Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is a rare but serious adverse event associated with antiresorptive treatment. There is little evidence regarding the incidence of ONJ among patients with osteoporosis who are treated with denosumab versus bisphosphonates (BPs). The aim of this study was to determine the risk of ONJ in a real‐world population. Subjects who underwent at least one dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA) examination were included in the osteoporosis register of the Swiss Society of Rheumatology between January 1, 2015, and September 30, 2019. Statistical analyses included incidence rates, rate ratios, and hazard ratios for ONJ, considering sequential therapies and drug holidays as covariates. Among 9956 registered patients, 3068 (89% female, median age 69 years [63 to 76]) were treated with BPs or denosumab for a cumulative duration of 11,101 and 4236 patient‐years, respectively. Seventeen cases of ONJ were identified: 12 in patients receiving denosumab at the time of ONJ diagnosis and 5 in patients receiving oral or intravenous BP therapy. The diagnosis of ONJ was confirmed by independent and blinded maxillofacial surgeons, using the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons case definition of ONJ. The incidence of ONJ per 10,000 observed patient‐years was 28.3 in patients receiving denosumab and 4.5 in patients with BP‐associated ONJ, yielding a rate ratio of 6.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1 to 22.8), p < 0.001. Nine of 12 patients who developed ONJ during denosumab treatment had been pretreated with BPs, but none of the 5 patients with BP‐related ONJ had previously received denosumab. The risk of ONJ was higher in patients receiving denosumab therapy compared with BPs (hazard ratio 3.49, 95% CI 1.16 to 10.47, p = 0.026). Previous BP therapy before switching to denosumab may be an additional risk factor for ONJ development. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).
Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) have been reported in patients taking bisphosphonates (BPs) for osteoporosis therapy but also in patients with no exposure to these drugs. In contrast, less is known about the incidence of AFFs in patients taking denosumab. This registry-based cohort study analyzed the incidence of AFFs in patients with suspected or confirmed osteoporosis who were included in the osteoporosis register of the Swiss Society of Rheumatology between January 2015 and September 2019. Statistical analyses included incidence rates, rate ratios, and hazard ratios for AFFs, and considered sequential therapies and drug holidays as timedependent covariates. Among the 9956 subjects in the cohort, 53 had subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures. Ten fractures occurred under BP or denosumab treatment and two under teriparatide therapy. Five fractures were classified as AFFs based on the revised American Society of Bone and Mineral Research case definition of AFFs from 2014. Three AFFs occurred in women being treated with denosumab at the time of diagnosis, all with prior BP use (10, 7, and 1 years, respectively). One AFF developed in a woman receiving ibandronate and one arose in a woman receiving glucocorticoids rather than antiresorptive therapy. The incidence of AFFs per 10,000 observed patient-years was 7.1 in patients receiving denosumab and 0.9 in patients with BP-associated AFFs, yielding a rate ratio of 7.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-413), p = 0.073. The risk of AFFs was not significantly higher in patients receiving denosumab therapy compared with BP therapy (hazard ratio = 7.07, 95% CI 0.74-68.01, p = 0.090). We conclude that the risk of AFFs is low in patients taking BPs, denosumab, or both sequentially. All three patients with AFFs under denosumab therapy had undergone prior BP therapy.
Summary This registry-based study of 3068 patients with osteoporosis compared the anti-fracture effectiveness of denosumab versus bisphosphonates. Denosumab was associated with significantly greater risk reduction than alendronate or ibandronate for vertebral and any fractures. No difference in fracture risk reduction was found between zoledronate and denosumab. Purpose To analyse the fracture risk of patients with osteoporosis receiving bisphosphonates or denosumab in a real-world setting. Methods This registry-based cohort study evaluated patients taking denosumab, bisphosphonates or both sequentially. Fractures were analysed using rates, rate ratios and hazard ratios (HR), including both therapies as time-varying co-variates. Fracture risk hazards were adjusted (aHR) for baseline T-Scores and trabecular bone score (TBS) and were additionally analysed with inverse probability treatment weighting. Results A total of 3068 patients (89% female; median age at treatment onset, 69 years [63 to 76]) received denosumab (median duration 2.8 years, [2.2 to 4.7]), bisphosphonates (3.4 years, [2.1 to 5.7]) or both sequentially. Thus, 11,078 subject-years were assessed for bisphosphonates (41% alendronate, 36% ibandronate, 23% zoledronate) and 4216 for denosumab. Moreover, 48,375 subject-years were observed before treatment onset, in addition to 2593 years of drug holidays. A total of 1481 vertebral fractures (435 under therapy), 1508 non-vertebral fractures (499 under therapy) and 202 hip fractures (67 under therapy) occurred after age 50. The risks of vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures were significantly lower under all bisphosphonates, denosumab and drug holidays than before treatment onset (all p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, baseline T-scores and TBS, denosumab was associated with lower risk than alendronate or ibandronate for vertebral fractures (aHR 0.47 (0.35 to 0.64) and 0.70 [0.53 to 0.91], p < 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively) and any fractures (aHR 0.62 [0.51 to 0.76] and 0.77 [0.64 to 0.92], p < 0.001 and p = 0.004). With propensity weighting, denosumab was associated with a lower hip fracture risk compared to alendronate (HR 0.54 [0.29 to 0.98], p = 0.044). No difference in fracture risk reduction (vertebral, non-vertebral or hip) was found between zoledronate and denosumab. Conclusions When adjusting for disease severity, denosumab was associated with significantly greater risk reduction than alendronate and ibandronate for vertebral fractures. No difference in fracture risk reduction was found between zoledronate and denosumab. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00198-023-06863-y.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.