Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/22920
Title: Reduced Bone Modeling and Unbalanced Bone Remodeling: Targets for Antiresorptive and Anabolic Therapy.
Austin Authors: Ramchand, Sabashini K ;Seeman, Ego 
Affiliation: Department of Medicine, Endocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA
Department of Medicine, Endocrine Unit, Austin Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia
Issue Date: 31-Mar-2020
metadata.dc.date: 2020-03-31
Publication information: Handbook of experimental pharmacology 2020; online first: 31 March
Abstract: Bone loss during advancing age is the net result of reduced modeling-based bone formation upon the outer (periosteal) envelope and unbalanced remodeling by basic multicellular units (BMUs) upon the three (intracortical, endocortical, and trabecular) components of the inner (endosteal) bone envelope. Each BMU deposits less bone than resorbed, reducing total bone volume and deteriorating the microstructure of the diminished residual bone volume.Antiresorptive agents like bisphosphonates reduce, but do not abolish, the rate of bone remodeling - fewer BMUs remodel, "turn over," the volume of bone. Residual unbalanced remodeling continues to slowly reduce total bone volume and deteriorate bone microstructure. By contrast, denosumab virtually abolishes remodeling so the decrease in bone volume and the deterioration in microstructure cease. The less remodeled matrix remains, leaving more time to complete the slow process of secondary mineralization which reduces the heterogeneity of matrix mineralization and allows it to become glycosylated, changes that may make the smaller and microstructurally deteriorated bone volume more brittle. Neither class of antiresorptive restores bone volume or its microstructure, despite increases in bone mineral density misleadingly suggesting otherwise. Nevertheless, these agents reduce vertebral and hip fractures by 50-60% but only reduce nonvertebral fractures by 20-30%.Restoring bone volume, microstructure, and material composition, "curing" bone fragility, may be partly achieved using anabolic therapy. Teriparatide, and probably abaloparatide, produce mainly remodeling-based bone formation by acting on BMUs existing in their resorption, reversal, or formation phase at the time of treatment and by promoting bone formation in newly initiated BMUs. Romosozumab produces modeling-based bone formation almost exclusively and decreases the surface extent of bone resorption. All three anabolic agents reduce vertebral fracture risk relative to untreated controls; parathyroid hormone 1-34 and romosozumab reduce vertebral fracture risk more greatly than risedronate or alendronate, respectively. Evidence for nonvertebral or hip fracture risk reduction relative to untreated or antiresorptive-treated controls is lacking or inconsistent. Only one study suggests sequential romosozumab followed by alendronate reduces vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fracture risk compared to continuous alendronate alone. Whether combined antiresorptive and anabolic therapy result in superior fracture risk reduction than monotherapy is untested.
URI: http://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/22920
DOI: 10.1007/164_2020_354
ORCID: 0000-0002-9692-048X
PubMed URL: 32232792
ISSN: 0171-2004
Type: Journal Article
Subjects: Anabolic
Antiresorptives
Bone mineral density
Fracture
Osteoporosis
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

2
checked on Dec 1, 2020

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.