Nicola Pannacciulli

10 years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase 3 randomised FREEDOM trial and open-label extension

BACKGROUND Long-term safety and efficacy of osteoporosis treatment are important because of the chronic nature of the disease. We aimed to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of denosumab, which is widely used for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. METHODS In the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 FREEDOM trial, postmenopausal women aged 60-90 years with osteoporosis were enrolled in 214 centres in North America, Europe, Latin America, and Australasia and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 60 mg subcutaneous denosumab or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. All participants who completed the FREEDOM trial without discontinuing treatment or missing more than one dose of investigational product were eligible to enrol in the open-label, 7-year extension, in which all participants received denosumab. The data represent up to 10 years of denosumab exposure for women who received 3 years of denosumab in FREEDOM and continued in the extension (long-term group), and up to 7 years for women who received 3 years of placebo and transitioned to denosumab in the extension (crossover group). The primary outcome was safety monitoring, comprising assessments of adverse event incidence and serious adverse event incidence, changes in safety laboratory analytes (ie, serum chemistry and haematology), and participant incidence of denosumab antibody formation. Secondary outcomes included new vertebral, hip, and non-vertebral fractures as well as bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, and one-third radius. Analyses were done according to the randomised FREEDOM treatment assignments. All participants who received at least one dose of investigational product in FREEDOM or the extension were included in the combined safety analyses. All participants who enrolled in the extension with observed data were included in the efficacy analyses. The FREEDOM trial (NCT00089791) and its extension (NCT00523341) are both registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. FINDINGS Between Aug 3, 2004, and June 1, 2005, 7808 women were enrolled in the FREEDOM study. 5928 (76%) women were eligible for enrolment in the extension, and of these, 4550 (77%) were enrolled (2343 long-term, 2207 crossover) between Aug 7, 2007, and June 20, 2008. 2626 women (1343 long-term; 1283 crossover) completed the extension. The yearly exposure-adjusted participant incidence of adverse events for all individuals receiving denosumab decreased from 165·3 to 95·9 per 100 participant-years over the course of 10 years. Serious adverse event rates were generally stable over time, varying between 11·5 and 14·4 per 100 participant-years. One atypical femoral fracture occurred in each group during the extension. Seven cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were reported in the long-term group and six cases in the crossover group. The yearly incidence of new vertebral fractures (ranging from 0·90% to 1·86%) and non-vertebral fractures (ranging from 0·84% to 2·55%) remained low during the extension, similar to rates observed in the denosumab group during the first three years of the FREEDOM study, and lower than rates projected for a virtual long-term placebo cohort. In the long-term group, BMD increased from FREEDOM baseline by 21·7% at the lumbar spine, 9·2% at total hip, 9·0% at femoral neck, and 2·7% at the one-third radius. In the crossover group, BMD increased from extension baseline by 16·5% at the lumbar spine, 7·4% at total hip, 7·1% at femoral neck, and 2·3% at one-third radius. INTERPRETATION Denosumab treatment for up to 10 years was associated with low rates of adverse events, low fracture incidence compared with that observed during the original trial, and continued increases in BMD without plateau. FUNDING Amgen.

Denosumab or Zoledronic Acid in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Previously Treated With Oral Bisphosphonates

Context: Denosumab and zoledronic acid (ZOL) are parenteral treatments for patients with osteoporosis. Objective: The objective of the study was to compare the effect of transitioning from oral bisphosphonates to denosumab or ZOL on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover. Design and Setting: This was an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial. Participants: A total of 643 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis previously treated with oral bisphosphonates participated in the study. Interventions: Subjects were randomized 1:1 to sc denosumab 60 mg every 6 months plus iv placebo once or ZOL 5 mg iv once plus sc placebo every 6 months for 12 months. Main Outcome Measures: Changes in BMD and bone turnover markers were measured. Results: BMD change from baseline at month 12 was significantly greater with denosumab compared with ZOL at the lumbar spine (primary end point; 3.2% vs 1.1%; P < .0001), total hip (1.9% vs 0.6%; P < .0001), femoral neck (1.2% vs −0.1%; P < .0001), and one-third radius (0.6% vs 0.0%; P < .05). The median decrease from baseline was greater with denosumab than ZOL for serum C-telopeptide of type 1 collagen at all time points after day 10 and for serum procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide at month 1 and at all time points after month 3 (all P < .05). Median percentage changes from baseline in serum intact PTH were significantly greater at months 3 and 9 with denosumab compared with ZOL (all P < .05). Adverse events were similar between groups. Three events consistent with the definition of atypical femoral fracture were observed (two denosumab and one ZOL). Conclusions: In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis previously treated with oral bisphosphonates, denosumab was associated with greater BMD increases at all measured skeletal sites and greater inhibition of bone remodeling compared with ZOL.

Denosumab versus risedronate in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, double-dummy, non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is the most common form of secondary osteoporosis and is associated with an estimated annual fracture rate of 5%. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of denosumab compared with risedronate in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. METHODS We did a 24-month, double-blind, active-controlled, double-dummy, non-inferiority study at 79 centres in Europe, Latin America, Asia, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and were receiving glucocorticoids (≥7·5 mg prednisone daily, or equivalent) for at least 3 months (glucocorticoid continuing) or less than 3 months (glucocorticoid initiating) before screening. Patients younger than 50 years needed to have a history of osteoporosis-related fracture; glucocorticoid-continuing patients aged 50 years or older needed a lumbar spine, total hip, or femoral neck bone mineral density T score of -2·0 or less, or -1·0 or less if they had a history of osteoporosis-related fracture. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 60 mg subcutaneous denosumab every 6 months and oral placebo daily for 24 months, or 5 mg oral risedronate daily and subcutaneous placebo every 6 months for 24 months. Randomisation was stratified by sex within each subpopulation, and was done with an interactive voice-response system. Active drugs and corresponding placebos had identical packaging, labels, and appearance. The primary outcome was non-inferiority of denosumab to risedronate in terms of percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months based on non-inferiority margins (-0·7 and -1·1 percentage points for the glucocorticoid-continuing and glucocorticoid-initiating subpopulations, respectively). Superiority was also assessed as a secondary outcome. The primary efficacy set included all randomly assigned participants who had a baseline and postbaseline lumbar spine bone mineral density measurement, and was analysed according to randomised treatment assignment. The safety analysis set included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of investigational product, and was analysed by actual treatment received. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01575873) and is completed. FINDINGS Between March 28, 2012, and June 30, 2015, 795 patients, 505 of whom were glucocorticoid continuing and 290 of whom were glucocorticoid initiating, were enrolled and randomly assigned (398 to denosumab, 397 to risedronate). Denosumab was both non-inferior and superior to risedronate at 12 months for effect on bone mineral density at the lumbar spine in both glucocorticoid-continuing (4·4% [95% CI 3·8-5·0] vs 2·3% [1·7-2·9]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoid-initiating (3·8% [3·1-4·5] vs 0·8% [0·2-1·5]; p<0·0001) subpopulations. Incidence of adverse events, serious adverse events (including infections), and fractures was similar between treatment groups. The most common adverse events were back pain (17 [4%] patients in the risedronate group and 18 [5%] in the denosumab group) and arthralgia (21 [5%] patients in the risedronate group and 17 [4%] in the denosumab group). Serious infection occurred in 15 (4%) patients in the risedronate group and 17 (4%) patients in the denosumab group. INTERPRETATION Denosumab could be a useful treatment option for patients newly initiating or continuing glucocorticoids who are at risk of fractures. FUNDING Amgen.

Effect of denosumab on fasting glucose in women with diabetes or prediabetes from the FREEDOM trial

RANKL is a key regulator of bone resorption that may also modulate glucose metabolism. Denosumab (DMAb) is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds RANKL and was associated with fracture risk reduction in the FREEDOM trial. We hypothesized that DMAb treatment decreased fasting serum glucose (FSG) relative to placebo in women with diabetes or prediabetes enrolled in FREEDOM trial.

Occurrence of Serious Infection in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Biologics and Denosumab Observed in a Clinical Setting

Objective. Previous studies combining biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have shown an increased risk of infection. However, the risk of infection with concurrent use of denosumab, a biologic agent for the treatment of osteoporosis, and a bDMARD remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the incidence of serious and opportunistic infections in patients treated concurrently with denosumab and a bDMARD and patients treated with a bDMARD alone. Methods. A chart review of patients with RA from 2 Canadian rheumatology practices between July 1, 2010, and July 31, 2014, identified 2 groups of patients: those taking denosumab and a bDMARD concurrently (concurrent group) and those taking only a bDMARD (biologic-alone group). Patients were followed from the time of initiation of denosumab, or a matched index date for the biologic-alone group, to the end of the study or loss to followup. Instances of serious or opportunistic infections were recorded. Results. A total of 308 patients (n = 102 for the concurrent group and n = 206 for the biologic-alone group) were evaluated. Within the concurrent group, 3 serious infection events occurred. Within the biologic-alone group, 4 serious infection events and 1 opportunistic infection event occurred. In both groups, all patients with serious or opportunistic infection recovered, and there were no instances of death during the study period. Conclusion. This study demonstrated a low occurrence of serious and opportunistic infections in patients with RA taking bDMARD, including patients with concurrent denosumab use.

Glucocorticoid Exposure and Fracture Risk in a Cohort of US Patients With Selected Conditions: GIOP COMBINED COHORTS

The purpose of this work was to evaluate systemic glucocorticoid exposure and fracture among patients with newly‐diagnosed inflammatory and immune‐modulated conditions. Using administrative data, inception cohorts of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), multiple sclerosis (MS), lupus, and sarcoidosis patients age 18 to 64 years with benefits coverage ≥12 months before diagnosis (January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2012) were followed to clinical fracture, cancer diagnosis, or December 31, 2012. Glucocorticoid users were new to therapy. Fracture incidence rates (IRs) per 1000 person‐years were stratified by prednisone equivalent doses. Coxs proportional hazards models assessed risk by daily and cumulative dose, and by time since discontinuation, adjusted for baseline characteristics. Most patients (72% of 403,337) had glucocorticoid exposure; 52% were under age 50. IR (95% confidence interval [CI]) of any osteoporotic fracture was elevated at doses <5 mg/day (IR 9.33; 95% CI, 7.29 to 11.77) versus 0 mg/day (IR 4.87 (95% CI, 4.72 to 5.02). Fracture rates were elevated at doses <5 mg/day in patients <50 years and those ≥50 years. In both age groups, fracture risk increased with increasing cumulative exposure, being approximately 2.5‐fold higher at cumulative dose ≥5400 mg compared to <675 mg. At ≥5400 mg, IR values were 5.69 (95% CI, 4.32 to 7.35) in patients <50 years and 17.10 (95% CI, 14.97 to 19.46) in older patients. Fracture risk decreased significantly within months following glucocorticoid discontinuation. In patients with a variety of inflammatory conditions, fracture risk increased at doses as low as <5 mg/day. Risk increased with increasing cumulative exposure and decreased soon following glucocorticoid discontinuation. Trends were similar between patients older and younger than 50 years.

Denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis – Authors' reply

768 www.thelancet.com/diabetes-endocrinology Vol 5 October 2017 Authors’ reply We note Yu Zhang and Rongrui Tang’s criticism of the use of a placebo control group in the original FREEDOM trial, which was followed by a 7-year openlabel extension, the subject of our Article. FREEDOM was initiated in 2004, was conducted in compliance with Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency regulatory guidance, and was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee or equivalent for every participating site. In addition, all participants were given calcium and vitamin D supplementation, and the protocol provided for discontinuation of study medication and initiation of appropriate treatment for participants who experienced an osteoporosisrelated fracture or a significant decrease in bone mineral density. To date, all registered drugs for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis have followed a similar path, with a placebocontrolled pivotal trial. Zhang and Tang also suggest that “most patients who were included in the study would not be offered medical treatment”. Treatment guidelines vary across geographies, and clearly treatment decisions in clinical practice will take into consideration individual characteristics and local guidelines. Notably, additional analyses from the FREEDOM trial have shown that fracture risk reduction with denosumab is more pronounced in participants at moderate-to-high risk. To address Zhang and Tang’s final point, as previously reported, prestudy exposure to other drugs for the treatment of osteoporosis was limited in FREEDOM by protocol. Only a minority of participants had any prior exposure, and predefined washout periods were required to minimise any carryover effects. Therefore, previous drug exposure in FREEDOM is unlike the 5 years of prior exposure to alendronate in FLEX, and is not a material consideration in the FREEDOM extension. To address Paul de Boissieu and Thierry Trenque’s query regarding assessment criteria, we note that criteria for assessment of adverse events, such as osteonecrosis of the jaw and atypical femoral fractures, evolve over time. The 3-year FREEDOM study enrolled patients between Aug 3, 2004, and June 1, 2005. Thus, the last participant completed the 7-year extension by mid-2015, and most participants had completed by the beginning of that year. The updated American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS) criteria were published in October, 2014, and e-published in May, 2014, which was effectively too late to be incorporated into the trial. The revised American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) criteria for atypical femoral fracture were electronically published in October, 2013, so their incorporation was feasible. Boissieu and Trenque refer to the possibility that the use of the 2009 case definition of osteonecrosis of the jaw might have led to negative adjudication of non-exposed forms, which would have been adjudicated positive had the 2014 AAOMS case definition been used. The updated AAOMS case definition added “or bone that can be probed through an intraoral or extraoral fistula” to “Exposed bone in the maxillofacial region that has persisted for more than 8 weeks” as one of the three characteristics that must be present for a patient to be considered to have osteonecrosis of the jaw. From May, 2014, to the end of the study, 38 potential cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were sent for adjudication and were negatively adjudicated. None of those cases reported bone that could be probed through an intraoral or extraoral fistula in the maxillofacial region. Therefore, all of the cases would have been negatively adjudicated regardless of the AAOMS case definition used (2009 or 2014). As a result, we believe that the incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw during the study was not underestimated.

A randomized double-blind study of denosumab compared with zoledronic acid in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis previously treated with oral bisphosphonate.

Are Ankylosing Spondylitis, Psoriatic Arthritis and Undifferentiated Spondylarthritis Associated with an Increased Risk of Cardiovascular Disease?For a searchable version of these abstracts, please visit www.acrabstracts.org. Please Note: It may take several minutes for this file to download.Background/Purpose: Person-centred care (PCC) is a holistic approach with respectful and individualized care allowing negotiation of care where persons with health problems are empowered to be involved in health decisions. Patients’ illness narratives constitute a starting point for building a collaboration with health care professionals and to empower them to play an active role in their health care. Little is known of the impact of PCC vs. regular care on patients’ skills as health care consumers. The aim was to study the impact on effective consumers’ skills over 6 and 12 months as measured by the Effective Consumer Scale (EC17) in patients undergoing biological therapy and randomly assigned to either a nurse-led rheumatology clinic (NLC) based on PCC or to a rheumatologist-led clinic (RLC) based on regular care.Methods: A 12 month RCT in 107 patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis1. Inclusion criteria were ongoing biological therapy and a DAS28 ≤3.2. All patients met a rheumatologist at inclusion and after 12 months, while the 6 month follow-up was randomized to either at an NLC (PCC) or at an RLC (regular care). Outcome measure was the EC17, developed and endorsed by the OMERACT, including five subscales; 1. Use of health information, 2. Clarifying personal priorities, 3. Communicating with others, 4. Negotiating roles and 5. Deciding and taking action. EC17 total score ranges from 0-100, worse to best. Differences between and within NLC and RLC were analyzed with Friedmans’ test or Mann Whitney U-test.Results: After 12 months 97 patients completed the RCT (NLC n=47, RLC n=50), mean (SD) age 55.4 (12.7) years, disease duration 16.7 (11.5) years, DAS28 2.1 (0.7), HAQ 0.54 (0.38), global health 20.4 (17.1), pain 21.1 (18.0) and 56% were women. There were no statistically significant differences within or between the two intervention groups at baseline nor in EC17 total score mean (SD) at baseline (NLC 83.5 (9.4) vs. RLC 83.2 (10.8), 6 months (NLC 85.4 (10.4) vs. RLC 82.9 (10.9) and 12 months (NLC 85.3 (11.1) vs. RLC 82.3 (10.9)). However, in NLC there was a statistically significant improvement in EC17 subscale “1. Use of health information” at both 6 and 12 months (p=0.041 and p=0.004 respectively).Conclusion: Replacing just one of three visits over 12 months to an NLC based on PCC instead of an RLC based on regular care resulted in more effective consumers concerning the use of health information. Larger studies over longer time frames focusing on PCC are needed to better understand its full impact on effective consumer skills measured by EC17.References:1. Larsson I, et al. Randomized controlled trial of a nurse-led rheumatology clinic for monitoring biological therapy. J Adv Nurs 2014;70:164-75.Background/Purpose: Chronic widespread pain (CWP), one of the hallmarks of fibromyalgia, is not uncommon in adolescents and it has previously been shown that adolescents with pain often become young adults with pain. CWP often co-varies with anxiety, depression, and stress symptoms in adults, but the knowledge regarding this is small in youth and young adults.The aim was to study the associations between CWP, anxiety, depression and stress in adolescents attending first year of high school.Methods: A computerized questionnaire to 296 adolescents attending Swedish high school, with validated questions regarding presence and distribution of pain (Epipain mannequin), stress symptoms (ELO question), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – HADS), and health related quality of life (HRQL as measured by EQ5D). Pain was considered chronic when persistent for more than three months, and the subgroup CWP was defined according to the 1990 ACR criteria for fibromyalgia. Statistical analyses in SPSS v21 with comparison of means by Student’s t-test and proportions by chi2-test or Fischer’s exact test.Results: 257 (87%) out of 296 eligible students, mean (SD) age 16.1 (0.7) and 65.8% girls, responded to the questionnaire. Prevalence of chronic pain was 20.8% and that of the subgroup CWP was 4.7%, without any gender differences (boys 18.2% vs girls 22.2%; p=0.224, and 3.4% vs 5.4%; p=0.692). High level (4 or 5 on a 5 point scale) of stress symptoms were less common in boys (16.0% vs 28.2%; p=0.015), as was possible or probable anxiety (17.1% vs 44.4%; p<0.001), but not depression (10.3% vs 12.5%; p=0.764). Students with high level of stress reported CWP five times more often than those with less stress (30.4% vs 5.8%; p=0.001). Students with probable anxiety reported CWP ten times more often than students with no anxiety (17.6% vs 1.8%; p=0.001), and CWP was also more common, but not statistically significant, in students with probable depression (20.0% vs 3.1%; p=0.163). Those reporting CWP had significantly lower HRQL (0.58 vs 0.87; p=0.038) than students with no chronic pain.Conclusion: The high prevalence of chronic pain and the strong associations between CWP and reports of stress and anxiety in adolescents highlights that a multifactorial background to chronic pain must be considered early in life. An apparent lower score in EQ5D also indicates that the presence of CWP has an marked impact on HRQL also in adolescents.Background/Purpose: The treatment target for axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) is to maximize health-related quality of life (HRQoL) by controlling disease activity and improving functioning. The treatment cornerstones are a combination of patient education, pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment. Health professionals are familiar with providing patient education but the knowledge is scarce concerning how this education is experienced by the patients.The aim was to describe patients’ experiences of education in SpA management.Methods: The study had a descriptive design with a qualitative conventional content analysis approach performed in seven steps in accordance with Graneheim & Lundman (1). The analysis aimed to describe and preserve contextual meanings. After coding and subgrouping meaningful parts of the text were merged into categories. Eleven interviews were conducted between 2014-2015 in patients with SpA based on a strategic sampling in order to achieve variation with regard to sex (7 men, 4 women), age (38-66 years), subdiagnoses (5 patients with AS, 6 with USpA), quality of life (EQ5D 0.29-1.0), disease activity (BASDAI 1-6), physical function (BASFI 0-5), and global health (BASG 0-7) .Results: Three categories representing patients’ experiences of patient education in disease management emerged; guiding education, reliable education and available education. Guiding education comprised SpA management including disease knowledge such as symptoms, prognosis, treatment, self-management, climate impact, heredity, and assisting devices. Reliable education meant how and by whom the education was communicated and was considered reliable if it was based on science and communicated by specialists, for example by physician, nurse, PT, dietician and senior patients with experience of rheumatic diseases. The patients experienced difficulties in assessing the large flow of education coming from various sources. Individualized education also increased the reliability. Available education meant that the education can and should be presented in varied formats, and that the amount of information could be chosen. The education could be given orally (through meetings, videos, lectures), in writing (by pamphlets, e-mails, journals, webpages) or obtained through own personal experiences. There were requests to utilize newer media like skype, video and chat forums. Furthermore, individual contacts with healthcare professionals when needed were of importance.Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of obtaining a guiding, reliable and available patient education for management of SpA. Health care professionals need to consider the importance of presenting varied formats of education based on patients’ experiences and expectations.References:1.Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse education today 2004;24(2):105-12.PMN Reactivity Contribute to Acute Onset Joint Inflammation By Increasing CXCL8 Production in Joints of RA Patients with Anti-Collagen II AntibodiesBig Data International Primary Sjogren Syndrome Registry : Baseline Characterization and Diagnostic Approach in 6047 Patients Fulfilling the 2002 AE CriteriaThe Link Between DAS28 and the Short-Term Risk of Acute Coronary Syndrome in RA, and Its Driving FactorsHypomethylation in Enhancer and Promoter Regions of Interferon Regulated Genes in Multiple Tissues Is Associated with Primary Sjogrens SyndromeReceptor Activator of Nuclear Factor Kappa-B Ligand (RANKL) and Sclerostin Are Related to Joint Destruction in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Unrelated to Polymorphisms of the Genes