Managing bone mineral density with oral bisphosphonate therapy in women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibition

The use of adjuvant aromatase inhibitors is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fractures. The oral bisphosphonate, risedronate - dosed as the US Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment or prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis - appears to mitigate bone loss associated with 2 years of adjuvant anastrozole in women with early-stage breast cancer

Pamidronic acid and cabergoline as effective long-term therapy in a 12-year-old girl with extended facial polyostotic fibrous dysplasia, prolactinoma and acromegaly in McCune-Albright syndrome: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>McCune-Albright syndrome is a complex inborn disorder due to early embryonal postzygotic somatic activating mutations in the <it>GNAS</it>1 gene. The phenotype is very heterogeneous and includes polyostotic fibrous dysplasia, typically involving the facial skull, numerous café-au-lait spots and autonomous hyperfunctions of several endocrine systems, leading to hyperthyroidism, hypercortisolism, precocious puberty and acromegaly.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>Here, we describe a 12-year-old Caucasian girl with severe facial involvement of fibrous dysplasia, along with massive acromegaly due to growth hormone excess and precocious puberty, with a prolactinoma. Our patient was treated with a bisphosphonate and the prolactin antagonist, cabergoline, resulting in the inhibition of fibrous dysplasia and involution of both the prolactinoma and growth hormone excess. During a follow-up of more than two years, no severe side effects were noted.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Treatment with bisphosphonates in combination with cabergoline is a suitable option in patients with McCune-Albright syndrome, especially in order to circumvent surgical interventions in patients suffering from polyostotic fibrous dysplasia involving the skull base.</p

The nature of fibrous dysplasia

Fibrous dysplasia has been regarded as a developmental skeletal disorder characterized by replacement of normal bone with benign cellular fibrous connective tissue. It has now become evident that fibrous dysplasia is a genetic disease caused by somatic activating mutation of the Gsα subunit of G protein-coupled receptor resulting in upregulation of cAMP. This leads to defects in differentiation of osteoblasts with subsequent production of abnormal bone in an abundant fibrous stroma. In addition there is an increased production of IL-6 by mutated stromal fibrous dysplastic cells that induce osteoclastic bone resorption

The prevalence of vertebral fracture amongst patients presenting with non-vertebral fractures

INTRODUCTION: Despite vertebral fracture being a significant risk factor for further fracture, vertebral fractures are often unrecognised. A study was therefore conducted to determine the proportion of patients presenting with a non-vertebral fracture who also have an unrecognised vertebral fracture. METHODS: Prospective study of patients presenting with a non-vertebral fracture in South Glasgow who underwent DXA evaluation with vertebral morphometry (MXA) from DV5/6 to LV4/5. Vertebral deformities (consistent with fracture) were identified by direct visualisation using the Genant semi-quantitative grading scale. RESULTS: Data were available for 337 patients presenting with low trauma non-vertebral fracture; 261 were female. Of all patients, 10.4% were aged 50–64 years, 53.2% were aged 65–74 years and 36.2% were aged 75 years or over. According to WHO definitions, 35.0% of patients had normal lumbar spine BMD (T-score −1 or above), 37.4% were osteopenic (T-score −1.1 to −2.4) and 27.6% osteoporotic (T-score −2.5 or lower). Humerus (n=103, 31%), radius–ulna (n=90, 27%) and hand/foot (n=53, 16%) were the most common fractures. For 72% of patients (n=241) the presenting fracture was the first low trauma fracture to come to clinical attention. The overall prevalence of vertebral deformity established by MXA was 25% (n=83); 45% (n=37) of patients with vertebral deformity had deformities of more than one vertebra. Of the patients with vertebral deformity and readable scans for grading, 72.5% (58/80) had deformities of grade 2 or 3. Patients presenting with hip fracture, or spine T-score ≤−2.5, or low BMI, or with more than one prior non-vertebral fracture were all significantly more likely to have evidence of a prevalent vertebral deformity (p<0.05). However, 19.8% of patients with an osteopenic T-score had a vertebral deformity (48% of which were multiple), and 16.1% of patients with a normal T-score had a vertebral deformity (26.3% of which were multiple). Following non-vertebral fracture, some guidelines suggest that anti-resorptive therapy should be reserved for patients with DXA-proven osteoporosis. However, patients who have one or more prior vertebral fractures (prevalent at the time of their non-vertebral fracture) would also become candidates for anti-resorptive therapy—which would have not been the case had their vertebral fracture status not been known. Overall in this study, 8.9% of patients are likely to have had a change in management by virtue of their underlying vertebral deformity status. In other words, 11 patients who present with a non-vertebral fracture would need to undergo vertebral morphometry in order to identify one patient who ought to be managed differently. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the recommendation to perform vertebral morphometry in patients who are referred for DXA after experiencing a non-vertebral fracture. Treatment decisions will then better reflect any given patient’s future absolute fracture risk. The 'Number Needed to Screen' if vertebral morphometry is used in this way would be seven to identify one patient with vertebral deformity, and 14 to identify one patient with two or more vertebral deformities. Although carrying out MXA will increase radiation exposure for the patient, this increased exposure is significantly less than would be obtained if X-rays of the dorso-lumbar spine were obtained

Combined vertebral fracture assessment and bone mineral density measurement: a new standard in the diagnosis of osteoporosis in academic populations

Vertebral Fracture Analysis enables the detection of vertebral fractures in the same session as bone mineral density testing. Using this method in 2,424 patients, we found unknown vertebral fractures in approximately one out of each six patients with significant impact on management. The presence of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VF) is an important risk factor for all future fractures independent of BMD. Yet, determination of the VF status has not become standard practice. Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA) is a new feature available on modern densitometers. In this study we aimed to determine the prevalence of VF using VFA in all patients referred for BMD testing in a university medical center and to evaluate its added clinical value. Prospective diagnostic evaluation study in 2,500 consecutive patients referred for BMD. Patients underwent VFA in supine position after BMD testing. Questionnaires were used to assess perceived added value of VFA. In 2,424 patients (1,573 women), results were evaluable. In 541 patients (22%), VFA detected a prevalent VF that was unknown in 69%. In women, the prevalence was 20% versus 27% found in men (p <0.0001). The prevalence of VF was 14% in patients with normal BMD (97/678), increased to 21% (229/1,100) in osteopenia and to 26% in those with osteoporosis (215/646) by WHO criteria. After excluding mild fractures VF prevalence was 13% (322/2,424). In 468 of 942 questionnaires (50% response rate), 27% of the referring physicians reported VFA results to impact on patient management. VFA is a patient friendly new tool with a high diagnostic yield, as it detected unknown VF in one out of each six patients, with significant impact on management. We believe these findings justify considering VFA in all new patients referred for osteoporosis assessment in similar populations

Response of bone turnover markers to raloxifene treatment in postmenopausal women with osteopenia.

Introduction: The change in bone turnover markers (BTM) in response to osteoporosis therapy can be assessed by a decrease beyond the least significant change (LSC) or below the mean of the reference interval (RI). We compared the performance of these two approaches in women treated with raloxifene. Methods: Fifty postmenopausal osteopenic women, (age 51-72y) were randomised to raloxifene or no treatment for 2 years. Blood samples were collected for the measurement of BTM. The LSC for each marker was calculated from the untreated women and the RI obtained from healthy premenopausal women (age 35-40y). Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at the spine and hip. Results: There was a decrease in BTM in response to raloxifene treatment; percentage change at 12 weeks, CTX -39% (95% CI -48 to -28) and PINP -32% (95% CI -40 to -23) P<0.001. The proportion of women classified as responding to treatment using LSC at 12 weeks was: CTX 38%, PINP 52%, at 48 weeks CTX 60%, PINP 65%. For the RI approach; at 12 weeks CTX and PINP 38%, at 48 weeks CTX 40%, PINP 45%. There was a significant difference in the change in spine BMD in the raloxifene treated group compared to the no-treatment group at week 48; difference 0.031 g/cm2, (95% CI 0.016 to 0.046, P<0.001). Conclusions: The two approaches identified women that reached the target for treatment using BTM. Both LSC and RI criteria appear useful in identifying treatment response but the two approaches do not fully overlap and may be complementary

Is bisphosphonate therapy for benign bone disease associated with impaired dental healing? A case-controlled study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Bisphosphonates are common first line medications used for the management of benign bone disease. One of the most devastating complications associated with bisphosphonate use is osteonecrosis of the jaws which may be related to duration of exposure and hence cumulative dose, dental interventions, medical co-morbidities or in some circumstances with no identifiable aggravating factor. While jaw osteonecrosis is a devastating outcome which is currently difficult to manage, various forms of delayed dental healing may be a less dramatic and, therefore, poorly-recognised complications of bisphosphonate use for the treatment of osteoporosis. It is hypothesised that long-term (more than 1 year's duration) bisphosphonate use for the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis or other benign bone disease is associated with impaired dental healing.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A case-control study has been chosen to test the hypothesis as the outcome event rate is likely to be very low. A total of 54 cases will be recruited into the study following review of all dental files from oral and maxillofacial surgeons and special needs dentists in Victoria where potential cases of delayed dental healing will be identified. Potential cases will be presented to an independent case adjudication panel to determine if they are definitive delayed dental healing cases. Two hundred and fifteen controls (1:4 cases:controls), matched for age and visit window period, will be selected from those who have attended local community based referring dental practices. The primary outcome will be the incidence of delayed dental healing that occurs either spontaneously or following dental treatment such as extractions, implant placement, or denture use.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study is the largest case-controlled study assessing the link between bisphosphonate use and delayed dental healing in Australia. It will provide invaluable data on the potential link between bisphosphonate use and osteonecrosis of the jaws.</p

Contralateral hip fractures and other osteoporosis-related fractures in hip fracture patients: Incidence and risk factors. An observational cohort study of 1,229 patients

Purpose: To report risk factors, 1-year and overall risk for a contralateral hip and other osteoporosis-related fractures in a hip fracture population. Methods: An observational study on 1,229 consecutive patients of 50 years and older, who sustained a hip fracture between January 2005 and June 2009. Fractures were scored retrospectively for 2005-2008 and prospectively for 2008-2009. Rates of a contralateral hip and other osteoporosis- related fractures were compared between patients with and without a history of a fracture. Previous fractures, gender, age and ASA classification were analysed as possible risk factors. Results: The absolute risk for a contralateral hip fracture was 13.8 %, for one or more osteoporosis-related fracture( s) 28.6 %. First-, second- and third-year risk for a second hip fracture was 2, 1 and 0 %. Median (IQR) interval between both hip fractures was 18.5 (26.6) months. One-year incidence of other fractures was 6 %. Only age was a risk factor for a contralateral hip fracture, hazard ratio (HR) 1.02 (1.006-1.042, p = 0.008). Patients with a history of a fracture (33.1 %) did not have a higher incidence of fractures during follow-up (16.7 %) than patients without fractures in their history (14 %). HR for a contralateral hip fracture for the fracture versus the non-fracture group was 1.29 (0.75-2.23, p = 0.360). Conclusion: The absolute risk of a contralateral hip fracture after a hip fracture is 13.8 %, the 1-year risk was 2 %, with a short interval between the 2 hip fractures. Age was a risk factor for sustaining a contralateral hip fracture; a fracture in history was not