Search

Previously, we reported on bone histomorphometry, biochemical markers, and bone mineral density distribution after 6 and 24 months of treatment with teriparatide (TPTD) or zoledronic acid (ZOL) in the SHOTZ study. The study included a 12-month primary study period, with treatment (TPTD 20 μg/d by subcutaneous injection or ZOL 5 mg/yr by intravenous infusion) randomized and double-blind until the month 6 biopsy (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 30 evaluable), then open-label, with an optional 12-month extension receiving the original treatment. A second biopsy (TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 9) was collected from the contralateral side at month 24. Here we present data on remodeling-based bone formation (RBF), modeling-based bone formation (MBF), and overflow modeling-based bone formation (oMBF, modeling overflow adjacent to RBF sites) in the cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal envelopes. RBF was significantly greater after TPTD versus ZOL in all envelopes at 6 and 24 months, except the periosteal envelope at 24 months. MBF was significantly greater with TPTD in all envelopes at 6 months but not at 24 months. oMBF was significantly greater at 6 months in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes with TPTD, with no significant differences at 24 months. At 6 months, total bone formation surface was also significantly greater in each envelope with TPTD treatment (all p < 0.001). For within-group comparisons from 6 to 24 months, no statistically significant changes were observed in RBF, MBF, or oMBF in any envelope for either the TPTD or ZOL treatment groups. Overall, TPTD treatment was associated with greater bone formation than ZOL. Taken together the data support the view that ZOL is a traditional antiremodeling agent, wheareas TPTD is a proremodeling anabolic agent that increases bone formation, especially that associated with bone remodeling, including related overflow modeling, with substantial modeling-based bone formation early in the course of treatment. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

There has been renewed interest of late in the role of modeling-based formation (MBF) during osteoporosis therapy. Here we describe early effects of an established anabolic (teriparatide) versus antiresorptive (denosumab) agent on remodeling-based formation (RBF), MBF, and overflow MBF (oMBF) in human transiliac bone biopsies. Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis received subcutaneous teriparatide (n = 33, 20 μg/d) or denosumab (n = 36, 60 mg once/6 months), open-label for 6 months at 7 US and Canadian sites. Subjects received double fluorochrome labeling at baseline and before biopsy at 3 months. Sites of bone formation were designated as MBF if the underlying cement line was smooth, RBF if scalloped, and oMBF if formed over smooth cement lines adjacent to scalloped reversal lines. At baseline, mean RBF/bone surface (BS), MBF/BS, and oMBF/BS were similar between the teriparatide and denosumab groups in each bone envelope assessed (cancellous, endocortical, periosteal). All types of formation significantly increased from baseline in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes (differences p < 0.001) with teriparatide (range of changes 2.9- to 21.9-fold), as did MBF in the periosteum (p < 0.001). In contrast, all types of formation were decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope, which increased 2.5-fold (difference p = 0.048). These data highlight mechanistic differences between these agents: all 3 types of bone formation increased significantly with teriparatide, whereas formation was predominantly decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except for a slight increase in MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Despite evidence for higher fracture risk, clinical effects of osteoporosis treatments in type 2 diabetes (T2D) are largely unknown. Post hoc analyses of the DANCE observational study compared T2D patients and patients without diabetes to assess the effect of teriparatide, an osteoanabolic therapy on skeletal outcomes and safety. Patients included ambulatory men and women with osteoporosis receiving teriparatide 20μg/day SQ up to 24months followed by observation up to 24months. Main outcome measures included nonvertebral fracture incidence comparing 0-6months with 6+ months of teriparatide, change from baseline in BMD and back pain severity, and serious adverse events. Analyses included 4042 patients; 291 with T2D, 3751 without diabetes. Treatment exposure did not differ by group. For T2D patients, fracture incidence was 3.5 per 100 patient-years during 0-6months treatment, and 1.6 during 6months to treatment end (47% of baseline, 95% CI 12-187%); during similar periods, for patients without diabetes, fracture incidence was 3.2 and 1.8 (57% of baseline, 95% CI 39-83%). As determinants of fracture outcome during teriparatide treatment, diabetes was not a significant factor (P=0.858), treatment duration was significant (P=0.003), and the effect of duration was not significantly different between the groups (interaction P=0.792). Increases in spine and total hip BMD did not differ between groups; increase in femoral neck BMD was greater in T2D patients than in patients without diabetes (+0.34 and +0.004g/cm(2), respectively; P=0.014). Back pain severity decreased in both groups. Teriparatide was well tolerated without new safety findings. In conclusion, during teriparatide treatment, reduction in nonvertebral fracture incidence, increase in BMD, and decrease in back pain were similar in T2D and non-diabetic patients., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the effect of alendronate (ALN) and teriparatide on trabecular bone score (TBS) in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis., Methods: Patients with chronic glucocorticoid therapy-induced osteoporosis (median 7.5 mg/day prednisone equivalent for ≥90 days) were randomized to receive oral ALN 10 mg/day (n = 214) or subcutaneous teriparatide 20 μg/day (n = 214) for 36 months; 118 patients in the ALN group and 123 patients in the teriparatide group completed treatment. Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results for 53 patients receiving ALN and 56 patients receiving teriparatide who had DXA scans with adequate resolution to perform TBS analysis and completed 36 months of therapy were blindly analyzed for TBS at baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months., Results: In teriparatide-treated patients, TBS was significantly increased at 18 months compared to baseline, and by 36 months had increased 3.7% (P < 0.05). In ALN-treated patients, there was not a significant change in TBS compared to baseline at any time point. Changes in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) measured by DXA in the subgroup with TBS data were similar to BMD results in the overall study population. At 36 months, increases in lumbar spine BMD were 5.5% and 10.3% in patients treated with ALN and teriparatide, respectively., Conclusion: In patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, both ALN and teriparatide increased lumbar spine BMD. However, trabecular bone score significantly increased with teriparatide but did not significantly change with ALN. The pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is predominantly reduced bone formation. TBS may represent a sensitive measure to discriminate treatment effects of an anabolic versus an antiresorptive drug in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

The Skeletal Histomorphometry in Patients on Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid Therapy (SHOTZ) study assessed the progressive effects of teriparatide (TPTD) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) on bone remodeling and material properties in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Previously, we reported that biochemical and histomorphometric bone formation indices were significantly higher in patients receiving TPTD versus ZOL. Here we report bone mineralization density distribution (BMDD) results based on quantitative backscattered electron imaging (qBEI). The 12-month primary study was randomized and double blind until the month 6 biopsy, then open label. Patients (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 31) were then eligible to enter a 12-month open-label extension with their original treatment: TPTD 20 μg/d (subcutaneous injection) or ZOL 5 mg/yr (intravenous infusion). A second biopsy was collected from the contralateral side at month 24 (TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 10). In cancellous bone, ZOL treatment was associated at 6 and 24 months with significantly higher average degree of mineralization (CaMEAN, +2.2%, p = 0.018; +3.9%, p = 0.009, respectively) and with lower percentage of low mineralized areas (CaLOW , -34.6%, p = 0.029; -33.7%, p = 0.025, respectively) and heterogeneity of mineralization CaWIDTH (-12.3%, p = 0.003; -9.9%, p = 0.012, respectively), indicating higher mineralization density and more homogeneous mineral content versus TPTD. Within the ZOL group, significant changes were found in all parameters from month 6 to 24, indicating a progressive increase in mineralization density. In sharp contrast, mineralization density did not increase over time with TPTD, reflecting ongoing deposition of new bone. Similar results were observed in cortical bone. In this study, TPTD stimulated new bone formation, producing a mineralized bone matrix that remained relatively heterogeneous with a stable mean mineral content. ZOL slowed bone turnover and prolonged secondary mineralization, producing a progressively more homogeneous and highly mineralized bone matrix. Although both TPTD and ZOL increase clinical measures of bone mineral density (BMD), this study shows that the underlying mechanisms of the BMD increases are fundamentally different. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Previously, we reported the effects of teriparatide (TPTD) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) on bone formation based on biochemical markers and bone histomorphometry of the cancellous envelope at month 6 in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who participated in the 12-month primary Skeletal Histomorphometry in Subjects on Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid Therapy (SHOTZ) study. Patients were eligible to enter a 12-month extension on their original treatment regimen: TPTD 20 μg/day (s.c. injection) or ZOL 5 mg/year (i.v. infusion). A second biopsy was performed at month 24. Here we report longitudinal changes between and within each treatment group in the cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal bone envelopes in patients with evaluable biopsies at months 6 and 24 (paired data set: TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 9). Between-group differences are also reported in the larger set of patients with evaluable biopsies at month 6 (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 30). Data from the cancellous envelope at month 6 or month 24 provided a reference to compare differences across envelopes within each treatment group. The 24-month results extend our earlier report that TPTD and ZOL possess different tissue-level mechanisms of action. Moreover, these differences persisted for at least 2 years in all four bone envelopes. Few longitudinal differences were observed within or across bone envelopes in ZOL-treated patients, suggesting that the low bone formation indices at month 6 persisted to month 24. Conversely, the magnitude of the effect of TPTD on bone formation varied across individual envelopes: median values for mineralizing surface (MS/BS) and bone formation rate (BFR/BS) at month 6 were approximately 3-fold to 5-fold higher in the endocortical and intracortical envelopes compared to the cancellous envelope. Although MS/BS and BFR/BS declined in these envelopes at month 24, median values continued to exceed, or were not significantly different from, those in the cancellous envelope. This study demonstrates for the first time that bone formation indices are higher with TPTD treatment than with ZOL in all four bone envelopes and the difference persists for at least 2 years. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect of TPTD in cortical bone remains robust at 24 months. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2016 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

We compared effects of teriparatide and denosumab on PTH, bone turnover markers, and bone histomorphometry in osteoporotic postmenopausal women. The findings were inconsistent with an early indirect anabolic effect of denosumab.

ABSTRACT: There has been renewed interest of late in the role of modeling‐based formation (MBF) during osteoporosis therapy. Here we describe early effects of an established anabolic (teriparatide) versus antiresorptive (denosumab) agent on remodeling‐based formation (RBF), MBF, and overflow MBF (oMBF) in human transiliac bone biopsies. Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis received subcutaneous teriparatide (n = 33, 20 μg/d) or denosumab (n = 36, 60 mg once/6 months), open‐label for 6 months at 7 US and Canadian sites. Subjects received double fluorochrome labeling at baseline and before biopsy at 3 months. Sites of bone formation were designated as MBF if the underlying cement line was smooth, RBF if scalloped, and oMBF if formed over smooth cement lines adjacent to scalloped reversal lines. At baseline, mean RBF/bone surface (BS), MBF/BS, and oMBF/BS were similar between the teriparatide and denosumab groups in each bone envelope assessed (cancellous, endocortical, periosteal). All types of formation significantly increased from baseline in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes (differences p < 0.001) with teriparatide (range of changes 2.9‐ to 21.9‐fold), as did MBF in the periosteum (p < 0.001). In contrast, all types of formation were decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope, which increased 2.5‐fold (difference p = 0.048). These data highlight mechanistic differences between these agents: all 3 types of bone formation increased significantly with teriparatide, whereas formation was predominantly decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except for a slight increase in MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]