Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Kung AW, Pasion EG, Sofiyan M, Lau EM, Tay BK, Lam KS, et al.
    Curr Med Res Opin, 2006 May;22(5):929-37.
    PMID: 16709314 DOI: 10.1185/030079906X104768
    OBJECTIVE: The number of hip fractures is expected to double in the next 20 years, with current estimates that Asia will account for 37% of these cases. As bone mineral density (BMD) may be used as a measure of fracture risk, we sought to compare the effects of teriparatide with salmon calcitonin treatment on changes in BMD, biochemical bone markers, and safety in postmenopausal Asian women with osteoporosis.
    METHODOLOGY: A total of 104 patients (n = 47 teriparatide [20 g/day subcutaneously] and n = 57 calcitonin [100 IU/day subcutaneously]) were enrolled in Hong Kong, Singapore, Philippines, Malaysia, and Thailand. Calcium (> or = 500 mg/day) and vitamin D (200-400 IU/day) supplements were taken throughout the 6-month controlled, randomized study.
    RESULTS: Teriparatide was associated with a 5.03 +/- 4.77% increase in lumbar spine BMD (p < 0.0001, mean +/- SD change from baseline), whereas changes in lumbar spine BMD for patients on calcitonin were not statistically significant (mean change of 0.36 +/- 4.12%, p = 0.16). Comparison of the two groups indicated that teriparatide treatment improved lumbar spine BMD statistically significantly more than calcitonin (p < 0.0001). No statistically significant changes were observed for total hip or femoral neck BMD. Serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP) increased by 55.9% (median change from baseline, p < 0.0001) in the teriparatide group, and remained stable with calcitonin (5.0% change, p = 0.24); osteocalcin increased by 156.15% (median change from baseline, p < 0.0001) with teriparatide, and decreased with calcitonin (-15.25%, p = 0.03). Similar rates of adverse events were observed, with nausea and dizziness the most commonly reported for both groups (teriparatide versus calcitonin, 13.0% versus 23.2% p = 0.21, 10.9% versus 21.4% p = 0.19, respectively). There were no clinically relevant changes observed in laboratory parameters.
    CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments were similarly tolerated, however teriparatide was associated with greater increases in lumbar spine BMD and bone formation markers, demonstrating the unique mechanism of action and safety of this treatment for osteoporosis in these Asian women.
    Matched MeSH terms: Teriparatide/pharmacology; Teriparatide/therapeutic use*
  2. Lee WC, Chua T
    Malays Orthop J, 2021 Mar;15(1):138-140.
    PMID: 33880163 DOI: 10.5704/MOJ.2103.023
    Atypical femoral fractures (AFF) have low union rates. The use of teriparatide has been advocated for the post-operative healing of AFF, but the evidence is limited to case reports and some series due to its low incidence. We present a case series of four female patients to support the use of teriparatide after the surgical fixation of their AFF. Three of the patients had a complete AFF and one had an incomplete fracture. Their mean age was 70 (52 - 87) years, mean body mass index 24.6 (18.3 - 29.3), mean bone mineral density T-score of -2.3 (-4.8/-1.0), with a prior history of anti-resorptive therapy with bisphosphonates and denosumab. Teriparatide was started at an average of 8 (2-18) days post-fixation, with 20mcg daily for six months. Immediate full weight-bearing was permitted in three patients, while one was non-weight bearing for two months. The mean time to union was 12 (10 - 14) weeks. No side effects were observed over a mean follow-up of 58 (50 - 72) weeks. The use of teriparatide facilitated the quick union of AFF after surgical fixation. It appeared to be safe and promoted fracture healing in AFF.
    Matched MeSH terms: Teriparatide
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links