Hirooka Yasuaki, Nozaki Yuji, Inoue Asuka, Li Jinhai, Shiga Toshihiko, Kishimoto Kazuya, Sugiyama Masafumi, Kinoshita Koji, Funauchi Masanori, Matsumura Itaru
Department of Rheumatology, Kindai University Nara Hospital, Nara, Japan.
Department of Hematology and Rheumatology, Kindai University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Bone Rep. 2020 Jul 4;13:100293. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2020.100293. eCollection 2020 Dec.
Osteoporosis is one of the serious adverse effects associated with glucocorticoid therapy. Although bisphosphonates have been used for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO), some patients have shown an inadequate response. In such cases, denosumab or teriparatide are used. However, there is no consensus on which of these two drugs is superior. We prospectively compared denosumab's and teriparatide's effects on the bone mineral density (BMD) in GIO patients with prior bisphosphonate treatment.
After receiving oral bisphosphonates for ≥2 years, GIO patients with low T-score BMD (<-2.5) were switched from bisphosphonates to denosumab (n = 20) or daily teriparatide (n = 21). We measured the BMD (lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip) in both groups every 6 months for 24 months.
At 24 months of treatment, the lumbar spine BMD increased significantly from baseline in both the denosumab and teriparatide groups (baseline vs. denosumab and teriparatide; 5.9 ± 5.6%, P < 0.001 and 7.9 ± 5.4%, P < 0.001). A significant increase in femoral neck BMD from baseline occurred only in the teriparatide group (6.6 ± 10.8%, P < 0.05); denosumab (1.5 ± 5.0%). No significant changes occurred in the total hip BMD from baseline in either group (-0.1 ± 5.6% and 3.3 ± 7.5%, respectively). There was no significant difference between the denosumab and teriparatide groups at 24 months in lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD, but was significantly higher in the teriparatide group at 12 months (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 in the lumbar spine and femoral neck, respectively).
Teriparatide might have some advantages over denosumab and be a good alternative for treating GIO patients with prior bisphosphonate treatment.
骨质疏松症是糖皮质激素治疗相关的严重不良反应之一。尽管双膦酸盐已用于治疗糖皮质激素诱导的骨质疏松症(GIO),但一些患者反应欠佳。在此类情况下,可使用地诺单抗或特立帕肽。然而,对于这两种药物哪种更具优势尚无共识。我们前瞻性地比较了地诺单抗和特立帕肽对先前接受双膦酸盐治疗的GIO患者骨密度(BMD)的影响。
接受口服双膦酸盐治疗≥2年且T值骨密度低(<-2.5)的GIO患者,从双膦酸盐转换为地诺单抗(n = 20)或每日使用特立帕肽(n = 21)。我们在24个月内每6个月测量两组患者的骨密度(腰椎、股骨颈和全髋)。
治疗24个月时,地诺单抗组和特立帕肽组的腰椎骨密度均较基线显著增加(基线与地诺单抗组和特立帕肽组比较;分别为5.9±5.6%,P<0.001和7.9±5.4%,P<0.001)。仅特立帕肽组的股骨颈骨密度较基线显著增加(6.6±10.8%,P<0.05);地诺单抗组为(1.5±5.0%)。两组全髋骨密度较基线均无显著变化(分别为-0.1±5.6%和3.3±7.5%)。地诺单抗组和特立帕肽组在24个月时腰椎和股骨颈骨密度无显著差异,但在12个月时特立帕肽组显著更高(腰椎和股骨颈分别为P<0.01和P<0.05)。
特立帕肽可能比地诺单抗具有一些优势,是治疗先前接受双膦酸盐治疗的GIO患者的良好替代药物。