Valerie A. Ruff

Skeletal histomorphometry in subjects on teriparatide or zoledronic acid therapy (SHOTZ) study: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT Recent studies on the mechanism of action (MOA) of bone-active drugs have rekindled interest in how to present and interpret dynamic histomorphometric parameters of bone remodeling. OBJECTIVE We compared the effects of an established anabolic agent, teriparatide (TPTD), with those of a prototypical antiresorptive agent, zoledronic acid (ZOL). DESIGN This was a 12-month, randomized, double-blind, active-comparator controlled, cross-sectional biopsy study. SETTING The study was conducted at 12 U.S. and Canadian centers. SUBJECTS Healthy postmenopausal women with osteoporosis participated in the study. INTERVENTIONS Subjects received TPTD 20 μg once daily by sc injection (n = 34) or ZOL 5 mg by iv infusion at baseline (n = 35). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was mineralizing surface/bone surface (MS/BS), a dynamic measure of bone formation, at month 6. A standard panel of dynamic and static histomorphometric indices was also assessed. When specimens with missing labels were encountered, several methods were used to calculate mineral apposition rate (MAR). Serum markers of bone turnover were also measured. RESULTS Among 58 subjects with evaluable biopsies (TPTD = 28; ZOL = 30), MS/BS was significantly higher in the TPTD group (median: 5.60 vs. 0.16%, P < 0.001). Other bone formation indices, including MAR, were also higher in the TPTD group (P < 0.05). TPTD significantly increased procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide (PINP) at months 1, 3, 6, and 12 and carboxyterminal cross-linking telopeptide of collagen type 1 (CTX) from months 3 to 12. ZOL significantly decreased PINP and CTX below baseline at all time points. CONCLUSIONS TPTD and ZOL possess fundamentally different mechanisms of action with opposite effects on bone formation based on this analysis of both histomorphometric data and serum markers of bone formation and resorption. An important mechanistic difference was a substantially higher MS/BS in the TPTD group. Overall, these results define the dynamic histomorphometric characteristics of anabolic activity relative to antiresorptive activity after treatment with these two drugs.

A Longitudinal Study of Skeletal Histomorphometry at 6 and 24 Months Across Four Bone Envelopes in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Receiving Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid in the SHOTZ Trial.

Previously, we reported the effects of teriparatide (TPTD) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) on bone formation based on biochemical markers and bone histomorphometry of the cancellous envelope at month 6 in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who participated in the 12‐month primary Skeletal Histomorphometry in Subjects on Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid Therapy (SHOTZ) study. Patients were eligible to enter a 12‐month extension on their original treatment regimen: TPTD 20 μg/day (s.c. injection) or ZOL 5 mg/year (i.v. infusion). A second biopsy was performed at month 24. Here we report longitudinal changes between and within each treatment group in the cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal bone envelopes in patients with evaluable biopsies at months 6 and 24 (paired data set: TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 9). Between‐group differences are also reported in the larger set of patients with evaluable biopsies at month 6 (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 30). Data from the cancellous envelope at month 6 or month 24 provided a reference to compare differences across envelopes within each treatment group. The 24‐month results extend our earlier report that TPTD and ZOL possess different tissue‐level mechanisms of action. Moreover, these differences persisted for at least 2 years in all four bone envelopes. Few longitudinal differences were observed within or across bone envelopes in ZOL‐treated patients, suggesting that the low bone formation indices at month 6 persisted to month 24. Conversely, the magnitude of the effect of TPTD on bone formation varied across individual envelopes: median values for mineralizing surface (MS/BS) and bone formation rate (BFR/BS) at month 6 were approximately 3‐fold to 5‐fold higher in the endocortical and intracortical envelopes compared to the cancellous envelope. Although MS/BS and BFR/BS declined in these envelopes at month 24, median values continued to exceed, or were not significantly different from, those in the cancellous envelope. This study demonstrates for the first time that bone formation indices are higher with TPTD treatment than with ZOL in all four bone envelopes and the difference persists for at least 2 years. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect of TPTD in cortical bone remains robust at 24 months.

Differential Effects of Teriparatide and Denosumab on Intact PTH and Bone Formation Indices: AVA Osteoporosis Study.

We compared effects of teriparatide and denosumab on PTH, bone turnover markers, and bone histomorphometry in osteoporotic postmenopausal women. The findings were inconsistent with an early indirect anabolic effect of denosumab.

Differential Effects of Teriparatide and Zoledronic Acid on Bone Mineralization Density Distribution at 6 and 24 Months in the SHOTZ Study.

The Skeletal Histomorphometry in Patients on Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid Therapy (SHOTZ) study assessed the progressive effects of teriparatide (TPTD) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) on bone remodeling and material properties in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Previously, we reported that biochemical and histomorphometric bone formation indices were significantly higher in patients receiving TPTD versus ZOL. Here we report bone mineralization density distribution (BMDD) results based on quantitative backscattered electron imaging (qBEI). The 12‐month primary study was randomized and double blind until the month 6 biopsy, then open label. Patients (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 31) were then eligible to enter a 12‐month open‐label extension with their original treatment: TPTD 20 μg/d (subcutaneous injection) or ZOL 5 mg/yr (intravenous infusion). A second biopsy was collected from the contralateral side at month 24 (TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 10). In cancellous bone, ZOL treatment was associated at 6 and 24 months with significantly higher average degree of mineralization (CaMEAN, +2.2%, p = 0.018; +3.9%, p = 0.009, respectively) and with lower percentage of low mineralized areas (CaLOW, –34.6%, p = 0.029; –33.7%, p = 0.025, respectively) and heterogeneity of mineralization CaWIDTH (–12.3%, p = 0.003; –9.9%, p = 0.012, respectively), indicating higher mineralization density and more homogeneous mineral content versus TPTD. Within the ZOL group, significant changes were found in all parameters from month 6 to 24, indicating a progressive increase in mineralization density. In sharp contrast, mineralization density did not increase over time with TPTD, reflecting ongoing deposition of new bone. Similar results were observed in cortical bone. In this study, TPTD stimulated new bone formation, producing a mineralized bone matrix that remained relatively heterogeneous with a stable mean mineral content. ZOL slowed bone turnover and prolonged secondary mineralization, producing a progressively more homogeneous and highly mineralized bone matrix. Although both TPTD and ZOL increase clinical measures of bone mineral density (BMD), this study shows that the underlying mechanisms of the BMD increases are fundamentally different.

Remodeling- and Modeling-Based Bone Formation With Teriparatide Versus Denosumab: A Longitudinal Analysis From Baseline to 3 Months in the AVA Study

There has been renewed interest of late in the role of modeling‐based formation (MBF) during osteoporosis therapy. Here we describe early effects of an established anabolic (teriparatide) versus antiresorptive (denosumab) agent on remodeling‐based formation (RBF), MBF, and overflow MBF (oMBF) in human transiliac bone biopsies. Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis received subcutaneous teriparatide (n = 33, 20 μg/d) or denosumab (n = 36, 60 mg once/6 months), open‐label for 6 months at 7 US and Canadian sites. Subjects received double fluorochrome labeling at baseline and before biopsy at 3 months. Sites of bone formation were designated as MBF if the underlying cement line was smooth, RBF if scalloped, and oMBF if formed over smooth cement lines adjacent to scalloped reversal lines. At baseline, mean RBF/bone surface (BS), MBF/BS, and oMBF/BS were similar between the teriparatide and denosumab groups in each bone envelope assessed (cancellous, endocortical, periosteal). All types of formation significantly increased from baseline in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes (differences p < 0.001) with teriparatide (range of changes 2.9‐ to 21.9‐fold), as did MBF in the periosteum (p < 0.001). In contrast, all types of formation were decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope, which increased 2.5‐fold (difference p = 0.048). These data highlight mechanistic differences between these agents: all 3 types of bone formation increased significantly with teriparatide, whereas formation was predominantly decreased or not significantly changed with denosumab, except for a slight increase in MBF/BS in the cancellous envelope.

Longitudinal Effects of Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid on Bone Modeling- and Remodeling-Based Formation in the SHOTZ Study: LONGITUDINAL EFFECTS OF TPTD AND ZOL ON BONE FORMATION

Previously, we reported on bone histomorphometry, biochemical markers, and bone mineral density distribution after 6 and 24 months of treatment with teriparatide (TPTD) or zoledronic acid (ZOL) in the SHOTZ study. The study included a 12‐month primary study period, with treatment (TPTD 20 μg/d by subcutaneous injection or ZOL 5 mg/yr by intravenous infusion) randomized and double‐blind until the month 6 biopsy (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 30 evaluable), then open‐label, with an optional 12‐month extension receiving the original treatment. A second biopsy (TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 9) was collected from the contralateral side at month 24. Here we present data on remodeling‐based bone formation (RBF), modeling‐based bone formation (MBF), and overflow modeling‐based bone formation (oMBF, modeling overflow adjacent to RBF sites) in the cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal envelopes. RBF was significantly greater after TPTD versus ZOL in all envelopes at 6 and 24 months, except the periosteal envelope at 24 months. MBF was significantly greater with TPTD in all envelopes at 6 months but not at 24 months. oMBF was significantly greater at 6 months in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes with TPTD, with no significant differences at 24 months. At 6 months, total bone formation surface was also significantly greater in each envelope with TPTD treatment (all p < 0.001). For within‐group comparisons from 6 to 24 months, no statistically significant changes were observed in RBF, MBF, or oMBF in any envelope for either the TPTD or ZOL treatment groups. Overall, TPTD treatment was associated with greater bone formation than ZOL. Taken together the data support the view that ZOL is a traditional antiremodeling agent, wheareas TPTD is a proremodeling anabolic agent that increases bone formation, especially that associated with bone remodeling, including related overflow modeling, with substantial modeling‐based bone formation early in the course of treatment.