References of "Papapoulos, S"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe risk of subsequent osteoporotic fractures is decreased in patients experiencing fracture while on denosumab: results from the FREEDOM and FREEDOM Extension studies.
Kendler, D.L.; Chines, A.; Brandi, M.L. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2017, March), 28 Suppl 1

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (3 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe effect of 8 or 5 years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the FREEDOM Extension study.
PAPAPOULOS, S.; LIPPUNER, K.; ROUX, C. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2015), 26(12), 2773-2783

Summary: The FREEDOM study and its Extension provide long-term information about the effects of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Treatment for up to 8 years was associated with ... [more ▼]

Summary: The FREEDOM study and its Extension provide long-term information about the effects of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Treatment for up to 8 years was associated with persistent reduction of bone turnover, continued increases in bone mineral density, low fracture incidence, and a favorable benefit/risk profile. Introduction: This study aims to report the results through year 5 of the FREEDOM Extension study, representing up to 8 years of continued denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Methods : Women who completed the 3-year FREEDOM study were eligible to enter the 7-year open-label FREEDOM Extension in which all participants are scheduled to receive denosumab, since placebo assignment was discontinued for ethical reasons. A total of 4550 women enrolled in the Extension (2343 long-term; 2207 cross-over). In this analysis, women in the long-term and cross-over groups received denosumab for up to 8 and 5 years, respectively. Results Throughout the Extension, sustained reduction of bone turnover markers (BTMs) was observed in both groups. In the long-term group, mean bone mineral density (BMD) continued to increase significantly at each time point measured, for cumulative 8-year gains of 18.4 and 8.3 % at the lumbar spine and total hip, respectively. In the cross-over group, mean BMD increased significantly from the Extension baseline for 5-year cumulative gains of 13.1 and 6.2 % at the lumbar spine and total hip, respectively. The yearly incidence of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures remained low in both groups. The incidence of adverse and serious adverse events did not increase over time. Through Extension year 5, eight events of osteonecrosis of the jaw and two events of atypical femoral fracture were confirmed. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 23 (3 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDenosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis for up to 9 years: results through year 6 of the freedom extension
Papapoulos, S; Roux, C; Bone, HG et al

in Osteoporosis International (2015), 26(S1), 37-39

Detailed reference viewed: 208 (3 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOcanacatib antifracture efficacy and saftey in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase III long-term adonacatib fracture trial (LOFT)
McClung, MR; Langdahl, B; Papapoulos, S et al

in Osteoporosis International (2015), 26(S1), 35-36

Detailed reference viewed: 57 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSafety and tolerability of odanacatib therapy in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase III long-term odanacatib fracture trial
Papapoulos, S; McClung, MR; Langdahl, B et al

in Osteoporosis International (2014), 25(5), 604-605

Detailed reference viewed: 49 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOdanacatib anti-fracture efficacy and safety in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase III long-term odanacatib fracture trial
McClung, MR; Langdahl, B; Papapoulos, S et al

in Osteoporosis International (2014), 25(5), 573-575

Detailed reference viewed: 29 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailOdanacatib anti-fracture efficacy and safety in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase III long-term odanacatib fracture trial
McClung, MR; Langdahl, B; Papapoulos, S et al

in Arthritis and Rheumatism (2014), 66(11), 987

Detailed reference viewed: 147 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailGoal-directed treatment of osteoporosis in Europe.
Kanis, J. A.; McCloskey, E.; Branco, J. et al

in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA (2014), 25(11), 2533-2543

Despite the proven predictive ability of bone mineral density, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX(R)), bone turnover markers, and fracture for osteoporotic fracture, their use as targets for treatment of ... [more ▼]

Despite the proven predictive ability of bone mineral density, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX(R)), bone turnover markers, and fracture for osteoporotic fracture, their use as targets for treatment of osteoporosis is limited. INTRODUCTION: Treat-to-target is a strategy applied in several fields of medicine and has recently become an area of interest in the management of osteoporosis. Its role in this setting remains controversial. This article was prepared following a European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) working group meeting convened under the auspices of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) to discuss the feasibility of applying such a strategy in osteoporosis in Europe. METHODS: Potential targets range from the absence of an incident fracture to fixed levels of bone mineral density (BMD), a desired FRAX(R) score, a specified level of bone turnover markers or indeed changes in any one or a combination of these parameters. RESULTS: Despite the proven predictive ability of all of these variables for fracture (particularly BMD and FRAX), their use as targets remains limited due to low sensitivity, the influence of confounders and current lack of evidence that targets can be consistently reached. CONCLUSION: ESCEO considers that it is not currently feasible to apply a treat-to-target strategy in osteoporosis, though it did identify a need to continue to improve the targeting of treatment to those at higher risk (target-to-treat strategy) and a number of issues for the research agenda. These include international consensus on intervention thresholds and definition of treatment failure, further exploration of the relationship between fracture and BMD, and FRAX and treatment efficacy and investigation of the potential of short-term targets to improve adherence. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 25 (9 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEffect of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: eight-year results from the freedom extension, phase 3 clinical trial
Lewieck, E; Papapoulos, S; Lippuner, K et al

in Endocrine Reviews (2014), 35(3), 22-1

Detailed reference viewed: 18 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEight years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the first five years of the freedom extension
Papapoulos, S; Lippuner, K; Roux, C et al

in Osteoporosis International (2014), 25(2), 46-47

Detailed reference viewed: 411 (2 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDenosumab treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis for 6 years : results from the first 3 years of the freedom extension
Papapoulos, S; Brown, JP; Chapurlat, R et al

in Osteoporosis International (2012, March), 23(S2), 76

Detailed reference viewed: 102 (2 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailFive years of denosumab exposure in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: Results from the first two years of the FREEDOM extension.
Papapoulos, S.; Chapurlat, R.; Libanati, C. et al

in Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (2012), 27(3), 694-701

The 3-year FREEDOM trial assessed the efficacy and safety of 60 mg denosumab every 6 months for treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Participants who completed FREEDOM were eligible to ... [more ▼]

The 3-year FREEDOM trial assessed the efficacy and safety of 60 mg denosumab every 6 months for treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Participants who completed FREEDOM were eligible to enter an extension to continue the evaluation of denosumab efficacy and safety for up to 10 years. For the extension results presented here, women from the FREEDOM denosumab group had 2 more years of denosumab treatment (long-term group) and those from the FREEDOM placebo group had 2 years of denosumab exposure (cross-over group). We report results for bone turnover markers (BTMs), bone mineral density (BMD), fractures rates, and safety. A total of 4550 women enrolled in the extension (2343 long-term; 2207 cross-over). Reductions in BTMs were maintained (long-term group) or occurred rapidly (cross-over group) following denosumab administration. In the long-term group, lumbar spine and total hip BMD increased further, resulting in 5-year gains of 13.7% and 7.0%, respectively. In the cross-over group, BMD increased at the lumbar spine (7.7%) and total hip (4.0%) during the 2-year denosumab treatment. Yearly fracture incidences for both groups were below rates observed in the FREEDOM placebo group and below rates projected for a "virtual untreated twin" cohort. Adverse events did not increase with long-term denosumab administration. Two adverse events in the cross-over group were adjudicated as consistent with osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). Five-year denosumab treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis maintained BTM reduction and increased BMD, and was associated with low fracture rates and a favorable risk/benefit profile. (c) 2011 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 45 (12 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailImplications for fracture healing of current and new osteoporosis treatments: an ESCEO consensus paper
Goldhahn, J.; Feron, J.M.; Kanis, J.A. et al

in Calcified Tissue International (2012), 90

Osteoporotic fracture healing is critical to clinical outcome in terms of functional recovery, morbidity, and quality of life. Osteoporosis treatments may affect bone repair, so insights into their impact ... [more ▼]

Osteoporotic fracture healing is critical to clinical outcome in terms of functional recovery, morbidity, and quality of life. Osteoporosis treatments may affect bone repair, so insights into their impact on fracture healing are important. We reviewed the current evidence for an impact of osteoporosis treatments on bone repair. Treatment with bisphosphonate in experimental models is associated with increased callus size and mineralization, reduced callus remodeling, and improved mechanical strength. Local and systemic bisphosphonate treatment may improve implant fixation. No negative impact on fracture healing has been observed, even after major surgery or when administered immediately after fracture. Experimental data for denosumab and raloxifene suggest no negative implications for bone repair. The extensive experimental results for teriparatide indicate increased callus formation, improved biomechanical strength, and greater external callus volume and total bone mineral content and density. Case reports and a randomized trial have produced mixed results but are consistent with a positive impact of teriparatide on clinical fracture healing. Studies with strontium ranelate in models of fracture healing indicate that it is associated with improved bone microstructure, callus volume, and biomechanical properties. Finally, there is experimental evidence for a beneficial effect of some of the agents currently being developed for osteoporosis, notably sclerostin antibody and DKK1 antibody. There is currently no evidence that osteoporosis treatments are detrimental for bone repair and some promising experimental evidence for positive effects on healing, notably for agents with a bone-forming mode of action, which may translate into therapeutic applications. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailManagement of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis
Rizzoli, R.; Adachi, J. D.; Cooper, C. et al

in Calcified Tissue International (2012), 91(4), 225-243

This review summarizes the available evidence-based data that form the basis for therapeutic intervention and covers the current status of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) management, regulatory ... [more ▼]

This review summarizes the available evidence-based data that form the basis for therapeutic intervention and covers the current status of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) management, regulatory requirements, and risk-assessment options. Glucocorticoids are known to cause bone loss and fractures, yet many patients receiving or initiating glucocorticoid therapy are not appropriately evaluated and treated. An European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis workshop was convened to discuss GIOP management and to provide a report by a panel of experts. An expert panel reviewed the available studies that discussed approved therapeutic agents, focusing on randomized and controlled clinical trials reporting on bone mineral density and/or fracture risk of at least 48 weeks' duration. There is no evidence that GIOP and postmenopausal osteoporosis respond differently to treatments. The FRAX algorithm can be adjusted according to glucocorticoid dose. Available antiosteoporotic therapies such as bisphosphonates and teriparatide are efficacious in GIOP management. Several other agents approved for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis may become available for GIOP. It is advised to stop antiosteoporotic treatment after glucocorticoid cessation, unless the patient remains at increased risk of fracture. Calcium and vitamin D supplementation as an osteoporosis-prevention measure is less effective than specific antiosteoporotic treatment. Fracture end-point studies and additional studies investigating specific subpopulations (pediatric, premenopausal, or elderly patients) would strengthen the evidence base and facilitate the development of intervention thresholds and treatment guidelines. © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 34 (6 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRelationship between changes in bone mineral density and incidence of fracture with 6 years of Denosumab treatment
Bolognese, MA; Miller, PD; Reginster, Jean-Yves ULiege et al

in Arthritis and Rheumatism (2012), 64(S10), 847

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTreatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis for six years with denosumab : three-year results from the freedom extension
Chapurlat, R; Papapoulos, S; Brown, JP et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2012), 71(3), 588

Detailed reference viewed: 53 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailFive-year Denosumab treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the first two years of the freedom trial extension
Papapoulos, S.; Man, Z.; Mellstrom, D. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2011, March), 22(Suppl.1), 107-108

Detailed reference viewed: 106 (6 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDenosumab therapy in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis : results from the first two years of the freedom trial extension
Bone, H. G.; Chapurlat, R.; Brandi, M. L. et al

in Endocrine Reviews (2011), 32

Detailed reference viewed: 48 (1 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailSafety observations from denosumab long-term extension and cross-over studies in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis
Bone, H. G.; Chapurlat, R.; Libanati, C. et al

in Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (2011), 26(S1), 22-23

Detailed reference viewed: 82 (4 ULiège)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTraitement durant cinq ans par denosumab (DMAb) chez des femmes ménopausées ostéoporotiques : résultats d'efficacité des deux premières années de l'extension de l'essai FREEDOM
Chapurlat, R.; Roux, C.; Papapoulos, S. et al

in Revue du Rhumatisme (2011), 78(S5), 214

Detailed reference viewed: 15 (1 ULiège)