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

Safety and efficacy of sequential treatments for postmenopausal osteoporosis: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Background

The sequential anti-osteoporotic treatment for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) is important, but the order in which different types of drugs are used is confusing and controversial. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of available sequential treatments to explore the most efficacious strategy for long-term management of osteoporosis.

Methods

In this network meta-analysis, we searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to September 19, 2023 to identify randomised controlled trials comparing sequential treatments for women with PMO. The identified trials were screened by reading the title and abstract, and only randomised clinical trials involving sequential anti-osteoporotic treatments and reported relevant outcomes for PMO were included. The main outcomes included vertebral fracture risk, the percentage change in bone mineral density (BMD) in different body parts, and all safety indicators in the stage after switching treatment. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using the multivariate random effects method and evaluated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Confidence in the Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework. This study is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42022360236.

Findings

A total of 19 trials comprising 18,416 participants were included in the study. Five different sequential treatments were investigated as the main interventions and compared to the corresponding control groups. The intervention groups in this study comprised the following treatment switch protocols: switching from an anabolic agent (AB) to an anti-resorptive agent (AR) (ABtAR), transitioning from one AR to another AR (ARtAAR), shifting from an AR to an AB (ARtAB), switching from an AB to a combined treatment of AB and AR (ABtC), and transitioning from an AR to a combined treatment (ARtC). A significant reduction in the incidence of vertebral fractures was observed in ARtC, ABtAR and ARtAB in the second stage, and ARtC had the lowest incidence with 81.5% SUCRA. ARtAAR and ABtAR were two effective strategies for preventing fractures and improving BMD in other body parts. Especially, ARtAAR could improve total hip BMD with the highest 96.1% SUCRA, and ABtAR could decrease the risk of total fractures with the highest 94.3% SUCRA. Almost no difference was observed in safety outcomes in other comparisons.

Interpretation

Our findings suggested that the ARtAAR and ABtAR strategy are the effective and safe sequential treatment for preventing fracture and improving BMD for PMO. ARtC is more effective in preventing vertebral fractures.

Funding

The National Natural Science Foundation of China (82170900, 81970762), the Hunan Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Hunan Province High-level Health Talents "225" Project.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of CT-Based Finite Element Modeling for Osteoporosis Screening in Secondary Fracture Prevention: An Early Health Technology Assessment in the Netherlands

Objective. To conduct cost-utility analyses for Computed Tomography To Strength (CT2S), a novel osteoporosis screening service, compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), treat all without screening, and no screening methods for Dutch postmenopausal women referred to fracture liaison service (FLS). CT2S uses CT scans to generate femur models and simulate sideways fall scenarios for bone strength assessment. Methods. Early health technology assessment (HTA) was adopted to evaluate CT2S as a novel osteoporosis screening tool for secondary fracture prevention. We constructed a 2-dimensional simulation model considering 4 strategies (no screening, treat all without screening, DXA, CT2S) together with screening intervals (5 y, 2 y), treatments (oral alendronate, zoledronic acid), and discount rate scenarios among Dutch women in 3 age groups (60s, 70s, and 80s). Strategy comparisons were based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), considering an ICER below €20,000 per QALY gained as cost-effective in the Netherlands. Results. Under the base-case scenario, CT2S versus DXA had estimated ICERs of €41,200 and €14,083 per QALY gained for the 60s and 70s age groups, respectively. For the 80s age group, CT2S was more effective and less costly than DXA. Changing treatment from weekly oral alendronate to annual zoledronic acid substantially decreased CT2S versus DXA ICERs across all age groups. Setting the screening interval to 2 y increased CT2S versus DXA ICERs to €100,333, €55,571, and €15,750 per QALY gained for the 60s, 70s, and 80s age groups, respectively. In all simulated populations and scenarios, CT2S was cost-effective (in some cases dominant) compared with the treat all strategy and cost-saving (more effective and less costly) compared with no screening. Conclusion. CT2S was estimated to be potentially cost-effective in the 70s and 80s age groups considering the willingness-to-pay threshold of the Netherlands. This early HTA suggests CT2S as a potential novel osteoporosis screening tool for secondary fracture prevention.

Highlights

For postmenopausal Dutch women who have been referred to the FLS, direct access to CT2S may be cost-effective compared with DXA for age groups 70s and 80s, when considering the ICER threshold of the Netherlands. This study positions CT2S as a potential novel osteoporosis-screening tool for secondary fracture prevention in the clinical setting.A shorter screening interval of 2 y increases the effectiveness of both screening strategies, but the ICER of CT2S compared with DXA also increased substantially, which made CT2S no longer cost-effective for the 70s age group; however, it remains cost-effective for individuals in their 80s.Annual zoledronic acid treatment with better adherence may contribute to a lower cost-effectiveness ratio when comparing CT2S to DXA screening and the treat all strategies for all age groups.

Novel formulations of oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis

Oral bisphosphonates are a key intervention in the treatment of osteoporosis and in reducing the risk of fragility fractures. Their use is supported by over 3 decades of evidence; however, patient adherence to oral bisphosphonates remains poor in part due to complex dosing instructions and adverse events, including upper gastrointestinal symptoms. This problem has led to the development of novel oral bisphosphonate formulations. Buffered, effervescent alendronate is dissolved in water and so seeks to reduce upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, and gastro-resistant risedronate aims to reduce the complexity of dosing procedure (e.g. fasting prior to consumption) whilst still maintaining the efficacy of fracture risk reduction. Clinical trials and real-world data have been employed to demonstrate some benefits in terms of reduced upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, adherence, persistence and health economic outcomes. This report describes the result of an ESCEO (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis) expert working group, which explores where oral bisphosphonates sit in current clinical practice guidelines, review their risk-benefit profile and the consequences of poor adherence before exploring novel oral bisphosphonate formulations and their potential clinical and health economic impact. Further research is required but there are signs that these novel, oral bisphosphonate formulations may lead to improved tolerance of oral bisphosphonates and thus, improved adherence and fracture outcomes.

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of fracture liaison services in China

This study is a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of fracture liaison services (FLS) in China, suggesting that FLS could potentially lead to lifetime cost-saving in patients who have experienced a fracture. However, Chinese-specific real-world data is needed to confirm the results of our study.

PURPOSE

The study aimed to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of fracture liaison services (FLS) from the Chinese healthcare perspective with a lifetime horizon.

METHODS

A previously validated Markov microsimulation model was adapted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of FLS compared to no-FLS. The evaluation was conducted in patients aged 65 years with a recent fracture. Treatment pathways were differentiated by gender, FLS attendance, osteoporosis diagnosis, treatment initiation, and adherence. Given the uncertainty in FLS cost, the cost in the base-case analysis was assumed at US$200. Analyses were also performed to determine the maximum cost for making the FLS cost-saving and cost-effective at the Chinese willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

When compared with no-FLS, the FLS was dominant (lower costs, higher quality-adjusted life years) in our target population at the FLS cost of US$200 per patient. For every 100 patients who were admitted to the FLS, approximately four hip fractures, nine clinical vertebral fractures, and three wrist fractures would be avoided over their lifetimes. Our findings were robust to numerous one-way sensitivity analyses; however, the FLS was not cost-effective in patients aged 80 years and older.

CONCLUSION

FLS could potentially lead to lifetime cost-saving in patients who have experienced a fracture. Our study informs the potential cost-effectiveness of FLS and the knowledge gap in China; more future research incorporating Chinese-specific real-world data are needed to confirm the results of our study and to better evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FLS in China.

Cost-effectiveness analyses of denosumab for osteoporosis: a systematic review

This paper systematically reviewed and assessed all retrievable pharmacoeconomic studies on denosumab for the treatment of osteoporosis. Denosumab was more cost-effective in patients with older age, prior fracture experience, lower BMD T-scores, and more risk factors. ESCEO-IOF guidelines were more applicable to improve the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies in osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION

There are many pharmacoeconomic studies on denosumab for osteoporosis. However, the corresponding reviews are outdated or incomplete and need to be updated and refined. This article aims to systematically review and evaluate all retrievable pharmacoeconomic studies of denosumab for osteoporosis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed utilizing PubMed, EMBASE(Ovid), Proquest(EconLit), Chongqing VIP, WanFang Database, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure to identify full-text articles published before September 2021. The quality of full-text articles was evaluated by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards(CHEERS) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases International Osteoporosis Foundation guideline(ESCEO-IOF).

RESULTS

In total, 21 full-text articles were eligible for inclusion. Denosumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis was not dominant compared to zoledronate and teriparatide. However, denosumab was dominant compared with strontium ranelate, raloxifene, and ibandronate in patients over 65 years. The probabilities of denosumab being cost-effective or dominant were more than 85% compared with no treatment and risedronate in patients aged over 70 years. Compared to alendronate, the highest rate of denosumab dominance occurred in patients aged 65 to 75 years, at about 65%. Most of the articles had higher CHEERS scores than ESCEO-IOF scores (converted into percentages).

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the treatment of osteoporosis was influenced by multiple factors. Generally, denosumab was more cost-effective in patients with older age, prior fracture experience, lower BMD T-scores, and more risk factors. ESCEO-IOF guidelines were more applicable to improve the transparency, generalization, and quality of pharmacoeconomic studies in osteoporosis.