Advertisement

EPMA Journal

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 21–29 | Cite as

Value of pre-operative CTX serum levels in the prediction of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ): a retrospective clinical study

  • Martin Salgueiro
  • Michael Stribos
  • Li Fang Zhang
  • Mark Stevens
  • Mohamed E. Awad
  • Mohammed ElsalantyEmail author
Research
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

Objectives

The low incidence yet severe presentation of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) makes it necessary to develop reliable predictive and preventive strategies. This study explored the value of pre-operative carboxy-terminal collagen crosslinks (CTX) serum level in the prediction of osteonecrosis-related complications in patients on bisphosphonate therapy.

Patients and methods

We examined patient records over 4 years (a total of 137 patients). Biometric data were extracted, in addition to type of treatment, CTX levels, drug holiday, procedure, complications, and co-morbidities. Non-parametric Wilcoxon two-sample tests were used to test the effect of initial CTX level in IV or PO and whether it was predictive of complications. Two independent proportion tests were used for testing the two different complication incident rates before or after the drug holiday.

Results

A total of 93 patients were included in the study, of whom 88.17% were female. A total of 11 patients were receiving IV bisphosphonates at the time of initial presentation, 82 oral bisphosphonates. Out of 64 patients who underwent invasive dental procedure (IDP) before a drug holiday, eight were on IV bisphosphonates. Three patients in this group experienced osteonecrosis-related complications (37.5%). Out of the remaining 56 patients on oral bisphosphonates, four (7.14%) developed complications, significantly lower than the IV bisphosphonate group (p = 0.0364). On the other hand, of the 34 patients placed on a drug holiday prior to IDP, only one subject developed complications related to osteonecrosis. Five subjects who had operations both before and after drug holiday did not experience any complications. No statistical difference was detected in complication rates based on initial CTX level (above versus below 150 pg/ml), gender, comorbidities, or total duration of bisphosphonate treatment (p = 0.2675). The sensitivity and specificity of CTX cutoff of 150 pg/ml in predicting osteonecrosis were 37.5% and 57.7, respectively.

Conclusions

Serum levels of CTX by itself are not reliable as a predictive or preventive measure for such complications. Our data also suggested that a drug holiday of 5 months was not helpful in preventing osteonecrosis-related complications in patients on intravenous bisphosphonates. Further studies are urgently needed to develop adequate predictive and preventive strategies of MRONJ.

Keywords

Bisphosphonates Osteonecrosis Drug holiday Osteoporosis treatment Prediction of complications 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethical approval

All investigations conformed to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and were performed with approval by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Augusta University (Pro00001995; 5/3/2014).

References

  1. 1.
    Zou P, Li Z, Ruan M. Experimental study on the effect of Chinese traditional medicine "bone growth fluid" in the change of trace elements in bone lengthening area. Zhongguo Xiu. Fu Chong.Jian.Wai Ke. Za Zhi. 1998;12(5):315–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khosla S, Shane E. Addressing the crisis in the treatment of osteoporosis: a path forward. J Bone Miner Res. 2016;31:1485–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Khosla S, Shane E. A crisis in the treatment of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2016;31(8):1485–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kourou K, Exarchos TP, Exarchos KP, Karamouzis MV, Fotiadis DI. Machine learning applications in cancer prognosis and prediction. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015;13:8–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hayes DF, Markus HS, Leslie RD, Topol EJ. Personalized medicine: risk prediction, targeted therapies and mobile health technology. BMC Med. 2014;12:37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marx RE, Cillo JE Jr, Ulloa JJ. Oral bisphosphonate-induced osteonecrosis: risk factors, prediction of risk using serum CTX testing, prevention, and treatment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(12):2397–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim YH, Lee HK, Song SI, Lee JK. Drug holiday as a prognostic factor of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;40(5):206–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lam DK, Sándor GK, Holmes HI, Evans AW, Clokie CM. A review of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws and its management. J Can Dent Assoc. 2007;73(5):417–22.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee CY, Suzuki JB. CTX biochemical marker of bone metabolism. Is it a reliable predictor of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws after surgery? Part II: a prospective clinical study. Implant Dent. 2010;19(1):29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Friedlander AH, Hazboun RC. Bisphosphonate therapy: C-terminal telopeptide testing facilitates devising more accurate consent for extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(3):377–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Friedlander AH, Chang TI, Hazboun RC, Garrett NR. High C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide levels are associated with a minimal risk of osteonecrosis of the jaws in patients taking oral bisphosphonates and having exodontia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(9):1735–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baim S, Miller PD. Assessing the clinical utility of serum CTX in postmenopausal osteoporosis and its use in predicting risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw. J Bone Miner Res. 2009;24(4):561–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ruggiero S, et al. Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw—2014 Update, in Special Committee on Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws. 2014, American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS): http://www.aaoms.org/docs/position_papers/mronj_position_paper.pdf?pdf=MRONJ-Position-Paper.
  14. 14.
    AAOM clinical practice statement: Subject: The use of serum C-terminal telopeptide cross-link of type 1 collagen (CTX) testing in predicting risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017;124(4):367–8.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosen LS, Gordon D, Kaminski M, Howell A, Belch A, Mackey J, et al. Zoledronic acid versus pamidronate in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients with breast cancer or osteolytic lesions of multiple myeloma: a phase III, double-blind, comparative trial. Cancer J. 2001;7(5):377–87.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yeh HS, Berenson JR. Treatment for myeloma bone disease. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(20 Pt 2):6279s–84s.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rachner TD, Platzbecker U, Felsenberg D, Hofbauer LC. Osteonecrosis of the jaw after osteoporosis therapy with denosumab following long-term bisphosphonate therapy. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013;88(4):418–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Adler RA, El-Hajj Fuleihan G, Bauer DC, Camacho PM, Clarke BL, Clines GA, et al. Managing osteoporosis in patients on long-term bisphosphonate treatment: report of a task force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. J Bone Miner Res. 2016;31(10):1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Golubnitschaja O, Costigliola V, EPMA. General report & recommendations in predictive, preventive and personalised medicine 2012: white paper of the European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine. EPMA J. 2012;3(1):14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Golubnitschaja O, Baban B, Boniolo G, Wang W, Bubnov R, Kapalla M, et al. Medicine in the early twenty-first century: paradigm and anticipation—EPMA position paper 2016. EPMA J. 2016;7:23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Al-Khaldi A, Eliopoulos N, Martineau D, Lejeune L, Lachapelle K, Galipeau J. Postnatal bone marrow stromal cells elicit a potent VEGF-dependent neoangiogenic response in vivo. Gene Ther. 2003;10(8):621–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gajewska J, Ambroszkiewicz J, Klemarczyk W, Chełchowska M, Weker H, Szamotulska K. The effect of weight loss on body composition, serum bone markers, and adipokines in prepubertal obese children after 1-year intervention. Endocr Res. 2018;43(2):80–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Landesberg R, Woo V, Cremers S, Cozin M, Marolt D, Vunjak-Novakovic G, et al. Potential pathophysiological mechanisms in osteonecrosis of the jaw. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011;1218:62–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reid IR, Cornish J. Epidemiology and pathogenesis of osteonecrosis of the jaw. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2011;8(2):90–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim J-W, Kong KA, Kim SJ, Choi SK, Cha IH, Kim MR. Prospective biomarker evaluation in patients with osteonecrosis of the jaw who received bisphosphonates. Bone. 2013;57(1):201–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thumbigere-Math V, Michalowicz BS, Hughes PJ, Basi DL, Tsai ML, Swenson KK, et al. Serum markers of bone turnover and angiogenesis in patients with bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw after discontinuation of long-term intravenous bisphosphonate therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;74(4):738–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lazarovici TS, Mesilaty-Gross S, Vered I, Pariente C, Kanety H, Givol N, et al. Serologic bone markers for predicting development of osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients receiving bisphosphonates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(9):2241–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    O'Connell JE, Ikeagwani O, Kearns GJ. A role for C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide (CTX) level to predict the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ) following oral surgery? Ir J Med Sci. 2012;181(2):237–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kim DW, Kim H, Nam W, Kim HJ, Cha IH. Machine learning to predict the occurrence of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with dental extraction: a preliminary report. Bone. 2018;116:207–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Eastell R, Hannon RA, Wenderoth D, Rodriguez-Moreno J, Sawicki A. Effect of stopping risedronate after long-term treatment on bone turnover. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(11):3367–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tsourdi E, Langdahl B, Cohen-Solal M, Aubry-Rozier B, Eriksen EF, Guañabens N, et al. Discontinuation of denosumab therapy for osteoporosis: a systematic review and position statement by ECTS. Bone. 2017;105:11–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mignot MA, Taisne N, Legroux I, Cortet B, Paccou J. Bisphosphonate drug holidays in postmenopausal osteoporosis: effect on clinical fracture risk. Osteoporos Int. 2017;28(12):3431–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hokugo A, Sun S, Park S, McKenna CE, Nishimura I. Equilibrium-dependent bisphosphonate interaction with crystalline bone mineral explains anti-resorptive pharmacokinetics and prevalence of osteonecrosis of the jaw in rats. Bone. 2013;53(1):59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Elsayed R, Abraham P, Awad ME, Kurago Z, Baladhandayutham B, Whitford GM, et al. Removal of matrix-bound zoledronate prevents post-extraction osteonecrosis of the jaw by rescuing osteoclast function. Bone. 2018;110:141–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yuan H, Niu LN, Jiao K, Pei DD, Pramanik C, Li JY, et al. Revival of nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate-induced inhibition of osteoclastogenesis and osteoclast function by water-soluble microfibrous borate glass. Acta Biomater. 2016;31:312–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pramanik C, Sood P, Niu LN, Yuan H, Ghoshal S, Henderson W, et al. A mechanistic study of the interaction of water-soluble borate glass with apatite-bound heterocyclic nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. Acta Biomater. 2016;31:339–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kinkorova J. Biobanks in the era of personalized medicine: objectives, challenges, and innovation: overview. EPMA J. 2015;7:4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kinkorova J, Topolcan O. Biobanks in horizon 2020: sustainability and attractive perspectives. EPMA J. 2018;9(4):345–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association for Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine (EPMA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Dental College of GeorgiaAugusta UniversityAugustaUSA
  2. 2.Medical Student, Medical College of GeorgiaAugusta UniversityAugustaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Medical College of GeorgiaAugusta UniversityAugustaUSA
  4. 4.Department of Oral Biology and Diagnostic Sciences, Dental College of GeorgiaAugusta UniversityAugustaUSA
  5. 5.Department of Oral Biology, Dental College of DentistryAugusta UniversityAugustaUSA

Personalised recommendations