The increase in prescriptions of bisphosphonates and the incidence proportion of osteonecrosis of the jaw after risk communication activities in Japan: a hospital-based cohort study

Incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw in Japanese osteoporosis patients taking minodronic acid

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) associated with bisphosphonate therapy is a rare but severe side effect in osteoporosis patients. Recently, the number of osteoporosis patients with ONJ has dramatically increased in Japan. This has contributed to an increase in the number of patients avoiding extractions. However, there has been no prospective study providing definitive incidence data for ONJ in Japanese patients. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the true as well as suspected incidence of ONJ. A total of 3229 subjects (1612 subjects in the minodronic acid group and 1617 subjects in the raloxifene group) in the Japanese Osteoporosis Intervention Trial protocol number 4 participated in this study. ONJ was diagnosed by experienced dentists. Suspected Stage 0 and 1 (bone exposure of the jaw) ONJ was assessed by a structured questionnaire at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. No established ONJ cases were diagnosed during the study. The incidence of suspected Stage 0 and/or Stage 1 ONJ was 6.14 per 1000 patient-years in the minodronic acid group and 3.38 per 1000 patient-years in the raloxifene group [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 1.82 (0.84-3.93), P = 0.13]. Approximately 50-60% of bone exposures that appeared during the study had disappeared at the next observation. Although the subjects in this study may have developed a greater interest in the health of the oral cavity, the incidence of ONJ after minodronic acid treatment would be lower than the expected incident rate.

Characteristics of Chronic Maxillary Sinusitis in Patients With a History of Long-term Bisphosphonate Use

Background

Bisphosphonates are widely used as bone stabilizers, which can cause major side effects including bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) that occurs more frequently in the mandible. Consequently, there is a need for a detailed investigation of BRONJ of the maxilla and, in particular, of involvement of the maxillary sinus.

Objective

Our aim was to evaluate the characteristic radiologic and clinical manifestations in patients with maxillary sinusitis and a history of long-term bisphosphonate use.

Methods

Between January 2015 and July 2018, 55 patients with symptoms consistent with chronic rhinosinusitis who underwent a paranasal sinus computed tomography (CT) and had a history of >12 months of bisphosphonate therapy were included in the analysis.

Results

Radiologically and clinically evident chronic rhinosinusitis was noted in 24 of the 55 patients, of whom more than half (14/24, 58.3%) had BRONJ. The CT studies demonstrated that the maxillary sinus was involved in all 24 patients, characterized by unilateral involvement (70.8%) and bony remodeling in the posterior maxillary region (90.5%). The evidence of osteitis on CT and/or single-photon emission CT was observed in the majority of cases (19/21, 90.5%) and 12 patients (50.0%) had oroantral fistula. However, there were no differences in the clinical appearance of the diseases with respect to the radiologic aspects.

Conclusions

Besides its well-known effects on the mandible, long-term bisphosphonate use can also affect the maxillary sinus, with typical clinical and radiological manifestations.

Hip fracture rates and time trends in use of anti-osteoporosis medications in Denmark for the period 2005 to 2015: Missed opportunities in fracture prevention

BACKGROUND

Declining use of bisphosphonates (BP) in the United States and Europe may lead to a widening of the treatment gap for osteoporosis and an increase in fracture rates. However, a shift to non-bisphosphonates and to hospital administered i.v. BPs could lead to overestimation of the treatment gap if analyses are based exclusively on BP prescriptions. When a healthcare system successfully narrows the treatment gap by making appropriate use of anti-osteoporosis drugs, we would expect to see declining rates of osteoporotic fractures with much of the decrease being statistically attributable to medication uptake. We analysed a best-case scenario where all use of BPs, denosumab, raloxifene and PTH analogues - including the oncology area - was contrasted with the trend in hip fracture rates. This scenario also considered users of raloxifene and teriparatide as covered by osteoporosis drugs though the primary RCT for raloxifene showed no risk reduction in nonvertebral fractures and the RCT for teriparatide risk reductions for non-vertebral fractures but not hip fracture specifically. Sensitivity analyses were also done.

METHODS

We used aggregate statistics on hip fracture events and total use of the above medications estimating the number of persons potentially covered. The reduction in hip fracture rates attributable to treatment was estimated using the absolute risk reduction (ARR) found in real-world users of oral alendronate in Denmark with the ARR in the FIT primary prevention arm as an alternative scenario.

RESULTS

A plateau in use of osteoporosis medications occurred in 2014. Between 2005 and 2015, hip fracture rates declined by 30%. However, only up to 20% of the observed reduction in hip fracture rates was statistically attributable to treatment even in a best-case scenario. Sensitivity analyses where raloxifene and teriparatide were excluded did not impact on this finding.

DISCUSSION

Anti-osteoporosis treatment in Denmark reached a plateau in 2014 even in a best-case scenario where all dispensations were assumed to be for osteoporosis. Future studies may be able to distinguish between the oncology area and the osteoporosis indication as well as provide a delineation of age and gender demographics among users of hospital administered osteoporosis medications. About 80% of the decline in hip fracture rates appears to be due to factors other than osteoporosis medication. The plateau in use of osteoporosis treatment at a level that is too low to make a meaningful impact on societal fracture burden is problematic given the predicted increased age-specific hip fracture rates.

The RIMES Statement: A Checklist to Assess the Quality of Studies Evaluating Risk Minimization Programs for Medicinal Products

INTRODUCTION

Pharmaceutical risk minimization programs involve interventions designed to support safe and appropriate use of medicines. Currently, information regarding the evaluation of these programs is not publicly reported in a standardized and transparent manner. To address this gap, we developed and piloted a quality reporting checklist entitled the Reporting recommendations Intended for pharmaceutical risk Minimization Evaluation Studies (RIMES).

METHODS

Checklist development was guided by three sources: (1) a theoretical framework derived from program theory and process evaluation; (2) public health intervention design and evaluation principles; and (3) a review of existing quality reporting checklists. Two raters independently reviewed 10 recently published (2012-2016) risk minimization program evaluation studies using the proposed checklist. Inter-rater reliability of the checklist was assessed using Cohen's Kappa and Gwet's AC1.

RESULTS

A 43-item checklist was generated. Results indicated substantial inter-rater reliability overall (κ = 0.65, AC1 = 0.65) and for three (key information, design and evaluation) of the four subscales (κ ≥ 0.64, AC1 ≥ 0.64). The fourth subscale (implementation) showed low reliability based on Cohen's Kappa, but substantial reliability based on the AC1 (κ = 0.17, AC1 = 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

The RIMES statement augments relevant elements from existing quality reporting guidelines with items that address aspects of intervention design, implementation and evaluation specific to pharmaceutical risk minimization programs. Our results show that the RIMES statement reliably measures key dimensions of reporting quality. This tailored checklist is an important first step in improving the reporting quality of risk minimization evaluation studies and may ultimately help to improve the quality of these interventions themselves.

Measuring the impact of medicines regulatory interventions - Systematic review and methodological considerations

AIMS

Evaluating the public health impact of regulatory interventions is important but there is currently no common methodological approach to guide this evaluation. This systematic review provides a descriptive overview of the analytical methods for impact research.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles with an empirical analysis evaluating the impact of European Union or non-European Union regulatory actions to safeguard public health published until March 2017. References from systematic reviews and articles from other known sources were added. Regulatory interventions, data sources, outcomes of interest, methodology and key findings were extracted.

RESULTS

From 1246 screened articles, 229 were eligible for full-text review and 153 articles in English language were included in the descriptive analysis. Over a third of articles studied analgesics and antidepressants. Interventions most frequently evaluated are regulatory safety communications (28.8%), black box warnings (23.5%) and direct healthcare professional communications (10.5%); 55% of studies measured changes in drug utilization patterns, 27% evaluated health outcomes, and 18% targeted knowledge, behaviour or changes in clinical practice. Unintended consequences like switching therapies or spill-over effects were rarely evaluated. Two-thirds used before-after time series and 15.7% before-after cross-sectional study designs. Various analytical approaches were applied including interrupted time series regression (31.4%), simple descriptive analysis (28.8%) and descriptive analysis with significance tests (23.5%).

CONCLUSION

Whilst impact evaluation of pharmacovigilance and product-specific regulatory interventions is increasing, the marked heterogeneity in study conduct and reporting highlights the need for scientific guidance to ensure robust methodologies are applied and systematic dissemination of results occurs.

Antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in osteoporosis patients from Asian countries

Bisphosphonate (BP)-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) was first reported in oncology patients in 2003 and subsequently in osteoporosis patients in 2004. Since oral surgical procedures, such as tooth extraction, are also considered one of the major risk factors for ONJ, there is confusion among physicians, dentists, and patients—particularly osteoporosis patients currently taking BPs—regarding the safety of remaining on therapy surrounding these procedures. Many papers about BP-related ONJ (BRONJ) have been published to date. In addition to BRONJ, recent studies have reported an association between ONJ and the antiresorptive therapy denosumab (Dmab; a RANKL-inhibitor). BRONJ and Dmab-related ONJ are together referred to as antiresorptive agent-related ONJ (ARONJ). The pathogenesis of ARONJ still remains unknown. It is forecasted that there will be an increased incidence of patients with osteoporotic fractures and an increased number of prescriptions for antiresorptive agents in Asia in the future. However, prescriptions for antiresorptives for osteoporosis may be restricted in the Asian population as the occurrence of ARONJ may be higher as compared with those in other countries. In this review, we focused on the following topics as it pertains to the Asian osteoporotic population: the oral condition specific for osteoporosis patients; definition, staging, prevalence and incidence of ARONJ; imaging modalities for ARONJ; specific risk factors for ARONJ; prevention strategies for ARONJ, and; cooperation between physicians and dentists in the prevention of ARONJ. Ideally, the Asian Federation of Osteoporosis Societies would cooperate with one another and find more population-specific evidence for the prevention of ARONJ.

Evaluation of dental implants as a risk factor for the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in breast cancer patients

It remains unclear whether dental implants are a risk factor for the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ). We retrospectively evaluated the status of dental implants in patients given intravenous bisphosphonates (BPs) in a breast cancer cohort to elucidate the risk for BRONJ at the implant site. We established a BRONJ oral monitoring program for 247 breast cancer patients given intravenous BP in our institution. The 3-year cumulative incidence rate was determined. The systemic and local risk factors of 44 patients who completed comprehensive oral examinations were evaluated by logistic regression analysis. The 3-year cumulative incidence rate of the 247 patients was 0.074 % (8/247, 95 % CI 0.0081-0.014). In the 44 orally examined patients, 6 (13.6 %: 6/44) had dental implants. Of these 6 patients, 1 developed BRONJ at the implant site. There were no significant differences in the age, total BP treatment period, number of residual teeth, time of regular oral monitoring, oral hygiene level, or dental implant insertion. Although a case of ONJ was identified, dental implants which were inserted before intravenous BP administration were not a risk factor for the development of ONJ in breast cancer patients.