Harry K. Genant

Effect of Parathyroid Hormone (1-34) on Fractures and Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis

BACKGROUND Once-daily injections of parathyroid hormone or its amino-terminal fragments increase bone formation and bone mass without causing hypercalcemia, but their effects on fractures are unknown. METHODS We randomly assigned 1637 postmenopausal women with prior vertebral fractures to receive 20 or 40 microg of parathyroid hormone (1-34) or placebo, administered subcutaneously by the women daily. We obtained vertebral radiographs at base line and at the end of the study (median duration of observation, 21 months) and performed serial measurements of bone mass by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS New vertebral fractures occurred in 14 percent of the women in the placebo group and in 5 percent and 4 percent, respectively, of the women in the 20-microg and 40-microg parathyroid hormone groups; the respective relative risks of fracture in the 20-microg and 40-microg groups, as compared with the placebo group, were 0.35 and 0.31 (95 percent confidence intervals, 0.22 to 0.55 and 0.19 to 0.50). New nonvertebral fragility fractures occurred in 6 percent of the women in the placebo group and in 3 percent of those in each parathyroid hormone group (relative risk, 0.47 and 0.46, respectively [95 percent confidence intervals, 0.25 to 0.88 and 0.25 to 0.861). As compared with placebo, the 20-microg and 40-microg doses of parathyroid hormone increased bone mineral density by 9 and 13 more percentage points in the lumbar spine and by 3 and 6 more percentage points in the femoral neck; the 40-microg dose decreased bone mineral density at the shaft of the radius by 2 more percentage points. Both doses increased total-body bone mineral by 2 to 4 more percentage points than did placebo. Parathyroid hormone had only minor side effects (occasional nausea and headache). CONCLUSIONS Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis with parathyroid hormone (1-34) decreases the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures; increases vertebral, femoral, and total-body bone mineral density; and is well tolerated. The 40-microg dose increased bone mineral density more than the 20-microg dose but had similar effects on the risk of fracture and was more likely to have side effects.

Randomised trial of effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with existing vertebral fractures

BACKGROUND Previous studies have shown that alendronate can increase bone mineral density (BMD) and prevent radiographically defined (morphometric) vertebral fractures. The Fracture Intervention Trial aimed to investigate the effect of alendronate on the risk of morphometric as well as clinically evident fractures in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. METHODS Women aged 55-81 with low femoral-neck BMD were enrolled in two study groups based on presence or absence of an existing vertebral fracture. Results for women with at least one vertebral fracture at baseline are reported here. 2027 women were randomly assigned placebo (1005) or alendronate (1022) and followed up for 36 months. The dose of alendronate (initially 5 mg daily) was increased (to 10 mg daily) at 24 months, with maintenance of the double blind. Lateral spine radiography was done at baseline and at 24 and 36 months. New vertebral fractures, the primary endpoint, were defined by morphometry as a decrease of 20% (and at least 4 mm) in at least one vertebral height between the baseline and latest follow-up radiograph. Non-spine clinical fractures were confirmed by radiographic reports. New symptomatic vertebral fractures were based on self-report and confirmed by radiography. FINDINGS Follow-up radiographs were obtained for 1946 women (98% of surviving participants). 78 (8.0%) of women in the alendronate group had one or more new morphometric vertebral fractures compared with 145 (15.0%) in the placebo group (relative risk 0.53 [95% Cl 0.41-0.68]). For clinically apparent vertebral fractures, the corresponding numbers were 23 (2.3%) alendronate and 50 (5.0%) placebo (relative hazard 0.45 [0.27-0.72]). The risk of any clinical fracture, the main secondary endpoint, was lower in the alendronate than in the placebo group (139 [13.6%] vs 183 [18.2%]; relative hazard 0.72 [0.58-0.90]). The relative hazards for hip fracture and wrist fracture for alendronate versus placebo were 0.49 (0.23-0.99) and 0.52 (0.31-0.87). There was no significant difference between the groups in numbers of adverse experiences, including upper-gastrointestinal disorders. INTERPRETATION We conclude that among women with low bone mass and existing vertebral fractures, alendronate is well tolerated and substantially reduces the frequency of morphometric and clinical vertebral fractures, as well as other clinical fractures.

BONE DENSITY AT VARIOUS SITES FOR PREDICTION OF HIP FRACTURES

Women with low bone density in the radius or calcaneus are at increased risk of hip fracture. To see whether bone density of the hip measured by dual X-ray absorptiometry is a better predictor of hip fracture than measurements of other bones, we assessed bone density at several sites in 8134 women aged 65 years or more. 65 women had hip fractures during a mean follow-up of 1.8 years. Each SD decrease in femoral neck bone density increased the age-adjusted risk of hip fracture 2.6 times (95% CL 1.9, 3.6). Women with bone density in the lowest quartile had an 8.5-fold greater risk of hip fracture than those in the highest quartile. Bone density of the femoral neck was a better predictor than measurements of the spine (p < 0.0001), radius (p < 0.002), and moderately better than the calcaneus (p = 0.10). Low hip bone density is a stronger predictor of hip fracture than bone density at other sites. Efforts to prevent hip fractures should focus on women with low hip bone density.

Atypical Subtrochanteric and Diaphyseal Femoral Fractures: Report of a Task Force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research

Bisphosphonates (BPs) and denosumab reduce the risk of spine and nonspine fractures. Atypical femur fractures (AFFs) located in the subtrochanteric region and diaphysis of the femur have been reported in patients taking BPs and in patients on denosumab, but they also occur in patients with no exposure to these drugs. In this report, we review studies on the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and medical management of AFFs, published since 2010. This newer evidence suggests that AFFs are stress or insufficiency fractures. The original case definition was revised to highlight radiographic features that distinguish AFFs from ordinary osteoporotic femoral diaphyseal fractures and to provide guidance on the importance of their transverse orientation. The requirement that fractures be noncomminuted was relaxed to include minimal comminution. The periosteal stress reaction at the fracture site was changed from a minor to a major feature. The association with specific diseases and drug exposures was removed from the minor features, because it was considered that these associations should be sought rather than be included in the case definition. Studies with radiographic review consistently report significant associations between AFFs and BP use, although the strength of associations and magnitude of effect vary. Although the relative risk of patients with AFFs taking BPs is high, the absolute risk of AFFs in patients on BPs is low, ranging from 3.2 to 50 cases per 100,000 person‐years. However, long‐term use may be associated with higher risk (∼100 per 100,000 person‐years). BPs localize in areas that are developing stress fractures; suppression of targeted intracortical remodeling at the site of an AFF could impair the processes by which stress fractures normally heal. When BPs are stopped, risk of an AFF may decline. Lower limb geometry and Asian ethnicity may contribute to the risk of AFFs. There is inconsistent evidence that teriparatide may advance healing of AFFs.

Accurate assessment of precision errors: how to measure the reproducibility of bone densitometry techniques.

Assessment of precision errors in bone mineral densitometry is important for characterization of a techniques ability to detect logitudinal skeletal changes. Short-term and long-term precision errors should be calculated as root-mean-square (RMS) averages of standard deviations of repeated measurements (SD) and standard errors of the estimate of changes in bone density with time (SEE), respectively. Inadequate adjustment for degrees of freedom and use of arithmetic means instead of RMS averages may cause underestimation of true imprecision by up to 41% and 25% (for duplicate measurements), respectively. Calculation of confidence intervals of precision errors based on the number of repeated measurements and the number of subjects assessed serves to characterize limitations of precision error assessments. Provided that precision error are comparable across subjects, examinations with a total of 27 degrees of freedom result in an upper 90% confidence limit of +30% of the mean precision error, a level considered sufficient for characterizing technique imprecision. We recommend three (or four) repeated measurements per individual in a subject group of at least 14 individuals to characterize short-term (or long-term) precision of a technique.

Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 for treatment of open tibial fractures: a prospective, controlled, randomized study of four hundred and fifty patients.

Background: The treatment of open fractures of the tibial shaft is often complicated by delayed union and nonunion. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2; dibotermin alfa) to accelerate healing of open tibial shaft fractures and to reduce the need for secondary intervention.Methods: In a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind study, 450 patients with an open tibial fracture were randomized to receive either the standard of care (intramedullary nail fixation and routine soft-tissue management [the control group]), the standard of care and an implant containing 0.75 mg/mL of rhBMP-2 (total dose of 6 mg), or the standard of care and an implant containing 1.50 mg/mL of rhBMP-2 (total dose of 12 mg). The rhBMP-2 implant (rhBMP-2 applied to an absorbable collagen sponge) was placed over the fracture at the time of definitive wound closure. Randomization was stratified by the severity of the open wound. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients requiring secondary intervention because of delayed union or nonunion within twelve months postoperatively.Results: Four hundred and twenty-one (94%) of the patients were available for the twelve-month follow-up. The 1.50-mg/mL rhBMP-2 group had a 44% reduction in the risk of failure (i.e., secondary intervention because of delayed union; relative risk = 0.56; 95% confidence interval = 0.40 to 0.78; pairwise p = 0.0005), significantly fewer invasive interventions (e.g., bone-grafting and nail exchange; p = 0.0264), and significantly faster fracture-healing (p = 0.0022) than did the control patients. Significantly more patients treated with 1.50 mg/mL of rhBMP-2 had healing of the fracture at the postoperative visits from ten weeks through twelve months (p = 0.0008). Compared with the control patients, those treated with 1.50 mg/mL of rhBMP-2 also had significantly fewer hardware failures (p = 0.0174), fewer infections (in association with Gustilo-Anderson type-III injuries; p = 0.0219), and faster wound-healing (83% compared with 65% had wound-healing at six weeks; p =0.0010).Conclusions: The rhBMP-2 implant was safe and, when 1.50 mg/mL was used, significantly superior to the standard of care in reducing the frequency of secondary interventions and the overall invasiveness of the procedures, accelerating fracture and wound-healing, and reducing the infection rate in patients with an open fracture of the tibia.

A randomized trial of nasal spray salmon calcitonin in postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis: the prevent recurrence of osteoporotic fractures study

PURPOSE We conducted a 5-year, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study to determine whether salmon calcitonin nasal spray reduced the risk of new vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. SUBJECTS AND METHODS A total of 1,255 postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis were randomly assigned to receive salmon calcitonin nasal spray (100, 200, or 400 IU) or placebo daily. All participants received elemental calcium (1,000 mg) and vitamin D (400 IU) daily. Vertebral fractures were assessed with lateral radiographs of the spine. The primary efficacy endpoint was the risk of new vertebral fractures in the salmon calcitonin nasal spray 200-IU group compared with the placebo group. RESULTS During 5 years, 1,108 participants had at least one follow-up radiograph. A total of 783 women completed 3 years of treatment, and 511 completed 5 years. The 200-IU dose of salmon calcitonin nasal spray significantly reduced the risk of new vertebral fractures by 33% compared with placebo [200 IU: 51 of 287, placebo: 70 of 270, relative risk (RR) = 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47- to 0.97, P = 0.03]. In the 817 women with one to five prevalent vertebral fractures at enrollment, the risk was reduced by 36% (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.43- to 0.96, P = 0.03). The reductions in vertebral fractures in the 100-IU (RR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.60- to 1.21) and the 400-IU (RR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.59- to 1.18) groups were not significantly different from placebo. Lumbar spine bone mineral density increased significantly from baseline (1% to 1. 5%, P<0.01) in all active treatment groups. Bone turnover was inhibited, as shown by suppression of serum type-I collagen cross-linked telopeptide (C-telopeptide) by 12% in the 200-IU group (P <0.01) and by 14% in the 400-IU group (P<0.01) as compared with placebo. CONCLUSION Salmon calcitonin nasal spray at a dose of 200 IU daily significantly reduces the risk of new vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Intermittent cyclical etidronate treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

Abstract Background. To determine the effects of etidronate (a bisphosphonate that inhibits osteoclast-mediated bone resorption) in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, we conducted a prospective, two-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study in 429 women who had one to four vertebral compression fractures plus radiographic evidence of osteopenia. Methods. The patients were randomly assigned to treatment with phosphate (1.0 g) or placebo twice daily on days 1 through 3, etidronate (400 mg) or placebo daily on days 4 through 17, and supplemental calcium (500 mg) daily on days 18 through 91 (group 1, placebo and placebo; group 2, phosphate and placebo; group 3, placebo and etidronate; and group 4, phosphate and etidronate). The treatment cycles were repeated eight times. The bone density of the spine was measured by dual-photon absorptiometry, and the rates of new vertebral fractures were determined from sequential radiographs. Results. After two years, the patients receiving etidro...

Effect of Intermittent Cyclical Etidronate Therapy on Bone Mass and Fracture Rate in Women with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Progressive bone loss in osteoporosis results from bone resorption in excess of bone formation. We conducted a double-blind study in 66 women with postmenopausal osteoporosis of therapy with etidronate, a diphosphonate compound that reduces bone resorption by inhibiting osteoclastic activity. The patients were randomly assigned in equal numbers to receive oral etidronate (400 mg per day) or placebo for 2 weeks, followed by a 13-week period in which no drugs were given. This sequence was repeated 10 times, for a total of 150 weeks. Daily oral supplementation with calcium and vitamin D was given throughout the study to both groups. Vertebral bone mineral content was measured by dual-photon absorptiometry; spinal radiographs were assessed to identify new vertebral fractures. Vertebral bone mineral content increased significantly (P less than 0.01) after 150 weeks of etidronate therapy (5.3 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.0 to 8.6; n = 20) but decreased with placebo (-2.7 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -7.3 to 1.9; n = 20). The difference between groups was 8.0 percentage points (P less than 0.01; 95 percent confidence interval, 2.4 to 13.6). The rates of fracture were significantly different for the period from week 60 to week 150 between the etidronate and placebo groups (6 vs. 54 fractures per 100 patient-years; P = 0.023). No adverse clinical, biochemical, or bone histomorphometric effects of treatment were observed. We conclude that at the end of nearly three years, etidronate therapy for postmenopausal osteoporosis results in significant increases in vertebral bone mineral content and, after approximately one year of treatment, a significant decrease in the rate of new vertebral fractures.

The Association of Radiographically Detected Vertebral Fractures with Back Pain and Function: A Prospective Study

Radiographically detected vertebral fractures (hereafter referred to as vertebral fractures) are a hallmark of postmenopausal osteoporosis and an important end point in clinical trials of osteoporosis treatment. Women with vertebral fractures have low bone mass compared with women without these fractures and, independently of bone mass, have an increased risk for additional vertebral and other fractures [1-4]. Vertebral fractures are common: Five percent of 50-year-old white women and 25% of 80-year-old women have had at least one vertebral fracture [5]. Surprisingly, however, the manner in which vertebral fractures affect health remains uncertain. Cross-sectional studies in community-derived samples of older women have demonstrated only a modest association [6-8] or no association [9-11] between prevalent vertebral fractures and back pain or disability. Cross-sectional studies do not distinguish more recent fractures from older vertebral fractures and may fail to capture transient increases in pain or disability [12], a limitation that may underestimate the clinical effect of these fractures [13]. Back pain is common among elderly women [14], and frequent causes of back pain, such as degenerative disc disease, facet joint osteoarthritis, spinal stenosis, and scoliosis, may obscure the impact of vertebral fracture. Only about one third of new vertebral fractures come to medical attention [15, 16], suggesting that most vertebral fractures are asymptomatic. However, attitudes toward back pain in older women and access to health care may also play a role in determining whether vertebral fractures come to medical attention. We examined the effect of incident vertebral fractures on back pain and back-related functional limitations in a large community-based sample of elderly women who underwent serial spinal radiography and annual assessments of back pain and disability over the same period. Methods Participants Study patients were participants in the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, a cohort recruited from population-based listings in four U.S. metropolitan areas. Details of the design of this study are published elsewhere [17]. Lateral spine radiographs were obtained for 9677 white women between the ages of 65 and 99 years (median age, 70 years) who underwent baseline examination between 1986 and 1988. Repeated spinal radiographs suitable for morphometry were obtained for 7223 women (75% of the original cohort) at a follow-up clinic visit held an average of 3.7 years (range, 1.3 to 5.1 years) later. All participants gave informed consent. Vertebral Morphometry Lateral radiographs of the thoracic and lumbar spine were obtained in accordance with current guidelines [18]. Quantitative vertebral morphometry was performed using six-point digitization as described elsewhere [3, 19] to calculate the anterior (Ha), mid- (Hm), and posterior (Hp) height for each vertebral body from T4 to L4. A system of triage of radiographs, described elsewhere [3, 20], was used to reduce the number of radiographs requiring morphometric measurements. Briefly, trained technicians separated sets of radiographs into normal, uncertain, or probably fractured groups on the basis of a limited semiquantitative grading scheme that categorized women by the most abnormal vertebral level [20]. Uncertain grades were further categorized by the study radiologist as normal or probably fractured. Morphometry was done on the radiograph pairs that were categorized as probably fractured (42%). In a random sample of 503 women whose radiographs were triaged and then digitized, triage missed no incident fractures according to the study definition. Definition of Vertebral Fracture A vertebra was classified as having a prevalent fracture on the baseline radiograph if any of the following ratios were more than 3 SDs (>4 SDs for severe fractures) below the normal mean for that vertebral level: (Ha/Hp), (Hm/Hp), or a combination of (H/H [] 1) and (Hai/Hai 1) [3, 21]. A new (incident) fracture was identified if any of the three vertebral heights (Ha, Hm, or Hp) on follow-up radiographs decreased by 20% or more and by at least 4 mm compared with the baseline height. Incident fractures identified by morphometry were reviewed by a radiologist to exclude imaging artifacts or such conditions as osteophytosis and Scheuermann disease; 7% of vertebrae meeting the morphometric criteria for incident fracture were reclassified as not fractured. Incident Clinical Fractures We used previously described methods [22] to assess the occurrence of clinical fractures of any bone during follow-up. Women were considered to have a clinical vertebral fracture if they reported a new diagnosis of spinal fracture and a clinical radiology report confirmed that a vertebral fracture was present. Measurements of Pain, Disability, and Limited Activity We evaluated outcome measures by using a previously described questionnaire [7, 23] that asked about back pain and back-related disability in the past 12 months and the number of days of limited activity due to back pain. The questionnaire was administered at baseline and at three annual follow-up contacts held before assessment of vertebral fractures. The third follow-up contact coincided with follow-up radiography. Back pain was assessed on scales of frequency (0, never or rarely; 1, some of the time; 2, most of the time; or 3, all of the time) and severity (0, no pain; 1, mild pain; 2, moderate pain; or 3, severe pain). The two pain questions had high internal consistency (Cronbach = 0.81) and were summed for a total score that could range from 0 to 6. We defined clinically significant back pain as pain that was experienced most or all of the time or pain that was moderate or severe. Women without significant back pain at baseline were considered to have increased back pain if clinically significant pain had developed between any follow-up contacts. For women with clinically significant back pain at baseline, increased back pain was defined as an increase in total pain score of at least two points. Both types of increase had a similar association with incident fractures and thus were combined for a single outcome. Back-related disability was assessed with questions about the degree of difficulty (0, no difficulty; 1, some difficulty; 2, much difficulty; or 3, unable to perform activity) in six activities of daily living that involved the back (bending down to pick up light-weight objects, lifting a 10-pound object from the floor, reaching for objects just above the head, putting on socks or stockings, getting in and out of an automobile, and standing for 2 hours). These measures were combined in a back-related disability score ranging from 0 to 18. As reported elsewhere [7], this scale has high internal consistency (Cronbach = 0.82) and is highly correlated (Spearman r = 0.73) with a more extensive instrument used to assess disability caused by low back pain [24]. We defined clinically significant disability as much difficulty or unable in one or more of the six activities. Women without significant disability at baseline were considered to have increased disability if clinically significant disability had developed between any follow-up contacts. For women with clinically significant disability at baseline, increased disability was defined as an increase in disability score of at least three points. Both types of increase had a similar association with incident fractures and thus were combined for a single outcome. We also asked participants if they had limited their activities because of back pain since the last contact; if the answer was yes, we asked for the number of days they had stayed in bed and the number of days on which activity was limited (not including days in bed) because of back pain. Questions were adapted from previous surveys [25, 26]. For all follow-up contacts, we summed the number of days of bed rest and, in a separate measure, the number of days of limited activity; we then divided these numbers by the total years of follow-up to estimate the average number of affected days per year. Other Measurements The baseline questionnaire assessed potential confounding factors that may be associated with the risk for incident vertebral fracture and with back pain or disability, including smoking (current or past smoker); inactivity, defined as walking less than one block daily (yes or no); a previous physician diagnosis of osteoporosis or spinal fracture (yes or no); current use of estrogen (yes or no); hip pain in the past 12 months (yes or no); and height at 25 years of age. At the baseline examination, we assessed height and weight and calculated body mass index (kg/m2). We assessed grip strength by using an isometric dynamometer (Jamar Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer, JA Preston, Jackson, Mississippi) at baseline and at the follow-up examination and calculated change in grip strength between the two measurements. A random sample of 16% of baseline spine radiographs was assessed for spinal disc degeneration by using previously published methods [27]. Statistical Analysis Unless otherwise indicated, analyses were done separately in groups stratified by the presence of one or more baseline prevalent vertebral fractures. Descriptive and bivariate associations were assessed by using the t-test for continuous variables and the chi-square test for dichotomous variables. The association between incident vertebral fractures and dichotomous outcomes (increased back pain and increased back disability) was analyzed with logistic regression techniques. We analyzed the association of incident vertebral fracture with days of bed rest and days of limited activity per year by using Poisson regression. The distribution of days of bed rest (mean SD, 0.44 5.15) and limited-activity days (16.3 53.7) indicate that considerable overdispersion is present. Poisson regression allowing for this overdispersion provides a good estimation and inferential scheme [2