2003
DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.6.1125
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Food and Drug Administration's Osteoporosis Guidance Document: Past, Present, and Future

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is worth noting here that the field of drug development for OA is currently analogous to osteoporosis 30 years ago [8], namely a disease in search of a robust gold standard outcome measure to inform clinical trials. The 1979 FDA Osteoporosis Guidelines acknowledged that evaluating the clinical effectiveness of osteoporosis drugs posed special challenges because of the “difficulties in assessing the state of skeletal bone quantitatively in vivo , the relatively small changes that are usually encountered and the duration of studies necessary to show significant effects” [8, 9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It is worth noting here that the field of drug development for OA is currently analogous to osteoporosis 30 years ago [8], namely a disease in search of a robust gold standard outcome measure to inform clinical trials. The 1979 FDA Osteoporosis Guidelines acknowledged that evaluating the clinical effectiveness of osteoporosis drugs posed special challenges because of the “difficulties in assessing the state of skeletal bone quantitatively in vivo , the relatively small changes that are usually encountered and the duration of studies necessary to show significant effects” [8, 9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 1979 FDA Osteoporosis Guidelines acknowledged that evaluating the clinical effectiveness of osteoporosis drugs posed special challenges because of the “difficulties in assessing the state of skeletal bone quantitatively in vivo , the relatively small changes that are usually encountered and the duration of studies necessary to show significant effects” [8, 9]. By 1984, the FDA Osteoporosis Guidelines upgraded dual-energy photon absorptiometry from investigational to a valid and reliable method for measuring trabecular bone mass of the spine and this was critical to the subsequent approach to the development and regulation of osteoporosis drugs [8, 9]. OA is at a similar crossroads to which biomarkers may contribute substantively at this time.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preclinical work in rats (Jiang et al, 1996b) confirmed the conclusions regarding the discrepancy between increases in bone mass and the expected increase in bone strength. Results from the work presented here directly assess the treatment-related impact on bone quality in preclinical models prior to clinical outcomes in support of the regulatory requirement guidance for the development of new osteoporosis drugs (FDA, 1994 Guidelines; Colmna, 2003). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are two biomarkers, NTX1 and CTX1, used in osteoporosis research and clinical monitoring that are in fact in vitro diagnostics for osteoporosis. These, along with the advent, in 1979, of dual-energy photon absorptiometry as an FDA-approved method for quantifying bone mass of the spine, led to the rapid development of effective osteoporosis drugs [1]. OA currently is analogous to osteoporosis approximately 30 years ago-a disease in need of robust FDA-approved outcome measures to overcome the lack of appropriate tools for sensitively quantifying the state of the OA joint.…”
Section: Biomarkers Of Oamentioning
confidence: 99%