Cargando…

Denosumab versus zoledronate for the treatment of low bone mineral density in male HIV-infected patients

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare annual changes in the bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (LS) and the femoral neck (FN) in males with HIV-associated osteoporosis treated with either zoledronate (ZOL) or denosumab (Dmab). METHODS: In this open label, 12-month, prospective, multicenter,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Makras, Polyzois, Petrikkos, Panagiotis, Anastasilakis, Athanasios D., Kolynou, Artemis, Katsarou, Angeliki, Tsachouridou, Olga, Metallidis, Symeon, Yavropoulou, Maria P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441091/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34541262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bonr.2021.101128
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare annual changes in the bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (LS) and the femoral neck (FN) in males with HIV-associated osteoporosis treated with either zoledronate (ZOL) or denosumab (Dmab). METHODS: In this open label, 12-month, prospective, multicenter, cohort study, 23 male people living with HIV (PLWH) under antiretroviral therapy (ART) with low BMD were administered either a single iv infusion of ZOL 5 mg (n = 10) or Dmab 60 mg sc injections biannually (n = 13). Fourteen age-matched male PLWH with normal BMD served as controls. BMD was measured at baseline and at 12 months. RESULTS: LS-BMD increased within both treatment groups at 12 months (ZOL 5.43% ± 3.60%, p = 0.001; Dmab 5.76% ± 3.44%, p < 0.005) and decreased in controls (−2.58% ± 4.12, p = 0.04). FN-BMD increased in both treatment groups at 12 months (ZOL 7.23% ± 5.46%, p = 0.003; Dmab 3.01% ± 2.46%, p < 0.005), and remained unchanged in controls (1.22% ± 2.09, p = 0.06). LS-BMD changes did not differ between the two treatment groups, but FN-BMD changes were more prominent in the ZOL group (p < 0.05). None of our study cohort sustained new fragility fractures during the 12-month study period, and no case of acute phase response was recorded in the ZOL group. CONCLUSIONS: In male PLWH under ART requiring osteoporosis treatment both ZOL and Dmab are efficient and well tolerated therapeutic options achieving BMD increases at least for the first year of treatment.