to 3.8; p<0.0001). The frequency of adverse events was generally balanced between treatment groups. The most frequently reported adverse events were nasopharyngitis (28 [13%] of 218 in the romosozumab group vs 22 [10%] of 214 in the teriparatide group), hypercalcaemia (two [<1%] vs 22 [10%]), and arthralgia (22 [10%] vs 13 [6%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 17 (8%) patients on romosozumab and in 23 (11%) on teriparatide; none were judged treatment related. There were six (3%) patients in the romosozumab group compared with 12 (6%) in the teriparatide group with adverse events leading to investigational product withdrawal. Interpretation: Transition to a bone-forming agent is common practice in patients treated with bisphosphonates, such as those who fracture while on therapy. In such patients, romosozumab led to gains in hip BMD that were not observed with teriparatide. These data could inform clinical decisions for patients at high risk of fracture

Romosozumab Enhances Vertebral Bone Structure in Women With Low Bone Density.

Funder: NIHR Cambridge BRC; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100018956Romosozumab monoclonal antibody treatment works by binding sclerostin and causing rapid stimulation of bone formation while decreasing bone resorption. The location and local magnitude of vertebral bone accrual by romosozumab and how it compares to teriparatide remains to be investigated. Here we analyzed the data from a study collecting lumbar computed tomography (CT) spine scans at enrollment and 12 months post-treatment with romosozumab (210 mg sc monthly, n = 17), open-label daily teriparatide (20 μg sc, n = 19), or placebo (sc monthly, n = 20). For each of the 56 women, cortical thickness (Ct.Th), endocortical thickness (Ec.Th), cortical bone mineral density (Ct.bone mineral density (BMD)), cancellous BMD (Cn.BMD), and cortical mass surface density (CMSD) were measured across the first lumbar vertebral surface. In addition, color maps of the changes in the lumbar vertebrae structure were statistically analyzed and then visualized on the bone surface. At 12 months, romosozumab improved all parameters significantly over placebo and resulted in a mean vertebral Ct.Th increase of 10.3% versus 4.3% for teriparatide, an Ec.Th increase of 137.6% versus 47.5% for teriparatide, a Ct.BMD increase of 2.1% versus a -0.1% decrease for teriparatide, and a CMSD increase of 12.4% versus 3.8% for teriparatide. For all these measurements, the differences between romosozumab and teriparatide were statistically significant (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the romosozumab-associated Cn.BMD gains of 22.2% versus 18.1% for teriparatide, but both were significantly greater compared with the change in the placebo group (-4.6%, p < 0.05). Cortical maps showed the topographical locations of the increase in bone in fracture-prone areas of the vertebral shell, walls, and endplates. This study confirms widespread vertebral bone accrual with romosozumab or teriparatide treatment and provides new insights into how the rapid prevention of vertebral fractures is achieved in women with osteoporosis using these anabolic agents. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).This research was funded by Amgen and supported by the NIHR Cambridge BRC. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care