Dataset Information

Early responsiveness of women with osteoporosis to teriparatide after therapy with alendronate or risedronate.

ABSTRACT: Anabolic responsiveness to teriparatide can be blunted or delayed in patients previously treated with alendronate. The extent of this effect is different for other antiresorptives. This study evaluated the early anabolic effects of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis previously treated with alendronate or risedronate.Patients treated for at least 24 months with alendronate or risedronate discontinued their bisphosphonate and received teriparatide for 12 months. The primary endpoint was a comparison of changes from baseline in N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen after 3 months between prior bisphosphonate groups. We also examined changes in other bone turnover markers, bone mineral density (BMD), and relationships between early changes in bone turnover markers and 12-month areal and volumetric BMD.In the prior risedronate group, the N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen increase was significantly greater after 3 months of teriparatide than in the prior alendronate group (mean +/- se, 86.0 +/- 5.6 vs. 61.2 +/- 5.3 ng/ml, respectively; P < 0.001). Findings were similar for the other bone turnover markers. The changes in areal BMD and trabecular spine volumetric BMD were also greater in the prior risedronate group (P < 0.05). Early changes in bone turnover markers correlated with changes in trabecular spine volumetric BMD at 12 months (Spearman r = 0.45). Teriparatide was well tolerated.This nonrandomized but prospective study suggests that there may be differences in anabolic responsiveness to teriparatide as a function of the type of prior bisphosphonate exposure.

SUBMITTER: Miller PD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5399468 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Early responsiveness of women with osteoporosis to teriparatide after therapy with alendronate or risedronate.

Miller Paul D PD Delmas Pierre D PD Lindsay Robert R Watts Nelson B NB Luckey Marjorie M Adachi Jonathan J Saag Kenneth K Greenspan Susan L SL Seeman Ego E Boonen Steven S Meeves Suzanne S Lang Thomas F TF Bilezikian John P JP

The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism 20080805 10

<h4>Background</h4>Anabolic responsiveness to teriparatide can be blunted or delayed in patients previously treated with alendronate. The extent of this effect is different for other antiresorptives. This study evaluated the early anabolic effects of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis previously treated with alendronate or risedronate.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients treated for at least 24 months with alendronate or risedronate discontinued their bisphosphonate and received teripara ...[more]

PMID: 18682511

Similar Datasets

Project description:The efficacy of generic teriparatide in improving BMD at lumbar spine in patients with osteoporosis was similar to that of alendronate. It provided a new choice for osteoporosis treatment in Chinese population.IntroductionTo determine whether the efficacy of generic teriparatide is noninferior to alendronate for Chinese postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.MethodsEligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) in a 48-week, open-label design to receive 20 µg sc daily teriparatide or 70 mg oral weekly alendronate. Primary outcome was percentage change in BMD at the lumbar spine from baseline to 48 weeks and was assessed for non-inferiority. The same outcome was further assessed for superiority as a secondary endpoint.ResultsThree hundred ninety-one and 196 participants were randomly assigned to the teriparatide or alendronate group, of whom 379 and 194 receiving at least one dose of teriparatide and alendronate treatment were eligible for the efficacy analysis. Teriparatide was non-inferior to alendronate for BMD change at lumbar spine (treatment difference: 0.7%, 95% CI: - 0.3 to 1.7%), which excluded the predefined non-inferiority margin of - 1.5%. However, teriparatide was not statistically superior to alendronate in improving BMD at lumbar spine (P = 0.169). At 48 weeks, changes in BMD at total hip were - 1.0% and 2.2% in teriparatide and alendronate group, respectively (P < 0.001). The incidence of new fracture showed no statistical difference between groups (P = 0.128). Serum P1NP and β-CTX levels significantly increased in the teriparatide group and markedly decreased in alendronate group (all P < 0.001 vs baseline). The adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were more common in the teriparatide group than in the alendronate group, which were mainly teriparatide-related hypercalcemia, elevated alkaline phosphatase or parathyroid hormone, dizziness, and arthralgia.ConclusionsTeriparatide was not inferior to alendronate in increasing BMD at lumbar spine in Chinese postmenopausal women, and they achieved these effects through different mechanisms.

Project description:Teriparatide, currently only available in brand form in the United States, is a costly drug approved for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women who are at high risk of fracture. Because market exclusivity for brand teriparatide expired in August 2019 in the US, we sought to understand the potential health economic impact of the availability of generic or biosimilar (generic/biosimilar) teriparatide. We examined the cost-effectiveness of daily teriparatide for 2?years followed by weekly alendronate for 10?years (ie, sequential teriparatide/alendronate) compared with alendronate alone for 10?years in community-dwelling white osteoporotic women with prior vertebral fracture at ages 65, 70, 75, and 80. Using an updated version of previously validated Markov microsimulation models, we obtained incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) (dollars [$] per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $150,000 per QALY from a societal perspective with a lifelong time horizon. In the base case, we estimated the annual cost of teriparatide to be $20,161, based on the assumption of 10% brand usage (at a cost of $27,618) and 90% generic/biosimilar usage (priced 30% lower than brand). The ICERs of sequential teriparatide/alendronate compared with alendronate alone were greater than $280,000 per QALY at all ages examined. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, results were sensitive to teriparatide's cost, with the cost of a generic/biosimilar product needing to be 65% to 85% lower than brand for sequential teriparatide/alendronate to be cost-effective. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, under the assumption that the annual cost of teriparatide was $20,161, the probabilities of sequential teriparatide/alendronate being cost-effective were less than 4% at a WTP of $150,000 per QALY. In conclusion, among community-dwelling older osteoporotic women with prior vertebral fracture in the US, even with the potential availability of generic/biosimilar teriparatide, sequential teriparatide/alendronate would not be cost-effective unless the cost of generic/biosimilar teriparatide were heavily discounted with respect to the current brand cost. © 2019 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Project description:Data on treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) in men are scarce. We performed a randomized, open-label trial in men who have taken glucocorticoids (GC) for ≥3 months, and had an areal bone mineral density (aBMD) T-score ≤ -1.5 standard deviations. Subjects received 20 μg/d teriparatide (n = 45) or 35 mg/week risedronate (n = 47) for 18 months. Primary objective was to compare lumbar spine (L1 -L3 ) BMD measured by quantitative computed tomography (QCT). Secondary outcomes included BMD and microstructure measured by high-resolution QCT (HRQCT) at the 12th thoracic vertebra, biomechanical effects for axial compression, anterior bending, and axial torsion evaluated by finite element (FE) analysis from HRQCT data, aBMD by dual X-ray absorptiometry, biochemical markers, and safety. Computed tomography scans were performed at 0, 6, and 18 months. A mixed model repeated measures analysis was performed to compare changes from baseline between groups. Mean age was 56.3 years. Median GC dose and duration were 8.8 mg/d and 6.4 years, respectively; 39.1% of subjects had a prevalent fracture, and 32.6% received prior bisphosphonate treatment. At 18 months, trabecular BMD had significantly increased for both treatments, with significantly greater increases with teriparatide (16.3% versus 3.8%; p = 0.004). HRQCT trabecular and cortical variables significantly increased for both treatments with significantly larger improvements for teriparatide for integral and trabecular BMD and bone surface to volume ratio (BS/BV) as a microstructural measure. Vertebral strength increases at 18 months were significant in both groups (teriparatide: 26.0% to 34.0%; risedronate: 4.2% to 6.7%), with significantly higher increases in the teriparatide group for all loading modes (0.005 < p < 0.015). Adverse events were similar between groups. None of the patients on teriparatide but five (10.6%) on risedronate developed new clinical fractures (p = 0.056). In conclusion, in this 18-month trial in men with GIO, teriparatide showed larger improvements in spinal BMD, microstructure, and FE-derived strength than risedronate.

Project description:In this randomized, controlled trial, sequential therapy with once-weekly subcutaneous injection of teriparatide for 72 weeks, followed by alendronate for 48 weeks resulted in a significantly lower incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture than monotherapy with alendronate for 120 weeks in women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture.PurposeTo determine whether the anti-fracture efficacy of sequential therapy with teriparatide, followed by alendronate is superior to that of monotherapy with alendronate, a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial was performed.MethodsJapanese women aged at least 75 years were eligible for the study, if they had primary osteoporosis and if they were at high risk of fracture. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive the sequential therapy (once-weekly subcutaneous injection of teriparatide 56.5 μg for 72 weeks, followed by alendronate for 48 weeks) or monotherapy with alendronate for 120 weeks. The primary endpoint in the final analysis was the incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture during the 120-week follow-up period.ResultsBetween October 2014 and June 2020, 505 patients in the sequential therapy group and 506 in the monotherapy group were enrolled. Of these, 489 and 496, respectively, were included in the main analysis. The incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture during the 120-week follow-up period in the sequential therapy group (64 per 627.5 person-years, annual incidence rate 0.1020) was significantly lower than that in the monotherapy group (126 per 844.2 person-years, annual incidence rate 0.1492), with a rate ratio of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.88, P < 0.01). After 72 weeks, no patient had a severe adverse event that was considered related to the study drug.ConclusionOnce-weekly injection of teriparatide, followed by alendronate resulted in a significantly lower incidence of morphometric vertebral fracture than alendronate monotherapy in women with osteoporosis who were at high risk of fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER, DATE OF REGISTRATION: jRCTs031180235 and UMIN000015573, March 12, 2019.

Project description:Using a Markov microsimulation model among hypothetical cohorts of community-dwelling older osteoporotic Japanese women with prior vertebral fracture over a lifetime horizon, we found that daily subcutaneous teriparatide for 2 years followed by weekly oral alendronate for 8 years was not cost-effective compared with alendronate monotherapy for 10 years.PurposeTeriparatide has proven efficacy in reducing osteoporotic fractures, but with substantial cost. We examined the cost-effectiveness of sequential teriparatide/alendronate (i.e., daily subcutaneous teriparatide for 2 years followed by weekly oral alendronate for 8 years) compared with alendronate monotherapy for 10 years among community-dwelling older osteoporotic women with prior clinical or morphometric vertebral fracture in Japan.MethodsUsing a previously validated and updated Markov microsimulation model, we obtained incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (Japanese yen [¥] (or US dollars [$]) per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) from the perspective of a single payer responsible for both public healthcare and long-term care. We assumed a lifetime horizon with a willingness-to-pay of ¥5million (or $47,500) per QALY in the base case. We modeled the cost of biosimilar teriparatide, which has been available since November 2019 in Japan, assuming the efficacy was the same as that of the brand version.ResultsIn the base case, sequential teriparatide/alendronate was not cost-effective compared with alendronate monotherapy. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, sequential teriparatide/alendronate would become cost-effective with 85%, 50%, and 15% price discounts to teriparatide at ages 70, 75, and 80, respectively, compared to the current biosimilar cost. Otherwise, results were especially sensitive to changes that affected efficacy of teriparatide or alendronate. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of sequential teriparatide/alendronate being cost-effective were 0%, 1%, and 37% at ages 70, 75, and 80, respectively.ConclusionsAmong high-risk osteoporotic women in Japan, sequential teriparatide/alendronate was not cost-effective compared with alendronate monotherapy, even with the availability of biosimilar teriparatide.

Project description:ObjectiveTo bridge the efficacy and compare the safety of the 24-week teriparatide treatment in a Chinese osteoporosis study (NCT00414973) to a large international trial (FPT, NCT00670501) to determine whether long-term results from the international study were applicable to Chinese patients.MethodsIn this post-hoc analysis, a propensity score matching method was used to select patients with similar baseline characteristics. Patients were female with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture, aged ≥55 years, and had no history of rheumatoid arthritis or corticosteroid use. Outcomes included percentage changes in lumbar-spine bone mineral density (LS-BMD) from baseline to 24 weeks, safety in matched-pair patients, and long-term percentage changes in LS-BMD and fragility fracture incidence in the matched fracture prevention trial (FPT) population. The determination of the acceptability of bridging results was based on the International Conference on Harmonization E5 guidelines.ResultsA total number of 228 patients from each study were matched and paired. Patients were similar at baseline (P-values >0.33) except for ethnicity (98% Caucasian for FPT). For changes in LS-BMD from baseline to week 24, treatment with teriparatide showed significantly greater increases (P-values <0.001; least-squares mean difference: 5.0% in the Chinese study and 5.4% in FPT) than comparator (calcitonin/placebo). The safety profiles over 24 weeks were similar between two studies. For matched-pair FPT patients, long-term changes in LS-BMD were significantly greater (least-squares mean difference: 11.5%, P<0.001) and the fragility fracture rate was marginally lower in the teriparatide group compared with the placebo group (13.1% vs 22.3%, P=0.070).ConclusionAssuming similar pharmacokinetic profiles for teriparatide between populations, comparable increases in LS-BMD and consistent safety profiles within 24 weeks of the treatment suggest long-term LS-BMD results from the FPT may be applicable to Chinese population.

Project description:ContextIn postmenopausal women, bone mineral density (BMD) declines after teriparatide therapy is stopped. The pattern of BMD loss after teriparatide therapy is stopped in men is less clear.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to determine whether the pattern of teriparatide-induced bone accrual and post-teriparatide bone loss differs between postmenopausal women and eugonadal men.DesignWe conducted a prospective cohort substudy.PatientsThe study included 14 postmenopausal women and 17 eugonadal men, ages 46-85 yr, with lumbar spine or femoral neck BMD T-scores below -2.InterventionTeriparatide (37 microg sc daily) was administered for 24 months, followed by 12 months off therapy.Main outcome measuresWe measured BMD at various anatomic sites by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, trabecular spine BMD by quantitative computed tomography, and bone turnover markers during the treatment and observation periods. The response to teriparatide administration and discontinuation was compared between females and males.ResultsBMD of the spine, femoral neck, total hip, and trabecular spine increased similarly during the treatment period in men and women, whereas BMD at the radius was stable in men but decreased by 8.1 +/- 3.3% in women (P < 0.0001). After teriparatide was stopped, BMD at the posterior-anterior spine decreased by 7.1 +/- 3.8% in women and by 4.1 +/- 3.5% in men (P = 0.036). BMD at the total hip and femoral neck decreased by 3.8 +/- 3.9 and 3.1 +/- 4.3%, respectively, in women but remained stable in men (P < 0.05 for both sites). BMD at the distal radius remained stable in men but increased in women by 1.6 +/- 3.1% (P = 0.069).ConclusionsTeriparatide appears to increase BMD similarly in postmenopausal women and eugonadal men with osteoporosis. After teriparatide is stopped, the decline in BMD is greater in women than in men. If confirmed in larger cohorts, these findings would suggest that the indication for immediate antiresorptive therapy after teriparatide may not be as urgent in men as in women.

Dataset Information

Early responsiveness of women with osteoporosis to teriparatide after therapy with alendronate or risedronate.

Publications

Early responsiveness of women with osteoporosis to teriparatide after therapy with alendronate or risedronate.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets