Literature DB >> 29318649

Treatment-Related Changes in Bone Turnover and Fracture Risk Reduction in Clinical Trials of Anti-Resorptive Drugs: A Meta-Regression.

Douglas C Bauer1, Dennis M Black1, Mary L Bouxsein2, Li-Yung Lui3, Jane A Cauley4, Anne E de Papp5, Andreas Grauer6, Sundeep Khosla7, Charles E McCulloch1, Richard Eastell8.   

Abstract

Few pooled analyses of antiresorptive (AR) treatment trials relate short-term changes in bone turnover markers (BTMs) to subsequent fracture reduction. Such information would be useful to assess new ARs or novel dosing regimens. In the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Bone Quality project, we analyzed individual-level data from 28,000 participants enrolled in 11 bisphosphonate (BP) and three selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) placebo-controlled fracture endpoint trials. Using BTM results for two bone formation markers (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [bone ALP] and pro-collagen I N-propeptide [PINP]) and two bone resorption markers (N-terminal and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen) and incident fracture outcome data, we performed a meta-regression relating the mean net effect of treatment on change in bone turnover (active minus placebo % difference after 3 to 12 months) to the log of study-wide fracture risk reduction, and used linear regression to plot the best fitting line. Separate analyses were performed for incident morphometric vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 1 to 4 years of follow-up. Change in bone ALP and PINP were available for over 16,000 and 10,000 participants, respectively. For vertebral fracture, the results showed a strong relationship between treatment-related bone ALP or PINP changes and vertebral fracture risk reduction (r2  = 0.82 [p < 0.001] and r2  = 0.75 [p = 0.011], respectively) Relationships were weaker and no longer statistically significant for nonvertebral (r2  = 0.33 [p = 0.053] and r2  = 0.53 [p = 0.065], respectively) and hip fracture (r2  = 0.17 [p = 0.24] and r2  = 0.43 [p = 0.11], respectively) outcomes. Analyses limited to BP trials gave similar results. For all fracture types, relationships were weaker and nonsignificant for bone resorption markers. We conclude that short-term AR treatment-related changes in bone ALP and PINP strongly predict vertebral fracture treatment efficacy, but not nonvertebral or hip fracture treatment efficacy. Change in bone formation markers might be useful to predict the anti-vertebral fracture efficacy of new AR compounds or novel dosing regiments with approved AR drugs.
© 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BIOCHEMICAL MARKERS OF BONE TURNOVER; BONE MODELING AND REMODELING; DISEASES AND DISORDERS OF/RELATED TO BONE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; OSTEOPOROSIS

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29318649     DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.3355

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  11 in total

1.  The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  M S LeBoff; S L Greenspan; K L Insogna; E M Lewiecki; K G Saag; A J Singer; E S Siris
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 5.071

2.  Pharmacogenetics of Osteoporosis: A Pathway Analysis of the Genetic Influence on the Effects of Antiresorptive Drugs.

Authors:  Álvaro Del Real; Carmen Valero; José M Olmos; Jose L Hernández; José A Riancho
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-04-02       Impact factor: 6.525

Review 3.  Clinical and translational pharmacology of the cathepsin K inhibitor odanacatib studied for osteoporosis.

Authors:  Julie A Stone; Jacqueline B McCrea; Rose Witter; Stefan Zajic; S Aubrey Stoch
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-03-18       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  The Role of PINP in Diagnosis and Management of Metabolic Bone Disease.

Authors:  Melissa J Gillett; Samuel D Vasikaran; Charles A Inderjeeth
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2021-02

5.  Effect of vitamin D on serum markers of bone turnover in SLE in a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Sara K Tedeschi; Cynthia Aranow; Diane L Kamen; Meryl LeBoff; Betty Diamond; Karen H Costenbader
Journal:  Lupus Sci Med       Date:  2019-09-17

6.  Randomised Controlled Trial of Nutritional Supplement on Bone Turnover Markers in Indian Premenopausal Women.

Authors:  Pramod B Umarji; Pankaj Verma; Vivek Garg; Marian Schini; Richard Eastell
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 5.717

7.  Prediction of Fracture Risk From Early-Stage Bone Markers in Patients With Osteoporosis Treated With Once-Yearly Administered Zoledronic Acid.

Authors:  Hidefumi Kasai; Yoko Mori; Atsushi Ose; Masataka Shiraki; Yusuke Tanigawara
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 3.126

Review 8.  Recent Progress in Space Physiology and Aging.

Authors:  Felice Strollo; Sandro Gentile; Giovanna Strollo; Andrea Mambro; Joan Vernikos
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 4.566

9.  Bone Turnover Markers and Bone Mineral Density to Predict Osteoporotic Fractures in Older Women: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Authors:  Xiao-Long Qu; Bo Zheng; Tian-Yi Chen; Zong-Rui Cao; Bo Qu; Tao Jiang
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2019-12-27       Impact factor: 2.071

10.  A 24-Week Physical Activity Intervention Increases Bone Mineral Content without Changes in Bone Markers in Youth with PWS.

Authors:  Daniela A Rubin; Kathleen S Wilson; Camila E Orsso; Erik R Gertz; Andrea M Haqq; Diobel M Castner; Marilyn Dumont-Driscoll
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 4.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.