Bone strength and surrogate markers: the first, second, and third fiddle.
Colorado Center for Bone Research, University of Colorado Medical School, Lakewood, CO 80227, USA.Journal of bone and mineral research: the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (Impact Factor: 6.04). 08/2012; 27(8):1623-6. DOI:10.1002/jbmr.1673
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Once-weekly alendronate 70 mg and once-weekly risedronate 35 mg are indicated for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. These two agents were compared in a 12-month head-to-head trial. Greater gains in BMD and greater reductions in markers of bone turnover were seen with alendronate compared with risedronate with similar tolerability. The nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates, alendronate and risedronate, are available in once-weekly (OW) formulations for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. A 12-month, head-to-head study was performed to compare these agents in the treatment of postmenopausal women with low BMD. A total of 1053 patients from 78 U.S. sites were randomized to OW alendronate 70 mg (N = 520) or risedronate 35 mg (N = 533), taken in the morning after fasting. Endpoints included BMD changes over 6 and 12 months at the hip trochanter, total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine (LS); percent of patients with predefined levels of change in trochanter and LS BMD at 12 months; and change in biochemical markers of bone turnover at 3, 6, and 12 months. Tolerability was evaluated by adverse experience (AE) reporting. Significantly greater increases in hip trochanter BMD were seen with alendronate (3.4%) than risedronate (2.1%) at 12 months (treatment difference, 1.4%; p < 0.001) as well as 6 months (treatment difference, 1.3%; p < 0.001). Significantly greater gains in BMD were seen with alendronate at all BMD sites measured (12-month difference: total hip, 1.0%; femoral neck, 0.7%; LS, 1.2%). Significant differences were seen as early as 6 months at all sites. A greater percentage of patients had > or =0% (p < 0.001) and > or =3% (p < 0.01) gain in trochanter and spine BMD at 12 months with alendronate than risedronate. Significantly greater (p < 0.001) reductions in all biochemical markers of bone turnover occurred with alendronate compared with risedronate by 3 months. No significant differences were seen between treatment groups in the incidence of upper gastrointestinal AEs or AEs causing discontinuation. In this 12-month, head-to-head trial of alendronate and risedronate, given in accordance with the approved OW regimens for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, alendronate produced greater gains in BMD and greater reductions in markers of bone turnover than risedronate. The greater antiresorptive effect of alendronate was seen as early as 3 months, and the tolerability profiles were similar.Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 01/2005; 20(1):141-51. · 6.13 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Published meta-analyses have investigated the relationship between changes in BMD and fracture risk reduction observed with antiresorptive agents, with inconsistent results. Many factors may affect the outcome of such analyses. Our work explores some of these factors and illustrates the need for caution in interpreting the results of meta-analyses. The role of the increase in bone mineral density (BMD) in fracture risk reduction observed in osteoporotic patients treated with antiresorptive drugs is unclear. We examined the effects of study selection, the use of summary statistics or individual patient data (IPD) as the basis for the analyses, and the choice of BMD values used on the outcome of meta-analyses. To evaluate the effects of study selection, we performed Poisson regression analyses using the results from a number of published studies. To evaluate the effects of using individual patient data instead of summary statistics, we simulated the IPD for vertebral fracture to match the summary statistics for published trials and compared these results with those based on meta-regression using summary statistics. We also evaluated the effect of varying the BMD increase with treatment (3-8%) used in predicting the fracture risk reductions in these simulations. The Poisson regression, which found a statistically significant relationship between nonvertebral fracture risk and spinal BMD when 18 trials of varying designs, duration, and sample size were included in the analysis (p = 0.02), was no longer significant when the analysis was based on the 7 large studies that were placebo-controlled, at least 3 years in duration (at least 1000 patient-years). Meta-analyses of simulated IPD from 12 trials of six antiresorptive agents gave accurate results regardless of the proportion of vertebral risk reduction assumed to be related to BMD change, whereas meta-regression based on summary statistics always produced an estimate around 50%. When the actual data from two risedronate studies were analyzed, the meta-regression based on summary statistics demonstrated a stronger correlation between BMD change and fracture risk reduction than the results based on the IPD analysis. In predicting the fracture risk reduction, the use of the average BMD gain (3%) observed in all studies in the calculations produced an overall fracture risk reduction very similar to the one observed clinically. In contrast, the use of a large BMD gain (8%) produced a substantially higher estimated fracture risk reduction and resulted in a high proportion of fracture risk reduction being attributed to BMD change. Many factors may influence the outcome of meta-analyses, and caution should be used in interpreting the results of such analyses when exploring the relationship between BMD changes and fracture risk reduction with antiresorptive therapy of osteoporosis.Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 03/2004; 19(2):330-7. · 6.13 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of risedronate once a week (35 mg and 50 mg) compared with risedronate 5 mg once daily in women with osteoporosis. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, 2-year study; the primary efficacy assessment was performed after 1 year. Subjects were women aged 50 years or older who had been postmenopausal for at least 5 years, with either a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score of -2.5 or lower (lumbar spine or proximal femur) or a T-score lower than -2 and at least one prevalent vertebral fracture. Subjects received risedronate 5 mg once daily, 35 mg once a week or 50 mg once a week. All subjects also received 1 g daily of elemental calcium supplementation and supplemental vitamin D if the baseline serum levels were low. The primary efficacy measure was percent change in lumbar spine BMD at 12 months. A total of 1,456 women were randomized and received medication; 1,209 (83%) women completed 12 months. The mean percent change (SE) in lumbar spine BMD after 12 months was 4.0% (0.2%) in the 5 mg daily group, 3.9% (0.2%) in the 35 mg group, and 4.2% (0.2%) in the 50 mg group; each once-a-week treatment was determined to be as effective as the daily treatment. Outcomes of the secondary efficacy measurements and safety assessments were also similar in all 3 groups after 12 months. Risedronate 35 mg and 50 mg once a week provide the same efficacy and safety as the daily 5 mg regimen; therefore, the lower dose, 35 mg once a week, is considered optimal for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis who desire a once-a-week regimen.Calcified Tissue International 09/2002; 71(2):103-11. · 2.50 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.