Warning: fopen(/home/virtual/enm-kes/journal/upload/ip_log/ip_log_2025-07.txt): failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 100 Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 101 Osteoporosis Management after the Occurrence of Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A 13-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center
Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Endocrinol Metab : Endocrinology and Metabolism

clarivate
OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Endocrinol Metab > Ahead-of print > Article
Original Article
Osteoporosis Management after the Occurrence of Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A 13-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center
Chun Ho Wong1*orcid, Kimberly Hang Tsoi1*orcid, Jingya Jane Pu2*orcid, Nancy Su Jiang1, Stacey Sheung Yi Chan1, Connie Hong Nin Loong1, Xincheng Zou1, Carol Ho Yi Fong1, Eunice Ka Hong Leung1, Alan Chun Hong Lee1, Chi Ho Lee1, Kathryn Choon Beng Tan1, Yu Cho Woo1, Yu-xiong Su2orcid, David Tak Wai Lui1orcid

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3803/EnM.2024.2262
Published online: June 13, 2025

1Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

2Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Corresponding authors: David Tak Wai Lui. Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong Tel: +852-22554704, Fax: +852-28162187, E-mail: dtwlui@hku.hk
Yu-xiong Su. Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, 34 Hospital Road, Hong Kong Tel: +852-28590262, Fax: +852-28575570, E-mail: richsu@hku.hk
*These authors contributed equally to this work.
• Received: December 2, 2024   • Revised: February 17, 2025   • Accepted: March 26, 2025

Copyright © 2025 Korean Endocrine Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 450 Views
  • 104 Download
  • Background
    We investigated osteoporosis management strategies and clinical outcomes following the occurrence of medicationrelated osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ).
  • Methods
    We retrospectively studied individuals diagnosed with MRONJ during osteoporosis treatment who were managed in the Osteoporosis Center or the Oral Maxillofacial Surgery & Dental Unit at Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong between 2010 and 2022. We examined subsequent osteoporosis management plans, fracture events, and bone mineral density (BMD).
  • Results
    Thirty-six individuals were included (mean age, 78.5 years; 94.4% women). The estimated prevalence of MRONJ was 0.26%. All patients had been exposed to bisphosphonates, and seven had also received denosumab before MRONJ. Following MRONJ, only 14 individuals continued anti-osteoporosis treatment, a decision influenced by a higher fracture probability at MRONJ onset. The most common regimen was a teriparatide-raloxifene sequence (n=8): three patients achieved stable BMD, four achieved improving BMD, and one exhibited a mixed response. The patient with a mixed BMD response had also been treated with denosumab. Six patients sustained incident fractures after MRONJ, and these patients had lower BMD T-scores than their counterparts. Two patients experienced MRONJ recurrence, which was associated with the resumption of bisphosphonate or denosumab therapy after MRONJ. These patients had higher BMD T-scores than those who did not experience MRONJ recurrence.
  • Conclusion
    MRONJ is challenging because high fracture risk necessitates discontinuation of antiresorptive agents. Teriparatide followed by raloxifene may be a reasonable regimen. Individualised decisions in osteoporosis management after MRONJ are required to balance fracture risk reduction with minimising MRONJ recurrence.
Osteoporosis is a global health issue that is becoming increasingly prevalent in ageing societies. It is characterised by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration, leading to fragility fractures [1] that are associated with significant morbidity and mortality [2]. A range of anti-osteoporosis therapies with proven efficacy in reducing fractures are available, and these are classified as antiresorptive or osteoanabolic agents [3]. Notably, antiresorptive agents such as bisphosphonates and denosumab specifically inhibit osteoclastic activity, reducing bone resorption and thereby lowering fracture risk [3]. Although antiresorptive agents are the cornerstone of osteoporosis treatment, they are associated with rare but potentially serious side effects, including medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), which impairs quality of life and causes significant morbidity [4]. MRONJ refers to the persistence of necrotic bone lesions in the maxillofacial region for at least 8 weeks [5]. The incidence of MRONJ among patients treated with bisphosphonates for osteoporosis has been reported to range from 0.02% to 0.05%, and for denosumab, from 0.04% to 0.3% [5]. There is some suggestion that MRONJ is more prevalent among Asians [6,7]. The risk of MRONJ associated with antiresorptive agents must be balanced against the risk of fragility fractures if left untreated. Given the rarity of MRONJ, it is widely believed that the fear of MRONJ alone should not impede the treatment of osteoporosis [5].
In the unfortunate event of MRONJ, there are few reports regarding subsequent osteoporosis management. Although reducing fracture risk in these patients remains a priority, there is concern regarding the recurrence of MRONJ upon resumption of bisphosphonate or denosumab therapy. Regarding osteoanabolic agents, rare cases of MRONJ have been reported with romosozumab, although these appear to be even rarer than those associated with bisphosphonates and denosumab [8]. This limitation restricts the role of romosozumab in post-MRONJ osteoporosis management. Conversely, the use of teriparatide after MRONJ is not without its challenges. In patients who develop denosumab-related MRONJ, switching from denosumab to teriparatide may lead to progressive reductions in total bone mineral density (BMD), cortical thickness, and overall bone strength [9]. However, discontinuing denosumab without subsequent therapy carries the risk of rebound vertebral fractures [10]. These factors contribute to the complexity of post-MRONJ osteoporosis management, particularly in cases related to denosumab. Here, we present a 13-year case series of patients who developed MRONJ during osteoporosis treatment, with a focus on their subsequent osteoporosis management and skeletal outcomes, to inform our clinical practice.
Study design
This retrospective cohort study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Hong Kong/Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster (UW 24-348), and the need for informed consent was waived due to its retrospective nature.
Setting
Data were collected from individuals managed in the Osteoporosis Center [11] or the Oral Maxillofacial Surgery & Dental Unit at Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2022. Data collection was concluded on June 11, 2024.
Participants
All individuals diagnosed with MRONJ while receiving treatment for osteoporosis and managed at the Osteoporosis Center [11] or the Oral Maxillofacial Surgery & Dental Unit at Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2022 were included.
Exclusion criteria were: (1) absence of information regarding the anti-osteoporosis treatment regimen before MRONJ; (2) follow-up of less than 1 year after MRONJ; and (3) treatment with antiresorptive agents for malignancy.
Osteoporosis management at the Osteoporosis Center during the inclusion period adhered to the 2013 Osteoporosis Society of Hong Kong Guideline for Clinical Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis [12]. Abaloparatide and romosozumab were not available during the inclusion period. The management of MRONJ in the Oral Maxillofacial Surgery & Dental Unit followed the guidelines outlined by the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS) [13].
Variables
Oral surgeons diagnosed MRONJ according to the recommendations of the AAOMS [5]. The criteria included: (1) the presence of exposed bone in the maxillofacial region for at least 8 weeks; (2) current or previous treatment with antiresorptive therapy; and (3) no history of radiation therapy to the jaws or evidence of metastatic disease to the jaws.
We collected demographic and anthropometric data (age, sex, body mass index [BMI]), initial indications for osteoporosis treatment, history of osteoporosis treatment prior to MRONJ, clinical risk factors for osteoporosis for calculating Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®), dental extractions before MRONJ, and the MRONJ treatment strategy. The clinical risk factors for osteoporosis were defined according to the original FRAX® definitions. Specifically, smoking was defined as current smoking, and alcohol use was defined as consumption of at least 3 units per day. Diabetes was defined as an HbA1c ≥ 6.5%, a previous physician diagnosis of diabetes, or the use of antidiabetic medications. Prevalent fracture was defined as the presence of major osteoporotic fractures, including those of the spine, forearm, hip, or shoulder. The FRAX® algorithms estimate the 10-year probability of hip fracture and major osteoporotic fractures (clinical spine, forearm, hip, or shoulder fractures). The Charlson comorbidity index was calculated. Following the occurrence of MRONJ, the treatment strategy employed was documented. The outcomes of interest included: (1) the decision regarding anti-osteoporosis management; (2) MRONJ recurrence; and (3) skeletal outcomes (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry [DXA] measurements and incident fractures).
Statistical analyses
All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27 for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results were reported as means±standard deviations, medians with interquartile ranges (IQR), or numbers with percentages, as appropriate. Comparisons of characteristics between patients who continued versus discontinued osteoporosis management were performed using the t test or the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-square or Fisher exact test for categorical variables. A similar approach was used to compare individuals who did and did not sustain fragility fractures after MRONJ, those who did and did not experience MRONJ recurrence, and cases of bisphosphonate- versus denosumab-related MRONJ. In all analyses, two-sided P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.
To estimate the prevalence of MRONJ among patients treated for osteoporosis with antiresorptive agents, we considered patients who might have received anti-osteoporosis treatments in other hospitals and were subsequently referred to our center for further management following MRONJ. Accordingly, we identified all individuals who received antiresorptive treatment for osteoporosis (excluding those who received bisphosphonates or denosumab for malignancy management) in the referral catchment area between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2022 using the territory-wide anonymised electronic health database of the Hospital Authority of Hong Kong–the Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System (CDARS). The Hospital Authority is the sole statutory public healthcare provider in Hong Kong (with a population of over 7.5 million), offering care for the majority of patients with chronic diseases due to high government subsidies. CDARS captures nearly all inpatient and outpatient data, including patient demographics, diagnoses, procedures, laboratory results, medication prescriptions and dosages, clinic attendance, hospital admissions, and mortality. Using CDARS, several high-quality, large population-based studies related to chronic diseases, including diabetes and osteoporosis, have been published [14,15]. The prevalence of MRONJ was calculated by dividing the number of MRONJ cases identified in this series by the number of patients exposed to antiresorptive therapy for osteoporosis during the same period.
Experiences of our osteoporosis center
During the inclusion period, 2,677 individuals (88.6% female) attended clinic visits at our osteoporosis center. Among them, 2,089 individuals (91.3% female) received anti-osteoporosis medication for fracture prevention: 1,556 received oral bisphosphonates (of whom 92.5% received alendronate, 5.4% received risedronate, and 4.7% received ibandronate), 978 received subcutaneous denosumab, and 233 received intravenous zoledronic acid. No patient received combination therapy (i.e., concurrent administration of two types of antiresorptive therapy). However, 656 individuals received more than one type of antiresorptive therapy during the inclusion period (538 received both denosumab and oral bisphosphonates; 62 received denosumab and intravenous zoledronic acid; 100 received oral bisphosphonates and intravenous zoledronic acid; and 22 received denosumab, oral bisphosphonates, and intravenous zoledronic acid).
Estimated prevalence of MRONJ during treatment for osteoporosis
In this study, 36 individuals (all Chinese) who developed MRONJ during osteoporosis treatment were identified and included. During the same inclusion period, 13,651 individuals receiving antiresorptive treatments for osteoporosis were identified in the referral catchment area. Thus, the estimated prevalence of MRONJ among patients treated for osteoporosis was 0.26% (36/13,651).
Characteristics of the 36 patients who developed MRONJ while on-treatment for osteoporosis
Baseline characteristics are summarised in Table 1. The mean age was 78.5±9.0 years, and most (94.4%) were women. The mean BMI was 22.8±4.0 kg/m2, and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 4 (IQR, 4 to 6). Fifty-two percent of the patients had prevalent fragility fractures at the time of osteoporosis diagnosis. Three patients were on steroids (patients no. 4, 16, and 19, receiving 5 mg prednisolone daily at the time of MRONJ). None were on antiangiogenic medications or tyrosine kinase inhibitors. At the time of MRONJ, the mean BMD T-score remained low—within the osteoporotic range for hip BMD—and the mean 10-year probabilities of major osteoporotic and hip fractures, as calculated by FRAX, were greater than 20% and 3%, respectively, indicating a generally high fracture risk in this cohort. The sites of MRONJ were recorded for 23 patients: 16 (69.6%) occurred in the mandibular region, six (26.1%) in the maxillary region, and one (4.3%) in both the mandibular and maxillary regions.
All patients had been exposed to bisphosphonates before MRONJ. Two cases were associated with intravenous zoledronic acid. Among the 34 individuals exposed to oral bisphosphonates, 28 received alendronate, six received ibandronate, and two received risedronate. Twenty-seven patients (79.4%) had exposure for 4 or more years (a duration associated with higher risks of MRONJ) [16,17], and three were even treated for >10 years (patients no. 31, 32 and 35). Notably, among the seven patients with denosumab exposure before MRONJ, all had prior bisphosphonate exposure. All seven patients who received denosumab, except one, had short-term exposure (≤2 years).
Fifteen patients (41.7%) had dental extraction identified as the trigger of MRONJ. While one patient underwent dental extraction only 1 month after the last dose of denosumab (patient no. 12), some had withdrawal of bisphosphonate 3 months before dental extraction (patients no. 21, 23, and 24) and one even had bisphosphonates off already for 2 years when dental extraction took place (patient no. 25).
Factors associated with continuation of anti-osteoporosis treatment post-MRONJ
Following MRONJ, treating physicians thoroughly discussed the benefits and risks of continuing anti-osteoporosis treatment with the patients, after which a joint decision was made. Among all 36 patients, only 14 (38.9%) chose to continue treatment. Those who chose to continue treatment had a higher 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture at the time of MRONJ diagnosis (28.8% [95% confidence interval, 24.2% to 33.3%] vs. 21.3% [95% confidence interval, 16.2% to 26.5%], P=0.035) compared to those who discontinued treatment (Table 1). It is important to note that decisions to discontinue anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ are often individualised, taking into account patients’ age, comorbidities, and personal preferences; however, statistical analyses did not identify age or comorbidities as determinants of treatment continuation in the current cohort. A review of clinical notes suggested that, in some cases, patients who decided against continuing treatment were influenced by a fear of further adverse events from subsequent anti-osteoporosis therapy.
Post-MRONJ outcomes: anti-osteoporosis treatment regime, fragility fractures, and MRONJ recurrence
Among the 14 patients who continued treatment, the most common regimen was teriparatide administered for 1.5 to 2 years (n=8): seven subsequently transitioned to raloxifene, while one switched to denosumab. A less common regimen included strontium (n=3), which was later discontinued when the medication was withdrawn from the market due to its association with cardiovascular risks [18]. Notably, patient no. 15, who was switched to denosumab by a private practitioner after strontium was discontinued, developed MRONJ recurrence when dental extraction was performed 3 months after the last denosumab injection. Similarly, patient no. 4, who resumed oral bisphosphonate therapy following resolution of the initial MRONJ episode, experienced MRONJ recurrence after a further 5 years of treatment.
At a median follow-up of 54 months (IQR, 29.5 to 94.5), six patients (16.7%) sustained incident fragility fractures following the initial MRONJ episode. There was no significant difference in the rate of incident fragility fractures between patients who continued anti-osteoporosis treatment and those who did not (3 [21.4%] vs. 3 [13.6%], respectively; P=0.658). The subsequent changes in BMD after MRONJ are summarised in Table 2 and Fig. 1. Twenty-nine patients had valid BMD measurements of the lumbar spine or hip at the time of MRONJ, and 21 of these underwent reassessment DXA. Unsurprisingly, patients who did not continue anti-osteoporosis treatment experienced a decline in BMD upon reassessment, particularly as the effects of bisphosphonates waned. Notably, one patient (patient no. 14) who received a single dose of denosumab immediately before MRONJ experienced BMD deterioration as early as 6 months after the event, underscoring the need for timely subsequent anti-osteoporosis treatment following denosumab discontinuation (in contrast to bisphosphonate therapy). Among the three patients who continued treatment with strontium, two (patients no. 1 and 15) underwent reassessment and demonstrated stable BMD over subsequent years. Of the eight patients treated with sequential teriparatide-raloxifene therapy (patients no. 12, 17, 23, 25, 26, 28, 30, and 36), three achieved stable BMD, four experienced improved BMD, and one had a mixed response with improved lumbar spine BMD but decreased total hip BMD. Interestingly, the patient with the mixed BMD response had also been treated with denosumab in addition to oral bisphosphonates. Among the remaining three patients who were restarted on bisphosphonate (patient no. 4) or denosumab (patients no. 16 and 29) after MRONJ, notably, one patient (patient no. 4) experienced a recurrence of MRONJ after a further 5 years of oral bisphosphonate treatment.
We performed several comparisons to identify potential factors associated with various clinical outcomes. First, individuals who did and did not develop incident fractures after MRONJ were compared (Table 3). Those who developed incident fractures tended to have a poorer fracture risk profile, as indicated by FRAX scores and BMD T-scores; however, these comparisons did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the small sample size. Secondly, individuals who did and did not experience MRONJ recurrence were compared (Table 4). Those who developed MRONJ recurrence had significantly higher BMD T-scores within the osteopenic range (–1.2±0.4 vs. –2.6±0.8, P=0.030). There was no association between fragility fractures after MRONJ and MRONJ recurrence (P=0.193). Thirdly, comparisons between individuals who developed bisphosphonaterelated and denosumab-related MRONJ (Table 5) revealed that bisphosphonate-related MRONJ was more likely to be managed surgically (26 [86.7%] vs. 2 [33.3%], P=0.014).
Our study examined osteoporosis management in a series of Chinese patients who developed MRONJ while receiving antiresorptive agents for osteoporosis—a subject that is less well described in the literature. Continuation of anti-osteoporosis therapy is often necessary in these patients, given their persistently high risk of subsequent fractures. Administration of teriparatide followed by raloxifene appears to be a feasible option after MRONJ related to either bisphosphonates or denosumab, since resuming antiresorptive therapy may precipitate MRONJ recurrence.
The inclusion of only 36 patients over a 13-year period underscores the rarity of MRONJ, with our study estimating its prevalence at 0.26%. We were unable to further delineate the prevalence attributable to bisphosphonates versus denosumab. Our reported prevalence represents the best estimate based on the available data from the territory’s electronic health records. A slight overestimation cannot be entirely excluded, as some patients may have been prescribed antiresorptive therapies in the private sector and thus not captured if they have never attended services under the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. Nonetheless, our estimate is reasonably consistent with the literature, which reports a risk of MRONJ of approximately 0.05% for oral bisphosphonates and 0.04% to 0.3% for denosumab in the context of osteoporosis treatment [5]. A recent study in Taiwan even reported a lower risk of MRONJ with denosumab compared to oral bisphosphonates (1.47 per 1,000 person-years vs. 2.49 per 1,000 person-years, respectively) [19]. In line with these findings, patients in our case series were predominantly exposed to bisphosphonates.
In accordance with existing literature, MRONJ in our series most commonly occurred in the mandibular region, and dental extraction was identified as the triggering event in 41.7% of cases. Previous reports have noted that dental extraction contributes to MRONJ in up to 60% of cases [20]. Organisations including the AAOMS have issued position statements addressing the risks of MRONJ following invasive dental procedures [21], and it cannot be overemphasised that maintaining good oral hygiene is essential for reducing MRONJ risk [21]. Nevertheless, if a patient requires an invasive dental procedure such as extraction, some professional societies in Italy [22], Japan [23], and Korea [16], have adopted the practice of a drug holiday for bisphosphonate users—stopping bisphosphonates approximately 2 months before dental treatment and resuming only after the wound has healed. However, the AAOMS remains inconclusive regarding the efficacy of such drug holidays in reducing MRONJ risk [5]. A 2024 review summarised the various international guidelines and suggested considerable variability among clinicians in the management and prevention of MRONJ [24]. In fact, several patients in our series developed MRONJ despite discontinuing bisphosphonates 3 months prior to dental extraction. Although a drug holiday may not fully mitigate MRONJ risk in bisphosphonate users due to the drug’s long half-life, evidence indicates that temporarily stopping bisphosphonates for at least 1 to 2 weeks before oral surgery can reduce direct toxicity on the keratinocytes of the oral mucosa [17]. In our comparison of bisphosphonate-versus denosumab-related MRONJ, patients with bisphosphonate-related MRONJ were more likely to undergo surgical treatment. However, given the relatively small sample size and the absence of a bisphosphonate-naïve denosumab cohort, further studies are required to validate these findings.
MRONJ poses a significant challenge for subsequent osteoporosis treatment, particularly in cases of denosumab-related MRONJ [25]. As demonstrated in our case series, the resumption of antiresorptive therapy may lead to MRONJ recurrence. Individuals who develop MRONJ may have inherent predispositions, such as genetic factors, that increase the risk of recurrence [4]. Patients with bisphosphonate-related MRONJ may discontinue bisphosphonates while retaining the BMD gains achieved from prior treatment [26], as reflected in our practice of prescribing a ‘bisphosphonate holiday.’ Conversely, patients with denosumab-related MRONJ may lose BMD gains—returning to pre-treatment baseline values after 1 to 2 years off treatment— and face a risk of multiple vertebral fractures upon denosumab discontinuation [10]. Therefore, especially in denosumab- related MRONJ, it is imperative to consider alternative antiosteoporosis therapies to optimise patients’ fragility fracture risk profiles. For atypical femoral fractures, the European Calcified Tissue Society recommends a regimen of teriparatide for 2 years, followed by raloxifene, as one feasible strategy [27]. However, applying this regimen in the context of MRONJ is challenging because denosumab accounts for a significant proportion of MRONJ cases [25]. Denosumab and teriparatide transitions in postmenopausal osteoporosis (the DATA-Switch study) revealed a transient or progressive loss of BMD when switching from denosumab to teriparatide [28]. Specifically, in the lumbar spine, a transient drop in BMD occurs during the initial 6 months of teriparatide treatment, followed by an increase over the subsequent 18 months to levels exceeding baseline; at the femoral neck and total hip, the BMD decline persists for the first 12 months, with improvement in the following 12 months to return to baseline levels. In contrast, the distal radius exhibits a progressive BMD loss throughout the 2-year course of teriparatide treatment. In our cohort, patient no. 12 demonstrated this phenomenon, with an increase in lumbar spine BMD but a decrease in total hip BMD. The remaining seven patients treated with a teriparatide to raloxifene sequence maintained stable or improved BMD. Conversely, raloxifene alone may be insufficient to maintain BMD after denosumab discontinuation, as suggested by the recent comparison of alendronate and raloxifene after denosumab (CARD) study comparing alendronate and raloxifene following denosumab [29]. Thus, immediate transition to raloxifene after denosumab-related MRONJ may be inferior to teriparatide, particularly for patients who remain at high fracture risk at the time of MRONJ. Rare cases of MRONJ have also been reported in the landmark FRActure study in postmenopausal woMen with ostEoporosis (FRAME) study of romosozumab [8], pending further clarification of the causal relationship between romosozumab and MRONJ [30], romosozumab is unlikely to be the optimal choice for osteoporosis management post-MRONJ. Our cohort showed no significant difference in post-MRONJ anti-osteoporosis treatment patterns between bisphosphonate-related and denosumab-related MRONJ.
Comparisons between patients with and without fragility fractures after MRONJ, as well as between those with and without MRONJ recurrence, support an individualised approach to osteoporosis management post-MRONJ. While patients with high fracture risk, as indicated by low BMD T-scores, should be offered appropriate anti-osteoporosis therapy, overly aggressive treatment—especially when BMD T-scores are in the osteopenic range or higher—should be avoided.
We present our 13-year experience from a tertiary referral center in managing osteoporosis among individuals who developed MRONJ. Our study largely reaffirms existing knowledge regarding the medications and risk factors associated with MRONJ. We also demonstrated the feasibility of using subcutaneous teriparatide followed by oral raloxifene post-MRONJ, and we reported the outcomes in these patients. However, our results should be interpreted in light of several limitations. First, the sample size was relatively small. Second, because our study cohort consisted exclusively of Chinese individuals, the results may not be generalisable to other ethnicities. Given that MRONJ prevalence may vary by ethnicity [6], broader studies in other populations are necessary. Third, detailed information on oral health was unavailable, particularly in cases where dental extraction was not the triggering event for MRONJ; these cases were presumably associated with dental or periodontal infections [17]. Furthermore, we had limited data regarding oral hygiene practices and dental follow-up, although evidence supports the role of preventive dental measures, such as professional cleaning, in potentially mitigating MRONJ risk [24]. Fourth, all included patients had prior bisphosphonate exposure, so it remains unclear whether these results apply to bisphosphonatenaïve patients with denosumab-related MRONJ. Fifth, as inherent in retrospective studies, the varying time points of follow-up BMD measurements after MRONJ make it challenging to draw quantitative comparisons of treatment-specific effects, and residual biases cannot be entirely excluded. Lastly, FRAX was used as a proxy for fracture risk in patients undergoing antiresorptive therapy. We acknowledge that FRAX was originally designed for treatment-naïve patients; nevertheless, studies suggest that on-treatment FRAX can also be used for fracture risk stratification, potentially guiding decisions regarding continued treatment or treatment withdrawal [31].

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conception or design: Y.S., D.T.W.L. Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: C.H.W., K.H.T., J.J.P., N.S.J., S.S.Y.C., C.H.N.L., X.Z., C.H.Y.F., D.T.W.L. Drafting the work or revising: C.H.W., K.H.T., J.J.P., E.K.H.L., A.C.H.L., C.H.L., K. C.B.T., Y.C.W., Y.S., D.T.W.L. Final approval of the manuscript: Y.S., D.T.W.L.

Fig. 1.
Summary of clinical outcomes of the 36 patients who developed medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw (MRONJ) during treatment for osteoporosis. Among the 36 patients, 14 continued anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ and 22 discontinued anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ. (A) It describes the subsequent anti-osteoporosis treatment regime and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) (if available). Patient no. 4 developed recurrence of MRONJ while on oral bisphosphonates requiring bisphosphonate discontinuation, and subsequently developed incident vertebral fracture. Patient no. 15 developed recurrence of MRONJ related to denosumab started 4 years after strontium was discontinued. Three patients developed fragility fractures (patients no. 3, 4, 7). (B) It describes the clinical course of patients who discontinued anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ. Patients no. 6, 9, 11 developed incident fragility fractures.
enm-2024-2262f1.jpg
Table 1.
Comparison between Patients Who Continued and Discontinued Anti-Osteoporosis Treatment after Experiencing Osteonecrosis of the Jaw
Variable All Continued anti-osteoporosis treatment Discontinued anti-osteoporosis treatment P value
No. of patients 36 14 22 -
Female sex 34 (94.4) 14 (100) 20 (90.9) 0.511
Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 79.1±7.6 (95% CI, 74.7–83.5) 78.2±9.9 (95% CI, 73.8–82.6) 0.776
BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 22.7±4.0 (95% CI, 20.3–25.1) (n=13) 22.8±4.1 (95% CI, 20.7–24.9) (n=17) 0.981
Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 4 (4–5.5) (5th–95th percentile 2.75–8) 4 (3–6) (5th–95th percentile 2.15–7) 0.906
Smoking 2 (5.6) 0 2 (9.1) 0.511
Alcohol 1 (2.8) 0 1 (4.5) 0.999
Diabetes 10 (27.8) 3 (21.4) 7 (31.8) 0.706
Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
 Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 7 (50.0) 12 (54.5) 0.790
 FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 21.0±11.9 (95% CI, 13.8 to 28.2) (n=13) 15.8±10.9 (95% CI, 10.1 to 21.4) (n=17) 0.223
 FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 11.1±9.4 (95% CI, 5.4 to 16.7) (n=13) 7.9±7.6 (95% CI, 3.9 to 11.8) (n=17) 0.307
 LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –3.2±0.9 (95% CI, –3.8 to –2.6) (n=12) –2.6±1.0 (95% CI, –3.2 to –2.1) (n=16) 0.156
 FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.6) (n=9) –3.2±0.8 (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.7) (n=11) 0.854
 TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –3.1±0.8 (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.6) (n=11) –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.3) (n=11) 0.288
Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
 Bisphosphonate-related (vs. denosumab-related) 30 (83.3) 11 (78.6) 19 (86.4) 0.658
 Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 9 (64.3) 12 (54.5) 0.563
 Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 8 (57.1) 7 (31.8) 0.133
 Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 10 (71.4) 18 (81.8) 0.683
 FRAX (MOF), % 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 28.8±7.6 (95% CI, 24.2 to 33.3) (n=13) 21.3±10.1 (95% CI, 16.2 to 26.5) (n=17) 0.035a
 FRAX (hip), % 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 16.2±7.7 (95% CI, 11.5 to 20.8) (n=13) 11.6±7.1 (95% CI, 8.0 to 15.3) (n=17) 0.106
 LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.6±0.8 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.1) (n=12) –2.1±1.0 (95% CI, –2.7 to –1.5) (n=13) 0.214
 FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.9±0.7 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=13) –2.6±0.8 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.2) (n=14) 0.293
 TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –2.5±1.0 (95% CI, –3.2 to –1.9) (n=12) –2.4±0.8 (95% CI, –2.8 to –1.9) (n=14) 0.670
 Subsequent fragility fractures 6 (16.7) 3 (21.4) 3 (13.6) 0.658

Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

ONJ, osteonecrosis of the jaw; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip; MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

a P<0.05.

Table 2.
Characteristics of Patients Who Developed Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw
No. Sex/age, yr Time of ONJ Dx Initial indication of osteoporosis treatment Site of fragility fracture Antiresorptive regimen prior to ONJ Dental extraction before ONJ Site of MRONJ ONJ treatment Post-ONJ osteoporosis treatment Follow-up duration, mo BMD T-score at ONJ Latest BMD T-score Subsequent fragility fracture Remarks
1 F/83 Jan 2010 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years N Not specified Surgical debridement Strontium for 5 years 69 LS: –2.7 LS: –3.1 N BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
FN: –2.4 FN: –2.2
TH: –2.3 TH: –1.8
(6 years post-ONJ)
2 F/81 Aug 2010 Fragility vertebral fracture L1 vertebra ALN for 6.5 years Y MD Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil 166 Nil Nil N
3 F/80 Sep 2010 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years Y MX Antibiotics Strontium 4 LS: –2.7 Nil Y Fractured pubic rami 4 months after MRONJ, died during hospitalisation
FN: –2.8
4 F/63 Nov 2010 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures; steroid-induced osteoporosis (for rheumatoid arthritis) L1-4 vertebrae ALN for 3 years Y MX Antibiotics and surgical debridement Oral BP 161 LS: –2.9 LS: –1.6 Y Recurrence of MRONJ after dental extraction after another 5 years of oral BP requiring antibiotics; started denosumab in view of incident multiple vertebral fractures; BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
FN: –2.6 FN: –2.8
TH: –1.4 TH: –1.9
(10 years post-ONJ)
5 F/72 Jan 2011 Osteopenia with high FRAX score Left proximal humerus IBN for 3 years Y Not specified Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 111 LS: –0.4 LS: 0.1 N
FN: –1.9 FN: –3.7
TH: –0.8 TH: –2.3
(sig. increase in LS, sig. decrease in TH, 9 years post-ONJ)
6 F/80 May 2012 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture L1 vertebra ALN for 3 years N (but related to dental implant 2 months prior) MD Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil 144 LS: –3.0 LS: –1.6 Y Fractured greater trochanter of right humerus 11 years after MRONJ; BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
TH: –3.7 FN: –4.1
TH: –3.8
(9 years post-ONJ)
7 F/53 Jun 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 9 months N Not specified Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 12 LS: –2.2 Nil N
FN: –3.2
TH: –1.9
8 F/85 Jun 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None RIS for 3 months then IBN for 3.75 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 73 LS: –2.0 Nil N
FN: –1.7
TH: –1.4
9 F/82 Aug 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip fracture Right hip IV ZOL for 2 doses N MD Surgical debridement Nil 111 Nil Nil Y Fractured left clavicle 5 years after MRONJ
10 F/67 Oct 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years N Not specified Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 120 LS: –3.1 LS: –3.4 N Eventually decided to start raloxifene 9 years after ONJ, sig increase in LS BMD 1 year later
FN: –2.4 FN: –3.0
TH: –2.0 TH: –1.9
(static, 10 years post-ONJ)
11 F/92 Mar 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 5.5 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 42 Nil Nil Y Fractured patella 2 years after MRONJ
12 F/65 Jul 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip and vertebral fractures Multiple vertebrae; left hip ALN for 9 years followed by 1 dose of Dmab Y (1 month after Dmab) Not specified Antibiotics Teriparatide for 2 years followed by raloxifene 109 LS: –2.4 LS: –1.7 N
FN: –2.3 FN: –2.4
TH: –1.0 TH: –1.9
(sig. increase in LS, sig. decrease in TH 9 years post-ONJ)
13 M/83 Aug 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip and vertebral fractures Right femoral neck, T12 vertebra, right proximal humerus ALN for 5 years Y (BP not stopped) Not specified Conservative Nil (patient’s preference) 95 LS: –0.9 FN: –2.8 N
FN: –2.9 TH: –1.9
TH: –2.3 DR: –2.5
(sig. increase 8 years post-ONJ)
14 F/88 Nov 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip fracture Right femoral neck RIS for 5 years then strontium for 2 years followed by 1 dose of Dmab Y (1 month after Dmab) Not specified Antibiotics Nil (patient’s preference) 27 FN: –3.0 FN: –3.7 N
TH: –3.0 TH: –3.3
(sig. decrease 6 months post-ONJ)
15 F/77 Jul 2015 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures T12 and L1 vertebrae ALN for 6 years Y MD Surgical debridement Strontium for 1.5 years 79 LS: –1.8 LS: –1.7 N Declined teriparatide
FN: –1.8 FN: –2.1 Put on Dmab another 4 years later, for a total of 2 years, had recurrence of ONJ when dental extraction was performed 3 months after last injection
TH: –0.9 TH: –1.3
(static, 7 years post-ONJ)
16 F/82 Nov 2015 BMD T-score ≤–2.5; steroid-induced osteoporosis (for rheumatoid arthritis) None ALN for 4 years Y MD Surgical debridement Teriparatide for 2 years, then denosumab 103 LS: –2.1 FN: –1.8 N BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
FN: –2.6 TH: –2.2
TH: –2.4 (7.5 years post-ONJ)
17 F/86 Dec 2015 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 5 years followed by Dmab for 1 year N Not specified Conservative Teriparatide for 2 years followed by raloxifene 61 LS: –2.7 LS: –1.1 Y Fracture of left humerus 5 years after ONJ
FN: –3.0 FN: –2.7
TH: –2.4 TH: –1.9
(Sig. increase over LS, 5 years post-ONJ)
18 F/86 Mar 2016 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Left wrist ALN for 7.5 years N MX Surgical debridement Nil (stage 4 chronic kidney disease) 42 LS: –0.7 Nil N
FN: –0.8
19 F/65 Jul 2016 Osteopenia with high FRAX score; steroid for rheumatoid arthritis None IBN for 5 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 93 Nil Nil N
20 F/90 Sep 2016 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures Multiple vertebrae Teriparatide for 2 years, followed by Dmab for 2 years and then ALN for 3 months N Not specified Antibiotics Nil (patient’s preference) 24 Nil Nil N
21 F/76 Dec 2016 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Left wrist ALN for 4.5 years Y (BP withheld for 3 months prior) Not specified Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 70 LS: –1.8 FN: –3.1 N
FN: –2.8 TH: –2.6
TH: –2.8 DR: –2.9
(static, 6 years post-ONJ)
22 F/76 Nov 2017 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip and vertebral fractures Left wrist, left femur, T12 and L1 vertebrae ALN for 3 years followed by 1 dose of Dmab N Not specified Conservative Nil (patient’s preference) 48 LS: –3.1 LS: –3.2 N
FN: –3.0 FN: –2.8
TH: –2.8 TH: –2.9
(static, 4 years post-ONJ)
23 F/80 Dec 2018 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures T10 and T12 vertebrae ALN for 7 years Y (BP withheld 3 months prior) MD Antibiotics and surgical debridement Teriparatide for 1.5 years, followed by raloxifene 60 LS: –3.6 LS: –3.2 N
FN: –2.4 FN: –2.6
TH: –2.3 TH: –2.4
(static, 5 years post-ONJ)
24 F/89 Jul 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 7 years Y (BP withheld 3 months prior) MD Surgical debridement Nil (teriparatide contraindicated due to hyper-parathyroidism) 41 FN: –2.8 FN: –3.7 N Hyper-parathyroidism resolved after vitamin D deficiency was addressed; in view of deteriorating BMD, started teriparatide for 1.5 years, followed by raloxifene; reassessment BMD 2 years later was stable
TH: –2.8 TH: –3.6
DR: –3.2 DR: –3.5
(sig. decrease over TH, 2 years post-ONJ)
25 F/72 Jul 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years Y (BP already off for 2 years) Not specified Conservative Teriparatide for 1.5 years, then raloxifene 55 LS: –1.7 FN: –3.2 N BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
TH: –2.8 TH: –2.9
DR: –2.3
(4.5 years post-ONJ)
26 F/80 Jul 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Left femur ALN for 5 years followed by Dmab for 6 years N MD Surgical debridement Teriparatide for 2 years, then raloxifene 58 LS: –1.1 LS: –1.3 N
FN: –3.7 FN: –3.3
TH: –2.9 TH: –2.8
(static, 4 years post-ONJ)
27 F/72 Dec 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture Lumbar vertebrae IBN for 4 years N MX Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 51 LS: –2.6 Nil N
FN: –2.6
TH: –2.4
28 F/89 May 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 L1 vertebra ALN for 4 years, switched to teriparatide for 1.5 years (in view of incident L1 vertebral fracture) N MD Surgical debridement Raloxifene 47 FN: –3.0 FN: –2.8 N
TH: –3.9 TH: –3.6
DR: – 4.5 DR: –4.6
(sig increase over TH, 4 years post-ONJ)
29 F/85 Jun 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture Left proximal humerus, L2 vertebra IV ZOL for 1 dose N MD Surgical debridement Denosumab for 1.5 years 27 LS: –3.8 LS: –3.0 N
FN: –3.8 FN: –3.5
TH: –4.0 TH: –3.8
(sig. increase over LS and TH, 2 years post-ONJ)
30 F/80 Oct 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture T12 vertebra ALN for 3.5 years Y MX Surgical debridement Teriparatide 2 years, then raloxifene 53 LS: –3.6 LS: –3.2 N
FN: –3.8 FN: –3.8
TH: –3.2 TH: –3.0
(sig. increase over LS, 3.5 years post-ONJ)
31 F/78 Dec 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 8 years then IBN for 8 years (declined injectables even when treated for >10 years with persistently low BMD T-score) Y Not specified Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 37 LS: –1.9 Nil N
FN: –3.1
TH: –3.0
32 F/84 Aug 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None IBN for 11 years N MX Surgical debridement Nil 18 Nil Nil N
33 M/69 Nov 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 31 Nil Nil N
34 F/66 Dec 2021 Osteopenia with high FRAX score; steroid for lupus nephritis None ALN for 5 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 29 LS: –2.3 Nil N
FN: –2.4
TH: –1.4
35 F/86 Dec 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip fracture Right wrist, right proximal humerus, right femoral neck ALN for 11 years, followed by Dmab for 2 years N MX & MD Surgical debridement Nil 29 LS: –3.6 Nil N
FN: –4.1
TH: –3.1
36 F/85 Dec 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Wrist and proximal humerus ALN for 5.5 years N MD Surgical debridement Teriparatide for 2 years, planned to be transitioned to raloxifene 23 LS: –2.1 LS: –1.6 N
FN: –3.8 FN: –3.5
TH: –3.4 TH: –3.4
DR: –4.6 DR: –4.7
(sig increase over LS and FN, 2 years post-ONJ)

ONJ, osteonecrosis of the jaw; Dx, diagnosis; MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw; BMD, bone mineral density; ALN, alendronate; N, no; LS, lumbar spine; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip; DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; Y, yes; MD, mandibular; MX, maxillary; BP, blood pressure; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; IBN, ibandronate; RIS, risedronate; IV, intravenous; ZOL, zoledronic acid; Dmab, denosumab; DR, distal radius.

Table 3.
Comparison between Those Who Did and Did Not Sustain Fragility Fractures after MRONJ
Variable All Fragility fracture after MRONJ No fragility fracture after MRONJ P value
No. of patients 36 6 30 -
Female sex 34 (94.4) 6 (100) 28 (93.3) 0.999
Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 80.5±9.7 78.1±8.9 0.562
BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 21.5±3.8 (n=4) 22.9±4.0 (n=26) 0.519
Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 5 (3–7.25) 4 (4–6) 0.523
Smoking 2 (5.6) 0 2 (6.7) 0.999
Alcohol 1 (2.8) 0 1 (3.3) 0.999
Diabetes 10 (27.8) 2 (33.3) 8 (26.7) 0.999
Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
 Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 3 (50.0) 16 (53.3) 0.999
 FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 23.0±8.2 (n=4) 17.2±11.8 (n=26) 0.359
 FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 12.6±6.3 (n=4) 8.7±8.7 (n=26) 0.406
 LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –3.3±1.1 (n=5) –2.8±1.0 (n=23) 0.359
 FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –3.6±0.4 (n=3) –3.1±0.7 (n=17) 0.292
 TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –3.2±0.4 (n=4) –2.9±0.8 (n=18) 0.487
Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
 Bisphosphonate-related (vs. denosumab-related) 30 (83.3) 5 (83.3) 25 (83.3) 0.999
 Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 3 (50.0) 18 (60.0) 0.677
 Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 2 (33.3) 13 (43.3) 0.999
 Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 4 (66.7) 24 (80.0) 0.596
 FRAX (MOF) 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 27.3±5.6 (n=4) 24.2±10.2 (n=26) 0.560
 FRAX (hip) 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 15.3±5.0 (n=4) 13.3±7.9 (n=26) 0.638
 LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.8±0.1 (n=4) –2.3±1.0 (n=21) 0.271
 FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.8±0.2 (n=3) –2.8±0.8 (n=24) 0.935
 TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –2.5±1.2 (n=3) –2.5±0.9 (n=23) 0.933
 Osteoporosis treatment after MRONJ 14 (38.9) 3 (50.0) 11 (36.7) 0.658

Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw; ONJ, osteonecrosis of jaw; BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip.

Table 4.
Comparison between Those Who Did and Did Not Have MRONJ Recurrence
Variable All MRONJ recurrence No MRONJ recurrence P value
No. of patients 36 2 34 -
Female sex 34 (94.4) 2 (100) 32 (94.1) 0.999
Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 70.0±9.9 79.0±8.8 0.169
BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 27.0±0.4 (n=2) 22.5±3.9 (n=28) 0.116
Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 4 (3–5) 4 (4–6) 0.591
Smoking 2 (5.6) 0 2 (5.9) 0.999
Alcohol 1 (2.8) 0 1 (2.9) 0.999
Diabetes 10 (27.8) 0 10 (29.4) 0.999
Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
 Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 2 (100.0) 17 (50.0) 0.487
 FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 15.5±0.7 (n=2) 18.2±11.9 (n=28) 0.755
 FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 4.9±0.5 (n=2) 9.6±8.7 (n=28) 0.465
 LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –2.5 (n=1) –2.9±1.0 (n=27) 0.703
 FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –1.9 (n=1) –3.3±0.7 (n=19) 0.060
 TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –1.2 (n=1) –3.0±0.7 (n=21) 0.019a
Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
 Bisphosphonate-related (vs. denosumab-related) 30 (83.3) 2 (100.0) 28 (82.4) 0.999
 Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 2 (100.0) 19 (55.9) 0.500
 Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 2 (100.0) 13 (38.2) 0.167
 Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 2 (100.0) 26 (76.5) 0.999
 FRAX (MOF) 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 22.5±0.7 (n=2) 24.7±10.0 (n=28) 0.761
 FRAX (hip) 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 9.0±1.1 (n=2) 13.9±7.7 (n=28) 0.378
 LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.4±0.8 (n=2) –2.3±1.0 (n=23) 0.998
 FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.2±0.6 (n=2) –2.8±0.7 (n=25) 0.263
 TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –1.2±0.4 (n=2) –2.6±0.8 (n=24) 0.030a
 Treatment with antiresorptives after MRONJ 3 (8.3) 1 (50.0) 2 (5.9) 0.162

Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw; ONJ, osteonecrosis of jaw; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip.

a P<0.05.

Table 5.
Comparison between Bisphosphonate- and Denosumab-Related ONJ
Variable All Bisphosphonate-related ONJ Denosumab-related ONJ P value
No. of patients 36 30 6 -
Female sex 34 (94.4) 28 (93.3) 6 (100) 0.999
Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 78.2±9.1 80.2±8.7 0.630
BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 23.0±4.1 (n=25) 21.6±3.1 (n=5) 0.485
Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 4 (3.75–6) 5 (3.5–6.5) 0.495
Smoking 2 (5.6) 2 (6.7) 0 0.999
Alcohol 1 (2.8) 1 (3.3) 0 0.999
Diabetes 10 (27.8) 8 (26.7) 2 (33.3) 0.999
Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
 Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 15 (50.0) 4 (66.7) 0.662
 FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 18.8±12.0 (n=25) 14.3±8.0 (n=5) 0.438
 FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 9.7±8.9 (n=25) 7.0±5.2 (n=5) 0.523
 LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –2.8±1.1 (n=23) –3.2±0.5 (n=5) 0.433
 FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –3.2±0.8 (n=17) –3.1±0.6 (n=3) 0.786
 TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –2.9±0.9 (n=18) –3.1±0.3 (n=4) 0.725
Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
 Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 16 (53.3) 5 (83.3) 0.367
 Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 13 (43.3) 2 (33.3) 0.999
 Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 26 (86.7) 2 (33.3) 0.014a
 FRAX (MOF) 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 24.3±10.4 (n=25) 26.0±4.6 (n=5) 0.723
 FRAX (hip) 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 13.6±7.9 (n=25) 13.6±6.6 (n=5) 0.990
 LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.3±0.9 (n=20) –2.6±0.9 (n=5) 0.544
 FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.6±0.7 (n=21) –3.2±0.6 (n=6) 0.115
 TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –2.4±1.0 (n=20) –2.5±0.8 (n=6) 0.820
 Osteoporosis treatment after MRONJ 14 (38.9) 11 (36.7) 3 (50.0) 0.658
Post-MRONJ treatment regimen 0.228
 Teriparatide to raloxifene 8 (22.2) 5 (16.7) 3 (50.0)
 Strontium 3 (8.3) 3 (10.0) 0
 Resumption of bisphosphonate/denosumab 3 (8.3) 3 (10.0) 0
BMD change (n=21) 0.447
 Stable 11 (30.6) 9 (30.0) 2 (33.3)
 Increase 6 (16.7) 5 (16.7) 1 (16.7)
 Decrease 2 (5.6) 1 (3.3) 1 (16.7)
 Mixed 2 (5.6) 1 (3.3) 1 (16.7)

Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw; ONJ, osteonecrosis of jaw; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip.

a P<0.05.

  • 1. Rachner TD, Khosla S, Hofbauer LC. Osteoporosis: now and the future. Lancet 2011;377:1276–87.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 2. Compston JE, McClung MR, Leslie WD. Osteoporosis. Lancet 2019;393:364–76.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Reid IR, Billington EO. Drug therapy for osteoporosis in older adults. Lancet 2022;399:1080–92.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Anastasilakis AD, Pepe J, Napoli N, Palermo A, Magopoulos C, Khan AA, et al. Osteonecrosis of the jaw and antiresorptive agents in benign and malignant diseases: a critical review organized by the ECTS. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2022;107:1441–60.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 5. Ruggiero SL, Dodson TB, Aghaloo T, Carlson ER, Ward BB, Kademani D. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons’ position paper on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: 2022 update. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2022;80:920–43.ArticlePubMed
  • 6. Taguchi A, Shiraki M, Morrison A, Khan AA. Antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in osteoporosis patients from Asian countries. Osteoporos Sarcopenia 2017;3:64–74.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 7. Sedghizadeh PP, Stanley K, Caligiuri M, Hofkes S, Lowry B, Shuler CF. Oral bisphosphonate use and the prevalence of osteonecrosis of the jaw: an institutional inquiry. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140:61–6.PubMed
  • 8. Cosman F, Crittenden DB, Adachi JD, Binkley N, Czerwinski E, Ferrari S, et al. Romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1532–43.ArticlePubMed
  • 9. Tsai JN, Nishiyama KK, Lin D, Yuan A, Lee H, Bouxsein ML, et al. Effects of denosumab and teriparatide transitions on bone microarchitecture and estimated strength: the DATA-Switch HR-pQCT study. J Bone Miner Res 2019;34:976.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 10. Tsourdi E, Zillikens MC, Meier C, Body JJ, Gonzalez Rodriguez E, Anastasilakis AD, et al. Fracture risk and management of discontinuation of denosumab therapy: a systematic review and position statement by ECTS. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2020;dgaa756.PubMed
  • 11. Wong CH, Kan AK, Tsoi KH, Chan SS, Jiang NS, Loong CH, et al. Clinical characteristics, densitometric parameters and outcomes of patients with atypical femoral fractures related to bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis. Endocrine 2024;84:223–35.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 12. OSHK Task Group for Formulation of 2013 OSHK Guideline for Clinical Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in Hong Kong, Ip TP, Cheung SK, Cheung TC, Choi TC, Chow SL, et al. The Osteoporosis Society of Hong Kong (OSHK): 2013 OSHK guideline for clinical management of postmenopausal osteoporosis in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J 2013;19 Suppl 2:1–40.PubMed
  • 13. Ruggiero SL, Dodson TB, Fantasia J, Goodday R, Aghaloo T, Mehrotra B, et al. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: 2014 update. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;72:1938–56.ArticlePubMed
  • 14. Lui DT, Ho Man Tang E, Au IC, Wu T, Lee CH, Wong CK, et al. Evaluation of fracture risk among patients with type 2 diabetes and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation receiving different oral anticoagulants. Diabetes Care 2022;45:2620–7.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 15. Lui DT, Lee CH, Chan YH, Chow WS, Fong CH, Siu DC, et al. HbA1c variability, in addition to mean HbA1c, predicts incident hip fractures in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes. Osteoporos Int 2020;31:1955–64.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 16. Kim JW, Kwak MK, Han JJ, Lee ST, Kim HY, Kim SH, et al. Medication related osteonecrosis of the jaw: 2021 position statement of the Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research and the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. J Bone Metab 2021;28:279–96.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 17. Cuozzo A, Iorio-Siciliano V, Vaia E, Mauriello L, Blasi A, Ramaglia L. Incidence and risk factors associated to medication-related osteo necrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients with osteoporosis after tooth extractions: a 12-months observational cohort study. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg 2022;123:616–21.ArticlePubMed
  • 18. Ali MS, Berencsi K, Marinier K, Deltour N, Perez-Guthann S, Pedersen L, et al. Comparative cardiovascular safety of strontium ranelate and bisphosphonates: a multi-database study in 5 EU countries by the EU-ADR Alliance. Osteoporos Int 2020;31:2425–38.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 19. Liu FC, Luk KC, Chen YC. Risk comparison of osteonecrosis of the jaw in osteoporotic patients treated with bisphosphonates vs. denosumab: a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study in Taiwan. Osteoporos Int 2023;34:1729–37.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 20. Kawahara M, Kuroshima S, Sawase T. Clinical considerations for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: a comprehensive literature review. Int J Implant Dent 2021;7:47.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 21. Kim HY. Review and update of the risk factors and prevention of antiresorptive-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul) 2021;36:917–27.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 22. Bedogni A, Mauceri R, Fusco V, Bertoldo F, Bettini G, Di Fede O, et al. Italian position paper (SIPMO-SICMF) on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). Oral Dis 2024;30:3679–709.PubMed
  • 23. Japanese Allied Committee on Osteonecrosis of the Jaw, Yoneda T, Hagino H, Sugimoto T, Ohta H, Takahashi S, et al. Antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: position paper 2017 of the Japanese Allied Committee on Osteonecrosis of the Jaw. J Bone Miner Metab 2017;35:6–19.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 24. Patel N, Seoudi N. Management of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: an overview of national and international guidelines. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2024;62:899–908.ArticlePubMed
  • 25. Park KS, Jung SM, Park YJ, Kim KJ. Denosumab-related osteonecrosis of the jaw may not be a subject of teriparatide treatment. J Bone Miner Res 2022;37:2044–5.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 26. Black DM, Rosen CJ. Clinical practice: postmenopausal osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 2016;374:254–62.ArticlePubMed
  • 27. van de Laarschot DM, McKenna MJ, Abrahamsen B, Langdahl B, Cohen-Solal M, Guanabens N, et al. Medical management of patients after atypical femur fractures: a systematic review and recommendations from the European Calcified Tissue Society. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2020;105:1682–99.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 28. Leder BZ, Tsai JN, Uihlein AV, Wallace PM, Lee H, Neer RM, et al. Denosumab and teriparatide transitions in postmenopausal osteoporosis (the DATA-Switch study): extension of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;386:1147–55.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 29. Ramchand SK, Tsai JN, Lee H, Sassana-Khadka G, Jordan M, Ryan S, et al. The comparison of alendronate and raloxifene after denosumab (CARD) study: a comparative efficacy trial. Osteoporos Int 2024;35:255–63.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 30. Wu D, Li L, Wen Z, Wang G. Romosozumab in osteoporosis: yesterday, today and tomorrow. J Transl Med 2023;21:668.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 31. Leslie WD, Lix LM, Johansson H, Oden A, McCloskey E, Kanis JA, et al. Does osteoporosis therapy invalidate FRAX for fracture prediction? J Bone Miner Res 2012;27:1243–51.ArticlePubMedPDF

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      • PubReader PubReader
      • ePub LinkePub Link
      • Cite
        Cite
        export Copy Download
        Close
        Download Citation
        Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

        Format:
        • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
        • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
        Include:
        • Citation for the content below
        Osteoporosis Management after the Occurrence of Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A 13-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center
        Close
      • XML DownloadXML Download
      Figure
      • 0
      Osteoporosis Management after the Occurrence of Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A 13-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center
      Image
      Fig. 1. Summary of clinical outcomes of the 36 patients who developed medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw (MRONJ) during treatment for osteoporosis. Among the 36 patients, 14 continued anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ and 22 discontinued anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ. (A) It describes the subsequent anti-osteoporosis treatment regime and changes in bone mineral density (BMD) (if available). Patient no. 4 developed recurrence of MRONJ while on oral bisphosphonates requiring bisphosphonate discontinuation, and subsequently developed incident vertebral fracture. Patient no. 15 developed recurrence of MRONJ related to denosumab started 4 years after strontium was discontinued. Three patients developed fragility fractures (patients no. 3, 4, 7). (B) It describes the clinical course of patients who discontinued anti-osteoporosis treatment following MRONJ. Patients no. 6, 9, 11 developed incident fragility fractures.
      Osteoporosis Management after the Occurrence of Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A 13-Year Experience at a Tertiary Center
      Variable All Continued anti-osteoporosis treatment Discontinued anti-osteoporosis treatment P value
      No. of patients 36 14 22 -
      Female sex 34 (94.4) 14 (100) 20 (90.9) 0.511
      Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 79.1±7.6 (95% CI, 74.7–83.5) 78.2±9.9 (95% CI, 73.8–82.6) 0.776
      BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 22.7±4.0 (95% CI, 20.3–25.1) (n=13) 22.8±4.1 (95% CI, 20.7–24.9) (n=17) 0.981
      Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 4 (4–5.5) (5th–95th percentile 2.75–8) 4 (3–6) (5th–95th percentile 2.15–7) 0.906
      Smoking 2 (5.6) 0 2 (9.1) 0.511
      Alcohol 1 (2.8) 0 1 (4.5) 0.999
      Diabetes 10 (27.8) 3 (21.4) 7 (31.8) 0.706
      Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
       Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 7 (50.0) 12 (54.5) 0.790
       FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 21.0±11.9 (95% CI, 13.8 to 28.2) (n=13) 15.8±10.9 (95% CI, 10.1 to 21.4) (n=17) 0.223
       FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 11.1±9.4 (95% CI, 5.4 to 16.7) (n=13) 7.9±7.6 (95% CI, 3.9 to 11.8) (n=17) 0.307
       LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –3.2±0.9 (95% CI, –3.8 to –2.6) (n=12) –2.6±1.0 (95% CI, –3.2 to –2.1) (n=16) 0.156
       FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.6) (n=9) –3.2±0.8 (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.7) (n=11) 0.854
       TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –3.1±0.8 (95% CI, –3.7 to –2.6) (n=11) –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.3) (n=11) 0.288
      Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
       Bisphosphonate-related (vs. denosumab-related) 30 (83.3) 11 (78.6) 19 (86.4) 0.658
       Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 9 (64.3) 12 (54.5) 0.563
       Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 8 (57.1) 7 (31.8) 0.133
       Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 10 (71.4) 18 (81.8) 0.683
       FRAX (MOF), % 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 28.8±7.6 (95% CI, 24.2 to 33.3) (n=13) 21.3±10.1 (95% CI, 16.2 to 26.5) (n=17) 0.035a
       FRAX (hip), % 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 16.2±7.7 (95% CI, 11.5 to 20.8) (n=13) 11.6±7.1 (95% CI, 8.0 to 15.3) (n=17) 0.106
       LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.6±0.8 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.1) (n=12) –2.1±1.0 (95% CI, –2.7 to –1.5) (n=13) 0.214
       FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.9±0.7 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=13) –2.6±0.8 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.2) (n=14) 0.293
       TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –2.5±1.0 (95% CI, –3.2 to –1.9) (n=12) –2.4±0.8 (95% CI, –2.8 to –1.9) (n=14) 0.670
       Subsequent fragility fractures 6 (16.7) 3 (21.4) 3 (13.6) 0.658
      No. Sex/age, yr Time of ONJ Dx Initial indication of osteoporosis treatment Site of fragility fracture Antiresorptive regimen prior to ONJ Dental extraction before ONJ Site of MRONJ ONJ treatment Post-ONJ osteoporosis treatment Follow-up duration, mo BMD T-score at ONJ Latest BMD T-score Subsequent fragility fracture Remarks
      1 F/83 Jan 2010 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years N Not specified Surgical debridement Strontium for 5 years 69 LS: –2.7 LS: –3.1 N BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
      FN: –2.4 FN: –2.2
      TH: –2.3 TH: –1.8
      (6 years post-ONJ)
      2 F/81 Aug 2010 Fragility vertebral fracture L1 vertebra ALN for 6.5 years Y MD Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil 166 Nil Nil N
      3 F/80 Sep 2010 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years Y MX Antibiotics Strontium 4 LS: –2.7 Nil Y Fractured pubic rami 4 months after MRONJ, died during hospitalisation
      FN: –2.8
      4 F/63 Nov 2010 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures; steroid-induced osteoporosis (for rheumatoid arthritis) L1-4 vertebrae ALN for 3 years Y MX Antibiotics and surgical debridement Oral BP 161 LS: –2.9 LS: –1.6 Y Recurrence of MRONJ after dental extraction after another 5 years of oral BP requiring antibiotics; started denosumab in view of incident multiple vertebral fractures; BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
      FN: –2.6 FN: –2.8
      TH: –1.4 TH: –1.9
      (10 years post-ONJ)
      5 F/72 Jan 2011 Osteopenia with high FRAX score Left proximal humerus IBN for 3 years Y Not specified Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 111 LS: –0.4 LS: 0.1 N
      FN: –1.9 FN: –3.7
      TH: –0.8 TH: –2.3
      (sig. increase in LS, sig. decrease in TH, 9 years post-ONJ)
      6 F/80 May 2012 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture L1 vertebra ALN for 3 years N (but related to dental implant 2 months prior) MD Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil 144 LS: –3.0 LS: –1.6 Y Fractured greater trochanter of right humerus 11 years after MRONJ; BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
      TH: –3.7 FN: –4.1
      TH: –3.8
      (9 years post-ONJ)
      7 F/53 Jun 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 9 months N Not specified Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 12 LS: –2.2 Nil N
      FN: –3.2
      TH: –1.9
      8 F/85 Jun 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None RIS for 3 months then IBN for 3.75 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 73 LS: –2.0 Nil N
      FN: –1.7
      TH: –1.4
      9 F/82 Aug 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip fracture Right hip IV ZOL for 2 doses N MD Surgical debridement Nil 111 Nil Nil Y Fractured left clavicle 5 years after MRONJ
      10 F/67 Oct 2013 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years N Not specified Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 120 LS: –3.1 LS: –3.4 N Eventually decided to start raloxifene 9 years after ONJ, sig increase in LS BMD 1 year later
      FN: –2.4 FN: –3.0
      TH: –2.0 TH: –1.9
      (static, 10 years post-ONJ)
      11 F/92 Mar 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 5.5 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 42 Nil Nil Y Fractured patella 2 years after MRONJ
      12 F/65 Jul 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip and vertebral fractures Multiple vertebrae; left hip ALN for 9 years followed by 1 dose of Dmab Y (1 month after Dmab) Not specified Antibiotics Teriparatide for 2 years followed by raloxifene 109 LS: –2.4 LS: –1.7 N
      FN: –2.3 FN: –2.4
      TH: –1.0 TH: –1.9
      (sig. increase in LS, sig. decrease in TH 9 years post-ONJ)
      13 M/83 Aug 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip and vertebral fractures Right femoral neck, T12 vertebra, right proximal humerus ALN for 5 years Y (BP not stopped) Not specified Conservative Nil (patient’s preference) 95 LS: –0.9 FN: –2.8 N
      FN: –2.9 TH: –1.9
      TH: –2.3 DR: –2.5
      (sig. increase 8 years post-ONJ)
      14 F/88 Nov 2014 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip fracture Right femoral neck RIS for 5 years then strontium for 2 years followed by 1 dose of Dmab Y (1 month after Dmab) Not specified Antibiotics Nil (patient’s preference) 27 FN: –3.0 FN: –3.7 N
      TH: –3.0 TH: –3.3
      (sig. decrease 6 months post-ONJ)
      15 F/77 Jul 2015 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures T12 and L1 vertebrae ALN for 6 years Y MD Surgical debridement Strontium for 1.5 years 79 LS: –1.8 LS: –1.7 N Declined teriparatide
      FN: –1.8 FN: –2.1 Put on Dmab another 4 years later, for a total of 2 years, had recurrence of ONJ when dental extraction was performed 3 months after last injection
      TH: –0.9 TH: –1.3
      (static, 7 years post-ONJ)
      16 F/82 Nov 2015 BMD T-score ≤–2.5; steroid-induced osteoporosis (for rheumatoid arthritis) None ALN for 4 years Y MD Surgical debridement Teriparatide for 2 years, then denosumab 103 LS: –2.1 FN: –1.8 N BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
      FN: –2.6 TH: –2.2
      TH: –2.4 (7.5 years post-ONJ)
      17 F/86 Dec 2015 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 5 years followed by Dmab for 1 year N Not specified Conservative Teriparatide for 2 years followed by raloxifene 61 LS: –2.7 LS: –1.1 Y Fracture of left humerus 5 years after ONJ
      FN: –3.0 FN: –2.7
      TH: –2.4 TH: –1.9
      (Sig. increase over LS, 5 years post-ONJ)
      18 F/86 Mar 2016 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Left wrist ALN for 7.5 years N MX Surgical debridement Nil (stage 4 chronic kidney disease) 42 LS: –0.7 Nil N
      FN: –0.8
      19 F/65 Jul 2016 Osteopenia with high FRAX score; steroid for rheumatoid arthritis None IBN for 5 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 93 Nil Nil N
      20 F/90 Sep 2016 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures Multiple vertebrae Teriparatide for 2 years, followed by Dmab for 2 years and then ALN for 3 months N Not specified Antibiotics Nil (patient’s preference) 24 Nil Nil N
      21 F/76 Dec 2016 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Left wrist ALN for 4.5 years Y (BP withheld for 3 months prior) Not specified Antibiotics and surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 70 LS: –1.8 FN: –3.1 N
      FN: –2.8 TH: –2.6
      TH: –2.8 DR: –2.9
      (static, 6 years post-ONJ)
      22 F/76 Nov 2017 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip and vertebral fractures Left wrist, left femur, T12 and L1 vertebrae ALN for 3 years followed by 1 dose of Dmab N Not specified Conservative Nil (patient’s preference) 48 LS: –3.1 LS: –3.2 N
      FN: –3.0 FN: –2.8
      TH: –2.8 TH: –2.9
      (static, 4 years post-ONJ)
      23 F/80 Dec 2018 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fractures T10 and T12 vertebrae ALN for 7 years Y (BP withheld 3 months prior) MD Antibiotics and surgical debridement Teriparatide for 1.5 years, followed by raloxifene 60 LS: –3.6 LS: –3.2 N
      FN: –2.4 FN: –2.6
      TH: –2.3 TH: –2.4
      (static, 5 years post-ONJ)
      24 F/89 Jul 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 7 years Y (BP withheld 3 months prior) MD Surgical debridement Nil (teriparatide contraindicated due to hyper-parathyroidism) 41 FN: –2.8 FN: –3.7 N Hyper-parathyroidism resolved after vitamin D deficiency was addressed; in view of deteriorating BMD, started teriparatide for 1.5 years, followed by raloxifene; reassessment BMD 2 years later was stable
      TH: –2.8 TH: –3.6
      DR: –3.2 DR: –3.5
      (sig. decrease over TH, 2 years post-ONJ)
      25 F/72 Jul 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years Y (BP already off for 2 years) Not specified Conservative Teriparatide for 1.5 years, then raloxifene 55 LS: –1.7 FN: –3.2 N BMD not directly comparable as DXA was performed at different centers
      TH: –2.8 TH: –2.9
      DR: –2.3
      (4.5 years post-ONJ)
      26 F/80 Jul 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Left femur ALN for 5 years followed by Dmab for 6 years N MD Surgical debridement Teriparatide for 2 years, then raloxifene 58 LS: –1.1 LS: –1.3 N
      FN: –3.7 FN: –3.3
      TH: –2.9 TH: –2.8
      (static, 4 years post-ONJ)
      27 F/72 Dec 2019 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture Lumbar vertebrae IBN for 4 years N MX Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 51 LS: –2.6 Nil N
      FN: –2.6
      TH: –2.4
      28 F/89 May 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 L1 vertebra ALN for 4 years, switched to teriparatide for 1.5 years (in view of incident L1 vertebral fracture) N MD Surgical debridement Raloxifene 47 FN: –3.0 FN: –2.8 N
      TH: –3.9 TH: –3.6
      DR: – 4.5 DR: –4.6
      (sig increase over TH, 4 years post-ONJ)
      29 F/85 Jun 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture Left proximal humerus, L2 vertebra IV ZOL for 1 dose N MD Surgical debridement Denosumab for 1.5 years 27 LS: –3.8 LS: –3.0 N
      FN: –3.8 FN: –3.5
      TH: –4.0 TH: –3.8
      (sig. increase over LS and TH, 2 years post-ONJ)
      30 F/80 Oct 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility vertebral fracture T12 vertebra ALN for 3.5 years Y MX Surgical debridement Teriparatide 2 years, then raloxifene 53 LS: –3.6 LS: –3.2 N
      FN: –3.8 FN: –3.8
      TH: –3.2 TH: –3.0
      (sig. increase over LS, 3.5 years post-ONJ)
      31 F/78 Dec 2020 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 8 years then IBN for 8 years (declined injectables even when treated for >10 years with persistently low BMD T-score) Y Not specified Surgical debridement Nil (patient’s preference) 37 LS: –1.9 Nil N
      FN: –3.1
      TH: –3.0
      32 F/84 Aug 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None IBN for 11 years N MX Surgical debridement Nil 18 Nil Nil N
      33 M/69 Nov 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 None ALN for 4 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 31 Nil Nil N
      34 F/66 Dec 2021 Osteopenia with high FRAX score; steroid for lupus nephritis None ALN for 5 years N MD Surgical debridement Nil 29 LS: –2.3 Nil N
      FN: –2.4
      TH: –1.4
      35 F/86 Dec 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 and fragility hip fracture Right wrist, right proximal humerus, right femoral neck ALN for 11 years, followed by Dmab for 2 years N MX & MD Surgical debridement Nil 29 LS: –3.6 Nil N
      FN: –4.1
      TH: –3.1
      36 F/85 Dec 2021 BMD T-score ≤–2.5 Wrist and proximal humerus ALN for 5.5 years N MD Surgical debridement Teriparatide for 2 years, planned to be transitioned to raloxifene 23 LS: –2.1 LS: –1.6 N
      FN: –3.8 FN: –3.5
      TH: –3.4 TH: –3.4
      DR: –4.6 DR: –4.7
      (sig increase over LS and FN, 2 years post-ONJ)
      Variable All Fragility fracture after MRONJ No fragility fracture after MRONJ P value
      No. of patients 36 6 30 -
      Female sex 34 (94.4) 6 (100) 28 (93.3) 0.999
      Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 80.5±9.7 78.1±8.9 0.562
      BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 21.5±3.8 (n=4) 22.9±4.0 (n=26) 0.519
      Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 5 (3–7.25) 4 (4–6) 0.523
      Smoking 2 (5.6) 0 2 (6.7) 0.999
      Alcohol 1 (2.8) 0 1 (3.3) 0.999
      Diabetes 10 (27.8) 2 (33.3) 8 (26.7) 0.999
      Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
       Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 3 (50.0) 16 (53.3) 0.999
       FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 23.0±8.2 (n=4) 17.2±11.8 (n=26) 0.359
       FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 12.6±6.3 (n=4) 8.7±8.7 (n=26) 0.406
       LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –3.3±1.1 (n=5) –2.8±1.0 (n=23) 0.359
       FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –3.6±0.4 (n=3) –3.1±0.7 (n=17) 0.292
       TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –3.2±0.4 (n=4) –2.9±0.8 (n=18) 0.487
      Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
       Bisphosphonate-related (vs. denosumab-related) 30 (83.3) 5 (83.3) 25 (83.3) 0.999
       Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 3 (50.0) 18 (60.0) 0.677
       Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 2 (33.3) 13 (43.3) 0.999
       Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 4 (66.7) 24 (80.0) 0.596
       FRAX (MOF) 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 27.3±5.6 (n=4) 24.2±10.2 (n=26) 0.560
       FRAX (hip) 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 15.3±5.0 (n=4) 13.3±7.9 (n=26) 0.638
       LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.8±0.1 (n=4) –2.3±1.0 (n=21) 0.271
       FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.8±0.2 (n=3) –2.8±0.8 (n=24) 0.935
       TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –2.5±1.2 (n=3) –2.5±0.9 (n=23) 0.933
       Osteoporosis treatment after MRONJ 14 (38.9) 3 (50.0) 11 (36.7) 0.658
      Variable All MRONJ recurrence No MRONJ recurrence P value
      No. of patients 36 2 34 -
      Female sex 34 (94.4) 2 (100) 32 (94.1) 0.999
      Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 70.0±9.9 79.0±8.8 0.169
      BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 27.0±0.4 (n=2) 22.5±3.9 (n=28) 0.116
      Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 4 (3–5) 4 (4–6) 0.591
      Smoking 2 (5.6) 0 2 (5.9) 0.999
      Alcohol 1 (2.8) 0 1 (2.9) 0.999
      Diabetes 10 (27.8) 0 10 (29.4) 0.999
      Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
       Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 2 (100.0) 17 (50.0) 0.487
       FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 15.5±0.7 (n=2) 18.2±11.9 (n=28) 0.755
       FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 4.9±0.5 (n=2) 9.6±8.7 (n=28) 0.465
       LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –2.5 (n=1) –2.9±1.0 (n=27) 0.703
       FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI, –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –1.9 (n=1) –3.3±0.7 (n=19) 0.060
       TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –1.2 (n=1) –3.0±0.7 (n=21) 0.019a
      Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
       Bisphosphonate-related (vs. denosumab-related) 30 (83.3) 2 (100.0) 28 (82.4) 0.999
       Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 2 (100.0) 19 (55.9) 0.500
       Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 2 (100.0) 13 (38.2) 0.167
       Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 2 (100.0) 26 (76.5) 0.999
       FRAX (MOF) 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 22.5±0.7 (n=2) 24.7±10.0 (n=28) 0.761
       FRAX (hip) 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 9.0±1.1 (n=2) 13.9±7.7 (n=28) 0.378
       LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.4±0.8 (n=2) –2.3±1.0 (n=23) 0.998
       FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.2±0.6 (n=2) –2.8±0.7 (n=25) 0.263
       TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –1.2±0.4 (n=2) –2.6±0.8 (n=24) 0.030a
       Treatment with antiresorptives after MRONJ 3 (8.3) 1 (50.0) 2 (5.9) 0.162
      Variable All Bisphosphonate-related ONJ Denosumab-related ONJ P value
      No. of patients 36 30 6 -
      Female sex 34 (94.4) 28 (93.3) 6 (100) 0.999
      Age at ONJ, yr 78.5±9.0 (95% CI, 75.5–81.6) 78.2±9.1 80.2±8.7 0.630
      BMI, kg/m2 22.8±4.0 (95% CI, 21.3–24.2) (n=30) 23.0±4.1 (n=25) 21.6±3.1 (n=5) 0.485
      Charlson comorbidity index 4 (4–6) (5th–95th percentile 2–7.15) 4 (3.75–6) 5 (3.5–6.5) 0.495
      Smoking 2 (5.6) 2 (6.7) 0 0.999
      Alcohol 1 (2.8) 1 (3.3) 0 0.999
      Diabetes 10 (27.8) 8 (26.7) 2 (33.3) 0.999
      Upon diagnosis of osteoporosis
       Prevalent fracture 19 (52.8) 15 (50.0) 4 (66.7) 0.662
       FRAX (MOF) 18.0±11.5 (95% CI, 13.7 to 22.3) (n=30) 18.8±12.0 (n=25) 14.3±8.0 (n=5) 0.438
       FRAX (hip) 9.3±8.4 (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.4) (n=30) 9.7±8.9 (n=25) 7.0±5.2 (n=5) 0.523
       LS BMD T-score –2.9±1.0 (95% CI, –3.3 to –2.5) (n=28) –2.8±1.1 (n=23) –3.2±0.5 (n=5) 0.433
       FN BMD T-score –3.2±0.7 (95% CI –3.5 to –2.9) (n=20) –3.2±0.8 (n=17) –3.1±0.6 (n=3) 0.786
       TH BMD T-score –2.9±0.8 (95% CI –3.3 to –2.6) (n=22) –2.9±0.9 (n=18) –3.1±0.3 (n=4) 0.725
      Upon diagnosis of MRONJ
       Prevalent fracture 21 (58.3) 16 (53.3) 5 (83.3) 0.367
       Dental extraction as the trigger 15 (41.7) 13 (43.3) 2 (33.3) 0.999
       Treatment of ONJ (surgical vs. non-surgical) 28 (77.8) 26 (86.7) 2 (33.3) 0.014a
       FRAX (MOF) 24.6±9.7 (95% CI, 21.0 to 28.2) (n=30) 24.3±10.4 (n=25) 26.0±4.6 (n=5) 0.723
       FRAX (hip) 13.6±7.6 (95% CI, 10.8 to 16.4) (n=30) 13.6±7.9 (n=25) 13.6±6.6 (n=5) 0.990
       LS BMD T-score –2.3±0.9 (95% CI, –2.7 to –2.0) (n=25) –2.3±0.9 (n=20) –2.6±0.9 (n=5) 0.544
       FN BMD T-score –2.8±0.7 (95% CI, –3.1 to –2.5) (n=27) –2.6±0.7 (n=21) –3.2±0.6 (n=6) 0.115
       TH BMD T-score –2.5±0.9 (95% CI, –2.8 to –2.1) (n=26) –2.4±1.0 (n=20) –2.5±0.8 (n=6) 0.820
       Osteoporosis treatment after MRONJ 14 (38.9) 11 (36.7) 3 (50.0) 0.658
      Post-MRONJ treatment regimen 0.228
       Teriparatide to raloxifene 8 (22.2) 5 (16.7) 3 (50.0)
       Strontium 3 (8.3) 3 (10.0) 0
       Resumption of bisphosphonate/denosumab 3 (8.3) 3 (10.0) 0
      BMD change (n=21) 0.447
       Stable 11 (30.6) 9 (30.0) 2 (33.3)
       Increase 6 (16.7) 5 (16.7) 1 (16.7)
       Decrease 2 (5.6) 1 (3.3) 1 (16.7)
       Mixed 2 (5.6) 1 (3.3) 1 (16.7)
      Table 1. Comparison between Patients Who Continued and Discontinued Anti-Osteoporosis Treatment after Experiencing Osteonecrosis of the Jaw

      Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

      ONJ, osteonecrosis of the jaw; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip; MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.

      P<0.05.

      Table 2. Characteristics of Patients Who Developed Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw

      ONJ, osteonecrosis of the jaw; Dx, diagnosis; MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw; BMD, bone mineral density; ALN, alendronate; N, no; LS, lumbar spine; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip; DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; Y, yes; MD, mandibular; MX, maxillary; BP, blood pressure; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; IBN, ibandronate; RIS, risedronate; IV, intravenous; ZOL, zoledronic acid; Dmab, denosumab; DR, distal radius.

      Table 3. Comparison between Those Who Did and Did Not Sustain Fragility Fractures after MRONJ

      Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

      MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw; ONJ, osteonecrosis of jaw; BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip.

      Table 4. Comparison between Those Who Did and Did Not Have MRONJ Recurrence

      Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

      MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw; ONJ, osteonecrosis of jaw; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip.

      P<0.05.

      Table 5. Comparison between Bisphosphonate- and Denosumab-Related ONJ

      Values are expressed as number (%), mean±standard deviation, or median (interquartile range) unless otherwise indicated.

      MRONJ, medication-related osteonecrosis of jaw; ONJ, osteonecrosis of jaw; CI, confidence interval; BMI, body mass index; FRAX, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; MOF, major osteoporotic fracture; LS, lumbar spine; BMD, bone mineral density; FN, femoral neck; TH, total hip.

      P<0.05.


      Endocrinol Metab : Endocrinology and Metabolism
      TOP