Risedronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women

Methodological guidance for the use of real-world data to measure exposure and utilization patterns of osteoporosis medications

Observational studies of osteoporosis medications can provide critical real-world evidence (RWE) that fills knowledge gaps left by clinical trials. However, careful consideration of study design is needed to yield reliable estimates of association. In particular, obtaining valid measurements of exposure to osteoporosis medications from real-world data (RWD) sources is complicated due to different medication classes, formulations, and routes of administration, each with different pharmacology. Extended half-lives of bisphosphonates and extended dosing of denosumab and zoledronic acid require particular attention. In addition, prescribing patterns and medication taking behavior often result in gaps in therapy, switching, and concomitant use of osteoporosis therapies. In this review, we present important considerations and provide specialized guidance for measuring osteoporosis drug exposures in RWD. First, we compare different sources of RWD used for osteoporosis drug studies and provide guidance on identifying osteoporosis medication use in these data sources. Next, we provide an overview of osteoporosis pharmacology and how it can influence decisions on exposure measurement within RWD. Finally, we present considerations for the measurement of osteoporosis medication exposure, adherence, switching, long-term exposures, and drug holidays using RWD. Ultimately, a thorough understanding of the differences in RWD sources and the pharmacology of osteoporosis medications is essential to obtain valid estimates of the relationship between osteoporosis medications and outcomes, such as fractures, but also to improve the critical appraisal of published studies.

Effects of bisphosphonates and treadmill exercise on bone and kidney in adenine-induced chronic kidney disease rats

INTRODUCTION

The increasing prevalence of osteoporosis and chronic kidney disease (CKD) due to the aging of society has highlighted the need for development of effective treatments for elderly patients. This study examined whether the combination of treadmill exercise therapy and alendronate (ALN) can improve bone mineral density (BMD) and bone strength without worsening renal function in adenine-induced CKD model rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

8-week-old male Wistar rats (n = 70) were divided into experimental groups based on the treatment protocol, i.e., non-CKD (control), vehicle only (CKD), ALN only, exercise only, and combined ALN plus exercise. A 0.75% adenine diet was used to induce CKD. Groups were killed at either 20 or 30 weeks of age. Comprehensive assessments included serum and urine biochemistry tests, renal histology, bone histomorphometry, BMD measurement, micro-computed tomography examinations, and biomechanical testing.

RESULTS

Blood biochemistry tests, urine analyses and histological evaluations of the kidney demonstrated that ALN treatment did not worsen renal function or kidney fibrosis in moderate-stage CKD model rats. Both ALN and treadmill exercise significantly suppressed bone resorption (p < 0.05-p < 0.01). Moreover, ALN monotherapy and combined ALN and treadmill exercise significantly improved BMD of the lumbar spine and femur, bone microstructure, and trabecular bone strength (p < 0.05-p < 0.01). Treadmill exercise was also shown to decrease cortical porosity at the mid-diaphysis of the femur and improve kidney fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

The combination of ALN and treadmill exercise is effective in improving BMD, the microstructure of trabecular and cortical bone, and bone strength, without compromising renal function in adenine-induced CKD model rats.

Decrease in osteoporotic fracture in the western Kitakyushu region by the STOP-Fx study

INTRODUCTION

The Seamless Treatment of Osteoporosis against Fractures (STOP-Fx) study was initiated to provide and continue therapeutic interventions for registered patients with osteoporotic fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Women who visited six hospitals in the western Kitakyushu area for osteoporotic fractures between October 2016 and December 2018 were included in the study. Data collection for primary and secondary outcomes was conducted from October 2018 to December 2020, 2 years after STOP-Fx study enrollment. The primary outcome included the number of surgeries for osteoporotic fractures after the STOP-Fx study intervention, while secondary outcomes were the intervention rate of osteoporosis treatment, incidence and timing of secondary fractures, and factors associated with secondary fractures and loss to follow-up.

RESULTS

Concerning the primary outcome, the number of surgeries for osteoporotic fractures decreased since the STOP-Fx study initiation: 813 in 2017, 786 in 2018, 754 in 2019, 716 in 2020, and 683 in 2021. Regarding the secondary outcome, of the 805 patients enrolled, 445 were available for follow-up at 24 months. Of the 279 patients who were untreated for osteoporosis at enrollment, 255 (91%) were on treatment at 24 months. There were 28 secondary fractures, which were associated with increased tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-5b and decreased lumbar spine bone mineral density during enrollment in the STOP-Fx study.

CONCLUSION

As the demographics and medical area served by six hospitals in the western Kitakyushu region have not changed significantly since the STOP-Fx study initiation, the STOP-Fx study may have contributed in decreasing the number of osteoporotic fractures.

Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To review the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments, including the bone anabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, on reducing the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women, and to characterise the effect of antiosteoporosis drug treatments on the risk of fractures according to baseline risk factors.

DESIGN

Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify randomised controlled trials published between 1 January 1996 and 24 November 2021 that examined the effect of bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo or active comparator.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials that included non-Asian postmenopausal women with no restriction on age, when interventions looked at bone quality in a broad perspective. The primary outcome was clinical fractures. Secondary outcomes were vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and major osteoporotic fractures, all cause mortality, adverse events, and serious cardiovascular adverse events.

RESULTS

The results were based on 69 trials (>80 000 patients). For clinical fractures, synthesis of the results showed a protective effect of bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo. Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, bisphosphonates were less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.00). Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and romosozumab, denosumab was less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.85, 1.18 to 2.92 for denosumab v parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and 1.56, 1.02 to 2.39 for denosumab v romosozumab). An effect of all treatments on vertebral fractures compared with placebo was found. In the active treatment comparisons, denosumab, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab were more effective than oral bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral fractures. The effect of all treatments was unaffected by baseline risk indicators, except for antiresorptive treatments that showed a greater reduction of clinical fractures compared with placebo with increasing mean age (number of studies=17; β=0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99). No harm outcomes were seen. The certainty in the effect estimates was moderate to low for all individual outcomes, mainly because of limitations in reporting, nominally indicating a serious risk of bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicated a benefit of a range of treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women for clinical and vertebral fractures. Bone anabolic treatments were more effective than bisphosphonates in the prevention of clinical and vertebral fractures, irrespective of baseline risk indicators. Hence this analysis provided no clinical evidence for restricting the use of anabolic treatment to patients with a very high risk of fractures.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019128391.

Managements of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: A narrative review

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) are the most common fragility fracture and significantly influence the quality of life in the elderly. Currently, the literature lacks a comprehensive narrative review of the management of OVCFs. The purpose of this study is to review background information, diagnosis, and surgical and non-surgical management of the OVCFs. A comprehensive search of PubMed and Google Scholar for articles in the English language between 1980 and 2021 was performed. Combinations of the following terms were used: compression fractures, vertebral compression fractures, osteoporosis, osteoporotic compression fractures, vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty, bisphosphonates, calcitonin, and osteoporosis treatments. Additional articles were also included by examining the reference list of articles found in the search. OVCFs, especially those that occur over long periods, can be asymptomatic. Symptoms of acute OVCFs include pain localized to the mid-line spine, a loss in height, and decreased mobility. The primary treatment regimens are pain control, medication management, vertebral augmentation, and anterior or posterior decompression and reconstructions. Pain control can be achieved with acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for mild pain or opioids and/or calcitonin for moderate to severe pain. Bisphosphonates and denosumab are the first-line treatments for osteoporosis. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are reserved for patients who have not found symptomatic relief through conservative methods and are effective in achieving pain relief. Vertebroplasty is less technical and cheaper than kyphoplasty but could have more complications. Calcium and vitamin D supplementation can have a protective and therapeutic effect. Management of OVCFs must be combined with multiple approaches. Appropriate exercises and activity modification are important in fracture prevention. Medication with different mechanisms of action is a critical long-term causal treatment strategy. The minimally invasive surgical interventions such as vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are reserved for patients not responsive to conservative therapy and are recognized as efficient stopgap treatment methods. Posterior decompression and fixation or Anterior decompression and reconstruction may be required if neurological deficits are present. The detailed pathogenesis and related targeted treatment options still need to be developed for better clinical outcomes.

Risedronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration leading to increased fracture risk. Risedronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts. This is an update of a Cochrane Review that was originally published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures for postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk for fractures, respectively.

SEARCH METHODS

With broader and updated strategies, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase. A grey literature search, including the online databases ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and drug approval agencies, as well as bibliography checks of relevant systematic reviews was also performed. Eligible trials published between 1966 to 24 March 2021 were identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Participants must have received at least one year of risedronate, placebo or other anti-osteoporotic drugs, with or without concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. In the interest of clinical relevance and applicability, we classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled more than one of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, low bone mineral density (BMD)T score ≤ -2.5, and age ≥ 75 years old. If none of these criteria was met, the study was considered to be primary prevention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We pooled the relative risk (RR) of fractures using a fixed-effect model based on the expectation that the clinical and methodological characteristics of the respective primary and secondary prevention studies would be homogeneous, and the experience from the previous review suggesting that there would be a small number of studies. The base case included the data available for the longest treatment period in each placebo-controlled trial and a >15% relative change was considered clinically important. The main findings of the review were presented in summary of findings tables, using the GRADE approach. In addition, we looked at benefit and harm comparisons between different dosage regimens for risedronate and between risedronate and other anti-osteoporotic drugs.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three trials fulfilled the eligibility criteria, among which 33 studies (27,348 participants) reported data that could be extracted and quantitatively synthesized. We had concerns about particular domains of risk of bias in each trial. Selection bias was the most frequent concern, with only 24% of the studies describing appropriate methods for both sequence generation and allocation concealment. Fifty per cent and 39% of the studies reporting benefit and harm outcomes, respectively, were subject to high risk. None of the studies included in the quantitative syntheses were judged to be at low risk of bias in all seven domains. The results described below pertain to the comparisons for daily risedronate 5 mg versus placebo which reported major outcomes. Other comparisons are described in the full text. For primary prevention, low- to very low-certainty evidence was collected from four studies (one to two years in length) including 989 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Risedronate 5 mg/day may make little or no difference to wrist fractures [RR 0.48 ( 95% CI 0.03 to 7.50; two studies, 243 participants); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 7% more)] and withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.18; three studies, 748 participants); ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 5% fewer to 1% more)], based on low-certainty evidence. However, its preventive effects on non-vertebral fractures and serious adverse events are not known due to the very low-certainty evidence. There were zero clinical vertebral and hip fractures reported therefore the effects of risedronate for these outcomes are not estimable.  For secondary prevention, nine studies (one to three years in length) including 14,354 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided evidence. Risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fractures [RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.90; six studies, 12,173 participants); RRR 20% (95% CI 10% to 28%) and ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 3% fewer), moderate certainty], and may reduce hip fractures [RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.94); RRR 27% (95% CI 6% to 44%) and ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 0.2% fewer to 1% fewer), low certainty]. Both of these effects are probably clinically important. However, risedronate's effects are not known for wrist fractures [RR 0.64 (95% CI 0.33 to 1.24); three studies,1746 participants); ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more), very-low certainty] and not estimable for clinical vertebral fractures due to zero events reported (low certainty). Risedronate results in little to no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; eight studies, 9529 participants); ARR 0.3% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more); 16.9% in risedronate versus 17.2% in control, high certainty] and probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events [RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.07; six studies, 9435 participants); ARR 0% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 2% more; 29.2% in both groups, moderate certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update recaps the key findings from our previous review that, for secondary prevention, risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fracture, and may reduce the risk of hip fractures. We are uncertain on whether risedronate 5mg/day reduces clinical vertebral and wrist fractures.  Compared to placebo, risedronate probably does not increase the risk of serious adverse events.  For primary prevention, the benefit and harms of risedronate were supported by limited evidence with high uncertainty.

Patients experience a need for informal care after a fragility fracture

In this qualitative secondary analysis, patients with a fragility fracture described needing informal care post-fracture. A significant proportion reported receiving no care or not enough care, often devising strategies to care for themselves. Requesting help from multiple individuals allowed patients to minimize the burden to family and friends.

INTRODUCTION

In individuals with fragility fractures, our objectives were to examine (1) the experience of receiving informal care post-fracture; and (2) how these care experiences influenced post-fracture recovery and subsequent management of bone health.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of six primary qualitative studies was conducted. Individuals in the primary studies were English-speaking women and men, 45 years and older, who were living in the community and had sustained a recent fragility fracture or reported a history of previous fragility fractures. Participants who reported at least one instance of needing informal care were categorized as receiving "enough care", "insufficient care", or "no care".

RESULTS

Of 145 participants in the primary studies, 109 (75%) described needing informal care after their fracture. Of those needing care, 62 (57%) were categorized as receiving enough care while 47 (43%) were categorized as receiving insufficient or no care. The care needed affected the management of participants' fracture and bone health, including access to health care services. Participants who received insufficient or no care, especially those living alone, devised strategies to care for themselves and often requested help from multiple individuals to minimize the burden to family and friends. Compared with men, women appeared to report needing help with personal daily activities, such as bathing, and transportation to appointments related to bone health.

CONCLUSION

Informal care needs are an additional burden of fragility fractures. Post-fracture interventions should consider the broader context of patients' lives and potentially support the care needs of patients as part of their services.

Improvement of Peri-Implant Repair in Estrogen-Deficient Rats Fed a Cafeteria Diet and Treated with Risedronate Sodium

Simple Summary

Postmenopausal osteoporosis, characterized by an imbalance in the remodeling cycle in which bone resorption exceeds bone formation, affects a large part of the population seeking rehabilitation with osseointegrated implants, making the prognosis of these patients unfavorable. It is estimated that approximately 99 million people over the age of 50 were diagnosed with osteoporosis in the United States in 2010. A range of drugs are used for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, aiming to prevent skeletal fractures in individuals with this osteometabolic disorder. Bisphosphonates are widely prescribed drugs to increase bone mineral density (BMD) and decrease the risk of skeletal fractures in patients with osteoporosis, with good results in this regard. However, little attention has been paid to the impact that the mechanism of action of this drug generates on the bone repair process, and more scientific evidence is needed to better understand the role of this drug in the peri-implant repair process.

Abstract

(1) Background: Postmenopausal osteoporosis combined with an unhealthy lifestyle can lead to the development of metabolic syndrome, a common condition in individuals requiring oral rehabilitation. Bisphosphonates are used to increase bone mineral density. However, further studies are needed to evaluate the action of this drug on the bone repair process in the jaws. The aim of this study was to evaluate the peri-implant repair of rats with estrogen deficiency and metabolic syndrome treated with risedronate sodium. (2) Methods: Twenty-four female Wistar rats were divided into three groups: SHAM: sham surgery; OVX/SM: ovariectomy combined with a cafeteria diet; OVX/SM/RIS: ovariectomy associated with a cafeteria diet and treatment with sodium risedronate. After 30 days, the animals underwent extraction of the upper first molars. Thirty days after the extraction, an implant was installed in the same region. Sixty days after the implant was installed, the animals were euthanized for biomechanical analysis and confocal microscopic analysis. After confirming the normal distribution of the sample data, a one-way ANOVA test was performed, followed by Tukey’s post-test, with a 5% significance level. (3) Results: Significant bone preservation was observed in the risedronate-treated group. Higher removal torque values were obtained by the risedronate-treated group. (4) Conclusions: Better biomechanical performance of the implants installed in the animals treated with risedronate sodium was observed.

Comparative Fracture Risk During Osteoporosis Drug Holidays After Long-Term Risedronate Versus Alendronate Therapy : A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

An osteoporosis drug holiday is recommended for most patients after 3 to 5 years of therapy. Risedronate has a shorter half-life than alendronate, and thus the residual length of fracture protection may be shorter.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the comparative risks of drug holidays after long-term (≥3 years) risedronate versus alendronate therapy.

DESIGN

Population-based, matched, cohort study.

SETTING

Province-wide health care administrative databases providing comprehensive coverage to Ontario residents aged 65 years or older between November 2000 and March 2020.

PATIENTS

Persons aged 66 years or older who had long-term risedronate therapy and a drug holiday were matched 1:1 on propensity score to those who had long-term alendronate therapy and a drug holiday.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was hip fracture within 3 years after a 120-day ascertainment period. Secondary analyses included shorter follow-up and sex-specific estimates. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for fracture risk between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 25 077 propensity score-matched pairs were eligible (mean age, 81 years; 81% women). Hip fracture rates were higher among risedronate than alendronate drug holidays (12.4 and 10.6 events, respectively, per 1000 patient-years; HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.34]; 915 total hip fractures). The association was attenuated when any fracture was included as the outcome (HR, 1.07 [CI, 1.00 to 1.16]) and with shorter drug holidays (1 year: HR, 1.03 [CI, 0.85 to 1.24]; 2 years: HR, 1.14 [CI, 0.96 to 1.32]).

LIMITATION

Analyses were limited to health care administrative data (potential unmeasured confounding), and some secondary analyses contained few events.

CONCLUSION

Drug holidays after long-term therapy with risedronate were associated with a small increase in risk for hip fracture compared with alendronate drug holidays. Future research should examine how best to mitigate this risk.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Bisphosphonate Use and Hospitalization for Hip Fractures in Women: An Observational Population-Based Study in France

Bisphosphonates are widely used in the treatment of women at risk of osteoporotic hip fracture; however, the overall effectiveness of bisphosphonates in the prevention of osteoporotic fractures has not been studied in real life. To investigate whether the use of bisphosphonates in women aged 50 years and over is associated with a decrease in hospitalization for osteoporotic hip fractures, a historical prospective cohort study was conducted between 2009 and 2016 from a permanent representative sample consisting of 1/97 of the French health insurance beneficiaries. Bisphosphonate use was defined according to medication persistence and adherence regarding bisphosphonate dispensations. The primary outcome was the hospitalization rate for osteoporotic hip fracture. Among the 81,268 women included, 2005 were exposed to bisphosphonates. The median time of bisphosphonate exposure was 12 (IQR, 3–29) and 17 (IQR, 5–42) months for the persistence and adherence definitions, respectively. Exposure to bisphosphonates was not associated with a decrease in hospitalization for hip fracture: weighted HRadherence = 0.66 (95% CI, 0.33 to 1.33); HRpersistance = 0.77 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.57). In real life, bisphosphonate use does not appear to reduce hospitalization for hip fractures, as to date, it is probably prescribed as primary prevention and for a duration too short to be effective.

Over half of seniors who start oral bisphosphonate therapy are exposed for 3 or more years: novel rolling window approach and patterns of use

Most adherence studies only consider treatment following a first prescription. Using an extended follow-up, we found that 60% of seniors starting oral bisphosphonate therapy were exposed for ≥ 3 years (48% for ≥ 5 years). Studies are needed to examine the benefits and harms of continuing bisphosphonate therapy beyond 3 years.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to identify and describe patterns of long-term oral bisphosphonate use among seniors using a novel methodological approach that considers extended follow-up.

METHODS

Among Ontarians aged 66 years or older, we identified subjects with a first dispensing of alendronate or risedronate between November 2000 and December 2016. We followed them until death or December 2019 to identify patients with ≥ 3 years of bisphosphonate use, defined as a proportion of days covered ≥ 80%, using 3-year rolling windows. We calculated the proportion of patients with long-term therapy (≥ 3 years of use) using Kaplan-Meier estimates. We described patterns of long-term use and compared patient characteristics between patients with and without long-term therapy.

RESULTS

We identified 260,784 eligible seniors initiating bisphosphonate therapy. Of these, 60% continued therapy ≥ 3 years (77% women), and 48% continued ≥ 5 years. Characteristics did not meaningfully differ between patients with or without long-term therapy. The median length of long-term therapy was 7.0 (IQR 5.1) years for women and 6.1 (IQR 4.3) years for men. Only 20% experienced a treatment gap before long-term therapy, yet 50% experienced a treatment gap of ≥ 120 days after a median 5.3 years of therapy. Eighty-one percent who returned to therapy following a treatment gap re-initiated an oral bisphosphonate, with 18% switching to denosumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Among seniors initiating oral bisphosphonates, we found that 60% receive at least 3 years of therapy when using an extended follow-up. Studies are needed to examine the benefits and harms of continuing bisphosphonate therapy beyond 3 years.

EVALUATION OF POST-SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF FRAGILITY FRACTURES

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the conduct of Brazilian orthopedists regarding preventive treatment after fragility fracture surgery.

METHODS

A questionnaire was applied to Brazilian orthopedists. Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS 16.0 program.

RESULTS

257 participants were analyzed. Most participants, 90.7% (n = 233), reported that they cared for patients with fractures and 62.3% (n = 160) treated them. The most indicated treatments were vitamin D (22.6%; n = 134) and calcium supplementation (21.4%; n = 127). According to the experience of the physicians - experienced (n = 184) and residents (n = 73) - fragility fractures were more common in the routine of residents (98.6%; n = 72) than experienced physicians (87.5%; n = 161), p = 0.0115. While treatment conduction was more reported by experienced physicians (63.6%; n = 117) than residents (58.9%; n = 43), p = 0.004. More experienced orthopedists (21.4%; n = 97) indicated treatment with bisphosphates than residents (14.2%; n = 20), p = 0.0266.

CONCLUSION

Although most professionals prescribe treatment after fragility fracture surgery, about 40% of professionals still do not treat it, with differences in relation to experience. In this sense, we reinforce the importance of secondary prevention in the management of fragility fractures. Level of Evidence II, Prospective comparative study.

Duration of Bisphosphonate Drug Holidays in Osteoporosis Patients: A Narrative Review of the Evidence and Considerations for Decision-Making

Bisphosphonates are first-line therapy for osteoporosis, with alendronate, risedronate, and zoledronate as the main treatments used globally. After one year of therapy, bisphosphonates are retained in bone for extended periods with extended anti-fracture effects after discontinuation. Due to this continued fracture protection and the potential for rare adverse events associated with long-term use (atypical femoral fractures and osteonecrosis of the jaw), a drug holiday of two to three years is recommended for most patients after long-term bisphosphonate therapy. The recommendation for a drug holiday up to three years is derived primarily from extensions of pivotal trials with alendronate and zoledronate and select surrogate marker studies. However, certain factors may modify the duration of bisphosphonate effects on a drug holiday and warrant consideration when determining an appropriate time off-therapy. In this narrative review, we recall what is currently known about drug holidays and discuss what we believe to be the primary considerations and areas for future research regarding drug holiday duration: total bisphosphonate exposure, type of bisphosphonate used, bone mineral density and falls risk, and patient sex and body weight.

Bisphosphonate-based nanocomposite hydrogels for biomedical applications

Nanocomposite hydrogels consist of polymeric network embedded with functional nanoparticles or nanostructures, which not only contribute to the enhanced mechanical properties but also exhibit the bioactivities for regulating cell behavior. Bisphosphonates (BPs) are capable of coordinating with various metal ions and modulating bone homeostasis. Thanks to the inherent dynamic properties of metal-ligand coordination bonds, BP-based nanocomposite hydrogels possess tunable mechanical properties, highly dynamic structures, and the capability to mediate controlled release of encapsulated therapeutic agents, thereby making them highly versatile for various biomedical applications. This review presents the comprehensive overview of recent developments in BP-based nanocomposite hydrogels with an emphasis on the properties of embedded nanoparticles (NPs) and interactions between hydrogel network and NPs. Furthermore, various challenges in the biomedical applications of these hydrogels are discussed to provide an outlook of potential clinical translation.

Economic Evaluation of Oral Alendronate Therapy for Osteoporosis in Chinese Postmenopausal Women: The Impact of Medication Compliance and Persistence

Objective: Prevalence of osteoporosis in Chinese postmenopausal women has significantly increased over the past decade and oral bisphosphonates are the most potent antiresorptive drugs. The purpose of the present research was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of oral alendronate for individuals with osteoporosis. We also assessed the impact of medication compliance and persistence on economic outcomes of alendronate and potential economic evaluations of persistence-enhancing interventions.

Methods: We constructed an individual-level state-transition model to project health outcomes and costs of oral alendronate for Chinese postmenopausal osteoporotic women. The impact of medication compliance and persistence on economic evaluation was addressed in various scenario analyses. Model inputs were derived from clinical trials and published sources, where available. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainties and assumptions on the cost-effectiveness results.

Results: Compared with no treatment, alendronate treatment was associated with an additional 0.052 QALYs (quality-adjusted life-years) at an additional cost of USD 738, which yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD 14,192.308/QALY. The ICER for the different scenarios (full compliance, full persistence, and both full persistence and full compliance) was USD 4,933.333/QALY, USD 3,006.849/QALY, and USD 2,049.822/QALY, respectively. One-way sensitivity analysis showed the ICER was most sensitive to variations in time horizon and residual effect. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that, at a willingness to pay of USD 29,340/QALY, the probability that oral alendronate therapy will be cost-effective is approximately 80%.

Conclusion: The findings support the view that oral alendronate is cost-effective for the treatment of osteoporotic fractures in Chinese postmenopausal women. Medication persistence is found to have a greater impact on cost-effectiveness than compliance and interventions to improve persistence to be an efficient use of resources.

Mesenchymal Stem Cells Coated with Synthetic Bone-Targeting Polymers Enhance Osteoporotic Bone Fracture Regeneration

Osteoporosis is a progressive skeletal disease characterized by reduced bone density leading to bone fragility and an elevated risk of bone fractures. In osteoporotic conditions, decrease in bone density happens due to the augmented osteoclastic activity and the reduced number of osteoblast progenitor cells (mesenchymal stem cells, MSCs). We investigated a new method of cell therapy with membrane-engineered MSCs to restore the osteoblast progenitor pool and to inhibit osteoclastic activity in the fractured osteoporotic bones. The primary active sites of the polymer are the N-hydroxysuccinimide and bisphosphonate groups that allow the polymer to covalently bind to the MSCs' plasma membrane, target hydroxyapatite molecules on the bone surface and inhibit osteolysis. The therapeutic utility of the membrane-engineered MSCs was investigated in female rats with induced estrogen-dependent osteoporosis and ulnar fractures. The analysis of the bone density dynamics showed a 27.4% and 21.5% increase in bone density at 4 and 24 weeks after the osteotomy of the ulna in animals that received four transplantations of polymer-modified MSCs. The results of the intravital observations were confirmed by the post-mortem analysis of histological slices of the fracture zones. Therefore, this combined approach that involves polymer and cell transplantation shows promise and warrants further bio-safety and clinical exploration.

Meta-analysis for the efficacy of bisphosphonates on hip fracture prevention

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of bisphosphonates on preventing osteoporotic hip fracture in patients with or without prior major osteoporotic fracture. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs) based on electronic health records were used to assess bisphosphonate efficacy and were searched using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases. Eight RCT studies and 14 OSs were extracted from the studies and quantitatively combined by random-effects meta-analysis. The odds ratio (OR) for all hip fractures in RCTs of 0.66, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.55-0.79, was lower than that in the OSs (OR 0.83; CI 0.74-0.94). The OR in patients with prior fracture was significantly reduced by bisphosphonates in both RCTs and OSs. Conversely, significant fracture reduction was not apparent in patients without prior fracture. A moderate relationship between prior major fracture rates and OR in hip fractures was defined. In patients with an average age of over 80 years, similar results were confirmed. In this meta-analysis, the efficacy of bisphosphonates was significant in patients with prior major fracture, recommending to prescribe for such patients. Their effect in patients without prior fracture, in contrast, remains unclear.

Post-operative Rehabilitation of Atypical Femoral Fracture in a Single Center

Objective:

Increasing numbers of reports have described atypical femoral fracture (AFF) in patients being treated with oral bone resorption inhibitors, such as bisphosphonates. Most AFF patients undergo surgical treatment. However, there is little information about post-operative rehabilitation and patient activity levels after surgery for such fractures. Here we report the outcome of surgical treatment and postoperative rehabilitation for AFF at a single center in Japan.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed 13 patients (14 AFFs) who underwent surgery at Nagano Matsushiro General Hospital between January 2013 and December 2016. The clinical backgrounds of the patients were evaluated.

Results:

The patients comprised 1 man (1 AFF) and 12 women (13 AFFs). The mean age at surgery was 77.7±7.1 years (mean±SD). Before AFF occurred, 12 of the 13 patients had used bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. An intramedullary nail was inserted in all patients. Partial weight bearing was started on average 2 weeks after surgery, and full weight-bearing gait was permitted on average 3 weeks after surgery. The average time to bone union was 9.9±6.1 months, ranging from 3 to 23 months. None of the patients required additional surgical procedures, including revision surgery for pseudoarthrosis (nonunion) or delayed union. Before AFF, 12 patients walked independently, and 1 patient walked with a single cane. At the final follow-up (mean duration: 34.5±15.7 months), 8 patients could walk independently and 5 patients walked with a single cane.

Conclusions:

We recognized that rigid fixation for AFF supported early weight-bearing gait after surgery.

Secular trends in the initiation of therapy in secondary fracture prevention in Europe: a multi-national cohort study including data from Denmark, Catalonia, and the United Kingdom

This paper demonstrates a large post-fracture anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in the period 2005 to 2015. The gap was stable in Denmark at around 88-90%, increased in Catalonia from 80 to 88%, and started to increase in the UK towards the end of our study. Improved post-fracture care is needed.

INTRODUCTION

Patients experiencing a fragility fracture are at high risk of subsequent fractures, particularly within the first 2 years after the fracture. Previous studies have demonstrated that only a small proportion of fracture patients initiate therapy with an anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM), despite the proven fracture risk reduction of such therapies. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the changes in this post-fracture treatment gap across three different countries from 2005 to 2015.

METHODS

This analysis, which is part of a multinational cohort study, included men and women, aged 50 years or older, sustaining a first incident fragility fracture. Using routinely collected patient data from three administrative health databases covering Catalonia, Denmark, and the United Kingdom, we estimated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients not treated with AOM within 1 year of their first incident fracture.

RESULTS

A total of 648,369 fracture patients were included. Mean age 70.2-78.9 years; 22.2-31.7% were men. In Denmark, the treatment gap was stable at approximately 88-90% throughout the 2005 to 2015 time period. In Catalonia, the treatment gap increased from 80 to 88%. In the UK, an initially decreasing treatment gap-though never smaller than 63%-was replaced by an increasing gap towards the end of our study. The gap was more pronounced in men than in women.

CONCLUSION

Despite repeated calls for improved secondary fracture prevention, an unacceptably large treatment gap remains, with time trends indicating that the problem may be getting worse in recent years.

Clinical efficacy and safety of drug interventions for primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women: Network meta-analysis followed by factor and cluster analysis

We aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of drugs respectively for primary prevention and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women (PMW), and to further identify the optimal intervention(s) respectively for the two groups when efficacy and safety both considered. We searched three databases. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted for two efficacy outcomes (vertebral fractures and nonvertebral fractures) and two safety outcomes (tolerability and acceptability) respectively in primary prevention group and secondary prevention group. We synthesized hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for nonvertebral fractures, and risk ratios (RRs) for three others. Factor and cluster analyses on surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were conducted to identify the best intervention(s) with efficacy and safety both considered. The study protocol has been registered in PROSPERO. We included 57 randomized trials involving fifteen anti-osteoporotic interventions and 106320 PMW. For primary prevention, only zoledronate (once per 18 months) reduced both vertebral (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28-0.74) and nonvertebral (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.85) fractures. For secondary prevention, abaloparatide, alendronate, denosumab, lasofoxifene, risedronate, romosozumab, teriparatide, and zoledronate (once per 12 months) reduced both vertebral (RRs: from 0.17 to 0.62) and nonvertebral (HRs: from 0.54 to 0.81) fractures. PTH (1-84) and abaloparatide increased withdrawal risk. Romosozumab, teriparatide, denosumab and risedronate, with the greatest composite scores, constituted the optimal cluster having both superior efficacy and superior safety. Zoledronate used at 5 mg per 18 months, with the similar safety as placebo, is the only drug intervention which has been shown to significantly reduce both vertebral and nonvertebral fractures for primary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in PMW; while romosozumab, teriparatide, denosumab, and risedronate are the optimal treatments for secondary prevention when efficacy and safety both considered. A limitation is that safety outcomes failed to consider the severity of adverse effects.

Adherence with brand versus generic bisphosphonates among osteoporosis patients: a new-user cohort study in the French National Healthcare Insurance database

Several studies documented declines in treatment adherence with generic forms of oral bisphosphonates in osteoporosis compared to branded forms, while others did not support this relation. Our aim was to compare medication adherence with brand versus generic forms of oral bisphosphonates. A new-user cohort study was conducted using routinely collected administrative and healthcare data linked at the individual level extracted from a nationwide representative sample of the French National Healthcare Insurance database. We included all patients aged 50 and older, new users of oral bisphosphonates for primary osteoporosis between 01/01/2009 and 31/12/2015. Two components of adherence were measured: implementation (continuous multiple-interval measure of medication availability version 7; CMA7) and persistence (time to discontinuation). The sample was composed of 1,834 in the "brand bisphosphonate" group and 1,495 patients in the "generic bisphosphonate" group. Initiating oral bisphosphonate treatment with brand was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation within 12 months (Hazard Ratio = 1.08; 95%CI = [1.02;1.14]). The risk of good implementation (CMA7 ≥ 0.90) was significantly lower in "brand bisphosphonate" group (Risk Ratio = 0.90; 95%CI = [0.85; 0.95]). We did not find any evidence to support the hypothesis of a lower adherence to generic bisphosphonates. In fact, prescribing of generic bisphosphonates led to a higher persistence rate and to better implementation at 1 year.

Cost-Effectiveness of Zoledronic Acid Versus Oral Alendronate for Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Women in China

Objective

This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of yearly intravenous zoledronic acid treatment versus weekly oral alendronate for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China.

Methods

We used a Markov microsimulation model to compare the cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid with alendronate in Chinese postmenopausal osteoporotic women with no fracture history at various ages of therapy initiation from health care payer perspective.

Results

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the zoledronic acid versus alendronate were $23,581/QALY at age 65 years, $17,367/QALY at age 70 years, $14,714/QALY at age 75 years, and $12,169/QALY at age 80 years, respectively. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, the study demonstrated that the two most impactful parameters were the annual cost of zoledronic acid and the relative risk of hip fracture with zoledronic acid. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of zoledronic acid being cost-effective compared with alendronate were 70–100% at a willingness-to-pay of $29,340 per QALY.

Conclusions

Among postmenopausal osteoporotic women in China, zoledronic acid therapy is cost-effective at all ages examined from health care payer perspective, compared with weekly oral alendronate. In addition, alendronate treatment is shown to be dominant for patients at ages 65 and 70 with full persistence. This study will help clinicians and policymakers make better decisions about the relative economic value of osteoporosis treatments in China.

Fracture prevention by screening for high fracture risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of (major) osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures after screening using fracture risk assessment and bone densitometry compared with usual care. The results indicate that screening is effective for fracture risk reduction, especially hip fractures. To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of population screening for high fracture risk on fracture prevention compared with usual care. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies published until June 20th 2019. Randomized studies were selected that screened for high fracture risk using at least bone densitometry, screened in a general population, provided subsequent treatment with anti-osteoporosis medication, had a usual care group as comparator, and had at least one fracture-related outcome (all fractures, (major) osteoporotic fractures, or hip fractures). The primary assessment was the hazard ratio (HR) for fracture-related outcomes. All-cause mortality was a secondary outcome. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled HRs. We identified 1186 potentially eligible articles and included three randomized studies: the ROSE study, the SCOOP study, and the SOS with a total number of N = 42,009 participants. Respectively, 11%, 15%, and 18% of the participants in the intervention group started medication. Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant and clinically relevant reduction of osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.89-1.00), major osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.91; 95%CI = 0.84-0.98), and hip fractures (HR = 0.80; 95%CI = 0.71-0.91), but no reduction of all fractures (HR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.89-1.02). The pooled HR for the secondary outcome all-cause mortality was 1.04 (95% CI = 0.95-1.14). Numbers needed to screen to prevent one fracture were 247 and 272 for osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures, respectively (corresponding to 113 and 124 performed bone densitometry examinations, and 25 and 28 persons being treated). This meta-analysis showed that population screening is effective to reduce osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures. Implementation of screening in older women should be considered as serious option to prevent osteoporotic fractures, especially hip fractures.

The Effect of a Screening and Treatment Program for the Prevention of Fractures in Older Women: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial

Population screening for fracture risk may reduce the fracture incidence. In this randomized pragmatic trial, the SALT Osteoporosis Study (SOS), we studied whether screening for fracture risk and subsequent treatment in primary care can reduce fractures compared with usual care. A total of 11,032 women aged 65 to 90 years with ≥1 clinical risk factor for fractures were individually randomized to screening (n = 5575) or usual care (n = 5457). Participants in the screening group underwent a screening program, including bone densitometry and vertebral fracture assessment. Participants with a high 10-year fracture probability (FRAX) or a vertebral fracture were offered treatment with anti-osteoporosis medication by their general practitioner. Incident fractures as reported by questionnaires were verified with medical records. Follow-up was completed by 94% of the participants (mean follow-up = 3.7 years). Of the 5575 participants in the screening group, 1417 (25.4%) had an indication for anti-osteoporosis medication. Screening and subsequent treatment had no statistically significant effect on the primary outcome fracture (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.08), nor on the secondary outcomes osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.81-1.03), major osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.80-1.04), hip fractures (HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.71-1.15), falls (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% CI 0.72-1.15), or mortality (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.91-1.17). Post hoc explorative finding suggested that screening might be most effective after a recent fracture (HR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.96 for major osteoporotic fractures and HR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.18-0.79 for hip fractures). The results of this study might have been compromised by nonparticipation and medication nonadherence in the screening group. Overall, this study does not provide sufficient indications to consider screening for fracture prevention. However, we cannot exclude its clinical relevance to reduce (major) osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures because of the relatively small number of women with a treatment indication in the intervention group. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Effects of denosumab on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching from bisphosphonates

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy of 12-month denosumab treatment on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers (BTMs) between treatment-naïve osteoporosis patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and those with previous bisphosphonate (BP) therapy.

METHODS

A total of 36 RA patients with osteoporosis completed 12-month follow-up. Twenty-five patients were osteoporotic treatment-naïve (naïve group), and 11 patients were previously treated with BPs (switch group) (average 7.9 years). BMD and BTMs were measured before and 6 and 12 months after treatment.

RESULTS

BTM levels were higher in the naïve group at baseline. However, the same level of suppression was achieved at 6 months in both groups. Spine BMD increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant difference in the mean percent changes of BMD of the spine (naïve group: 6.8 ± 0.8, switch group: 5.1 ± 1.5), femoral neck (2.9 ± 1.4, 2.9 ± 1.3), and total hip (1.7 ± 0.9, 1.4 ± 1.1) between these two groups at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of denosumab on BMD and BTMs of the switch group after long-term BP treatment are comparable to those of the naïve group in RA patients. Thus, switching BPs to denosumab is one of the useful options to treat osteoporosis with RA.

Effect of medications on prevention of secondary osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, non-vertebral fracture, and discontinuation due to adverse events: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Bone loss with aging and menopause increases the risk of fragile vertebral fracture, osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF). The fracture causes severe pain, impedes respiratory function, lower the quality of life, and increases the risk of new fractures and deaths. Various medications have been prescribed to prevent a secondary fracture, but few study summarized their effects. Therefore, we investigated their effects on preventing subsequent OVCF via meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched for published randomized controlled trials from June 2015 to June 2019. The trials that recruited participants with at least one OVCF were included. We assessed the risk of bias of every study, estimated relative risk ratio of secondary OVCF, non-vertebral fracture, gastrointestinal complaints and discontinuation due to adverse events. Finally, we evaluated the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Forty-one articles were included. Moderate to high quality evidence proved the effectiveness of zoledronate (Relative Risk, RR: 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.69, p = 0.003), alendronate (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.43-0.68; p < 0.0001), risedronate (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.51-0.73; p < 0.0001), etidronate (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.29-0.87, p < 0.01), ibandronate (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38-0.71; p < 0.0001), parathyroid hormone (RR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.23-0.41; p < 0.0001), denosumab (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.29-0.57; p < 0.0001) and selective estrogen receptor modulators (Raloxifene, RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.44-0.76; p < 0.0001; Bazedoxifene, RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.53-0.82; p = 0.0002) in preventing secondary fractures. Moderate quality evidence proved romosozumab had better effect than alendronate (Romosozumab vs. alendronate, RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.49-0.84; p = 0.001) and high quality evidence proved that teriparatide had better effect than risedronate (risedronate vs. teriparatide, RR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.44-2.70; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Zoledronate, alendronate, risedronate, etidronate, ibandronate, parathyroid hormone, denosumab and selective estrogen receptor modulators had significant secondary prevention effects on OVCF. Moderate quality evidence proved romosozumab had better effect than alendronate. High quality evidence proved PTH had better effect than risedronate, but with higher risk of adverse events.

Sesamin Promotes Osteoblastic Differentiation and Protects Rats from Osteoporosis

Background

Osteoporosis is a common osteopathy, resulting in fractures, especially in elder people. Sesamin has many pharmacological effects, including supplying calcium. However, how sesamin might prevent osteoporosis is still under study.

Material/Methods

Bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs) extracted from rat femur were induced for osteoblastic differentiation. Cell proliferation, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), osterix (OSX), SRY-box 9 (SOX9), runt-related transcription factor 2 (RUNX2), osteocalcin (OCN), β-catenin, low density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 5 (LRP5), and glycogen synthase kinase-3β (GSK-3β) levels in BMSCs were detected in the presence or absence of sesamin (1 μM or 10 μM). In addition, FH535 (1 μM) was used to silence Wnt/β-catenin in vitro. Ovariectomized (OVX) rats were established and intragastrically administrated sesamin (80 mg/kg), and then the rat bones were analyzed by micro-computed tomography. Osteocalcin and collagen type I were measured in the rat femurs.

Results

Sesamin had no influence on BMSC proliferation. Higher sesamin concentration promoted Wnt/β-catenin activity and enhanced more expressions of ALP, OSX, SOX9, RUNX2, and OCN, gradually and significantly (P<0.05). Silencing Wnt/β-catenin weakened the enhancement on RUNX2 and OCN expression. Sesamin (80 mg/kg) promoted bone structure in ovariectomized rats, and significantly enhanced osteocalcin and collage type I expression (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Sesamin promoted osteoblastic differentiation of rat BMSCs by regulating the Wnt/β-catenin pathway, and improved rat bone structure. Sesamin could have therapeutic and preventive effects on osteoporosis.

Exercise for improving outcomes after osteoporotic vertebral fracture

BACKGROUND

Vertebral fractures are associated with increased morbidity (e.g. pain, reduced quality of life) and mortality. Therapeutic exercise is a non-pharmacological conservative treatment that is often recommended for patients with vertebral fractures to reduce pain and restore functional movement. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of exercise intervention of four weeks or greater (alone or as part of a physical therapy intervention) versus non-exercise/non-active physical therapy intervention, no intervention or placebo among adults with a history of vertebral fractures on incident fragility fractures of the hip, vertebra or other sites. Our secondary objectives were to evaluate the effects of exercise on the following outcomes: falls, pain, physical performance, health-related quality of life (disease-specific and generic), and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases until November 2017: the Cochrane Library (Issue 11 of 12), MEDLINE (from 2005), Embase (from 1988), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, from 1982), AMED (from 1985), and PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database, from 1929). Ongoing/recently completed trials were identified by searching the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. Conference proceedings were searched via ISI and SCOPUS, and targeted searches of proceedings of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. Search terms or MeSH headings included terms such as vertebral fracture AND exercise OR physical therapy. For this update, the search results were limited from 2011 onward.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized trials comparing exercise or active physical therapy interventions with placebo/non-exercise/non-active physical therapy interventions or no intervention implemented in individuals with a history of vertebral fracture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data using a pre-tested data extraction form. Disagreements were resolved by consensus, or third-party adjudication. We used Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias to evaluate each study. Studies were grouped according to duration of follow-up (i.e. a) 4-12 weeks; b) 16-24 weeks; c) 52 weeks); a study could be represented in more than one group depending on the number of follow-up assessments. For dichotomous data, we reported risk ratios (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). For continuous data, we reported mean differences (MD) of the change from baseline and 95% CI. Data were pooled for Timed Up and Go test, self-reported physical function measured by the QUALEFFO-41 physical function subscale score (scale of zero to 100; lower scores indicate better self-reported physical function), and disease-specific quality of life measured by the QUALEFFO-41 total score (scale of zero to 100; lower scores indicate better quality of life) at 12 weeks using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials (n = 749, 68 male participants; two new trials in this review update) were included. Substantial variability across the trials prevented any meaningful pooling of data for most outcomes. Risk of bias across all studies was variable; low risk across most domains in four studies, and unclear/high risk in most domains for five studies. Performance bias and blinding of subjective outcome assessment were almost all high risk of bias.One trial reported no between-group difference in favor of the effect of exercise on incident fragility fractures after 52 weeks (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.71; very low-quality evidence with control: 184 per 1000 and exercise: 100 per 1000, 95% CI 31 to 315; absolute difference: 8%, 95% CI 2 to 30). One trial reported no between-group difference in favor of the effect of exercise on incident falls after 52 weeks (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.10; very low-quality evidence with control: 262 per 1000 and exercise: 277 per 1000; 95% CI 139 to 550; absolute difference: 2%, 95% CI -12 to 29). These findings should be interpreted with caution because of the very serious risk of bias in these studies and the small sample sizes resulting in imprecise estimates.We are uncertain that exercise could improve pain, self-reported physical function, and disease-specific quality of life, because certain studies showed no evidence of clinically important differences for these outcomes. Pooled analyses revealed a small between-group difference in favor of exercise for Timed Up and Go (MD -1.13 seconds, 95% CI -1.85 to -0.42; studies = 2), which did not change following a sensitivity analysis (MD -1.09 seconds, 95% CI -1.78 to -0.40; studies = 3; moderate-quality evidence). Exercise improved QUALEFFO-41 physical function score (MD -2.84 points, 95% CI -5.57 to -0.11; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence) and QUALEFFO-41 total score (MD -3.24 points, 95% CI -6.05 to -0.43; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence), yet it is unlikely that we observed any clinically important differences. Three trials reported four adverse events related to the exercise intervention (costal cartilage fracture, rib fracture, knee pain, irritation to tape, very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, we do not have sufficient evidence to determine the effects of exercise on incident fractures, falls or adverse events. Our updated review found moderate-quality evidence that exercise probably improves physical performance, specifically Timed Up and Go test, in individuals with vertebral fracture (downgraded due to study limitations). However, a one-second improvement in Timed Up and Go is not a clinically important improvement. Although individual trials did report benefits for some pain and disease-specific quality of life outcomes, the findings do not represent clinically meaningful improvements and should be interpreted with caution given the very low-quality evidence due to inconsistent findings, study limitations and imprecise estimates. The small number of trials and variability across trials limited our ability to pool outcomes or make conclusions. Evidence regarding the effects of exercise after vertebral fracture in men is scarce. A high-quality randomized trial is needed to inform safety and effectiveness of exercise to lower incidence of fracture and falls and to improve patient-centered outcomes (pain, function) for individuals with vertebral fractures (minimal sample size required is approximately 2500 untreated participants or 4400 participants if taking anti-osteoporosis therapy).

ARE TRAUMATOLOGISTS TREATING OSTEOPOROSIS TO PREVENT NEW FRACTURES IN BRAZIL?

Objectives:

To determine the proportion of traumatologists who investigate osteoporosis in elderly patients with fractures and recommend secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures.

Methods:

We distributed questionnaires to 244 physicians attending the 2015 Brazilian Congress of Orthopedic Trauma. We determined the respondents’ profiles and assessed how they investigated and treated osteoporosis in elderly patients with fractures.

Results:

Overall, 32% of the respondents reported that their knowledge level regarding osteoporosis ranged from 0-5 (out of 0-10). In total, 42% of the participants reported that they usually requested DXA for elderly patients with fractures and less than 30% reported prescribing supplemental calcium and/or vitamin D. We considered physicians conducting a complete treatment for the patient as those who in addition to requesting DXA prescribed supplemental calcium, vitamin D, and specific medications for their elderly patients, and recommended non-pharmacological measures. Only 0.8% of the participants fulfilled all these criteria. In addition, 47% of the traumatologists reported that they did not treat osteoporosis directly but instead, referred osteoporotic patients to a qualified physician.

Conclusion:

Less than 50% of the surveyed traumatologists investigated and performed secondary prevention against osteoporotic fractures after treating an elderly patient with a fracture. Level of evidence III, Economic and Decision Analyses - Developing an Economic or Decisions Model.

Anabolic Therapies in Osteoporosis and Bone Regeneration

Osteoporosis represents the most common bone disease worldwide and results in a significantly increased fracture risk. Extrinsic and intrinsic factors implicated in the development of osteoporosis are also associated with delayed fracture healing and impaired bone regeneration. Based on a steadily increasing life expectancy in modern societies, the global implications of osteoporosis and impaired bone healing are substantial. Research in the last decades has revealed several molecular pathways that stimulate bone formation and could be targeted to treat both osteoporosis and impaired fracture healing. The identification and development of therapeutic approaches modulating bone formation, rather than bone resorption, fulfils an essential clinical need, as treatment options for reversing bone loss and promoting bone regeneration are limited. This review focuses on currently available and future approaches that may have the potential to achieve these aims.

Impact of bisphosphonate compliance on the risk of osteoporotic fracture in France

Limited information is available on the impact of bisphosphonate compliance levels on fracture risk in osteoporosis patients in France. The results of this nested case-control, retrospective study suggest that fracture risk did not significantly change with bisphosphonate compliance levels, except for highly compliant patients.

PURPOSE/INTRODUCTION

This was the first study conducted in France to evaluate the impact of compliance levels for bisphosphonates, the most frequently prescribed first-line anti-osteoporotic treatment, on fracture risk.

METHODS

This retrospective nested case-control study included patients ≥ 50 years old, who were recorded in a random sample of French claims data, did not die between 2006 and 2013, and received ≥ 1 reimbursement for anti-osteoporotic treatment between 2007 and 2013. Cases (patients hospitalised for osteoporosis-related fractures) were matched to 1-3 controls (patients hospitalised for other reasons). Patients hospitalised for fractures within 12 months preceding the first delivery of anti-osteoporotic treatment or during the first 24 months of follow-up were excluded. Bisphosphonate compliance during the 24 months preceding hospitalisation was calculated by the Continuous measure of Medication Acquisition version 7 (CMA7). We evaluated the impact of bisphosphonate compliance (CMA7 ≥ 80%) and very good compliance levels (CMA7 > 90%) on fracture risk.

RESULTS

In the main analysis, the mean CMA7 values during the 24 months preceding hospitalisation were 48.4% for the 434 cases and 51.3% for the 1123 age-matched controls. An adjusted conditional logistic regression showed no significant impact (odds ratio: 0.851 [95% confidence interval: 0.668, 1.084]) of bisphosphonate compliance on fracture occurrence. In the sensitivity analysis, including one randomly selected control per case and only controls with CMA7 values > 90%, occurrence of fractures was lower (odds ratio: 0.741 [95% confidence interval: 0.608, 0.903]) among the 119 controls.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study suggested that very high levels of compliance with bisphosphonates are necessary to induce significant decreases in fracture risk.

Comparative anti-fracture effectiveness of different oral anti-osteoporosis therapies based on "real-world" data: a meta-analysis of propensity-matched cohort findings from the UK Clinical Practice Research Database and the Catalan SIDIAP Database

PURPOSE

This paper aims to compare the clinical effectiveness of oral anti-osteoporosis drugs based on the observed risk of fracture while on treatment in primary care actual practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We investigated two primary care records databases covering UK National Health Service (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD) and Catalan healthcare (Information System for Research in Primary Care, SIDIAP) patients during 1995-2014 and 2006-2014, respectivey. Treatment-naive incident users of anti-osteoporosis drugs were included and followed until treatment cessation, switching, death, transfer out, or study completion. We considered hip fracture while on treatment as main outcome and major osteoporotic fractures (hip, clinical spine, wrist, and proximal humerus) as secondary outcome. Users of alendronate (reference group) were compared to those of (1) OBP, (2) strontium ranelate (SR), and (3) selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), after matching on baseline characteristics using propensity scores. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing data on confounders and competing risk modelling for the calculation of relative risk according to therapy. Country-specific data were analyzed separately and meta-analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 163,950 UK and 145,236 Catalan patients were identified. Hip (sub-hazard ratio [SHR] [95% CI] 1.04 [0.77-1.40]) and major osteoporotic (SHR [95% CI] 1 [0.78-1.27]) fracture risks were similar among OBP compared to alendronate users. Both hip (SHR [95% CI] 1.26 [1.14-1.39]) and major osteoporotic (SHR [95% CI] 1.06 [1.02-1.12]) fracture risk were higher in SR compared to alendronate users. SERM users had a reduced hip (SHR [95% CI] 0.75 [0.60-0.94]) and major osteoporotic (SHR [95% CI] 0.77 [0.72-0.83]) fracture risk compared to alendronate users.

CONCLUSION

We found a 26% excess hip fracture risk among SR compared to matched alendronate users, in line with placebo-controlled RCT findings. Conversely, in a lower risk population, SERM users had a 25% reduced hip fracture risk compared to alendronate users. Head-to-head RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Effects of bone remodeling agents following teriparatide treatment

Teriparatide is an anabolic therapy used to treat patients with osteoporosis and is only approved for 2 years of treatment. This is the first study to look at two common osteoporosis drugs in maintaining its beneficial effects: denosumab and zoledronic acid. Denosumab treatment was associated with the greatest increase in bone mineral density (BMD) at the femoral neck and lumbar spine, an amount that was statistically greater than no treatment and zoledronic acid treatment.

INTRODUCTION

Teriparatide, a hallmark treatment for osteoporosis, has been shown to increase BMD and bone turnover. This can be measured using BMD scans, N-terminal propeptide of type-1 collagen (P1NP) for bone formation and C-terminal telopeptide (CTX) for bone resorption. This study examines the effects of the two most common antiresorptive drugs prescribed following 2 years of teriparatide treatment: zoledronic acid and denosumab. The purpose of this study is to quantify the beneficial effects of teriparatide and compare the ability of each antiresorptive drug to maintain the effects.

METHODS

Ninety-four patients with prior fragility fractures were identified from a bone health clinic associated with a level I trauma center. All of the study participants completed 2 years of treatment with teriparatide between 2008 and 2013 followed by 2 years of treatment with zoledronic acid, denosumab, or no treatment. After excluding patients with insufficient laboratory data, 64 patients remained for analysis in this retrospective cohort study. Bone mineral density was measured in the lumbar spine and femoral neck.

RESULTS

Following completion of teriparatide, patients who were started on denosumab showed the largest increase in bone mineral density after 2 years of treatment: lumbar spine 4.94% ± 8.2%, femoral neck 5.68% ± 6.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who elected to discontinue osteoporosis treatment experienced a significant decline in the change in BMD compared to the change on teriparatide putting them at higher risk for recurrence of fragility fractures. Patients on denosumab following teriparatide had the largest increase in BMD.

The efficiency of risedronate in reducing bone resorption after total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials at a minimum of 6 months' follow-up

Background

Recently risedronate is suggested to be effective for the prevention and treatment of for osteoporosis in total hip arthroplasty. This meta-analysis aimes to evaluate the efficacy of risedronate in reducing femoral periprosthetic bone mineral density loss in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in Medline (1966-31 October 2017), PubMed (1966-31 October 2017), Embase (1980-31 October 2017), ScienceDirect (1985-31 October 2017) and the Cochrane Library. Only randomized controlled trial (RCT) were included. Fixed/random effect model was used according to the heterogeneity tested by I2 statistic. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11.0 software. The outcome measures included periprosthetic bone mineral density, length of stay and adverse effects.

Results

Four RCTs including 198 patients met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis showed that there were significant differences between treatment groups in terms of periprosthetic bone mineral density in Gruen zones 1 (standard mean difference (SMD) = 0.758, 95% CI 0.469 to 1.047, P = 0.000), 2 (SMD = 0.814, 95% CI 0.523 to 1.106, P = 0.000), 3 (SMD = 0.340, 95% CI 0.059 to 0.622, P = 0.018), 6 (SMD = 2.400, 95% CI 2.029 to 2.771, P = 0.000), and 7 (SMD = 2.400, 95% CI 2.029 to 2.771, P = 0.000).

Conclusion

Oral risedronate could significantly reduce periprosthetic bone resorption around an uncemented femoral stem (Gruen zones 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7) up to 6 months after THA. In addition, no severe adverse events were identified. Future trials of risedronate treatment after THA should focus on clinically relevant end points such as the risks of fracture and revision arthroplasty.

Finite element analysis of compression fractures at the thoracolumbar junction using models constructed from medical images

Vertebral fractures commonly occur at the thoracolumbar junction. These fractures can be treated with mild residual deformity in many cases, but are reportedly associated with increased risk of secondary vertebral fractures. In the present study, a three-dimensional (3D) whole spine model was constructed using the finite element method to explore the mechanism of development of compression fractures. The 3D model of the whole spine, from the cervical spine to the pelvis, was constructed from computed tomography (CT) images of an adult male. Using a normal spine model and spine models with compression fractures at the T11, T12 or L1 vertebrae, the distribution of strain was analyzed in the vertebrae after load application. The normal spine model demonstrated greater strain around the thoracolumbar junction and the middle thoracic spine, while the compression fracture models indicated focused strain at the fracture site and adjacent vertebrae. Increased load time resulted in the extension of the strain region up to the middle thoracic spine. The present findings, that secondary vertebral fractures commonly occur around the fracture site, and may also affect the thoracic vertebrae, are consistent with previous clinical and experimental results. These results suggest that follow-up examinations of compression fractures at the thoracolumbar junction should include the thoracic spine and adjacent vertebrae. The current data also demonstrate that models created from CT images can be used for various analyses.

Effectiveness of anti-osteoporotic drugs to prevent secondary fragility fractures: systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with osteoporotic fractures have an increased risk for secondary fractures. However, a rigorous study that assesses the effectiveness of individual osteoporotic drugs in preventing subsequent fractures is lacking. The purpose of this review was to analyze the effectiveness of anti-osteoporotic drugs in preventing secondary fractures. We searched for randomized controlled trials that showed the incidence of secondary fractures while using anti-osteoporotic drugs (bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone (PTH), or calcitonin) in MEDLINE, Embase.com , and Cochrane Central Register databases. We estimated risk ratios (RR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) to prevent secondary fractures. Twenty-six studies met our eligibility criteria. There was a significant reduction in RR (0.38-0.77) after the use of anti-osteoporotic drugs for secondary vertebral fractures. Bisphosphonates and PTH significantly reduced the risk of a secondary non-vertebral fracture (RR 0.59 and 0.64). PTH needed the fewest number of patients to be treated to prevent a secondary vertebral fracture (NNT: 56). Our study demonstrated the effectiveness of anti-osteoporotic agents included in our systematic review in preventing secondary vertebral fractures. Bisphosphonates and PTH were most effective in preventing non-vertebral fractures. We suggest that clinicians should prescribe these drugs to prevent secondary vertebral/non-vertebral fractures.

Design of the SALT Osteoporosis Study: a randomised pragmatic trial, to study a primary care screening and treatment program for the prevention of fractures in women aged 65 years or older

Background

Several drugs have become available for the treatment of osteoporosis. However, screening and treatment of patients with a high fracture risk is currently not recommended in the Netherlands, because the effectiveness of bone sparing drugs has not been demonstrated in the general primary care population. Here we describe the design of the SALT Osteoporosis study, which aims to examine whether the screening and treatment of older, female patients in primary care can reduce fractures, in comparison to usual care.

Methods

A randomised pragmatic trial has been designed using a stepwise approach in general care practices in the Netherlands. Women aged ≥65 years, who are not prescribed bone sparing drugs or corticosteroids are eligible for the study. First, women with at least one clinical risk factor for fractures, as determined by questionnaires, are randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Second, women in the intervention group having a high fracture risk according to our screening program, including an adapted fracture risk assessment (FRAX) tool, combined with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and instant vertebral assessment (IVA), are offered a structured treatment program. The women in the control group receive care as usual and will undergo the same screening as the intervention group at the end of the trial. The follow-up duration will be three years and the primary outcome is time to first incident fracture and the total number of fractures.

Discussion

The results of the current study will be very important for underpinnings of the prevention strategy of the osteoporosis guidelines.

Trial registration

ID NTR2430. Registered 26 July 2010.

Short-term daily teriparatide in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of six-month teriparatide treatment followed by six-month bisphosphonate therapy with 12-month bisphosphonate monotherapy in Japanese rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who had not been previously treated for osteoporosis.

METHODS

A total of 34 RA patients with osteoporosis were enrolled. Thirteen patients received six-month teriparatide prior to six-month minodronate therapy (PTH group), and 21 patients received 12-month minodronate therapy (BP group). Bone mineral density (BMD), and bone turnover markers were measured prior to and 6 and 12 months after the initiation of treatment.

RESULTS

Bone mineral density of the spine was significantly increased after 12 months of treatment in both groups. In the PTH group, the mean percent change of BMD of the spine was significantly higher at 12 months after the initiation of treatment, as compared to the BP group (PTH group: 9.9 ± 1.5%, BP group: 5.5 ± 0.7%). Femoral neck BMD was significantly increased only in the PTH group after 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Therapy involving six-month teriparatide followed by six-month minodronate therapy increased spine BMD to a greater degree than 12-month minodronate monotherapy. The strategy of short-term administration of teriparatide for RA patients with osteoporosis might be useful when additional bisphosphonate therapy is considered.

Atraumatic segmental atypical femur fracture secondary to bisphosphonate use: A case report

Atypical femur fractures as a result of long term bisphosphonate use are characterized by several unique radiographic features. We describe an atypical femur fracture treated by cephalomedullary nail with a previously undescribed segmental fracture pattern. Other than 1.5 years of bisphosphonate use the patient did not have any other risk factors known to cause atypical femur fractures. Judicious bisphosphonate use as well as increased awareness of the associated complications may help reduce the rate of bisphosphonate associated atypical femur fractures.

Fracture Preventing Effects of Maxmarvil® Tablets (Alendronate 5 mg + Calcitriol 0.5 µg) in Patients with Osteoporosis

Background

The purpose of this prospective, open-label, observational study was to assess the fracture preventing effect of Maxmarvil® tablets (alendronate 5 mg + calcitriol 0.5 µg) in patients with osteoporosis and to evaluate the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the minimum 1-year follow-up.

Methods

In this multicenter observational study, 691 patients with osteoporosis (aged 50 years or older) were treated with alendronate 5 mg + calcitriol 0.5 µg/day during their normal course of care. Patients were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Baseline characteristics (including age, gender, concomitant disease, and baseline fractures) were evaluated.

Results

From among the 848 participants, 149 individuals were lost to follow-up at the time of the study and 8 people had died. The 691 participants (54 men and 637 women) finished the follow-up study and completed the questionnaire. The mean age of the participants was 71.5 years (range, 50–92 years; mean age, 72.3 years for men and 71.4 years for women). Osteoporotic fracture occurred in 19 patients (2.7%). BMD of the lumbar spine and hip was improved by 5% and 1.5% at the latest follow-up. At the latest follow-up, 24 patients (3.5%) complained of drug-related complications such as dyspepsia, constipation, and nausea.

Conclusions

This prospective observational study demonstrated that alendronate 5 mg + calcitriol 0.5 µg/day had a preventive effect on osteoporotic fracture and it increased the BMD of the lumbar spine by 5% at the latest follow-up.

Mind the (treatment) gap: a global perspective on current and future strategies for prevention of fragility fractures

This narrative review considers the key challenges facing healthcare professionals and policymakers responsible for providing care to populations in relation to bone health. These challenges broadly fall into four distinct themes: (1) case finding and management of individuals at high risk of fracture, (2) public awareness of osteoporosis and fragility fractures, (3) reimbursement and health system policy and (4) epidemiology of fracture in the developing world. Findings from cohort studies, randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, in addition to current clinical guidelines, position papers and national and international audits, are summarised, with the intention of providing a prioritised approach to delivery of optimal bone health for all. Systematic approaches to case-finding individuals who are at high risk of sustaining fragility fractures are described. These include strategies and models of care intended to improve case finding for individuals who have sustained fragility fractures, those undergoing treatment with medicines which have an adverse effect on bone health and people who have diseases, whereby bone loss and, consequently, fragility fractures are a common comorbidity. Approaches to deliver primary fracture prevention in a clinically effective and cost-effective manner are also explored. Public awareness of osteoporosis is low worldwide. If older people are to be more pro-active in the management of their bone health, that needs to change. Effective disease awareness campaigns have been implemented in some countries but need to be undertaken in many more. A major need exists to improve awareness of the risk that osteoporosis poses to individuals who have initiated treatment, with the intention of improving adherence in the long term. A multisector effort is also required to support patients and their clinicians to have meaningful discussions concerning the risk-benefit ratio of osteoporosis treatment. With regard to prioritisation of fragility fracture prevention in national policy, there is much to be done. In the developing world, robust epidemiological estimates of fracture incidence are required to inform policy development. As the aging of the baby boomer generation is upon us, this review provides a comprehensive analysis of how bone health can be improved worldwide for all.

Bisphosphonates and atypical subtrochanteric fractures of the femur

OBJECTIVES

Bisphosphonates are widely used as first-line treatment for primary and secondary prevention of fragility fractures. Whilst they have proved effective in this role, there is growing concern over their long-term use, with much evidence linking bisphosphonate-related suppression of bone remodelling to an increased risk of atypical subtrochanteric fractures of the femur (AFFs). The objective of this article is to review this evidence, while presenting the current available strategies for the management of AFFs.

METHODS

We present an evaluation of current literature relating to the pathogenesis and treatment of AFFs in the context of bisphosphonate use.

RESULTS

Six broad themes relating to the pathogenesis and management of bisphosphonate-related AFFs are presented. The key themes in fracture pathogenesis are: bone microdamage accumulation; altered bone mineralisation and altered collagen formation. The key themes in fracture management are: medical therapy and surgical therapy. In addition, primary prevention strategies for AFFs are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

This article presents current knowledge about the relationship between bisphosphonates and the development of AFFs, and highlights key areas for future research. In particular, studies aimed at identifying at-risk subpopulations and organising surveillance for those on long-term therapy will be crucial in both increasing our understanding of the condition, and improving population outcomes.Cite this article: N. Kharwadkar, B. Mayne, J. E. Lawrence, V. Khanduja. Bisphosphonates and atypical subtrochanteric fractures of the femur. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:144-153. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.63.BJR-2016-0125.R1.

The Efficacy of Bisphosphonates for Prevention of Osteoporotic Fracture: An Update Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of bisphosphonates for osteoporotic fracture has been consistently reported in recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling hundreds of patients. The objective of this study was to update knowledge on the efficacy of available bisphosphonates in the prevention of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures.

METHODS

An approach "using systematic reviews" on PubMed and Cochrane Library was taken. Twenty-four RCTs investigating the effects of bisphosphonates for the prevention of osteoporotic fracture were included in final analysis. A pairwise meta-analysis was conducted with a random effects model. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the type of bisphosphonate.

RESULTS

The use of bisphosphonate decrease the risk of overall osteoporotic fracture (odds ratio [OR] 0.62; P<0.001), vertebral fracture (OR 0.55; P<0.001) and non-vertebral fracture (OR 0.73; P<0.001). Subgroup analysis indicated that zoledronic acid showed the lowest risk reduction (OR 0.61; P<0.001) for overall osteoporotic fractures but no significance was observed for etidronate (OR 0.34; P=0.127).

CONCLUSIONS

This update meta-analysis re-confirmed that bisphosphonate use can effectively reduce the risk of osteoporotic fracture. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding etidronate for the prevention of osteoporotic fracture.

Bone Loss Prevention of Bisphosphonates in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of bisphosphonates in improving bone mineral density (BMD) and decreasing the occurrence rate of fractures and adverse events in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which use bisphosphonates in IBD patients were identified in PubMed, MEDLINE database, EMBASE database, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Databases between 1990 and June 2016. People received bisphosphonate or placebos with a follow-up of at least one year were also considered. STATA 12.0 software was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized clinical trials were included in the meta-analysis. The data indicated that the percentage change in the increased BMD in the bisphosphonates groups was superior to that of the control groups at the lumbar spine and total hip. At the femoral neck, there was no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of new fractures during follow-up showed significant reduction. The adverse event analysis revealed no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that bisphosphonates therapy has an effect on bone loss in patients with IBD but show no evident efficiency at increasing the incidence of adverse events.

Comparison of predictors of hip fracture and mortality after hip fracture in community-dwellers with and without Alzheimer's disease - exposure-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Dementia, with Alzheimer's disease (AD) being the most common form, is a major hip fracture risk factor, but currently it is not known whether the same factors predict hip fracture among persons with and without dementia/AD. We compared the predictors of hip fracture and mortality after hip fracture in persons with and without AD.

METHODS

An exposure-matched cohort of all community-dwellers of Finland who received a new clinically verified AD diagnosis in 2005-2011 and had no history of previous hip fracture (N = 67,072) and an age, sex, and region-matched cohort of persons without AD (N = 67,072). Associations between sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities and medications and risk of hip fracture and mortality after hip fracture were assessed with Cox regression.

RESULTS

As expected, the incidence of hip fractures in 2005-2012 (2.19/100 person-years vs 0.90/100 person-years in the non-AD cohort), as well as mortality after hip fracture (29/100 person-years vs 23/100 person-years in the non-AD cohort) were higher in the AD cohort. This difference was evident regardless of the risk factors. Mental and behavioural disorders (adjusted hazard ratio; HR 95% confidence interval CI: 1.16, 1.09-1.24 and 1.71, 1.52-1.92 in the AD and non-AD-cohorts), antipsychotics (1.12, 1.04-1.20 and 1.56, 1.38-1.76 for AD and non-AD-cohorts) and antidepressants (1.06, 1.00-1.12 and 1.34 1.22-1.47 for AD and non-AD-cohorts) were related to higher, and estrogen/combination hormone therapy (0.87, 0.77-0.9 and 0.79, 0.64-0.98 for AD and non-AD-cohorts) to lower hip fracture risk in both cohorts. Stroke (1.42, 1.26-1.62), diabetes (1.13, 0.99-1.28), active cancer treatment (1.67, 1.22-2.30), proton pump inhibitors (1.14, 1.05-1.25), antiepileptics (1.27, 1.11-1.46) and opioids (1.10, 1.01-1.19) were associated with higher hip fracture risk in the non-AD cohort. Similarly, the associations between mortality risk factors (age, sex, several comorbidities and medications) were stronger in the non-AD cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

AD itself appears to be such a significant risk factor for hip fracture, and mortality after hip fracture, that it overrules or diminishes the effect of other risk factors. Thus, it is important to develop and implement preventive interventions that are suitable and effective in this population.