4.3 Article

Markers of Bone Turnover Are Elevated in Patients With Antiretroviral Treatment Independent of the Substance Used

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e31820cf010

Keywords

bone turnover markers; osteoporosis; antiretroviral treatment; tenofovir

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Osteoporosis and bone fractures are correlated to antiretroviral treatment. It is not clear whether some substances comprise greater risks of bone loss than others. Methods: We measured pyridinoline, deoxypyridinoline crosslinks, and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase in 113 HIV-positive patients. We compared patients with and without antiretroviral treatment. We then compared patients with versus without tenofovir and patients with protease inhibitor versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor use. Results: Bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, pyridinoline, and deoxypyridinoline crosslinks were significantly higher in patients with antiretroviral treatment compared with patients without antiretroviral treatment: 24.5 versus 13.04 pg/L (P < 0.001), 82.73 versus 51.93 nmol/mmol (P < 0.001), and 16.56 versus 9.94 nmol/mmol (P < 0.001), respectively. In contrast, no difference was found between patients with and without tenofovir: 25.38 versus 20.02 pg/l (P = 0.1); 79.85 versus 83.95 nmol/mmol (P = 0.64), and 19.12 versus 14.00 nmol/mmol (P = 0.14), respectively. Comparison between patients with protease inhibitor versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor yielded no difference either: 23.07 versus 27.18 pg/L (P = 0.24), 92.96 versus 80.73 nmol/mmol (P = 0.36), and 18.22 versus 16.39 nmol/mmol (P = 0.55). Conclusion: Markers for bone turnover are higher in treated compared with untreated patients. No difference concerning tenofovir use or protease inhibitor versus nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor use could be found.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available