Rui Niimi1, Toshibumi Kono2, Atsushi Nishihara2, Masahiro Hasegawa3, Toshihiko Kono2, Akihiro Sudo3. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tomidahama Hospital, 26-14, Tomidahamacho, Yokkaichi, Mie, 510-8008, Japan. furikakefuri@hotmail.co.jp. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tomidahama Hospital, 26-14, Tomidahamacho, Yokkaichi, Mie, 510-8008, Japan. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Tsu, Mie, 514-8507, Japan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the efficacy of osteoporosis medication in patients with low levels of walking state, namely, influence by immobilization levels. We retrospectively compared the efficacy of the daily teriparatide therapy in patients with low and high levels of walking state to detect possible immobilization-related differences. METHODS: We analyzed 661 patients treated with 20 μg/day of teriparatide for 24 months. We measured the changes in the bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine (LS) and of the femoral neck (FN), the changes in serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (PINP) levels and urinary N-telopeptide (uNTX) excretion. To compare the results of BMD and bone turnover marker, the patients were divided into two subgroups, low levels of walking state and high levels of walking state. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, in the low levels of walking state subgroup, the percent LS BMD and FN BMD increased significantly by 12.8 ± 8.9% and 5.0 ± 13.8% at 24 months, respectively (p < 0.01 vs baseline for LS and FN, respectively); the mean absolute LS BMD and FN BMD change was 0.101 ± 0.067 g/cm2 and 0.017 ± 0.063 g/cm2 at 24 months, respectively. In the high levels of walking state subgroup, the percent LS BMD and FN BMD increased significantly by 13.4 ± 9.5% and 3.1 ± 7.8% at 24 months, respectively; the mean absolute LS BMD and FN BMD change was 0.104 ± 0.068 g/cm2 and 0.017 ± 0.042 g/cm2 at 24 months, respectively. The increases in percent and absolute BMD in LS and FN, and the changes in PINP and uNTX were similar between the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of the daily teriparatide treatment is similar between low levels of walking state patients and high levels of walking state patients and was not influenced by immobilization levels.
INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the efficacy of osteoporosis medication in patients with low levels of walking state, namely, influence by immobilization levels. We retrospectively compared the efficacy of the daily teriparatide therapy in patients with low and high levels of walking state to detect possible immobilization-related differences. METHODS: We analyzed 661 patients treated with 20 μg/day of teriparatide for 24 months. We measured the changes in the bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine (LS) and of the femoral neck (FN), the changes in serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (PINP) levels and urinary N-telopeptide (uNTX) excretion. To compare the results of BMD and bone turnover marker, the patients were divided into two subgroups, low levels of walking state and high levels of walking state. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, in the low levels of walking state subgroup, the percent LS BMD and FN BMD increased significantly by 12.8 ± 8.9% and 5.0 ± 13.8% at 24 months, respectively (p < 0.01 vs baseline for LS and FN, respectively); the mean absolute LS BMD and FN BMD change was 0.101 ± 0.067 g/cm2 and 0.017 ± 0.063 g/cm2 at 24 months, respectively. In the high levels of walking state subgroup, the percent LS BMD and FN BMD increased significantly by 13.4 ± 9.5% and 3.1 ± 7.8% at 24 months, respectively; the mean absolute LS BMD and FN BMD change was 0.104 ± 0.068 g/cm2 and 0.017 ± 0.042 g/cm2 at 24 months, respectively. The increases in percent and absolute BMD in LS and FN, and the changes in PINP and uNTX were similar between the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of the daily teriparatide treatment is similar between low levels of walking state patients and high levels of walking state patients and was not influenced by immobilization levels.
Authors: R Niimi; T Kono; A Nishihara; M Hasegawa; A Matsumine; T Nakamura; T Kono; A Sudo Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2013-06-29 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: D M Black; M Steinbuch; L Palermo; P Dargent-Molina; R Lindsay; M S Hoseyni; O Johnell Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2001 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Susan L Greenspan; Diane L Schneider; Michael R McClung; Paul D Miller; Thomas J Schnitzer; Randi Bonin; Mary Elizabeth Smith; Paul DeLucca; Glenn J Gormley; Mary E Melton Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-21 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Dennis R Taaffe; Eleanor M Simonsick; Marjolein Visser; Stefano Volpato; Michael C Nevitt; Jane A Cauley; Frances A Tylavsky; Tamara B Harris Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 6.053