Recombinant protein therapeutics cannot enter brain drug development because these large molecule drugs do not cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). However, recombinant proteins can be reengineered ...as BBB-penetrating IgG fusion proteins, where the IgG part is a genetically engineered monoclonal antibody (MAb) against an endogenous BBB receptor, such as the human insulin receptor (HIR) or the transferrin receptor (TfR). The IgG binds the endogenous insulin receptor or TfR to trigger transport across the BBB and acts as a molecular Trojan horse (MTH) to ferry into brain the fused protein therapeutic. The most potent MTH to date is a MAb against the HIR, designated the HIRMAb, which is active in humans and Old World primates, such as the Rhesus monkey. There is no known MAb against the mouse insulin receptor. For drug delivery in the mouse, protein therapeutics are fused to a chimeric MAb against the mouse TfR, designated the cTfRMAb. The HIRMAb or cTfRMAb Trojan horses have been engineered and expressed as fusion proteins with multiple classes of protein therapeutics, including lysosomal enzymes, neurotrophins, decoy receptors, single chain Fv therapeutic antibodies, and avidin. The pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of the IgG fusion proteins differ from that of typical MAb drugs and resemble the PK profiles of small molecules due to rapid uptake by peripheral tissues, as well as brain. The brain uptake of the IgG fusion proteins, 2-3% of injected dose/brain, is comparable to the brain uptake of small molecules. The IgG fusion proteins have been administered chronically in mouse models, and the immune response is low titer and has no effect on the fusion protein clearance from blood or brain uptake in vivo. The BBB MTH technology enables the reengineering of a wide spectrum of recombinant protein therapeutics for targeted drug delivery to the brain.
Ipilimumab is a first-in-class immune checkpoint inhibitor approved for treatment of metastatic melanoma but not studied in children until this phase I protocol.
This study examined safety, ...pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity, and immune correlates of ipilimumab administered to subjects ≤21 years old with recurrent or progressive solid tumors. Dose escalation cohorts received 1, 3, 5, or 10 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks in a 3 + 3 design. Response was assessed after 6 weeks and 12 weeks, and then every 3 months. Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
Thirty-three patients received 72 doses of ipilimumab. Patients enrolled had melanoma (n = 12), sarcoma (n = 17), or other refractory solid tumors (n = 4). Immune-related adverse events included pancreatitis, pneumonitis, colitis, endocrinopathies, and transaminitis with dose-limiting toxicities observed at 5 and 10 mg/kg dose levels. Pharmacokinetics revealed a half-life of 8 to 15 days. At day 21, subjects had increased levels of cycling T cells, but no change in regulatory T-cell populations. Six subjects had confirmed stable disease for 4 to 10 cycles (melanoma, osteosarcoma, clear cell sarcoma, and synovial sarcoma).
Ipilimumab was safely administered to pediatric patients using management algorithms for immune-related toxicities. The spectrum of immune-related adverse events is similar to those described in adults; however, many of the pediatric toxicities were evident after a single dose. Although no objective tumor regressions were observed with ipilimumab as a single agent, subjects with immune-related toxicities had an increased overall survival compared with those who showed no evidence of breaking tolerance.
Migraine is a highly disabling neurovascular disorder characterized by a severe headache (associated with nausea, photophobia and/or phonophobia), and trigeminovascular system activation involving ...the release of calcitonin-gene related peptide (CGRP). Novel anti-migraine drugs target CGRP signaling through either stimulation of 5-HT1F receptors on trigeminovascular nerves (resulting in inhibition of CGRP release) or direct blockade of CGRP or its receptor. Lasmiditan is a highly selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist and, unlike the triptans, is devoid of vasoconstrictive properties, allowing its use in patients with cardiovascular risk. Since lasmiditan can actively penetrate the blood-brain barrier, central therapeutic as well as side effects mediated by 5-HT1F receptor activation should be further investigated. Other novel anti-migraine drugs target CGRP signaling directly. This neuropeptide can be targeted by the monoclonal antibodies eptinezumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab, or by CGRP-neutralizing L-aptamers called Spiegelmers. The CGRP receptor can be targeted by the monoclonal antibody erenumab, or by small-molecule antagonists called gepants. Currently, rimegepant and ubrogepant have been developed for acute migraine treatment, while atogepant is studied for migraine prophylaxis. Of these drugs targeting CGRP signaling directly, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, rimegepant and ubrogepant have been approved for clinical use, while atogepant is in the last stage before approval. Although all of these drugs seem highly promising for migraine treatment, their safety should be investigated in the long-term. Moreover, the exact mechanism(s) of action of these drugs need to be elucidated further, to increase both safety and efficacy and to increase the number of responders to the different treatments, so that all migraine patients can satisfactorily be treated.
Head-to-head trials in psoriatic arthritis are helpful in guiding clinical decision making. The EXCEED study evaluated the efficacy and safety of secukinumab versus adalimumab as first-line ...biological monotherapy for 52 weeks in patients with active psoriatic arthritis, with a musculoskeletal primary endpoint of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response.
This parallel-group, double-blind, active-controlled, phase-3b, multicentre (168 sites in 26 countries) trial enrolled patients aged at least 18 years with active psoriatic arthritis. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of interactive response technology to receive secukinumab or adalimumab. Patients, investigators, site personnel, and those doing the assessments (except independent study drug administrators) were masked to study assignment. 300 mg secukinumab was administered subcutaneously at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4, and then every 4 weeks until week 48 as a pre-filled syringe. Adalimumab was administered every 2 weeks from baseline until week 50 as 40 mg per 0·4 mL citrate free subcutaneous injection. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with at least 20% improvement in the ACR response criteria (ACR20) at week 52. Patients were analysed according to the treatment to which they were randomly assigned. Safety analyses included all safety data reported up to and including the week 52 visit for each patient who received at least one dose of study drug. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02745080.
Between April 3, 2017 and Aug 23, 2018, we randomly assigned 853 patients to receive secukinumab (n=426) or adalimumab (n=427). 709 (83%) of 853 patients completed week 52 of the study, of whom 691 (81%) received the last study treatment at week 50. 61 (14%) of 426 patients in the secukinumab group discontinued treatment by week 52 versus 101 (24%) of 427 patients in the adalimumab group. The primary endpoint of superiority of secukinumab versus adalimumab for ACR20 response at week 52 was not met. 67% of patients in the secukinumab group achieved an ACR20 response at week 52 versus 62% of patients in the adalimumab group (OR 1·30, 95% CI 0·98–1·72; p=0·0719). The safety profiles of secukinumab and adalimumab were consistent with previous reports. Seven (2%) of 426 patients in the secukinumab group and six (1%) of 427 patients in the adalimumab group had serious infections. One death was reported in the secukinumab group due to colon cancer and was assessed as not related to the study drug by the investigator.
Secukinumab did not meet statistical significance for superiority versus adalimumab in the primary endpoint of ACR20 response at week 52. However, secukinumab was associated with a higher treatment retention rate than adalimumab. This study provides comparative data on two biological agents with different mechanisms of action, which could help guide clinical decision making in the management of patients with psoriatic arthritis.
Novartis Pharma.
All bound up: A small variant of protein A (red; see picture) was used as a biotemplate for the synthesis and biofunctionalization of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs). These functionalized AuNPs were able ...to bind to antibodies (green blocks, trastuzumab; TZ) with a defined orientation, thus showing promise as bio‐nanoparticle systems suitable for selective cell labeling by membrane‐receptor‐specific recognition.
Background
Psoriasis is an immune‐mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it ...has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head‐to‐head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta‐analysis.
Objectives
To compare the efficacy and safety of non‐biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis using a network meta‐analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.
Search methods
For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.
Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.
Data collection and analysis
Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair‐wise and network meta‐analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events).
We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing.
We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).
Main results
We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo‐controlled (58%), 30% were head‐to‐head studies, and 11% were multi‐armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding.
Network meta‐analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non‐biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90.
At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti‐IL17, anti‐IL12/23, anti‐IL23, and anti‐TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non‐biological systemic agents.
At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti‐TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non‐biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate.
Network meta‐analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high‐certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high‐certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high‐certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high‐certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high‐certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high‐certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate‐certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials.
We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking.
For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90.
Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.
Authors' conclusions
Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate‐ to high‐certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer‐term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice.
Another major concern is that short‐term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly‐reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long‐term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non‐randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies.
In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high‐quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head‐to‐head trials amongst and between non‐biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti‐IL17 versus anti‐IL23, anti‐IL23 versus anti‐IL12/23, anti‐TNF alpha versus anti‐IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological‐naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium‐ and long‐term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents.
Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
The role of factor XI in the pathogenesis of postoperative venous thromboembolism is uncertain. Abelacimab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to factor XI and locks it in the zymogen (inactive ...precursor) conformation.
In this open-label, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned 412 patients who were undergoing total knee arthroplasty to receive one of three regimens of abelacimab (30 mg, 75 mg, or 150 mg) administered postoperatively in a single intravenous dose or to receive 40 mg of enoxaparin administered subcutaneously once daily. The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism, detected by mandatory venography of the leg involved in the operation or objective confirmation of symptomatic events. The principal safety outcome was a composite of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding up to 30 days after surgery.
Venous thromboembolism occurred in 13 of 102 patients (13%) in the 30-mg abelacimab group, 5 of 99 patients (5%) in the 75-mg abelacimab group, and 4 of 98 patients (4%) in the 150-mg abelacimab group, as compared with 22 of 101 patients (22%) in the enoxaparin group. The 30-mg abelacimab regimen was noninferior to enoxaparin, and the 75-mg and 150-mg abelacimab regimens were superior to enoxaparin (P<0.001). Bleeding occurred in 2%, 2%, and none of the patients in the 30-mg, 75-mg, and 150-mg abelacimab groups, respectively, and in none of the patients in the enoxaparin group.
This trial showed that factor XI is important for the development of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Factor XI inhibition with a single intravenous dose of abelacimab after total knee arthroplasty was effective for the prevention of venous thromboembolism and was associated with a low risk of bleeding. (Funded by Anthos Therapeutics; ANT-005 TKA EudraCT number, 2019-003756-37.).
Purpose
MNRP1685A is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks binding of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), VEGF-B, and placental growth factor 2 to neuropilin-1 resulting in vessel immaturity ...and VEGF dependency. The safety of combining MNRP1685A with bevacizumab, with or without paclitaxel, was examined.
Methods
Patients with advanced solid tumors received escalating doses of MNRP1685A (7.5, 15, 24, and 36 mg/kg) with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks in Arm A (
n
= 14). Arm B (
n
= 10) dosing consisted of MNRP1685A (12 and 16 mg/kg) with bevacizumab 10 mg/kg (every 2 weeks) and paclitaxel 90 mg/m
2
(weekly, 3 of 4 weeks). Objectives were to determine safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and the maximum tolerated dose of MNRP1685A.
Results
Infusion reactions (88 %) and transient thrombocytopenia (67 %) represent the most frequent study drug-related adverse events (AEs). Drug-related Grade 2 or 3 proteinuria occurred in 13 patients (54 %). Additional study drug-related AEs occurring in >20 % of patients included neutropenia, alopecia, dysphonia, fatigue, and nausea. Neutropenia occurred only in Arm B. Grade ≥3 study drug-related AEs in ≥3 patients included neutropenia (Arm B), proteinuria, and thrombocytopenia. Two confirmed and three unconfirmed partial responses were observed.
Conclusions
The safety profiles were consistent with the single-agent profiles of all study drugs. However, a higher than expected rate of clinically significant proteinuria was observed that does not support further testing of MNRP1685A in combination with bevacizumab.
Overactivated complement is a high-risk feature in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients with transplant-associated thrombotic microangiopathy (TA-TMA), and untreated patients have ...dismal outcomes. We present our experience with 64 pediatric HSCT recipients who had high-risk TA-TMA (hrTA-TMA) and multiorgan injury treated with the complement blocker eculizumab. We demonstrate significant improvement to 66% in 1-year post-HSCT survival in treated patients from our previously reported untreated cohort with same hrTA-TMA features that had 1-year post-HSCT survival of 16.7%. Responding patients benefited from a brief but intensive course of eculizumab using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic–guided dosing, requiring a median of 11 doses of eculizumab (interquartile range IQR 7-20). Treatment was discontinued because TA-TMA resolved at a median of 66 days (IQR 41-110). Subjects with higher complement activation measured by elevated blood sC5b-9 at the start of treatment were less likely to respond (odds ratio, 0.15; P = .0014) and required more doses of eculizumab (r = 0.43; P = .0004). Patients with intestinal bleeding had the fastest eculizumab clearance, required the highest number of eculizumab doses (20 vs 9; P = .0015), and had lower 1-year survival (44% vs 78%; P = .01). Over 70% of survivors had proteinuria on long-term follow-up. The best glomerular filtration rate (GFR) recovery in survivors was a median 20% lower (IQR, 7.3%-40.3%) than their pre-HSCT GFR. In summary, complement blockade with eculizumab is an effective therapeutic strategy for hrTA-TMA, but some patients with severe disease lacked a complete response, prompting us to propose early intervention and search for additional targetable endothelial injury pathways.
•Eculizumab is an effective therapeutic strategy for HSCT recipients with high-risk TA-TMA, with improved 1-year post-HSCT survival.•Subjects with a higher sC5b-9 level at the start of eculizumab therapy are less likely to respond to treatment and need more drug doses.
Display omitted
Summary Background Unlike most chronic diseases, osteoporosis treatments are generally limited to a single drug at a fixed dose and frequency. Nonetheless, no approved therapy is able to restore ...skeletal integrity in most osteoporotic patients and the long-term use of osteoporosis drugs is controversial. Thus, many patients are treated with the sequential use of two or more therapies. The DATA study showed that combined teriparatide and denosumab increased bone mineral density more than either drug alone. Discontinuing teriparatide and denosumab, however, results in rapidly declining bone mineral density. In this DATA-Switch study, we aimed to assess the changes in bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporotic women who transitioned between treatments. Methods This randomised controlled trial (DATA-Switch) is a preplanned extension of the denosumab and teriparatide administration study (DATA), in which 94 postmenopausal osteoporotic women were randomly assigned to receive 24 months of teriparatide (20 mg daily), denosumab (60 mg every 6 months), or both drugs. In DATA-Switch, women originally assigned to teriparatide received denosumab (teriparatide to denosumab group), those originally assigned to denosumab received teriparatide (denosumab to teriparatide group), and those originally assigned to both received an additional 24 months of denosumab alone (combination to denosumab group). Bone mineral density at the spine, hip, and wrist were measured 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months after the drug transitions as were biochemical markers of bone turnover. The primary endpoint was the percent change in posterior-anterior spine bone mineral density over 4 years. Between-group changes were assessed by one-way analysis of variance in our modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00926380. Findings Between Sept 27, 2011, and Jan 28, 2013, eligible women from the DATA study were enrolled into DATA-Switch. Of 83 potential enrollees from the DATA study, 77 completed at least one post-baseline visit. After 48 months, the primary outcome of mean spine bone mineral density increased by 18·3% (95% CI 14·9–21·8) in 27 women in the teriparatide to denosumab group, 14·0% (10·9–17·2) in 27 women the denosumab to teriparatide group, and 16·0% (14·0–18·0) in 23 women in the combination to denosumab group, although this increase did not differ significantly between groups (for between-group comparisons, p=0·13 for the teriparatide to denosumab group vs the denosumab to teriparatide group, p=0·30 for the teriparatide to denosumab group vs the combination to denosumab group, and p=0·41 for the denosumab to teriparatide group vs the combination to denosumab group). For the bone mineral density secondary outcomes, total hip bone mineral density increased more in the teriparatide to denosumab group (6·6% 95% CI 5·3–7·9) than in the denosumab to teriparatide group (2·8% 1·3–4·2, p=0·0002), but had the greatest increase in the combination to denosumab group (8·6% 7·1–10·0; p=0·0446 vs the teriparatide to denosumab group, p<0·0001 vs the denosumab to teriparatide group). Similarly, femoral neck bone mineral density increased more in the teriparatide to denosumab group (8·3% 95% CI 6·1–10·5) and the combination to denosumab group (9·1% 6·1–12·0) than in the denosumab to teriparatide group (4·9% 2·2–7·5; p=0·0447 for teriparatide to denosumab vs denosumab to teriparatide, p=0·0336 for combination to denosumab vs denosumab to teriparatide). Differences between the combination to denosumab group and the teriparatide to denosumab group did not differ significantly (p=0·67). After 48 months, radius bone mineral density was unchanged in the teriparatide to denosumab group (0·0% 95% CI −1·3 to 1·4), whereas it decreased by −1·8% (−5·0 to 1·3) in the denosumab to teriparatide group, and increased by 2·8% (1·2–4·4) in the combination to denosumab group (p=0·0075 for the teriparatide to denosumab group vs the combination to denosumab group; p=0·0099 for the denosumab to teriparatide group vs the combination to denosumab group). One participant in the denosumab to teriparatide group had nephrolithiasis, classified as being possibly related to treatment. Interpretation In postmenopausal osteoporotic women switching from teriparatide to denosumab, bone mineral density continued to increase, whereas switching from denosumab to teriparatide results in progressive or transient bone loss. These results should be considered when choosing the initial and subsequent management of postmenopausal osteoporotic patients. Funding Amgen, Eli Lilly, and National Institutes of Health.
PDF
