Persistence and adherence to parenteral osteoporosis therapies: a systematic review

The Dutch multidisciplinary guideline osteoporosis and fracture prevention, taking a local guideline to the international arena

BACKGROUND

In 2018, a grant was provided for an evidence-based guideline on osteoporosis and fracture prevention based on 10 clinically relevant questions.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary working group was formed with delegates from Dutch scientific and professional societies, including representatives from the patient's organization and the Dutch Institute for Medical Knowledge. The purpose was to obtain a broad consensus among all participating societies to facilitate the implementation of the updated guideline.

RESULTS

Novel recommendations in our guideline are as follows: - In patients with an indication for DXA of the lumbar spine and hips, there is also an indication for VFA. - Directly starting with anabolic drugs (teriparatide or romosozumab) in patients with a very high fracture risk; - Directly starting with zoledronic acid in patients 75 years and over with a hip fracture (independent of DXA); - Directly starting with parenteral drugs (denosumab, teriparatide, zoledronic acid) in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis with very high fracture risk; - A lifelong fracture risk management, including lifestyle, is indicated from the start of the first treatment.

CONCLUSION

In our new multidisciplinary guideline osteoporosis and fracture prevention, we developed 5 "relatively new statements" that are all a crucial step forward in the optimization of diagnosis and treatment for fracture prevention. We also developed 5 flowcharts, and we suppose that this may be helpful for individual doctors and their patients in daily practice and may facilitate implementation.

Bisphosphonate alternative regimens for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures: BLAST-OFF, a mixed-methods study

Background

Bisphosphonates are a class of medication commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is recommended as the first-line treatment; however, long-term adherence (both treatment compliance and persistence) is poor. Alternative bisphosphonates are available, which can be given intravenously and have been shown to improve long-term adherence. However, the most clinically effective and cost-effective alternative bisphosphonate regimen remains unclear. What is the most cost-effective bisphosphonate in clinical trials may not be the most cost-effective or acceptable to patients in everyday clinical practice.

Objectives

1. Explore patient, clinician and stakeholder views, experiences and preferences of alendronate compared to alternative bisphosphonates. 2. Update and refine the 2016 systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of bisphosphonates, and estimate the value of further research into their benefits. 3. Undertake stakeholder/consensus engagement to identify important research questions and further rank research priorities.

Methods

The study was conducted in two stages, stages 1A and 1B in parallel, followed by stage 2: • Stage 1A - we elicited patient and healthcare experiences to understand their preferences of bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. This was undertaken by performing a systematic review and framework synthesis of qualitative studies, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews with participants. • Stage 1B - we updated and expanded the existing Health Technology Assessment systematic review and clinical and cost-effectiveness model, incorporating a more comprehensive review of treatment efficacy, safety, side effects, compliance and long-term persistence. • Stage 2 - we identified and ranked further research questions that need to be answered about the effectiveness and acceptability of bisphosphonates.

Results

Patients and healthcare professionals identified a number of challenges in adhering to bisphosphonate medication, balancing the potential for long-term risk reduction against the work involved in adhering to oral alendronate. Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable, with such regimens perceived to be more straightforward to engage in, although a portion of patients taking alendronate were satisfied with their current treatment. Intravenous zoledronate was found to be the most effective, with higher adherence rates compared to the other bisphosphonates, for reducing the risk of fragility fracture. However, oral bisphosphonates are more cost-effective than intravenous zoledronate due to the high cost of zoledronate administration in hospital. The importance of including patients and healthcare professionals when setting research priorities is recognised. Important areas for research were related to patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, how to optimise long-term care and the cost-effectiveness of delivering zoledronate in an alternative, non-hospital setting.

Conclusions

Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable to patients and found to be the most effective bisphosphonate and with greater adherence; however, the cost-effectiveness relative to oral alendronate is limited by its higher zoledronate hospital administration costs.

Future work

Further research is needed to support people to make decisions influencing treatment selection, effectiveness and optimal long-term care, together with the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intravenous zoledronate administered in a non-hospital (community) setting.

Limitations

Lack of clarity and limitations in the many studies included in the systematic review may have under-interpreted some of the findings relating to effects of bisphosphonates.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN10491361.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127550) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Targeted Coaching to Improve Osteoporosis Therapy Adherence: A Single Arm Variation of the C-STOP Study

BACKGROUND

In this pre-planned variation of the Comparing Strategies Targeting Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures After an Upper Extremity Fracture (C-STOP) trial, we investigated whether adherence-specific coaching by the case manager (CM) further improved the adherence and persistence rates compared to those seen in the C-STOP trial.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational cohort study of community-dwelling adults 50 years or older who suffered an upper-extremity fracture and were not previously treated with osteoporosis medications, to assess whether a well-trained CM can partner with patients to improve adherence to and persistence with oral bisphosphonate intake. The primary outcome was adherence (taking > 80% of prescribed doses) to oral bisphosphonate intake at 12 months after study enrollment. Secondary outcomes included primary adherence to and 12-month persistence with oral bisphosphonate and calcium and vitamin D supplement intake at 12 months.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 84 participants, of which 30 were prescribed an oral bisphosphonate. Twenty-two (73.3%) started treatment within 3 months. The adherence rate at 12 months was 77.3%. The persistence rate at 12 months was 95.5%. Of those not prescribed an oral bisphosphonate, 62.8% were taking supplemental calcium and 93.0% were taking supplemental vitamin D at 12 months. Depression was a significant predictor of 12-month non-adherence (adjusted odds ratio, 9.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-81.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence-specific coaching by a CM did not further improve the level of medication adherence achieved in the original C-STOP study. Importantly, these results can inform adherence in future intervention studies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of fracture liaison services: a Markov model using Dutch real-world data

This study assessed the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a fracture liaison service (FLS) compared to no-FLS in the Netherlands from a societal perspective and suggested that FLS was cost-effective in patients with a recent fracture aged 50 years and older. The implementation of FLS could lead to lifetime health-economic benefits.

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to investigate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a fracture liaison service (FLS) compared to no-FLS in the Netherlands from a societal perspective and using real-world data.

METHODS

Annual fracture incidence, treatment scenarios as well as treatment initiation in the years 2017-2019 were collected from a large secondary care hospital in the Netherlands. An individual-level, state transition model was designed to simulate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Treatment pathways were differentiated by gender, presence of osteoporosis and/or prevalent vertebral fracture, and treatment status. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

For patients with a recent fracture aged 50 years and older, the presence of an FLS was associated with a lifetime €45 higher cost and 0.11 additional QALY gained leading to an ICER of €409 per QALY gained, indicating FLS was cost-effective compared to no-FLS at the Dutch threshold of €20,000/QALY. The FLS remained cost-effectiveness across different age categories. Our findings were robust in all one-way sensitivity analyses, the higher the treatment initiation rate in FLS, the greater the cost-effective of FLS. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that FLS was cost-effective in 90% of the simulations at the threshold of €20,000/QALY, with women 92% versus men 84% by gender.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first health-economic analysis of FLS in the Netherlands, suggesting the implementation of FLS could lead to lifetime health-economic benefits.

The interruption of romosozumab treatment during COVID lockdown among US post-menopausal women enrolled in Medicare

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the COVID lock-down on treatment interruptions of romosozumab, a first in class biologic therapy, administered by healthcare providers once monthly.

METHODS

We used Medicare data from 1/1/2017 to 9/30/2021 to identify women age ≥65 initiating romosozumab between 4/1/2019 and 6/30/2021. Patient demographics, provider specialty, and baseline comorbidities were identified. Romosozumab dispensations were grouped into five 6-month periods based on the dispensing date from FDA licensure to the end of the data (Period 1 to 5). "Treatment interruption" was defined as any interval gap between 2 dispensations >60 days. The numbers of treatment interruption event were aggregated per period per patient. Mixed effect Poisson regression with patient-level random effects was performed, including an interaction term between Period and number of prior doses.

RESULTS

There were 12,216 romosozumab new users identified. A total of 2724 treatment interruption events were identified among 2229 romosozumab users. After adjustment, comparing with the period immediately before the lockdown (Period 2: 2019-10-1-2020-3-30), the IRRs (95 % CI) for treatment interruption were 0.49 (0.29, 0.81), 1.65 (1.48, 1.85), 1.79 (1.60, 2.01), and 1.67 (1.49, 1.87) for periods 1, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, per 1 prior dose change (p < 0.01 for all IRRs), where Periods 3, 4, and 5 were post-lockdown.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the pre-COVID period, the lockdown negatively impacted the continuity of romosozumab treatment among Medicare beneficiaries. Prioritizing in-time assistance for patients receiving a provider-administered parenteral therapy is critical when patients' in-person access to their provider is compromised.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Adherence to Denosumab Therapy: A Single Center Study

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective comparative study of denosumab therapy adherence before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on denosumab therapy adherence in Japan.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody for osteoporosis treatment. Delayed denosumab injections are associated with reduced treatment responses, which was a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Participants included 376 patients who received denosumab (60 mg every 6 months) from January 2013 to June 2021. The time from therapy initiation to discontinuation was used to measure persistence, and that between initial and subsequent injections was used to determine adherence. The pandemic period was from March 2020 to December 2021.

RESULTS

Patients were divided into those treated after March 2020 (pandemic group, n=244) and those who discontinued treatment before March 2020 (non-pandemic group, n=132). Non-persistent cases accounted for 154, including 24 (20%), 64 (19%), and 66 (53%) aged ≤59 years, 60-79 years, and ≥80 years, respectively. The overall persistence rate at 78 months was 59.2%. Postponed cases were significantly lower in the non-pandemic group than in the pandemic group (8% vs. 15%, p =0.042). Postponement with a delay of 1-2 months did not significantly differ between the two groups, but with a significant difference for a delay of ≥3 months (0% vs. 36%, p =0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Denosumab adherence remained constant but postponed cases significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Better communication by health providers on denosumab adherence and alternative administration may reduce dosing interruptions in similar pandemic situations.

Drug utilization analysis of osteoporosis medications in seven European electronic health databases

We studied the characteristics of patients prescribed osteoporosis medication and patterns of use in European databases. Patients were mostly female, older, had hypertension. There was suboptimal persistence particularly for oral medications. Our findings would be useful to healthcare providers to focus their resources on improving persistence to specific osteoporosis treatments.

PURPOSE

To characterise the patients prescribed osteoporosis therapy and describe the drug utilization patterns.

METHODS

We investigated the treatment patterns of bisphosphonates, denosumab, teriparatide, and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) in seven European databases in the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, and Germany. In this cohort study, we included adults aged ≥ 18 years, with ≥ 1 year of registration in the respective databases, who were new users of the osteoporosis medications. The study period was between 01 January 2018 to 31 January 2022.

RESULTS

Overall, patients were most commonly initiated on alendronate. Persistence decreased over time across all medications and databases, ranging from 52-73% at 6 months to 29-53% at 12 months for alendronate. For other oral bisphosphonates, the proportion of persistent users was 50-66% at 6 months and decreased to 30-44% at 12 months. For SERMs, the proportion of persistent users at 6 months was 40-73% and decreased to 25-59% at 12 months. For parenteral treatment groups, the proportions of persistence with denosumab were 50-85% (6 month), 30-63% (12 month) and with teriparatide 40-75% (6 month) decreasing to 21-54% (12 month). Switching occurred most frequently in the alendronate group (2.8-5.8%) and in the teriparatide group (7.1-14%). Switching typically occurred in the first 6 months and decreased over time. Patients in the alendronate group most often switched to other oral or intravenous bisphosphonates and denosumab.

CONCLUSION

Our results show suboptimal persistence to medications that varied across different databases and treatment switching was relatively rare.

Rare and Common Variants in GALNT3 May Affect Bone Mass Independently of Phosphate Metabolism

Anabolic treatment options for osteoporosis remain limited. One approach to discovering novel anabolic drug targets is to identify genetic causes of extreme high bone mass (HBM). We investigated a pedigree with unexplained HBM within the UK HBM study, a national cohort of probands with HBM and their relatives. Whole exome sequencing (WES) in a family with HBM identified a rare heterozygous missense variant (NM_004482.4:c.1657C > T, p.Arg553Trp) in GALNT3, segregating appropriately. Interrogation of data from the UK HBM study and the Anglo-Australasian Osteoporosis Genetics Consortium (AOGC) revealed an unrelated individual with HBM with another rare heterozygous variant (NM_004482.4:c.831 T > A, p.Asp277Glu) within the same gene. In silico protein modeling predicted that p.Arg553Trp would disrupt salt-bridge interactions, causing instability of GALNT3, and that p.Asp277Glu would disrupt manganese binding and consequently GALNT3 catalytic function. Bi-allelic loss-of-function GALNT3 mutations alter FGF23 metabolism, resulting in hyperphosphatemia and causing familial tumoral calcinosis (FTC). However, bone mineral density (BMD) in FTC cases, when reported, has been either normal or low. Common variants in the GALNT3 locus show genome-wide significant associations with lumbar, femoral neck, and total body BMD. However, no significant associations with BMD are observed at loci coding for FGF23, its receptor FGFR1, or coreceptor klotho. Mendelian randomization analysis, using expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) data from primary human osteoblasts and genome-wide association studies data from UK Biobank, suggested increased expression of GALNT3 reduces total body, lumbar spine, and femoral neck BMD but has no effect on phosphate concentrations. In conclusion, rare heterozygous loss-of-function variants in GALNT3 may cause HBM without altering phosphate concentration. These findings suggest that GALNT3 may affect BMD through pathways other than FGF23 regulation, the identification of which may yield novel anabolic drug targets for osteoporosis. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Cost-Effectiveness of Sequential Abaloparatide/Alendronate in Men at High Risk of Fractures in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Abaloparatide (ABL) significantly increases bone mineral density in men with osteoporosis similar to what was reported in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. The cost effectiveness of sequential treatment with ABL followed by alendronate (ALN) in men at high fracture risk was compared to relevant alternative treatments.

METHODS

A Markov-based microsimulation model based on a lifetime US healthcare decision maker perspective was developed to evaluate the cost (expressed in US$2021) per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained of sequential ABL/ALN. Comparators were sequential treatment unbranded teriparatide (TPTD)/ALN, generic ALN monotherapy, and no treatment. Discount rates of 3% were used. Consistent with practice guidelines, patients received 18 months of ABL or TPTD followed by ALN for 5 years, or 5 years of ALN monotherapy. Analyses were conducted in high-risk men aged over 50 years defined as having a bone mineral density T-score ≤-2.5 and a recent fracture. Time-specific risk of subsequent fracture after a recent fracture, incremental costs up to 5 years following fractures, real-world medication adherence, and mostly US men-specific data were included in the model. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of results.

RESULTS

Over the full age range, sequential ABL/ALN led to more QALYs for lower costs than sequential unbranded TPTD/ALN, while no treatment was dominated (more QALYs, lower costs) by ALN monotherapy. The costs per QALY gained of sequential ABL/ALN were lower than the US threshold of US$150,000 versus generic ALN monotherapy. The probabilities that sequential ABL/ALN was cost effective compared to ALN monotherapy were estimated at 51% in men aged 50 years and between 88 and 90% in those aged ≥ 60 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential therapy using ABL/ALN may be cost effective compared with generic ALN monotherapy in US men aged ≥ 50 years at high fracture risk, especially in those aged ≥ 60 years. Unbranded TPTD/ALN and no treatment were dominated interventions (less QALY, more costs) compared with ABL/ALN or ALN monotherapy.

Efficacy of denosumab on bisphosphonate-treated osteoporosis and osteopenia in systemic rheumatic disease patients receiving glucocorticoids

INTRODUCTION

Evidence on second-line agents for osteoporosis and osteopenia associated with glucocorticoid use after first-line bisphosphonate therapy is limited. We, therefore, examine the efficacy of denosumab on bisphosphonate-treated osteoporosis and osteopenia in Japanese systemic rheumatic disease (SRD) patients receiving glucocorticoids.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Glucocorticoid-treated SRD patients with a pre-existing fragility fracture, either lumbar spine (LS) or femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD) T-score of ≤ -2.5 or of ≤ -1.5 without a significant increase in BMD in the past year despite oral bisphosphonate therapy were enrolled in this study. They were randomized to switch to 60 mg subcutaneous denosumab every six months (switching group) or to continue the bisphosphonate (continuing group). The primary endpoint was the percent change from baseline in BMD at the LS and FN at week 52.

RESULTS

Of the 39 subjects, 19 were assigned to the switching group and 20 to the continuing group. The switching group showed significant increases in LS BMD (5.7% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.002) and FN BMD (4.2% vs. -0.3%, p = 0.008) at week 52 than the continuing group, with a significant decrease in serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (-28.1% vs. 7.0%, p < 0.001) and improved patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Switching to denosumab demonstrated greater efficacy than continuing bisphosphonates in increasing BMD, inhibiting osteoclast activation, and enhancing patient satisfaction in Japanese bisphosphonate-treated osteoporosis and osteopenia patients with concomitant SRD receiving glucocorticoids.

The osteoporosis treatment gap in Switzerland between 1998 and 2018

The annual number of patients treated for osteoporosis between 1998 and 2018 in Switzerland increased until 2008 and steadily decreased thereafter. With a continuously growing population at fracture risk exceeding an intervention threshold, the treatment gap has increased and the incidence of hip fractures has stopped declining in the past decade.

INTRODUCTION

The existence of an osteoporosis treatment gap, defined as the percentage of patients at risk for osteoporotic fractures exceeding an intervention threshold but remaining untreated, is widely acknowledged. Between 1998 and 2018, new bone active substances (BAS) indicated for the treatment of osteoporosis became available. Whether and if so to what extent these new introductions have altered the treatment gap is unknown.

METHODS

The annual number of patients treated with a BAS was calculated starting from single-drug unit sales. The number of patients theoretically eligible for treatment with a BAS was estimated based on four scenarios corresponding to different intervention thresholds (one based solely on a bone mineral density T score threshold and three FRAX-based thresholds) and the resulting annual treatment gaps were calculated.

RESULTS

In Switzerland, the estimated number of patients on treatment with a BAS increased from 35,901 in year 1998 to 233,381 in year 2018. However, this number grew regularly since 1998, peaked in 2008, and steadily decreased thereafter, in timely coincidence with the launch of intravenous bisphosphonates and the RANKL inhibitor denosumab. When expressed in numbers of untreated persons at risk for osteoporotic fractures exceeding a given intervention threshold, the treatment gaps were of similar magnitude in 1998 (when the first BSAs just had become available) and 2018. There was a strong association, which does not imply causation, between the proportion of patients treated and hip fracture incidence.

CONCLUSION

In Switzerland, the osteoporosis treatment gap has increased over the past decade. The availability of new BAS has not contributed to its decrease.

Denosumab versus zoledronic acid in elderly patients after hip fracture

BACKGROUND

Two injectable anti-osteoporosis medications, denosumab and zoledronic acid, have been widely used to treat patients with severe osteoporosis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and adherence of denosumab compared to zoledronic acid in geriatric patients after a hip fracture.

METHODS

A total of 282 patients treated with osteoporotic hip fracture between March 2014 and Aug 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were asked to select the anti-osteoporosis medication after surgery. Treatment persistence was monitored by follow-up visit to the outpatient clinic at postoperative 2 years.

RESULTS

Of 282 individuals with baseline data, 162 patients took subcutaneous denosumab and 120 patients took intravenous zoledronic acid. At postoperative 2 years, the change in bone mineral density (BMD) from baseline was greater in the denosumab group compared with the zoledronic acid group (p < 0.001). The rate of persistence to denosumab was significantly higher than that for 12-months zoledronic acid (p = 0.01). Serious adverse events were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed the effectiveness and patients' persistence for two commonly used anti-osteoporosis agents after hip fracture. In this frail, elderly population, half-yearly denosumab was superior to yearly zoledronic acid in BMD and demonstrated significant higher persistence rate, indicating a potential therapeutic advantage that warrants further validation.

Urban-rural differences in outcomes and management of vertebral fractures: A real-world observational study

BACKGROUND

A fracture liaison services (FLSs) and its modified services reduce refractures and mortality and can be cost-effective. Limited studies have addressed whether urban-rural differences exist in vertebral fracture outcomes and management. Therefore, the aims of the study were to investigate any urban-rural differences in refracture, mortality, prescription pattern, and associated factors of vertebral fractures after receiving assistance from an FLSs.

METHODS

Baseline characteristics and osteoporosis medication prescription patterns of participants were collected. After 1-year follow-up, mortality, refracture rate, and osteoporosis medication switching and adherence were evaluated. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to identify baseline correlates on one-year mortality.

RESULTS

There was higher mortality rate in the rural group but no urban-rural difference in the 1-year refracture rate after implementation of FLSs and medication management services (MMSs). The types of osteoporosis medications prescribed for both groups were similar, but participants in the rural group were less likely to change their osteoporosis medications during the 1-year follow-up timeframe and with lower adherence rate. The likelihood of being older and having chronic kidney disease, osteoarthritis, and neurological disease was higher in the rural group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multicomponent services have similar effectiveness in osteoporosis treatment between urban and rural areas. The overall adherence rate was lower in the rural group with higher mortality but no difference in the refracture rate in one year.

Treatment patterns of long-dose-interval medication for persistent management of osteoporosis in Taiwan

Treatment persistence was higher among the patients who initially received an anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) with a long-dose-interval.

PURPOSE

With long-dose-interval anti-osteoporosis medications (AOMs) available for osteoporosis management, it is important to evaluate persistence of any AOM as long as it is continuously used. The purpose of this study was to investigate the treatment pattern and persistence of AOMs, allowing for medication switch.

METHODS

This study was an observational retrospective cohort study using Taiwan's National Health Insurance claims data. We selected patients who first initiated an AOM between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2016. AOM therapy included alendronate, raloxifene, teriparatide, denosumab, zoledronate, and ibandronate; the latter three were categorized as long-dose-interval medications. Persistence was defined as continual prescription of any AOM at a given time point with a grace period of 45 days within which to obtain prescription refill. The competing risk model was used to examine the factors affecting patients switching their initial AOM.

RESULTS

During the study period, 126,539 patients with mean age of 75 years met the inclusion criteria; 85% were female. For initial AOM, 43.3%, 25.6%, 14.6%, 9.3%, 5.3%, and 1.9% of the patients received alendronate, denosumab, raloxifene, zoledronate, ibandronate, and teriparatide, respectively. During a mean 36-month follow-up, 29.6% of the patients who received at least two AOM pharmacy claims throughout the study period have ever switched their initial medication. Long-dose-interval medications, mainly denosumab and zoledronate, were the preferred choice for medication switch. Treatment persistence was higher in patients who initiated with long-dose-interval AOMs.

CONCLUSION

The real-world data reveal long-dose-interval therapy as an initial treatment or at the first switch stage may improve management of persistent AOM treatment.

Comparing medication adherence in patients receiving bisphosphonates for preventing fragility fractures: a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures; however, high rates of adherence are needed to preserve clinical benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate persistence and compliance to oral and intravenous bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronate).

METHODS

Searches of 12 databases, unpublished sources, and trial registries were conducted, covering the period from 2000 to April 2021. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool 1.0 & ROBINS-I) were independently undertaken by two study authors. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that used prescription claim databases or hospital medical records to examine patients' adherence were included. Network meta-analyses (NMA) embedded within a Bayesian framework were conducted, investigating users' likelihood in discontinuing bisphosphonate treatment. Where meta-analysis was not possible, data were synthesised using the vote-counting synthesis method.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine RCTs and 43 observational studies were identified, resulting in a total population of 2,656,659 participants. Data from 59 RCTs and 24 observational studies were used to populate NMAs. Zoledronate users were the least likely to discontinue their treatment HR = 0.73 (95%CrI: 0.61, 0.88). Higher rates of compliance were observed in those receiving intravenous treatments. The paucity of data and the heterogeneity in the reported medication possession ratio thresholds precluded a NMA of compliance data.

CONCLUSIONS

Users of intravenously administered bisphosphonates were found to be the most adherent to treatment among bisphosphonates' users. Patterns of adherence will permit the more precise estimation of clinical and cost-effectiveness of bisphosphonates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020177166.

Effectiveness of denosumab for fracture prevention in real-world postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a retrospective cohort study

To determine denosumab's effectiveness for fracture prevention among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in East Asia, the risk of fracture was compared between patients continuing denosumab therapy versus patients discontinuing denosumab after one dose. The real-world effectiveness was observed to be consistent with the efficacy demonstrated in the phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION

After therapeutic efficacy is demonstrated for subjects in global clinical trials, real-world evidence may provide complementary knowledge of therapeutic effectiveness in a heterogeneous mix of patients seen in clinical practice. This retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the fracture risk in real-world clinical care received in Taiwan and Hong Kong between a treatment cohort (patients receiving denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months) versus an off-treatment cohort (patients discontinuing after 1 dose of denosumab, which has no known clinical benefit) among real-world postmenopausal women.

METHODS

This study included 38,906 and 2,835 postmenopausal women receiving denosumab in Taiwan and Hong Kong, respectively. The primary endpoint was hip fracture, and secondary endpoints were clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Propensity-score-matched analysis, adjusting for known covariates, was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The robustness of findings was evaluated with a series of sensitivity and quantitative bias analyses.

RESULTS

In this study, 554 hip fractures were included in the primary Taiwan population analysis. The crude incidence rate was 0.9 per 100 person-years in the treatment cohort (n = 25,059) and 1.7 per 100 person-years in the off-treatment cohort (n = 13,847). After adjusting for prognostic differences between cohorts, denosumab reduced the risk of hip fractures by 38% (HR = 0.62, CI:0.52-0.75). Risk reductions of similar magnitude were observed for the secondary endpoints and for the analysis of the smaller Hong Kong population.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of denosumab for fracture reduction among real-world postmenopausal women with osteoporosis was consistent with the efficacy demonstrated in a global clinical trial.

REGISTRATION

EnCePP registration number: EUPAS26372; registration date: 12/11/2018.

Utility of PINP to monitor osteoporosis treatment in primary care, the POSE study (PINP and Osteoporosis in Sheffield Evaluation)

PURPOSE

In Sheffield (UK), we introduced the PINP monitoring algorithm for the management of osteoporosis treatment delivered in primary care. Our aims were to evaluate whether this algorithm was associated with better osteoporosis outcomes and was cost-effective compared to standard care.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were referral from Sheffield GPs, BMD scans performed between 2012 and 2013 and a report advising initiation of oral bisphosphonate and PINP monitoring. 906 patients were identified and retrospectively divided into Group A (intention to monitor, with baseline PINP, n = 588) and Group B (no intention to monitor, without baseline PINP, n = 318). The model described by Davis and colleagues was used to extrapolate life-time costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

No differences were found in baseline characteristics between groups (age, gender, BMI, BMD and major risk factors for fractures). More patients in Group A started oral treatment (77.4% vs 49.1%; p < 0.001), but there were no differences between groups in the presence of a gap in treatment >3 months or in treatment duration. Patients in Group A were more likely to have follow-up DXA scan at 4-6 years from baseline (46.9% vs 29.2%; p < 0.000) and had a greater increase in total hip BMD (+2.74% vs + 0.42%; p value = 0.003). Fewer new fractures occurred in Group A but this was not statistically significant, but the numbers of fractures were small. Patients in Group A were more likely to change management (p = 0.005) including switching to zoledronate (p = 0.03). The PINP measurement and increased prescribing in Group A resulted in increases in both costs (£30.19) and QALYs (0.0039) relative to Group B, giving an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £7660 in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients monitored with PINP are more likely to start oral bisphosphonate treatment, switch to zoledronate, have follow-up DXA scans and a greater increase of hip BMD. PINP monitoring has the potential to be cost-effective in a UK NHS setting given that interventions with an ICER under £20,000 are generally considered to be cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of romosozumab for the treatment of postmenopausal women at very high risk of fracture in Canada

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of 1 year of romosozumab followed by alendronate versus oral bisphosphonates alone in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis at very high risk for fracture in Canada. Results showed that romosozumab sequenced to alendronate is a cost-effective treatment option, dominating both alendronate and risedronate alone.

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the value of romosozumab sequenced to alendronate compared to alendronate or risedronate alone, for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women with a history of osteoporotic fracture and who are at very high risk for future fracture in Canada.

METHODS

A Markov model followed a hypothetical cohort of postmenopausal osteoporotic women at very high risk for future fractures, to estimate the cost-effectiveness of romosozumab and alendronate compared to oral bisphosphonates alone. A total treatment period of 5 years was assumed. Quality-adjusted life years and costs were estimated for each comparator across health states defined by different types of fragility fractures.

RESULTS

Romosozumab/alendronate was associated with a lifetime gain of 0.103 and 0.127 QALYs and a cost reduction of $343 and $3805, relative to alendronate and risedronate, respectively. These results were driven by a reduction of the number of fractures (2561 per 1000 patients, versus 2700 for alendronate and 2724 for risedronate over lifetime). Romosozumab/alendronate had the highest probability of being cost-effective, relative to alendronate and risedronate, at any willingness to pay threshold value.

CONCLUSION

Romosozumab/alendronate was associated with reduced costs and greater benefit relative to other comparators. Probabilistic, deterministic, and scenario analyses indicate that romosozumab/alendronate represents the best value for money; the uncertainty analyses are robust, and therefore romosozumab should be considered for reimbursement by public drug plans in Canada .

Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment and a range of effective pharmacological agents. Currently, bone-forming (anabolic) agents, in many countries, are used in those patients who have continued to lose bone mineral density (BMD), patients with multiple subsequent fractures or those who have fractured despite treatment with antiresorptive agents. However, head-to-head data suggest that anabolic agents have greater rapidity and efficacy for fracture risk reduction than do antiresorptive therapies. The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) convened an expert working group to discuss the tools available to identify patients at high risk of fracture, review the evidence for the use of anabolic agents as the initial intervention in patients at highest risk of fracture and consider the sequence of therapy following their use. This position paper sets out the findings of the group and the consequent recommendations. The key conclusion is that the current evidence base supports an "anabolic first" approach in patients found to be at very high risk of fracture, followed by maintenance therapy using an antiresorptive agent, and with the subsequent need for antiosteoporosis therapy addressed over a lifetime horizon.

Single pharmacy governed denosumab home administration: optimal adherence by means of a fracture liaison service (FLS) and home care collaboration

Low adherence for denosumab (Dmab, Prolia®) is of major concern. Dutch pharmacies deliveries were calculated recently being 76.5% for a total of 3 injections.

INTRODUCTION

Comparing a model where the prescriber maintains responsibility for adherence (model HC1) (Dmab is purchased and dispensed by patient's own community pharmacy and administered through a home care service (HC)) or an all-in-one model where the pharmacist maintains responsibility for the adherence (Dmab is purchased, dispensed, and administered by a pharmacist's HC) (HC2).

METHODS

We counted the number of Dmab injections, follow-up appointments on time, Dmab administrations delayed to a maximum of 60 days, the number of Dmab discontinuations, and all causes legally traceable under EU privacy act (EDPR).

RESULTS

Home care started by 2014 (study closure in 2021) and included 711 Dmab injections to 256 unique patients: HC1: 536 and HC2: 175 orders. The whole group received on average 2.8 Dmab injections by consistent intervals of about 182 days. Average administration after the latest Dmab injection: 272.8 days (HC1: 362.0 and HC2: 124.0 days). Administration of a subsequent injection > 60 days occurred in 26.6% (HC1: 38.8% and HC2: 6.2%; OR = 9.49). After adjustment for no more than three Dmab injections administered per patient, it occurred in 27.3% (HC1: 51.8% and HC2 4.4%; OR = 23.34).

CONCLUSION

It was possible to achieve 94% adherence for Dmab injections treatment just by transferring the complete supply chain to one pharmacy-initiated home care provider after treatment initiation by either a physician or FLS health care professional.

Long-term persistence with denosumab: real-world data from the Austrian Osteoporosis Clinic (AOC). A retrospective data analysis

In short-term studies, persistence with denosumab has been higher than with other osteoporosis drugs. This study shows that persistence can be maintained in the long-term and is associated with efficacy and safety parameters.

PURPOSE

To assess long-term persistence with denosumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Secondary purposes were the evaluation of changes in efficacy and tolerance/safety parameters over time.

METHODS

Persistence was determined by number and rate of patients receiving denosumab on time in 6-month intervals (+ / - 8 weeks). The total population was stratified by internal patients (injections and monitoring at the Austrian Osteoporosis Clinic [AOC], 74%) and external patients (injections at the practitioner's office with occasional monitoring at the AOC, 26%). In internal patients, efficacy parameters including bone mineral density (BMD) and the bone marker CTX were assessed at fixed time points and tolerance/safety parameters including side effects (SEs), adverse events (AEs), and serious AEs (SAEs) evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 851 patients, 71% (73% internal and 64% external) were persistent at 7.5 years of follow-up. The mean rate of cumulative persistence in internal patients decreased from 94% at the time of the second dose to 73% at the time of the fifteenth dose. BMD increased and CTX decreased, overall and in pairwise comparisons (all p < .001). AEs and SAEs, but not SEs, were lower in persistent than non-persistent patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study showing that long-term (> 3 years) real-world persistence with denosumab could be maintained at a high level (> 70%) in most patients. Denosumab was well tolerated and associated with decreased CTX levels and increased BMD.

The Effect of Teriparatide Treatment on the Risk of Fragility Fractures in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis: Results from the Asian and Latin America Fracture Observational Study (ALAFOS)

The Asian and Latin America Fracture Observational Study (ALAFOS) is a prospective, observational, single-arm study conducted in 20 countries across Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. ALAFOS evaluated new clinical vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures in relation to time on teriparatide, in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in real-life clinical practice. Clinical fragility fractures, back pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were recorded in 6-month intervals for ≤ 24 months during teriparatide treatment and up to 12-months post-treatment. Data were analysed with piecewise exponential regression with inverse probability weighting for time to event outcomes and mixed-model repeated measures for back pain and HRQoL. 3054 postmenopausal women started teriparatide and attended ≥ one follow-up visit (mean [SD] age 72.5 [10.4] years). The median (95% CI) time to treatment discontinuation was 22.0 months (21.2, 22.8). During the treatment period, 111 patients (3.6%) sustained 126 clinical fractures (2.98 fractures/100 patient-years). Rates of new clinical fragility fractures were significantly decreased during the > 6-12, > 12-18, and > 18-24-month periods, as compared with the first 6 months of treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; 95% CI 0.37, 0.88; p = 0.012; HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.19, 0.62; p < 0.001; HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23, 0.83; p = 0.011; respectively). Patients also reported an improvement in back pain and HRQoL (p < 0.001). These results provide data on the real-world effectiveness of teriparatide in the ALAFOS regions and are consistent with other studies showing reduction of fractures after 6 months of teriparatide treatment. These results should be interpreted in the context of the noncontrolled design of this observational study.

Anabolic treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

Antiresorptive agents are generally recommended as first-line treatment for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. These drugs suppress bone resorption but do not rebuild bone, limiting their efficacy. Antiresorptive use is further hampered by concerns over rare side effects, including atypical femoral fractures and osteonecrosis of the jaw. Anabolic treatments overcome limitations of antiresorptive treatment by stimulating new bone formation, reducing the risk of fracture with greater efficacy. This review summarises the latest trial data for the three anabolic agents currently available for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: teriparatide, abaloparatide, and romosozumab. Data from head-to-head studies comparing anabolic and antiresorptive treatments are reviewed. At present, anabolic treatments are generally reserved for use in patients with severe osteoporosis at very high fracture risk; the factors limiting their more widespread use are discussed together with how this may change in the future.

Role of bone-forming agents in the management of osteoporosis

Recent evidence confirms the superiority of osteoanabolic therapy compared to anti-remodeling drugs for rapid improvement in bone density and fracture risk reduction, providing strong justification for the use of these anabolic agents as the initial therapy in high-risk patients, to be followed by anti-remodeling therapy. This review will highlight the results of recent studies and define the current status of osteoanabolic therapy for osteoporosis.

Cost-effectiveness of buffered soluble alendronate 70 mg effervescent tablet for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in Italy

The use of buffered soluble alendronate 70 mg effervescent tablet, a convenient dosing regimen for bisphosphonate therapy, seems a cost-effective strategy compared with relevant alternative treatments for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis aged 60 years and over in Italy.

INTRODUCTION

To assess the cost-effectiveness of buffered soluble alendronate (ALN) 70 mg effervescent tablet compared with relevant alternative treatments for postmenopausal osteoporotic women in Italy.

METHODS

A previously validated Markov microsimulation model was adjusted to the Italian healthcare setting to estimate the lifetime costs (expressed in €2019) per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of buffered soluble ALN compared with generic ALN, denosumab, zoledronic acid and no treatment. Pooled efficacy data derived from the NICE network meta-analysis were used for bisphosphonate treatments. Two treatment duration scenarios were assessed: 1 year using persistence data derived from an Italian prospective observational study including 144 and 216 postmenopausal osteoporotic women on buffered soluble ALN and oral ALN, respectively, and 3 years. Analyses were conducted for women 60-80 years of age with a bone mineral density T-score ≤ - 3.0 or with existing vertebral fractures.

RESULTS

In all simulated populations, buffered soluble ALN was dominant (more QALYs, lower costs) compared to denosumab. The cost per QALY gained of buffered soluble ALN compared to generic ALN and no treatment always falls below €20,000 per QALY gained. In the 1-year treatment scenario, zoledronic acid was associated with more QALY than buffered soluble ALN but the cost per QALY gained of zoledronic acid compared with buffered soluble ALN was always higher than €70,000, while buffered soluble ALN was dominant in the 3-year treatment scenario.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that buffered soluble ALN represents a cost-effective strategy compared with relevant alternative treatments for postmenopausal osteoporosis women in Italy aged 60 years and over.

Persistence with oral bisphosphonates and denosumab among older adults in primary care in Ireland

Gaps in pharmacological treatment for osteoporosis can reduce effectiveness. Among older adults, we found about half of new users of oral bisphosphonate and denosumab persisted with their treatment at 2 years, with few switching to alternative therapy. Persistence is suboptimal and warrants evaluation of interventions to improve this.

PURPOSE

Gaps in pharmacological treatment for osteoporosis can reduce effectiveness. This study aimed to estimate persistence rates for oral bisphosphonates and denosumab in older primary care patients and identify factors associated with discontinuation.

METHODS

Older patients newly prescribed oral bisphosphonates or denosumab during 2012-2017 were identified from 44 general practices (GP) in Ireland. Persistence without a coverage gap of >90 days was calculated for both medications from therapy initiation. Factors associated with time to discontinuation were explored using Cox regression analysis. Exposures included age group, osteoporosis diagnosis, fracture history, calcium/vitamin D prescription, number of other medications, health cover, dosing frequency (bisphosphonates) and previous bone-health medication (denosumab).

RESULTS

Of 41,901 patients, n=1569 were newly initiated on oral bisphosphonates and n=1615 on denosumab. Two-year persistence was 49.4% for oral bisphosphonates and 53.8% for denosumab and <10% were switched to other medication. Having state-funded health cover was associated with a lower hazard of discontinuation for both oral bisphosphonates (HR=0.49, 95% CI=0.36-0.66, p<0.01) and denosumab (HR=0.71, 95% CI=0.57-0.89, p<0.01). Older age group, number of medications and calcium/vitamin D prescription were also associated with better bisphosphonate persistence, while having osteoporosis diagnosed was associated with better denosumab persistence.

CONCLUSION

Persistence for osteoporosis medications is suboptimal. Of concern, few patients are switched to other bone-health treatments when denosumab is stopped which could increase fracture risk. Free access to GP services and medications may have resulted in better medication persistence in this cohort. Future research should explore prescribing choices in primary care osteoporosis management and evaluate cost-effectiveness of interventions for improving persistence.

Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate for older osteoporotic women in Japan

Among hypothetical cohorts of older osteoporotic women without prior fragility fracture in Japan, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of two treatment strategies using a simulation model. Annual intravenous zoledronic acid for 3 years was cost-saving compared with biannual subcutaneous denosumab for 3 years followed by weekly oral alendronate for 3 years.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis constitutes a major medical and health economic burden to society worldwide. Injectable treatments for osteoporosis require less frequent administration than oral treatments and therefore have higher persistence and adherence with treatment, which could explain better efficacy for fracture prevention. Although annual intravenous zoledronic acid and biannual subcutaneous denosumab are available, it remains unclear which treatment strategy represents a better value from a health economic perspective. Accordingly, we examined the cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid for 3 years compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate (i.e., denosumab for 3 years followed by oral weekly alendronate for 3 years, making the total treatment duration 6 years) among hypothetical cohorts of community-dwelling osteoporotic women without prior fragility fracture in Japan at ages 65, 70, 75, or 80 years.

METHODS

Using a previously validated and updated Markov microsimulation model, we obtained incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (Japanese yen [¥] (or US dollars [$]) per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) from the public healthcare and long-term care payer's perspective over a lifetime horizon with a willingness-to-pay of ¥5 million (or $47,500) per QALY.

RESULTS

In the base case, zoledronic acid was cost-saving (i.e., more effective and less expensive) compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, results were sensitive to changes in the efficacy of zoledronic acid or the cumulative persistence rate with zoledronic acid or denosumab. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of zoledronic acid being cost-effective were 98-100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older osteoporotic women without prior fragility fracture in Japan, zoledronic acid was cost-saving compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate.

Cost-effectiveness of Screening for Osteoporosis in Older Men With a History of Falls

Importance

Falls and osteoporosis share the potential clinical end point of fractures among older patients. To date, few fall prevention guidelines incorporate screening for osteoporosis to reduce fall-related fractures.

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of screening for osteoporosis using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) followed by osteoporosis treatment in older men with a history of falls.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this economic evaluation, a Markov model was developed to simulate the incidence of major osteoporotic fractures in a hypothetical cohort of community-dwelling men aged 65 years who had fallen at least once in the past year. Data sources included literature published from January 1, 1946, to July 31, 2020. The model adopted a societal perspective, a lifetime horizon, a 1-year cycle length, and a discount rate of 3% per year for both health benefits and costs. The analysis was designed and conducted from October 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.

Interventions

Screening with DXA followed by treatment for men diagnosed with osteoporosis compared with usual care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured by cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

Results

Among the hypothetical cohort of men aged 65 years, the screening strategy had an ICER of $33 169/QALY gained and was preferred over usual care at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY gained. The number needed to screen to prevent 1 hip fracture was 1876; to prevent 1 major osteoporotic fracture, 746. The screening strategy would become more effective and less costly than usual care for men 77 years and older. The ICER for the screening strategy did not substantially change across a wide range of assumptions tested in all other deterministic sensitivity analyses. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY gained, screening was cost-effective in 56.0% of simulations; at $100 000/QALY gained, 90.8% of simulations; and at $200 000/QALY gained, 99.6% of simulations.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that for older men who have fallen at least once in the past year, screening with DXA followed by treatment for those diagnosed with osteoporosis is a cost-effective use of resources. Fall history could be a useful cue to trigger assessment for osteoporosis in men.