» Articles » PMID: 18318643

Considerations for Development of Surrogate Endpoints for Antifracture Efficacy of New Treatments in Osteoporosis: a Perspective

Overview
Date 2008 Mar 6
PMID 18318643
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Because of the broad availability of efficacious osteoporosis therapies, conduct of placebo-controlled trials in subjects at high risk for fracture is becoming increasing difficult. Alternative trial designs include placebo-controlled trials in patients at low risk for fracture or active comparator studies, both of which would require enormous sample sizes and associated financial resources. Another more attractive alternative is to develop and validate surrogate endpoints for fracture. In this perspective, we review the concept of surrogate endpoints as it has been developed in other fields of medicine and discuss how it could be applied in clinical trials of osteoporosis. We outline a stepwise approach and possible study designs to qualify a biomarker as a surrogate endpoint in osteoporosis and review the existing data for several potential surrogate endpoints to assess their success in meeting the proposed criteria. Finally, we suggest a research agenda needed to advance the development of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for fracture in osteoporosis trials. To ensure optimal development and best use of biomarkers to accelerate drug development, continuous dialog among the health professionals, industry, and regulators is of paramount importance.

Citing Articles

Age- and Sex-Related Volumetric Density Differences in Trabecular and Cortical Bone of the Proximal Femur in Healthy Population.

Brance M, Saravi F, Henriquez M, Larroude M, Jacobo J, Araujo S J Bone Metab. 2024; 31(4):279-289.

PMID: 39701108 PMC: 11658838. DOI: 10.11005/jbm.24.765.


In Silico Clinical Trial for Osteoporosis Treatments to Prevent Hip Fractures: Simulation of the Placebo Arm.

Savelli G, Oliviero S, La Mattina A, Viceconti M Ann Biomed Eng. 2024; 53(3):578-587.

PMID: 39576502 PMC: 11836154. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-024-03636-4.


Bone Tissue Changes in Individuals Living with HIV/AIDS: The Importance of a Hierarchical Approach in Investigating Bone Fragility.

Jadzic J, Dragovic G, Lukic R, Obradovic B, Djuric M J Pers Med. 2024; 14(8).

PMID: 39201983 PMC: 11355540. DOI: 10.3390/jpm14080791.


The effect of low-intensity whole-body vibration with or without high-intensity resistance and impact training on risk factors for proximal femur fragility fracture in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: study protocol for the VIBMOR randomized....

Beck B, Rubin C, Harding A, Paul S, Forwood M Trials. 2022; 23(1):15.

PMID: 34991684 PMC: 8734256. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05911-4.


Alendronate use and bone mineral density gains in women with moderate-severe (stages 3B-5) chronic kidney disease: an open cohort multivariable and propensity score analysis from Funen, Denmark.

Ali M, Ernst M, Robinson D, Caskey F, Arden N, Ben-Shlomo Y Arch Osteoporos. 2020; 15(1):81.

PMID: 32483674 PMC: 8448716. DOI: 10.1007/s11657-020-00746-z.


References
1.
Chen P, Satterwhite J, Licata A, Lewiecki E, Sipos A, Misurski D . Early changes in biochemical markers of bone formation predict BMD response to teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2005; 20(6):962-70. DOI: 10.1359/JBMR.050105. View

2.
Bouxsein M . Determinants of skeletal fragility. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2005; 19(6):897-911. DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2005.07.004. View

3.
Keyak J, Kaneko T, Tehranzadeh J, Skinner H . Predicting proximal femoral strength using structural engineering models. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005; (437):219-28. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000164400.37905.22. View

4.
Rossini M, Gatti D, Zamberlan N, Braga V, Dorizzi R, Adami S . Long-term effects of a treatment course with oral alendronate of postmenopausal osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 1994; 9(11):1833-7. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.5650091121. View

5.
Eckstein F, Lochmuller E, Lill C, Kuhn V, Schneider E, Delling G . Bone strength at clinically relevant sites displays substantial heterogeneity and is best predicted from site-specific bone densitometry. J Bone Miner Res. 2002; 17(1):162-71. DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.1.162. View