Adherence to raloxifene therapy: assessment methods and relationship with efficacy

Non-Adherence to Anti-Osteoporosis Medication: Factors Influencing and Strategies to Overcome It. A Narrative Review

To evaluate the reasons for inadequate adherence to osteoporosis therapy and to describe the strategies for improving adherence to and persistence with regular medications, we conducted a review of the literature. The primary outcome of the study was the determination of the factors adverse to the onset and maintenance of anti-osteoporosis therapies. Secondly, we focused on studies whose efforts led to finding different strategies to improve adherence and persistence. We identified a total of 26 articles. The most recurrent and significant factors identified were aging, polypharmacy, and smoking habits. Different strategies to guide patients in their osteoporosis care have been identified, such as monitoring and follow-up via telephone calls, email, and promotional meetings, and proactive care interventions such as medication monitoring, post-fracture care programs, and decision aids. Changes in the drugs regimen and dispensation are strategies tried to lead to better adherence and persistence, but also improved satisfaction of patients undergoing anti-osteoporosis treatment. Patient involvement is an important factor to increase medication persistence while using a flexible drugs regimen.

Bone Turnover Markers: Basic Biology to Clinical Applications

Bone turnover markers (BTMs) are used widely, in both research and clinical practice. In the last 20 years, much experience has been gained in measurement and interpretation of these markers, which include commonly used bone formation markers bone alkaline phosphatase, osteocalcin, and procollagen I N-propeptide; and commonly used resorption markers serum C-telopeptides of type I collagen, urinary N-telopeptides of type I collagen and tartrate resistant acid phosphatase type 5b. BTMs are usually measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or automated immunoassay. Sources contributing to BTM variability include uncontrollable components (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity) and controllable components, particularly relating to collection conditions (e.g., fasting/feeding state, and timing relative to circadian rhythms, menstrual cycling, and exercise). Pregnancy, season, drugs, and recent fracture(s) can also affect BTMs. BTMs correlate with other methods of assessing bone turnover, such as bone biopsies and radiotracer kinetics; and can usefully contribute to diagnosis and management of several diseases such as osteoporosis, osteomalacia, Paget's disease, fibrous dysplasia, hypophosphatasia, primary hyperparathyroidism, and chronic kidney disease-mineral bone disorder.

DIAGNOSIS OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: Bone turnover markers: are they clinically useful?

Bone turnover markers (BTMs) are useful in clinical practice as they are inexpensive, and they have proven useful for treatment monitoring and identification of poor adherence. BTMs cannot be used in individual patients for identifying accelerated bone loss or an increase in fracture risk or in deciding on the optimal therapy. They are useful for monitoring both anti-resorptive and anabolic treatment. Response can be defined as a result that exceeds an absolute target, or by a change greater than the least significant change; if such a response is not present, then poor compliance or secondary osteoporosis are likely causes. A baseline BTM measurement is not always made; in that case, a value of BTM on anti-resorptive treatment that is low or low normal or above the reference interval for anabolic therapy may be taken to indicate a satisfactory response. We provide an approach to using these bone turnover markers in clinical practice by describing algorithms for anti-resorptive and anabolic therapy and describing the changes we observe in the clinical practice setting.

Use of bone turnover markers in postmenopausal osteoporosis

Bone turnover comprises two processes: the removal of old bone (resorption) and the laying down of new bone (formation). N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) and C-telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX-I) are markers of bone formation and resorption, respectively, that are recommended for clinical use. Bone turnover markers can be measured on several occasions in one individual with good precision. However, these markers are subject to several sources of variability, including feeding (resorption decreases) and recent fracture (all markers increase for several months). Bone turnover markers are not used for diagnosis of osteoporosis and do not improve prediction of bone loss or fracture within an individual. In untreated women, very high bone turnover marker concentrations suggest secondary causes of high bone turnover (eg, bone metastases or multiple myeloma). In people with osteoporosis, bone turnover markers might be useful to assess the response to anabolic and antiresorptive therapies, to assess compliance to therapy, or to indicate possible secondary osteoporosis. Much remains to be learnt about how bone turnover markers can be used to monitor the effect of stopping bisphosphonate therapy (eg, to identify a threshold above which restarting therapy should be considered). More studies are needed to investigate the use of bone turnover markers for assessment of the bone safety of new medications.

Response of bone turnover markers to raloxifene treatment in postmenopausal women with osteopenia

We used two methods of identifying women who reached the target for raloxifene treatment with bone turnover markers. Both approaches identified women that responded to treatment but did not fully agree and may be complementary.

INTRODUCTION

The change in bone turnover markers (BTMs) in response to osteoporosis therapy can be assessed by a decrease beyond the least significant change (LSC) or below the mean of the reference interval (RI). We compared the performance of these two approaches in women treated with raloxifene.

METHODS

Fifty postmenopausal osteopenic women (age 51-72 years) were randomised to raloxifene or no treatment for 2 years. Blood samples were collected for the measurement of BTM. The LSC for each marker was calculated from the untreated women and the RI obtained from healthy premenopausal women (age 35-40 years). Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at the spine and hip.

RESULTS

There was a decrease in BTM in response to raloxifene treatment, percentage change at 12 weeks: C terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) -39 % (95 % CI -48 to -28) and N terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) -32 % (95 % CI -40 to -23) P < 0.001. The proportion of women classified as responding to treatment using LSC at 12 weeks was as follows: CTX 38 % and PINP 52 % and at 48 weeks CTX 60 % and PINP 65 %. For the RI approach, the proportion of women classified as responding to treatment at 12 weeks was CTX and PINP 38 % and at 48 weeks CTX 40 % and PINP 45 %. There was a significant difference in the change in spine BMD in the raloxifene-treated group compared to the no-treatment group at week 48: difference 0.031 g/cm(2) (95 % CI 0.016 to 0.046, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The two approaches identified women that reached the target for treatment using BTM. Both LSC and RI criteria appear useful in identifying treatment response, but the two approaches do not fully overlap and may be complementary.

A scoping review of studies comparing the medication event monitoring system (MEMS) with alternative methods for measuring medication adherence

Different methods are available for measuring medication adherence. In this paper, we conducted a scoping review to identify and summarize evidence of all studies comparing the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) with alternative methods for measuring medication adherence. A literature search was performed using the open database www.iAdherence.org that includes all original studies reporting findings from the MEMS. Papers comparing methods for measuring adherence to solid oral formulations were included. Data was extracted using a standardized extraction table. A total of 117 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 251 comparisons. Most frequent comparisons were against self-report (n = 119) and pill count (n = 59). Similar outcome measures were used in 210 comparisons (84%), among which 78 used dichotomous variables (adherent or not) and 132 used continuous measures (adherence expressed as percentage). Furthermore, 32% of all comparisons did not estimate adherence over the same coverage period and 44% of all comparisons did not use a statistical method or used a suboptimal one. Only eighty-seven (35%) comparisons had similar coverage periods, similar outcome measures and optimal statistical methods. Compared to MEMS, median adherence was grossly overestimated by 17% using self-report, by 8% using pill count and by 6% using rating. In conclusion, among all comparisons of MEMS versus alternative methods for measuring adherence, only a few used adequate comparisons in terms of outcome measures, coverage periods and statistical method. Researchers should therefore use stronger methodological frameworks when comparing measurement methods and be aware that non-electronic measures could lead to overestimation of medication adherence.

Response of bone turnover markers to three oral bisphosphonate therapies in postmenopausal osteoporosis: the TRIO study

We used bone turnover markers to identify women who responded to bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis. Response was more likely with alendronate and ibandronate than risedronate. There was a greater decrease in bone markers if baseline bone turnover markers were higher and if the patient took more than 80 % of her medication.

INTRODUCTION

Biochemical response to bisphosphonate therapy can be assessed using either a decrease in bone turnover marker beyond the least significant change (LSC) or a reduction to within a reference interval (RI). We compared the performance of these target responses and determined whether response was related to the type of bisphosphonate, compliance and baseline bone turnover markers.

METHODS

Biochemical responses to three oral bisphosphonates were assessed in an open, controlled trial comprising 172 postmenopausal osteoporotic women (age 53-84 years), randomised to alendronate, ibandronate or risedronate, plus calcium and vitamin D supplementation for 2 years. The LSC for each marker was derived within the study population, whereas RIs were obtained from a control group of healthy premenopausal women (age 35-40 years).

RESULTS

Over 70 % of women achieved a target response for serum CTX and PINP, irrespective of the approach used. The percentage decrease at 12 weeks was greater for women with baseline PINP above the RI -63 % (difference 13 %, 95 % CI 0 to 27.1, P = 0.049) and good compliance -67 % (difference 15.9 %, 95 % CI 6.3 to 25.5, P = 0.001). Responders had a greater increase in spine bone density compared to nonresponders; for example 6.2 vs. 2.3 % (difference 3.9 %, 95 % CI 1.6 to 6.3, P = 0.0011) for PINP LSC. The magnitude of change in bone markers was greater with ibandronate and alendronate than risedronate.

CONCLUSIONS

Both approaches to response identified similar proportions of women as responders. Nonresponders had smaller increases in BMD, and we suggest that biochemical assessment of response is a useful tool for the management of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Drug holidays: the most frequent type of noncompliance with calcium plus vitamin D supplementation in persistent patients with osteoporosis

PURPOSE

All current recommendations include calcium and vitamin D (Ca-D) as an integrated part of osteoporosis treatment. The purpose of this pilot study was to analyze compliance with a fixed combination of Ca-D in women persistent with the treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An observational study was carried out in three osteocenters in the Czech Republic. Women with osteoporosis ≥55 years of age concurrently treated with oral ibandronate were eligible. Compliance was evaluated in a period of 3 months by Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS), tablet count, and self-report. Nonpersistence was defined as a MEMS-based gap in the use of Ca-D to be 30 days or more.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients were monitored, of which 49 patients were analyzed (target population). Based on MEMS, mean overall compliance was 71%; good compliance (≥80%) was observed in 59% of the patients. As many as 71% of the patients took drug holidays (≥3 consecutive days without intake); overall compliance of these patients was 59% and was slightly lower on Fridays and weekends. Patients without drug holidays were fully compliant (did not omit individual doses). Compliance differed according to daily time at which the patients mostly used the Ca-D. Afternoon/evening takers showed a mean overall compliance of 82% while morning/night takers only 51% (P=0.049). Based on MEMS, tablet count, and self-report, compliance ≥75% was observed in 59%, 100%, and 87% of the patients, respectively. Outcomes obtained by the three methods were not associated with each other. Undesirable concurrent ingestion of Ca-D and ibandronate was present only twice.

CONCLUSION

Despite almost perfect self-reported and tablet count-based compliance, MEMS-based compliance was relatively poor. Consecutive supplementation-free days were common; more than two-thirds of the patients took at least one drug holiday. This pilot study showed drug holiday to be the most important type of noncompliance with Ca-D in those who are persistent with the treatment.