Effects of denosumab on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching from bisphosphonates.
Bisphosphonate
Denosumab
Fragility fractures
Osteoporosis
Rheumatoid arthritis
Journal
Journal of experimental orthopaedics
ISSN: 2197-1153
Titre abrégé: J Exp Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101653750
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Oct 2019
29 Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
10
07
2019
accepted:
17
10
2019
entrez:
31
10
2019
pubmed:
31
10
2019
medline:
31
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To compare the efficacy of 12-month denosumab treatment on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers (BTMs) between treatment-naïve osteoporosis patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and those with previous bisphosphonate (BP) therapy. A total of 36 RA patients with osteoporosis completed 12-month follow-up. Twenty-five patients were osteoporotic treatment-naïve (naïve group), and 11 patients were previously treated with BPs (switch group) (average 7.9 years). BMD and BTMs were measured before and 6 and 12 months after treatment. BTM levels were higher in the naïve group at baseline. However, the same level of suppression was achieved at 6 months in both groups. Spine BMD increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant difference in the mean percent changes of BMD of the spine (naïve group: 6.8 ± 0.8, switch group: 5.1 ± 1.5), femoral neck (2.9 ± 1.4, 2.9 ± 1.3), and total hip (1.7 ± 0.9, 1.4 ± 1.1) between these two groups at 12 months. The effects of denosumab on BMD and BTMs of the switch group after long-term BP treatment are comparable to those of the naïve group in RA patients. Thus, switching BPs to denosumab is one of the useful options to treat osteoporosis with RA.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To compare the efficacy of 12-month denosumab treatment on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers (BTMs) between treatment-naïve osteoporosis patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and those with previous bisphosphonate (BP) therapy.
METHODS
METHODS
A total of 36 RA patients with osteoporosis completed 12-month follow-up. Twenty-five patients were osteoporotic treatment-naïve (naïve group), and 11 patients were previously treated with BPs (switch group) (average 7.9 years). BMD and BTMs were measured before and 6 and 12 months after treatment.
RESULTS
RESULTS
BTM levels were higher in the naïve group at baseline. However, the same level of suppression was achieved at 6 months in both groups. Spine BMD increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant difference in the mean percent changes of BMD of the spine (naïve group: 6.8 ± 0.8, switch group: 5.1 ± 1.5), femoral neck (2.9 ± 1.4, 2.9 ± 1.3), and total hip (1.7 ± 0.9, 1.4 ± 1.1) between these two groups at 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The effects of denosumab on BMD and BTMs of the switch group after long-term BP treatment are comparable to those of the naïve group in RA patients. Thus, switching BPs to denosumab is one of the useful options to treat osteoporosis with RA.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31664591
doi: 10.1186/s40634-019-0211-7
pii: 10.1186/s40634-019-0211-7
pmc: PMC6820644
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
41Références
Metabolism. 2015 Oct;64(10):1291-7
pubmed: 26198440
Arthritis Rheum. 2000 Mar;43(3):522-30
pubmed: 10728744
Osteoporos Int. 2002 Oct;13(10):777-87
pubmed: 12378366
J Bone Miner Res. 2009 Jan;24(1):153-61
pubmed: 18767928
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD001155
pubmed: 18253985
Ann Rheum Dis. 2006 Nov;65(11):1495-9
pubmed: 16606653
Scand J Rheumatol. 2012 Aug;41(4):260-6
pubmed: 22803768
Br J Rheumatol. 1992 Feb;31(2):91-6
pubmed: 1737238
Rheumatol Int. 2008 Jan;28(3):245-51
pubmed: 17661050
Am J Pathol. 2000 Aug;157(2):435-48
pubmed: 10934148
J Exp Med. 1998 Sep 7;188(5):997-1001
pubmed: 9730902
Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2003 Feb;5(1):65-74
pubmed: 12590887
J Bone Miner Metab. 2018 Jul;36(4):478-487
pubmed: 28766140
Ann Rheum Dis. 1994 Jan;53(1):14-7
pubmed: 8311548
Cell. 1998 Apr 17;93(2):165-76
pubmed: 9568710
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Jun;19(6):733-59
pubmed: 18214569
Arch Osteoporos. 2017 Sep 21;12(1):80
pubmed: 28936606
Bone. 2010 Jul;47(1):131-9
pubmed: 20399288
Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2010 Feb;6(2):82-8
pubmed: 20125175
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005 Sep-Oct;23(5 Suppl 39):S100-8
pubmed: 16273793
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Mar 31;95(7):3597-602
pubmed: 9520411
Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014 Dec;28(6):911-35
pubmed: 25432361
Arthritis Rheum. 1988 Mar;31(3):315-24
pubmed: 3358796
Arthritis Rheum. 2008 May;58(5):1299-309
pubmed: 18438830
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2009 Jul-Aug;27(4):567-73
pubmed: 19772786
J Bone Miner Res. 2005 Mar;20(3):390-8
pubmed: 15746983
Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2005 Nov;1(1):47-54
pubmed: 16932627
ISRN Rheumatol. 2013 Dec 07;2013:708323
pubmed: 24381766
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2011 Sep-Oct;29(5 Suppl 68):S93-8
pubmed: 22018192
Arthritis Rheum. 2001 May;44(5):1003-12
pubmed: 11352231
Ann Rheum Dis. 2009 Mar;68(3):373-6
pubmed: 18408246
Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Jun;75(6):983-90
pubmed: 26585988
J Am Med Assoc. 1949 Jun 25;140(8):659-62
pubmed: 18150288
J Bone Miner Res. 2010 Jan;25(1):72-81
pubmed: 19594293
Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Oct;75(10):e70
pubmed: 27338779
Biochim Biophys Acta. 2003 Sep 23;1642(1-2):79-85
pubmed: 12972296
J Bone Miner Res. 2015 Jan;30(1):46-54
pubmed: 25088963
Bone. 2015 Jun;75:222-8
pubmed: 25761434
Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9(3):R61
pubmed: 17597527
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jun;121(6):1291-9
pubmed: 23812464
J Rheumatol. 2000 Nov;27(11):2582-9
pubmed: 11093437
Mod Rheumatol. 2017 Jul;27(4):582-586
pubmed: 27659808