Bone forming agents, also known as anabolic therapies, are essential in managing osteoporosis, particularly for patients at very high-risk of fractures. Identifying candidates who will benefit the most from these treatments is crucial. For example, this group might include individuals with severe osteoporosis, multiple vertebral fractures, a recent fragility fracture or those unresponsive to antiresorptive treatments. Definitions of patients with a very high fracture risk vary across nations, are often based on fracture history, bone mineral density (BMD), and/or fracture risk calculated by FRAX® or other algorithms. However, for very high-risk patients, anabolic agents such as teriparatide, abaloparatide, or romosozumab are commonly recommended as first-line therapies due to their ability to stimulate new bone formation and improve bone microarchitecture, offering significant benefits in rapid fracture reduction over antiresorptive therapies. The cost-effectiveness of these agents is a critical consideration for decision-makers. Despite their higher costs, their effectiveness in significantly reducing fracture risk and improving quality of life can justify the investment, especially when long-term savings from reduced fracture rates and associated healthcare costs are considered. Additionally, after completing a course of anabolic therapy, transitioning to antiresorptive agents like bisphosphonates or denosumab is crucial to maintain the gains in bone density and minimize subsequent fracture risks. This sequential treatment approach ensures sustained protection and optimal resource utilization. In summary, the effective use of bone forming agents in osteoporosis requires a comprehensive strategy that includes accurate patient identification, consideration of cost-effectiveness, and implementation of appropriate sequential treatments, ultimately maximizing patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Hypophosphatasia is a rare inherited metabolic disease leading to inhibition of bone and teeth mineralization that can be complicated by multiple insufficiency fractures. Treatment is currently limited to enzyme replacement therapy using bone-targeting recombinant human alkaline phosphatase, or asfotase alfa. Romosozumab is a monoclonal anti-sclerostin antibody originally indicated for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women with high-risk of fracture. Recently its indication had been expanded to other metabolic bone disorders such as osteogenesis imperfecta. We report a unique case of a 67-yer-old female with hypophosphatasia complicated by multiple delayed-union and nonunion insufficiency fractures of the pelvis. After 12-month therapy with Romosozumab to address her osteoporosis, the patient healed her fractures and increased her bone mass density. Our case report shows interesting effects of Romozumab in an adult patient with hypophosphatasia. It not only helped increase bone density, but also help in the healing process of delayed-union and nonunion insufficiency fractures of the pelvis and prevented the occurrence of new fractures during the treatment period. To our knowledge, this is the first report describing the potential effect of Romosozumab on insufficiency fractures in patients with hypophosphatasia.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: There are challenges for the treatment of osteoporosis in patients with kidney failure and monoclonal antibodies (MAb) might be a suitable therapy. However, the efficacy and safety of MAb among patients with osteoporosis and renal insufficiency remains unclear.
UNASSIGNED: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of the use of MAb in patients with osteoporosis and renal insufficiency. We pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes. Mean difference (MD) was used for continuous outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: We included 5 studies with 33,550 patients. MAb therapy decreased the risk of vertebral fractures (RR 0.32; 95% CI 0.26-0.40; P < 0.01) when compared to placebo and no statistical difference was found when comparing to bisphosphonate (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.49-1.03; P = 0.07). MAb therapy also decreased the risk of nonvertebral fractures (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.69-0.91; P = 0.0009). Lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) was higher in the MAb therapy when compared to both placebo (MD 10.90; 95% CI 8.00-13.80; P < 0.01) and bisphosphonate (MD 7.66; 95% CI 6.19-9.14; P < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the change of estimated glomerular filtration rate and in the incidence of hypocalcemia and serious adverse events between groups.
UNASSIGNED: There were reductions in both vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risks, alongside improvements in BMD among patients with renal insufficiency treated with MAb.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this observational study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of romosozumab (ROMO) and teriparatide (TPTD) in a clinical setting.
METHODS: 315 postmenopausal women were included based on the reimbursement criteria for ROMO and TPTD at the Department of Endocrinology at Aarhus University Hospital. ROMO: Bone Mineral Density (BMD) T-score <-2.5 (femoral neck (FN), total hip (TH), or lumbar spine (LS)) + a fragility fracture (hip, spine, pelvis, distal forearm, or proximal humerus) within 3 years. TPTD: Within 3 years ≥2 vertebral fractures or 1 vertebral fracture + BMD T-score (FN, TH, or LS) <-3. Data was collected from medical records. The primary end point was percentage change from baseline in BMD (FN, TH, and LS) at month 12. BMD was measured by DXA.
RESULTS: At month 12 ROMO led to significantly (p<0.001) larger increases than TPTD in BMD (FN: 4.8% vs. 0.2%, TH: 5.7% vs. 0.3%, and LS: 13.7% vs. 9.3%). Discontinuation rate was lower with ROMO than with TPTD. Lower incidence of cardiovascular adverse events was observed with ROMO compared to TPTD. Treatment-naïve patients had non-significantly higher BMD increases compared to previously treated patients with both ROMO and TPTD.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with romosozumab yields larger increases in bone mineral density than teriparatide after 12 months and a higher rate of completion.

In the management of osteoporosis, anti-resorptive agents serve as a primary therapeutic approach. However, in cases where individuals exhibit an increased susceptibility to fractures, such as those characterized by severe low bone mass or a history of vertebral or hip fractures that markedly diminish life expectancy, the immediate reduction of fracture risk through the administration of osteoanabolic agents could be beneficial. Teriparatide, available in daily, once-weekly, or twice-weekly dosages, along with abaloparatide and romosozumab, constitutes a trio of such agents. Each of these medications is defined by unique characteristics, distinct efficacy profiles, and specific adverse effects. There is growing evidence to suggest that these agents have a superior effect on enhancing bone mineral density and reducing fracture incidence when compared to traditional bisphosphonate therapies. Nonetheless, their employment demands thorough consideration of clinical indications, which includes evaluating economic factors, the frequency of injections required, and the potential for adverse effects. The objective of this review is to consolidate the current evidence focusing primarily on the efficacy of these agents, with the goal of enhancing understanding and aiding in making more informed treatment decisions, particularly for those individuals who are at an elevated risk of fractures.

BACKGROUND: Describe real-world treatment of osteoporosis and romosozumab treatment patterns in Japan.
METHODS: Data for patients initiating romosozumab or other antiosteoporotic medications between March 01, 2018, and May 31, 2022, were extracted from the Medical Data Vision (MDV) and Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) databases. Patients were categorized into four cohorts: those who newly initiated romosozumab within the first (MDV: n = 4782; JMDC: n = 2578) or second (MDV: n = 3888; JMDC: n = 2446) year after launch and those who initiated teriparatide (TPTD; MDV: n = 14,576; JMDC: n = 8259) or non-TPTD antiosteoporotic medications within the first year of romosozumab launch (MDV: n = 352,142; JMDC: n = 185,785).
RESULTS: Mean age, sex, baseline cardiovascular history, comorbidities, and concomitant medications were similar across cohorts. In the MDV database, fracture history was higher in the romosozumab year-1 (59.3%), year-2 (64.1%), and TPTD (65.5%) cohorts versus the non-TPTD cohort (24.4%). Similar rates were identified in the JMDC database: romosozumab year-1 (64.7%), year-2 (66.6%), TPTD (67.5%), and non-TPTD (27.8%). Vertebral fractures were most common in all cohorts. 12-month romosozumab discontinuation varied between the year-1 and year-2 cohorts in MDV (62.4% and 58.8%) and JMDC (57.1% and 52.7%), whereas mean number of injections remained consistent (MDV: 9.7 and 9.8; JMDC: 7.3 and 7.8). Romosozumab persistence was lower in year-1 versus year-2 (MDV: 37.6% and 42.9%; JMDC: 41.2% and 47.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiating romosozumab and TPTD had a high fracture history. Given the dual effects of promoting bone formation and suppressing resorption, improving romosozumab adherence and persistence over time may be important for antiosteoporotic therapy.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: We aimed to comprehensively compile placebo-controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of romosozumab (210 mg, subcutaneously, once monthly) in postmenopausal women and men with osteoporosis.
METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant placebo-controlled trials (as of January 1, 2024). Percent change in bone mineral density (BMD), falls, fractures, and adverse events (AEs) after drug administration were collected. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS: Six trials (7990 patients; follow-up period, 6-12 months) were included. Compared with placebo, romosozumab significantly increased lumbar spine BMD (MD = 12.69; 95% CI 11.10-14.29), total hip BMD (MD = 4.42; 95% CI 3.03-5.80), and femoral neck BMD (MD = 3.99; 95% CI 2.42-5.57) at 12 months. Romosozumab significantly decreased falls (RR = 0.80; 95% CI 0.68-0.93) and major osteoporotic fractures (RR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.25-0.54), but increased injection-site reactions (RR = 1.83; 95% CI 1.46-2.30) within 12 months. No significant differences were observed in other AEs (including cardiovascular AEs) within 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Romosozumab treatment resulted in a significant BMD gain, reduced falls and major osteoporotic fractures. It was generally well-tolerated, including the cardiovascular aspects. However, clinicians should consider the occurrence of minor AEs (e.g., injection-site reactions).