Gail P. Dalsky

Teriparatide for acceleration of fracture repair in humans: A prospective, randomized, double‐blind study of 102 postmenopausal women with distal radial fractures

Animal experiments show a dramatic improvement in skeletal repair by teriparatide. We tested the hypothesis that recombinant teriparatide, at the 20 µg dose normally used for osteoporosis treatment or higher, would accelerate fracture repair in humans. Postmenopausal women (45 to 85 years of age) who had sustained a dorsally angulated distal radial fracture in need of closed reduction but no surgery were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of once‐daily injections of placebo (n = 34) or teriparatide 20 µg (n = 34) or teriparatide 40 µg (n = 34) within 10 days of fracture. Hypotheses were tested sequentially, beginning with the teriparatide 40 µg versus placebo comparison, using a gatekeeping strategy. The estimated median time from fracture to first radiographic evidence of complete cortical bridging in three of four cortices was 9.1, 7.4, and 8.8 weeks for placebo and teriparatide 20 µg and 40 µg, respectively (overall p = .015). There was no significant difference between the teriparatide 40 µg versus placebo groups (p = .523). In post hoc analyses, there was no significant difference between teriparatide 40 µg versus 20 µg (p = .053); however, the time to healing was shorter in teriparatide 20 µg than placebo (p = .006). The primary hypothesis that teriparatide 40 µg would shorten the time to cortical bridging was not supported. The shortened time to healing for teriparatide 20 µg compared with placebo still may suggest that fracture repair can be accelerated by teriparatide, but this result should be interpreted with caution and warrants further study.

Teriparatide increases bone formation in modeling and remodeling osteons and enhances IGF-II immunoreactivity in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Transiliac bone biopsies were obtained from 55 women treated with teriparatide or placebo for 12–24 months. We report direct evidence that modeling bone formation at quiescent surfaces was present only in teriparatide‐treated patients and bone formation at remodeling sites was higher with teriparatide than placebo.

Differential Effects of Teriparatide and Alendronate on Bone Remodeling in Postmenopausal Women Assessed by Histomorphometric Parameters

An 18‐month randomized double‐blind study was conducted in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis to compare the effects of once‐daily teriparatide 20 μg with alendronate 10 mg on bone histomorphometry. Biopsies were obtained from 42 patients. Indices of bone formation were significantly higher after 6 or 18 months of teriparatide compared with alendronate treatment.

Sustained Nonvertebral Fragility Fracture Risk Reduction After Discontinuation of Teriparatide Treatment

A follow‐up in 1262 women was conducted after the discontinuation of teriparatide. The hazard ratio for combined teriparatide group (20 and 40 μg) for the 50‐month period after baseline was 0.57 (p = 0.002), suggesting a sustained effect in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fragility fracture.

Severity of vertebral fracture reflects deterioration of bone microarchitecture

IntroductionBone microarchitecture, a component of bone strength, is generally measured on transiliac bone biopsy samples. The objective of this study was to determine whether assessment of four grades of vertebral fracture severity could serve as a noninvasive surrogate marker for trabecular bone volume and microarchitecture.MethodsBaseline vertebral fracture severity was determined by semiquantitative assessment of spine radiographs from 190 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Bone-structure indices were obtained by 2D histomorphometry and 3D microcomputed tomography (CT) analyses. Significance of differences was determined after adjusting for age, height, and lumbar spine bone mineral density.ResultsThere were significant (P < 0.05) trends in decreasing bone volume, trabecular number, and connectivity, and increasing trabecular separation with greater vertebral fracture severity. Histomorphometric bone volume was 25 and 36% lower (P < 0.05) in women with moderate and severe fractures than in women with no fractures, respectively. Compared with women without fractures, women with mild, moderate, and severe fractures had lower (P < 0.05) microCT bone volume (23, 30, and 51%, respectively).ConclusionsMicroarchitectural deterioration was progressively worse in women with increasing severity of vertebral fractures. We conclude that assessment of vertebral fracture severity is an important clinical tool to evaluate the severity of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Correlations between biochemical markers of bone turnover and bone density responses in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis treated with teriparatide or alendronate

The purpose of this post hoc analysis was to determine whether baseline concentrations or early changes in serum bone turnover markers were correlated with changes in bone mineral density (BMD) at 18 months in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) treated with teriparatide (n=80; 20 mug/day) or alendronate (n=77; 10 mg/day). Bone markers included type I collagen N-terminal propeptide (PINP), type I collagen C-terminal propeptide (PICP), bone alkaline phosphatase (bone ALP), and cross-linked C-telopeptide of type I collagen (Sbeta-CTX). The relationship between baseline and early changes in markers and the 18-month changes in lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN) BMD was evaluated using Spearman correlation analysis. In the teriparatide group, increases in LS and FN BMD at 18 months were not significantly correlated with baseline marker concentrations (P>0.05) but were correlated with the increases in PINP at 1 and 6 months (P<0.05). In the alendronate group, the increase in FN BMD at 18 months was positively correlated with baseline marker concentrations (P<0.05) and negatively correlated with change in PINP and Sbeta-CTX at 1 and 6 months. In addition, in the alendronate group, the increase in LS BMD was negatively correlated with change in Sbeta-CTX at 1 month (P<0.05). Increases in BMD at the spine and hip were independent of baseline bone turnover in the teriparatide group, while increases in hip BMD were dependent on baseline bone turnover in the alendronate group. With both therapies, early changes in some bone turnover markers were correlated with 18-month gains in BMD in patients with GIO.

Teriparatide [rhPTH (1-34)], But Not Strontium Ranelate, Demonstrated Bone Anabolic Efficacy in Mature, Osteopenic, Ovariectomized Rats

We compared teriparatide (TPTD) and strontium ranelate (SR) efficacy on bone formation activity in a mature rat model of estrogen-deficiency bone loss. Rats were ovariectomized (OVX) at age 6 months and permitted to lose bone for 2 months to establish osteopenia before initiation of treatment with TPTD (5 or 15 μg/kg · d sc) or SR (150 or 450 mg/kg · d oral gavage). After 3 wk, RT-PCR analyses of bone formation genes in the distal femur metaphysis showed significant elevation of collagen 1α2, osteocalcin, bone sialoprotein, alkaline phosphatase, and Runx2 gene expression at both TPTD doses, relative to OVX controls. SR had no significant effect on expression of these genes. TPTD treatment for 12 wk dose dependently increased lumbar vertebral (LV) and femoral midshaft bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density over pretreatment and age-matched OVX controls. SR 150 increased BMC, and SR 450 increased BMC and bone mineral density of femoral midshaft and LV over OVX controls. There were significant dose-dependent TPTD increases of LV and femoral neck strength, and TPTD 15 also increased midshaft strength compared with pretreatment and age-matched OVX controls. SR did not enhance bone strength relative to pretreatment or age-matched OVX controls. Histomorphometry of the proximal tibial metaphysis showed dose-dependent effects of TPTD on trabecular area, number, width, and osteoblast surface, bone mineralizing surface, and bone formation rate relative to pretreatment and age-matched OVX controls, whereas SR had no effect on these parameters. These findings confirmed the bone anabolic efficacy of teriparatide, but not SR in mature, osteopenic, OVX rats.

Bone density after teriparatide in patients with or without prior antiresorptive treatment: one-year results from the EUROFORS study*

Objective: Recombinant teriparatide, a bone anabolic agent, is given to treatment-naïve and pre-treated patients with severe osteoporosis, but few data exist comparing the response to teriparatide in these groups. EUROFORS (the EUROpean study of FORSteo‡) enrolled postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis who were either treatment-naïve or had prior antiresorptive (AR) treatment with or without documented inadequate clinical response. The objective of the secondary analysis described here was to evaluate the interim bone mineral density (BMD) response in these groups after one year of open-label teriparatide therapy. Research design and methods: Postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis who enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial received open-label teriparatide 20 µg/day for the first year. With respect to their prior osteoporosis treatment history, they were retrospectively allocated to one of three groups: treatment-naïve (n = 204), prior treatment with an antiresorptive drug (AR-pretreated) (n = 240), or prior antiresorptive treatment with inadequate response (inadequate AR-responders) (n = 421). BMD was measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Results: Lumbar spine BMD increased from baseline (p < 0.001) in the three groups (mean, 95% CI); treatment-naïve: 8.4% (7.4%, 9.3%); AR-pretreated: 7.1% (6.3%, 7.9%); inadequate AR-responders: 6.2% (5.6%, 6.9%). Total hip BMD increased from baseline in the treatment-naïve (p < 0.001): 1.8% (1.1%, 2.5%) but did not change in the AR-pretreated: 0.4% (−0.2%, 1.1%) or inadequate AR-responders: −0.3% (−0.9%, 0.2%). Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in the three groups. Conclusion: One year of teriparatide significantly (p < 0.001) increased spine BMD in all groups, and total hip BMD in the treatment-naïve group. Because of the limitations of this interim analysis (most importantly, the short duration of treatment and lack of a control group), further study is needed to determine the optimal treatment duration to reach the potential BMD gains at the proximal femur in patients with prior antiresorptive drug use (mostly bisphosphonates). Clinical trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov, nct00191425

Patient experience with a new teriparatide delivery device.

Abstract Objective: To determine functionality and acceptability of a new teriparatide (Forteo, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA) delivery device by patients with osteoporosis. Research design and methods: This was an eight week, single-arm, multicenter, open-label clinical trial. Patients received teriparatide 20 µg/day by subcutaneous injection using a new delivery device. Men and postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture were stratified to Current User (n = 92) or Not Current User (n = 107) groups. Current Users had used the original delivery device for ≥8 weeks, including uninterrupted use for four weeks before enrollment. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00577863. Main outcome measures: The primary objective was to detect common complaints (≥3% for all patients) regarding the functionality and acceptability of the new device. Complaints were categorized as functional (e.g., malfunction), nonfunctional (e.g., size), or user manual. Secondary objectives included questionnaire assessment of preference of the new versus original device, features of the new delivery device, and analysis of adverse events. Results: A total of 31 patients (16%) reported 47 complaints (four functional, 27 nonfunctional, and 16 user manual). There were two common complaints: device size (4.0%) and lack of information on alcohol swabs (3.5%). Overall, patients agreed that the new device was easy to use (99.5%), easy to learn to use (99%), easy to attach a needle (97%), easy to hold while injecting (95%), and that it reduced their reluctance to take injections (90%). Most Current Users (92%) preferred the new delivery device over the original device. Adverse events reported by ≥2% of patients were upper respiratory infection (3.5%), urinary tract infection (2%), influenza (2%), and headache (2%). Limitations include the one-arm study design and the short (eight week) duration of the study. Conclusions: Patients found the new teriparatide delivery device easy to use and Current Users preferred the new delivery device over the original device.