Development of Bone Targeting Drugs

Stapleton, Molly; Sawamoto, Kazuki; Alméciga-Díaz, Carlos J.; Mackenzie, William G.; Mason, Robert W.; Orii, Tadao; Tomatsu, Shunji

doi:10.3390/ijms18071345

Cited by 93 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bisphosphonates have been demonstrated as optimal drugs for targeting bones and are among the most studied molecules in the field. Several studies proved their efficacy by carrying antibiotics or chemotherapy agents to the bone and accredited their affinity to hydroxyapatite (Stapleton et al., ). Antibodies have also been suggested as a model to target the bone in diverse conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone grafts: which is the ideal biomaterial?

Haugen

Lyngstadaas

Rossi

et al. 2019

J Clinic Periodontology

393

353

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bovine xenograft materials, followed by synthetic biomaterials, which unfortunately still lack documented predictability and clinical performance, dominate the market for the cranio‐maxillofacial area. In Europe, new stringent regulations are expected to further limit the allograft market in the future. Aim Within this narrative review, we discuss possible future biomaterials for bone replacement. Scientific Rationale for Study Although the bone graft (BG) literature is overflooded, only a handful of new BG substitutes are clinically available. Laboratory studies tend to focus on advanced production methods and novel biomaterial features, which can be costly to produce. Practical Implications In this review, we ask why such a limited number of BGs are clinically available when compared to extensive laboratory studies. We also discuss what features are needed for an ideal BG. Results We have identified the key properties of current bone substitutes and have provided important information to guide clinical decision‐making and generate new perspectives on bone substitutes. Our results indicated that different mechanical and biological properties are needed despite each having a broad spectrum of variations. Conclusions We foresee bone replacement composite materials with higher levels of bioactivity, providing an appropriate balance between bioabsorption and volume maintenance for achieving ideal bone remodelling.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone grafts: which is the ideal biomaterial?

Haugen

Lyngstadaas

Rossi

et al. 2019

J Clinic Periodontology

393

353

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with monotherapy, the transition from Romosozumab to other antiresorptive drugs may further increase bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporotic women. Through bone-targeting systems to deliver siRNA is also a new method for osteoporosis, and it has already been examined in a preclinical study [48].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Romosozumab better than Teriparatide for the treatment of osteoporosis? A meta-analysis through a grade analysis of evidence

Liu¹,

Ma²,

Sun³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Osteoporosis is a common systemic skeletal disease. With an ageing population, the socioeconomic effect of osteoporosis will remarkably improve. Romosozumab (EVENITYTM) is a new osteoanabolic drug, which is a humanised monoclonal antibody against sclerostin, and received its first global approval for the treatment of osteoporosis in patients at high risk of fracture in Japan on January 8, 2019. Teriparatide is the first osteoanabolic drug. However, there is no comprehensive analysis and systematic review about the efficacy and safety of the two treatment. Method Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about our analysis were searched from electronic database, including Pubmed (1996 to June 2019), Embase (1980 to June 2019), Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, June 2019), Web of Science (1998 to June 2019) and others. Four studies were included in our meta-analysis. Results Four studies containing 1304 patients meet our selection criteria. Our result of analysis indicated that Romosozumab showed better effects in improving BMD of lumbar spine (month 6: MD=3.54, 95% CI [3.13, 3.94], P<0.00001; month 12: MD=4.93, 95% CI [4.21, 5.64], P<0.00001), total hip (month 6: MD=2.27, 95% CI [0.62, 3.91], P=0.007; month 12: MD=3.17, 95% CI [2.68, 3.65], P<0.00001) and femoral neck (month 6: MD=2.30, 95% CI [0.51, 4.08], P=0.01; month 12: MD=3.04, 95% CI [2.29, 3.78], P<0.00001). And the injection-site reaction was fewer (month 12: RR=2.84, 95% CI [1.22, 6.59], P=0.02).But there were no significant differences in the incidence of serious adverse events (month 12: RR=0.78, 95% CI [0.46, 1.33], P=0.37), and death (month 12: RR=0.61, 95% CI [0.08, 4.62], P=0.63). Conclusion Based on the available studies, our current results demonstrated that Romosozumab was better than Teriparatide both in terms of efficacy and side effects.

show abstract

“…En concreto nos vamos a centrar en el risedronato que se une a la hidroxiapatita. Este risedronato se une a nanopartículas de ácido metoxi poli (etilenglicol) -poli láctico-co-glicólico (mPEG-PLGA), y es capaz de dirigirlas a hueso.Otra opción es la desarrollar un sistema de direccionamiento de NP compatible biodegradable que utiliza poli (d, l) lactida-ácido co-glicólico conjugado a alendronato [14].…”

Section: Vehiculización De Fármacos: Direccionamiento Del Fármaco a Lunclassified