Randomized trial of the effects of risedronate on vertebral fractures in women with established postmenopausal osteoporosis. Vertebral Efficacy with Risedronate Therapy (VERT) Study Group

Estrogen deficiency induces changes in bone matrix bound water that do not closely correspond with bone turnover

Postmenopausal osteoporosis, marked by estrogen deficiency, is a major contributor to osteoporotic fractures, yet early prediction of fractures in this population remains challenging. Our goal was to explore the temporal changes in bone-specific inflammation, oxidative stress, bone turnover, and bone-matrix water, and their relationship with estrogen deficiency-induced modifications in bone structure and mechanical properties. Additionally, we sought to determine if emerging clinically translatable imaging techniques could capture early bone modifications prior to standard clinical imaging. Two-month-old female Sprague Dawley rats (n = 48) underwent ovariectomy (OVX, n = 24) or sham operations (n = 24). A subgroup of n = 8 rats per group was sacrificed at 2-, 5-, and 10-weeks post-surgery to assess the temporal relationships of inflammation, oxidative stress, bone turnover, bone matrix water, mechanics, and imaging outcomes. OVX rats exhibited higher body weight compared to sham rats at all time points. By 5-weeks, OVX animals showed elevated markers of inflammation and oxidative stress in cortical bone, which persisted throughout the study, while cortical bone formation rate did not differ from sham until 10-weeks. DXA outcomes did not reveal differences between OVX and sham at any time point. Bound water, assessed using ultrashort echo time magnetic resonance imaging (UTE MRI), was lower in OVX at the earliest time point (2-weeks) and reduced again at 10-weeks with no difference at 5-weeks. These data demonstrate that bound water assessment using novel UTE MRI technology was lower at the earliest time point following OVX. However, no temporal relationship with bone turnover, inflammation, or oxidative stress was observed at the time points assessed in this study. These findings underscore both the increased need to understand bone hydration changes and highlight the usefulness of UTE MRI for non-invasive bone hydration measurements.

Can Bisphosphonate Therapy Reduce Overall Mortality in Patients With Osteoporosis? A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

For patients with osteoporosis, bisphosphonate therapy can reduce the risk of fractures, but its effect on reducing mortality remains unclear. Previous studies on this topic have produced conflicting results and generally have been too small to definitively answer the question of whether bisphosphonate therapy reduces mortality. Therefore, a meta-analysis may help us arrive at a more conclusive answer.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In a large meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we asked: (1) Does bisphosphonate use reduce mortality? (2) Is there a subgroup effect based on whether different bisphosphonate drugs were used (zoledronate, alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate), different geographic regions where the study took place (Europe, the Americas, and Asia), whether the study was limited to postmenopausal female patients, or whether the trials lasted 3 years or longer?

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using multiple databases, including Embase, Web of Science, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, with each database searched up to November 20, 2023 (which also was the date of our last search), following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We included randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials with participants diagnosed with osteoporosis and receiving bisphosphonate treatment. We excluded papers posted to preprint servers, other unpublished work, conference abstracts, and papers that were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov but were not yet published. We collected 2263 records. After excluding records due to study type, study content not meeting the inclusion criteria, and duplicates, our meta-analysis included 47 placebo-controlled RCTs involving 59,437 participants. Data extraction, quality assessment, and statistical analyses were performed. The evaluation of randomized trials for potential bias was conducted using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. This assessment encompassed factors such as sequence generation, allocation concealment, subject blinding, outcome assessor blinding, incomplete outcome data, and reporting bias. Some studies did not provide explicit details regarding random sequence generation, leading to a high risk of selection bias. A few studies, due to their open-label nature, were unable to achieve double-blind conditions for both the subjects and the researchers, resulting in intermediate performance bias. Nevertheless, the overall study quality was high. Due to the low heterogeneity among the studies, as evidenced by the low statistical heterogeneity (that is, a low I2 statistic), we opted for a fixed-effects model, indicating that the effect size is consistent across the studies. In such cases, the fixed-effects model can provide more precise estimates. According to the results of the funnel plot, we did not find evidence of publication bias.

RESULTS

The use of bisphosphonates did not reduce the overall risk of mortality in patients with osteoporosis (risk ratio 0.95 [95% CI 0.88 to 1.03]). Subgroup analyses involving different bisphosphonate drugs (zoledronate, alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate), regions (Europe, the Americas, and Asia), diverse populations (postmenopausal female patients and other patients), and trials lasting 3 years or longer revealed no associations with reduced overall mortality.

CONCLUSION

Based on our comprehensive meta-analysis, there is high-quality evidence suggesting that bisphosphonate therapy for patients with osteoporosis does not reduce the overall risk of mortality despite its effectiveness in reducing the risk of fractures. The primary consideration for prescribing bisphosphonates to individuals with osteoporosis should continue to be centered on reducing fracture risk, aligning with clinical guidelines. Long-term studies are needed to investigate potential effects on mortality during extended treatment periods.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Pre-treatment bone mineral density and the benefit of pharmacologic treatment on fracture risk and BMD change: analysis from the FNIH-ASBMR SABRE project

Some osteoporosis drug trials have suggested that treatment is more effective in those with low BMD measured by DXA. This study used data from a large set of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine whether the anti-fracture efficacy of treatments differs according to baseline BMD. We used individual patient data from 25 RCTs (103 086 subjects) of osteoporosis medications collected as part of the FNIH-ASBMR SABRE project. Participants were stratified into FN BMD T-score subgroups (≤-2.5, > -2.5). We used Cox proportional hazard regression to estimate treatment effect for clinical fracture outcomes and logistic regression for the radiographic vertebral fracture outcome. We also performed analyses based on BMD quintiles. Overall, 42% had a FN BMD T-score ≤ -2.5. Treatment with anti-osteoporosis drugs led to significant reductions in fractures in both T-score ≤ -2.5 and > -2.5 subgroups. Compared to those with FN BMD T-score > -2.5, the risk reduction for each fracture outcome was greater in those with T-score ≤ -2.5, but only the all-fracture outcome reached statistical significance (interaction P = .001). Results were similar when limited to bisphosphonate trials. In the quintile analysis, there was significant anti-fracture efficacy across all quintiles for vertebral fractures and with greater effects on fracture risk reduction for non-vertebral, all, and all clinical fractures in the lower BMD quintiles (all interaction P ≤ .03). In summary, anti-osteoporotic medications reduced the risk of fractures regardless of baseline BMD. Significant fracture risk reduction with treatment for 4 of the 5 fracture endpoints was seen in participants with T-scores above -2.5, though effects tended to be larger and more significant in those with baseline T-scores <-2.5.

Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty: Is it Safe in Demineralized Bone?

There is concern for cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with decreased bone mineral density (BMD) due to the potential increase in complications, namely failed in-growth or future aseptic loosening. Some data suggest that advances in cementless prostheses mitigate these risks; however this is not yet born out in long-term registry data. It is crucial to expand our understanding of the prevalence and etiology of osteoporosis in TKA patients, survivorship of cementless implants in decreased BMD, role of bone-modifying agents, indications and technical considerations for cementless TKA in patients with decreased BMD. The purpose of this study is to review current literature and expert opinion on such topics.

Osteoporosis treatment prevents hip fracture similarly in both sexes: the FOCUS observational study

Randomized trials have not been performed, and may never be, to determine if osteoporosis treatment prevents hip fracture in men. Addressing that evidence gap, we analyzed data from an observational study of new hip fractures in a large integrated healthcare system to compare the reduction in hip fractures associated with standard-of-care osteoporosis treatment in men versus women. Sampling from 271 389 patients age ≥ 65 who had a hip-containing computed tomography scan during care between 2005-2018, we selected all who subsequently had a first hip fracture (cases) after the CT scan (start of observation) and a sex-matched equal number of randomly selected patients. From those, we analyzed all who tested positive for osteoporosis (DXA-equivalent hip bone mineral density T-score ≤ -2.5, measured from the CT scan using VirtuOst). We defined "treated" as at least six months of any osteoporosis medication by prescription fill data during follow up; "not-treated" was no prescription fill. Sex-specific odds ratios of hip fracture for treated versus not-treated patients were calculated by logistic regression; adjustments included age, BMD T-score, a BMD-treatment interaction, body mass index, race/ethnicity, and seven baseline clinical risk factors. At two-year follow-up, 33.9% of the women (750/2211 patients) and 24.0% of the men (175/728 patients) were treated, primarily with alendronate; 51.3% and 66.3%, respectively, were not-treated; and 721 and 269, respectively, had a first hip fracture since the CT scan. Odds ratio of hip fracture for treated versus not-treated was 0.26 (95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.33) for women and 0.21 (0.13-0.34) for men; the ratio of these odds ratios (men:women) was 0.81 (0.47-1.37), indicating no significant sex effect. Various sensitivity and stratified analyses confirmed these trends, including results at five-year follow-up. Given these results and considering the relevant literature, we conclude that osteoporosis treatment prevents hip fracture similarly in both sexes.

Influence of age on the efficacy of pharmacologic treatments on fracture risk reduction and increases in BMD: RCT results from the FNIH-ASBMR-SABRE project

There is a common belief that antiosteoporosis medications are less effective in older adults. This study used data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine whether the anti-fracture efficacy of treatments and their effects on BMD differ in people ≥70 compared to those <70 yr. We used individual patient data from 23 RCTs of osteoporosis medications collected as part of the FNIH-ASBMR SABRE project. We assessed the following fractures: radiographic vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, all clinical, and all fractures. We used Cox proportional hazard regression to estimate treatment effect for clinical fracture outcomes, logistic regression for the radiographic vertebral fracture outcome, and linear regression to estimate treatment effect on 24-mo change in hip and spine BMD in each age subgroup. The analysis included 123 164 (99% female) participants; 43% being ≥70 yr. Treatment with anti-osteoporosis drugs significantly and similarly reduced fractures in both subgroups (eg, odds ratio [OR] = 0.47 and 0.51 for vertebral fractures in those below and above 70 yr, interaction P = .19; hazard ratio [HR] for all fractures: 0.72 vs 0.70, interaction P = .20). Results were similar when limited to bisphosphonate trials with the exception of hip fracture risk reduction which was somewhat greater in those <70 (HR = 0.44) vs ≥70 (HR = 0.79) yr (interaction P = .02). Allocation to anti-osteoporotic drugs resulted in significantly greater increases in hip and spine BMD at 24 mo in those ≥70 compared to those <70 yr. In summary, anti-osteoporotic medications similarly reduced the risk of fractures regardless of age, and the few small differences in fracture risk reduction by age were of uncertain clinical significance.

Guidelines for fracture risk assessment and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men above the age of 50 in Qatar

We present comprehensive guidelines for osteoporosis management in Qatar. Formulated by the Qatar Osteoporosis Association, the guidelines recommend the age-dependent Qatar fracture risk assessment tool for screening, emphasizing risk-based treatment strategies and discouraging routine dual-energy X-ray scans. They offer a vital resource for physicians managing osteoporosis and fragility fractures nationwide.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis and related fragility fractures are a growing public health issue with an impact on individuals and the healthcare system. We aimed to present guidelines providing unified guidance to all healthcare professionals in Qatar regarding the management of osteoporosis.

METHODS

The Qatar Osteoporosis Association formulated guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men above the age of 50. A panel of six local rheumatologists who are experts in the field of osteoporosis met together and conducted an extensive review of published articles and local and international guidelines to formulate guidance for the screening and management of postmenopausal women and men older than 50 years in Qatar.

RESULTS

The guidelines emphasize the use of the age-dependent hybrid model of the Qatar fracture risk assessment tool for screening osteoporosis and risk categorization. The guidelines include screening, risk stratification, investigations, treatment, and monitoring of patients with osteoporosis. The use of a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan without any risk factors is discouraged. Treatment options are recommended based on risk stratification.

CONCLUSION

Guidance is provided to all physicians across the country who are involved in the care of patients with osteoporosis and fragility fractures.

Use of vitamin D with anti-osteoporotic drugs: are available clinical trials telling us the whole story?

There is a strong rationale for using vitamin D in combination with anti-osteoporotic drugs. Still, available trials do not give clear indications in this setting, presenting a suboptimal and heavily inhomogeneous experimental design. Health authorities should revise requirements for using vitamin D in anti-osteoporotic drug trials to maximise their effect and produce reliable indications for clinical practice in this setting.

Follow-up Bone Mineral Density Testing: 2023 Official Positions of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard method for measuring bone mineral density (BMD) which is most strongly associated with fracture risk. BMD is therefore the basis for the World Health Organization's densitometric definition of osteoporosis. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) promotes best densitometry practices and its official positions reflect critical review of current evidence by domain experts. This document reports new official positions regarding follow-up DXA examinations based on a systematic review of literature published through December 2022. Adoption of official positions requires consensus agreement from an expert panel following a modified RAND protocol. Unless explicitly altered by the new position statements, prior ISCD official positions remain in force. This update reflects increased consideration of the clinical context prompting repeat examination. Follow-up DXA should be performed with pre-defined objectives when the results would have an impact on patient management. Testing intervals should be individualized according to the patient's age, sex, fracture risk and treatment history. Incident fractures and therapeutic approach are key considerations. Appropriately ordered and interpreted follow-up DXA examinations support diagnostic and therapeutic decision making, thereby contributing to excellent clinical care. Future research should address the complementary roles of clinical findings, imaging and laboratory testing to guide management.

Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis: A Comprehensive Review of Guidelines

Importance

Osteoporosis causes increased morbidity and mortality, and thus poses a significant economic burden to the health systems worldwide.

Objective

The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published major guidelines on diagnosis and management of this common medical entity.

Evidence Acquisition

A thorough comparative review of the most influential guidelines from the RACGP (Royal Australian College of General Practitioners), the ESCEO-IOF (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis-International Osteoporosis Foundation), the NOGG (National Osteoporosis Guideline Group), the NAMS (North American Menopause Society), the ES (Endocrine Society), and the ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) was conducted.

Results

The reviewed guidelines generally agree on the definition, the criteria, and investigations used to diagnose osteoporosis. They also concur regarding the risk factors for osteoporosis and the suggested lifestyle modifications (calcium and vitamin D intake, normal body weight, reduction of alcohol consumption, and smoking cessation). However, there is lack of consensus on indications for fracture risk assessment in the general population and the exact indications for bone mineral density assessment. Referral to a bone specialist is reserved for complex cases of osteoporosis (NOGG, NAMS, and ACOG) or in case of inadequate access to care (RACGP). The use of hip protectors to reduce the risk of fractures is supported by RACGP, NOGG, and NAMS, solely for high-risk elderly patients in residential care settings. All guidelines reviewed recognize the efficacy of the pharmacologic agents (ie, bisphosphonates, denosumab, hormone therapy, and parathyroid hormone analogs). Nonetheless, recommendations regarding monitoring of pharmacotherapy differ, primarily in the case of bisphosphonates. The proposed intervals of repeat bone mineral density testing after initiation of drug therapy are set at 2 years (RACGP), 1-3 years (NAMS, ES, and ACOG), or 3-5 years (ESCEO-IOF and NOGG). All guidelines agree upon the restricted use of bone turnover markers only in bone specialist centers for treatment monitoring purposes. Finally, the definition of treatment failure varies among the reviewed guidelines.

Conclusions

Osteoporosis is a distressing condition for women, mainly those of postmenopausal age. Thus, it seems of paramount importance to develop consistent international practice protocols for more cost-effective diagnostic and management techniques, in order to improve women's quality of life.

A Population-Based Registry Study of Extended Bisphosphonate Use: Minimal Shift After Landmark Publications About Shorter Treatment Duration

Optimal duration of bisphosphonate therapy was unknown until the FLEX study was published in 2006 showing a 5-year course to be adequate for most women. In 2008, a link between long-term bisphosphonate and atypical femoral fractures was reported and confirmed in later studies. We hypothesized these landmark observations should have led to a decrease in use of bisphosphonates for >5 or 10 years, from 2010 onward. The Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Registry with linkage to provincial pharmacy data was used to determine the percentage of long- and very long-term bisphosphonate users from therapy start. The cohort comprised women aged >50 years with BMD between 1995 and 2018 with oral bisphosphonate first prescribed for >90 days with adherence >75% in the first year. For each calendar year of continued therapy, the percentage of patients and medication possession rate was tabulated. The percentage of users beyond 5 years was compared among patients who started therapy in 1998-2004 (those taking 5 years of therapy still finish before 2010) versus 2005-2012 (all new therapy starts overlap 2010 in those taking ≥5 years of treatment). The cohort included 2991 women with mean follow-up 8.8 (1.3) years, 64.9% of whom took continuous oral bisphosphonate for >5 years and 41.9% for >10 years. In the earlier versus later era, there were 74.4% versus 70.2% who completed 5 years. With respect to longer treatment, there were 68.0% and 60.5% of patients treated for 6 or more years (p < 0.0001) and 46.6% versus 33.5% treated for >10 years (p = 0.08). Medication possession rate was >79% in every year of therapy. Landmark studies leading to more limited bisphosphonate courses may have slightly reduced longer-term treatment, but up to one-third of adherent patients in the modern era still receive continuous bisphosphonate therapy for >10 years. © 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).

Association between bisphosphonate use and stroke risk: a meta-analysis

Previous studies have suggested that bisphosphonates may reduce stroke risk. This meta-analysis, which included 21 studies with 741,274 participants, revealed that bisphosphonates might be associated with lower stroke risk. However, evidence derived from randomized controlled trials identified no statistically significant association. Future high-quality studies are still required to determine causality.

PURPOSE

Whether bisphosphonates may reduce the risk of stroke remains inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between bisphosphonate use and the risk of stroke based on up-to-date evidence.

METHODS

We searched for studies evaluating the effects of bisphosphonate on the risk of stroke from inception until January 3, 2022, on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane libraries and updated our search until August 22, 2022, using PubMed to identify any new potential published studies. Two or more reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the study quality. We retrieved the data to synthesize the pooled relative risk (RR) of stroke associated with bisphosphonate use compared with controls; random-effects models were used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies (7 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 14 observational studies) involving 741,274 participants were included in our meta-analysis. Overall, bisphosphonate use was associated with a lower risk of stroke, but the result was only borderline significant (pooled RR = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-0.99, p = 0.048), and high between-study heterogeneity was found (I2 = 83.7%). Subgroup analyses showed that the evidence derived from RCTs suggested no significant association between bisphosphonate use and stroke risk (pooled RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.76-1.13, p = 0.462; I2 = 13.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that bisphosphonate use is associated with a lower risk of stroke. However, the current evidence does not lead to a definite conclusion due to the borderline statistical significance and high between-study heterogeneity. Future studies, especially RCTs, are necessary to assess causality.

Long-term and sequential treatment for osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder that causes impairment of bone structure and strength, leading to a progressively increased risk of fragility fractures. The global prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the ageing population. Owing to the chronic character of osteoporosis, years or even decades of preventive measures or therapy are required. The long-term use of bone-specific pharmacological treatment options, including antiresorptive and/or osteoanabolic approaches, has raised concerns around adverse effects or potential rebound phenomena after treatment discontinuation. Imaging options, risk scores and the assessment of bone turnover during initiation and monitoring of such therapies could help to inform individualized treatment strategies. Combination therapies are currently used less often than 'sequential' treatments. However, all patients with osteoporosis, including those with secondary and rare causes of osteoporosis, as well as specific patient populations (for example, young adults, men and pregnant women) require new approaches for long-term therapy and disease monitoring. New pathophysiological aspects of bone metabolism might therefore help to inform and revolutionize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis.

Using sequential pharmacotherapy for the treatment of osteoporosis: an update of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis, which is characterized by compromised bone density and heightened susceptibility to fractures, is a substantial public health concern, especially among the aging population. Underdiagnosis, undertreatment, and therapy non-adherence contribute to its impact. Anabolic and dual-action agents like teriparatide, abaloparatide, and romosozumab have emerged as effective treatments, allowing rapid gains in bone mineral density (BMD) and reducing fracture risk. However, administering treatments in the correct order is paramount, with an 'anabolic first' approach gaining traction for patients at high risk of fractures. This strategy involves starting anabolic therapies, followed by antiresorptive agents as maintenance therapy. It is important to note that the effectiveness of anabolic agents differs between treatment-naive and previously treated patients: tailored treatment approaches are therefore necessary. This comprehensive strategy adheres to clinical guidelines, emphasizing individualized care, early intervention, and patient-centered management to mitigate the burden of osteoporosis and enhance patients' quality of life.

AREA COVERED

The aim of this review is to summarize recent evidence on the sequential treatment of osteoporosis and to provide recommendations on the best treatment strategies.

EXPERT OPINION

Effective treatments, such as anabolic agents, are key in high-risk patients, who require an 'anabolic first' approach. Sequential therapy, specifically tailored to a patient's history, can help to optimize prevention and management of fractures.

Oral Therapeutics Post Menopausal Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis affects a significant number of postmenopausal women in the United States. Screening is performed using clinical assessments and bone mineral density scans via dual x-ray absorptiometry. Oral therapy is indicated to prevent pathologic fractures in those deemed at increased risk following screening. Bisphosphonates including alendronate, ibandronate, and risedronate are currently first-line oral therapeutics in fracture prevention following the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Hormonal therapies include estrogen-containing therapies, selective estrogen receptor modulators, and other compounds that mimic the effects of estrogen such as tibolone. Lifestyle modifications such as supplementation and physical activity may also contribute to the prevention of osteoporosis and are used as adjuncts to therapy following diagnosis. These therapeutics are limited primarily by their adverse effects. Treatment regimens should be tailored based on significant risk factors demonstrated by patients, adverse effects, and clinical response to treatment. The most severe risk factors relevant to pharmacological selection involve hormone replacement therapies, where concern for venous thrombosis, coronary artery disease, breast, and uterine cancer exist. Bisphosphonates are most commonly associated with gastrointestinal discomfort which may be mitigated with proper administration. Although adverse effects exist, these medications have proven to be efficacious in the prevention of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in post-menopausal women. Fracture risk should be weighed against the risk of adverse events associated with each of the regimens, with clinical judgment dictating the treatment approach centered around patient goals and experiences.

A summary of the Malaysian Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis, 2022

Objectives

The aim of these Clinical Practice Guidelines is to provide evidence-based recommendations to assist healthcare providers in the screening, diagnosis and management of patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis (OP).

Methods

A list of key clinical questions on the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of OP was formulated. A literature search using the PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews, and OVID electronic databases identified all relevant articles on OP based on the key clinical questions, from 2014 onwards, to update from the 2015 edition. The articles were graded using the SIGN50 format. For each statement, studies with the highest level of evidence were used to frame the recommendation.

Results

This article summarizes the diagnostic and treatment pathways for postmenopausal OP. Risk stratification of patients with OP encompasses clinical risk factors, bone mineral density measurements and FRAX risk estimates. Non-pharmacological measures including adequate calcium and vitamin D, regular exercise and falls prevention are recommended. Pharmacological measures depend on patients' fracture risk status. Very high-risk individuals are recommended for treatment with an anabolic agent, if available, followed by an anti-resorptive agent. Alternatively, parenteral anti-resorptive agents can be used. High-risk individuals should be treated with anti-resorptive agents. In low-risk individuals, menopausal hormone replacement or selective estrogen receptor modulators can be used, if indicated. Patients should be assessed regularly to monitor treatment response and treatment adjusted, as appropriate.

Conclusions

The pathways for the management of postmenopausal OP in Malaysia have been updated. Incorporation of fracture risk stratification can guide appropriate treatment.

Summary of the Thai Osteoporosis Foundation (TOPF) Clinical Practice Guideline on the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis 2021

Objectives

The Thai Osteoporosis Foundation (TOPF) is an academic organization that consists of a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals managing osteoporosis. The first clinical practice guideline for diagnosing and managing osteoporosis in Thailand was published by the TOPF in 2010, then updated in 2016 and 2021. This paper presents important updates of the guideline for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Thailand.

Methods

A panel of experts in the field of osteoporosis was recruited by the TOPF to review and update the TOPF position statement from 2016. Evidence was searched using the MEDLINE database through PubMed. Primary writers submitted their first drafts, which were reviewed, discussed, and integrated into the final document. Recommendations are based on reviews of the clinical evidence and experts' opinions. The recommendations are classified using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation classification system.

Results

The updated guideline comprises 90 recommendations divided into 12 main topics. This paper summarizes the recommendations focused on 4 main topics: the diagnosis and evaluation of osteoporosis, fracture risk assessment and indications for bone mineral density measurement, fracture risk categorization, management according to fracture risk, and pharmacological management of osteoporosis.

Conclusions

This updated clinical practice guideline is a practical tool to assist healthcare professionals in diagnosing, evaluating, and managing osteoporosis in Thailand.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

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

DATA SOURCES

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

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019128391.

Pharmaceutical treatment of bone loss: From animal models and drug development to future treatment strategies

Animal models are fundamental to advance our knowledge of the underlying pathophysiology of bone loss and to study pharmaceutical countermeasures against it. The animal model of post-menopausal osteoporosis from ovariectomy is the most widely used preclinical approach to study skeletal deterioration. However, several other animal models exist, each with unique characteristics such as bone loss from disuse, lactation, glucocorticoid excess, or exposure to hypobaric hypoxia. The present review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of these animal models to emphasize the importance and significance of investigating bone loss and pharmaceutical countermeasures from perspectives other than post-menopausal osteoporosis only. Hence, the pathophysiology and underlying cellular mechanisms involved in the various types of bone loss are different, and this might influence which prevention and treatment strategies are the most effective. In addition, the review sought to map the current landscape of pharmaceutical countermeasures against osteoporosis with an emphasis on how drug development has changed from being driven by clinical observations and enhancement or repurposing of existing drugs to today's use of targeted anti-bodies that are the result of advanced insights into the underlying molecular mechanisms of bone formation and resorption. Moreover, new treatment combinations or repurposing opportunities of already approved drugs with a focus on dabigatran, parathyroid hormone and abaloparatide, growth hormone, inhibitors of the activin signaling pathway, acetazolamide, zoledronate, and romosozumab are discussed. Despite the considerable progress in drug development, there is still a clear need to improve treatment strategies and develop new pharmaceuticals against various types of osteoporosis. The review also highlights that new treatment indications should be explored using multiple animal models of bone loss in order to ensure a broad representation of different types of skeletal deterioration instead of mainly focusing on primary osteoporosis from post-menopausal estrogen deficiency.

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures caused by Cushing's syndrome in young women: case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Cushing's syndrome is known as an important cause of secondary osteoporosis, characterized by reduction of bone mineral density and potential occurrence of fragility fractures before diagnosis in young population. Therefore, for young patients with fragility fractures, especially in young women, more attention should be paid on glucocorticoid excess caused by Cushing's syndrome, due to relatively higher rate of misdiagnosis, distinct pathological characteristics and different treatment strategies compared with violent fractures and primary osteoporosis related fractures.

CASE PRESENTATION

We presented an unusual case of a 26-year-old woman with multiple vertebral compression fractures and pelvis fractures, subsequently diagnosed as Cushing's syndrome. On admission, the radiographic results showed fresh second lumbar vertebra fracture, and old fourth lumbar vertebra and pelvic fractures. The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of lumbar spine revealed marked osteoporosis, and her plasm cortisol was extremely high. Then, Cushing's syndrome, caused by left adrenal adenoma, was diagnosed by further endocrinological and radiographic examinations. After receiving left adrenalectomy, her plasma ACTH and cortisol values returned to normal level. In term of OVCF, we adopted conservative treatments, including pain management, brace treatment, and anti-osteoporosis measures. Three months after discharge, the patient's low back pain was in complete remission without new onset of pain, and returned to normal life and work. Furthermore, we reviewed the literatures on advancements in the treatment of OVCF caused by Cushing's syndrome, and based on our experiences, proposed some additional perspectives to guide treatment.

CONCLUSION

In term of OVCF secondary to Cushing's syndrome without neurological damage, we prefer systematic conservative treatments, including pain management, brace treatment, and anti-osteoporosis measures, to surgical treatment. Among them, anti-osteoporosis treatment has the highest priority because of the reversibility of osteoporosis caused by Cushing's syndrome.

Meta-analysis of placebo-arm dropouts in osteoporosis randomized-controlled trials and implications for nocebo-associated discontinuation of anti-osteoporotic drugs in clinical practice

Dropout from placebo arms in randomized-controlled trials is a surrogate for nocebo responses, resulting from patients' negative expectations to treatment. Among 16,460 placebo-treated patients in oral anti-osteoporotic drug trials, nocebo dropouts were 8% on average, being higher in older patients. This implies that nocebo may contribute to the osteoporosis treatment gap in clinical practice.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis is a common disease requiring long-term treatment. Despite the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic drugs, adherence to treatment is low. Nocebo, a behavior mostly related to the negative expectations to a certain treatment, decreases adherence and negatively affects treatment outcomes and health-related care costs in chronic diseases. Since in double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials any unfavorable outcome leading to discontinuation in placebo arms is considered as nocebo, we aimed to investigate the size of nocebo response in patients participating in osteoporosis trials.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases for dropouts due to reported adverse events in the placebo arms (nocebo dropouts) in all double-blind trials investigating anti-osteoporotic drugs published between January 1993 and March 2022. Only data on bisphosphonates and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) were analyzed (Prospero registration number CRD42020212843).

RESULTS

Data from 44 trials were extracted. In 16,460 placebo-treated patients, the pooled nocebo-dropout was 8% both for bisphosphonates (average: 0.08; range 0.01-0.27; 95%CI 0.06-0.10) and SERMs (average: 0.08; range 0.03-0.15; 95%CI 0.05-0.13). Nocebo-dropouts were higher in bisphosphonate trials enrolling individuals ≥ 65 years (11%) (n = 18) compared to trials enrolling younger individuals (6%) (n = 18) (average: 0.11; 95%CI 0.08-0.13 vs. average: 0.06; 95%CI 0.05-0.08, respectively, p = 0.001). Participants' sex, dosing-intervals, publication year, or severity of osteoporosis had no impact on the nocebo-dropouts.

CONCLUSION

Almost 1 in 10 osteoporosis patients receiving placebo in trials of bisphosphonates and SERMs experiences AEs leading to dropout, implying that nocebo contributes to treatment-discontinuation in clinical practice. Efforts to identify and minimize nocebo, especially in older patients, are warranted.

Frailty and risk of subsequent fracture among older adults presenting to hospital with a minimal trauma fracture

We investigated frailty and refracture risk among older adults with a minimal trauma fracture. After adjusting for age, sex, and site of initial fracture, increasing frailty was associated with an increased risk subsequent fracture. These results indicate the need to routinely screen for frailty following an initial fracture among older adults.

INTRODUCTION

Minimal trauma fractures are common among older adults, and frailty increases risk of an initial minimal trauma fracture. This study was undertaken to estimate the risk of subsequent fracture based on frailty status at the time of an initial fracture.

METHODS

The study population was older adults presenting to hospital, aged 60 years or more, with a minimal trauma fracture. Frailty was estimated using a cumulative deficit approach. The risk of subsequent fracture based on increasing cumulative frailty deficit item group, adjusted for sex, age, and site of initial fracture, was estimated using Cox's proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

Between January 2014 and December 2020, 12,115 older adults presented to hospital (8371 women [69%]), with an initial minimal trauma fracture. The average age was 80 years (SD 9.5). Subsequent fractures identified during the follow-up period occurred in 1137 (9.4%) of study participants. The incidence of subsequent fracture ranged from 25.0 per 1000 older adults (95% confidence interval (CI) 22.4 to 27.8) among the lowest frailty deficit group (1 deficit item) to 31.8 per 1000 (95% CI 28.0 to 35.8) among the highest frailty deficit group (4 to 12 deficit items). After adjusting for age, sex, and site of initial fracture, an increasing number of frailty deficit items was associated with increased risk subsequent fracture (p-value for trend = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that following an initial minimal trauma fracture, frailty independently increases the risk of a subsequent fracture. Therefore, it is important at the time of an initial fracture that older women and men are screened for the presence of frailty, and models of care are implemented to reduce the risk of subsequent fracture among this vulnerable group of older adults.

Oligosaccharides from Sargassum thunbergii inhibit osteoclast differentiation via regulation of IRF-8 signaling

Osteoporosis (OP) is a systemic bone degenerative disease characterized by low bone mass and deteriorated microarchitecture of bone tissue, causing high morbidity and mortality rates. Bone resorption by overactivated osteoclasts (OCs) is the main cause of osteoporosis. Glucuronomannan and its oligomers (Gs) and their sulfated derivatives (SGs) were previously prepared. The anti-osteoporosis activities of these glycans were evaluated. Firstly, we determined the viability of RAW264.7 by CCK-8 test. Nextly, we investigated the inhibitory effects of Gs and SGs on the differentiation of RAW264.7 cells into OCs using tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) staining, F-actin ring staining, qualitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction(qRT-PCR) and western blotting. TRAP staining revealed that Gs significantly blocked RANKL-induced OC generation while SGs did not exhibit this ability. F-actin staining assays demonstrated that Gs inhibits RANKL-induced actin ring formation. qRT-PCR analyses indicated that Gs dose-dependently inhibited the expression of OCs marker genes including Trap, NFATc1, c-Fos, DC-Stamp and ATP60 during the differentiation process, while SGs did not suppress. Regarding the mechanism of Gs, it was found that Gs suppressed osteoclastogenesis via inhibiting the degradation of IRF-8 and interfering with NF-κB pathway activation. Together, these results suggest that Gs have the ability to inhibit osteoclastogenesis by modulating IRF-8 signaling.

Effectiveness and Safety of Treatments to Prevent Fractures in People With Low Bone Mass or Primary Osteoporosis: A Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis for the American College of Physicians

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing in the United States.

PURPOSE

To evaluate low bone mass and osteoporosis treatments to prevent fractures.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Ovid Evidence Based Medicine Reviews: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2014 through February 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Adults receiving eligible interventions for low bone mass or osteoporosis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for fracture outcomes, and RCTs and large observational studies (n ≥1000) for harms.

DATA EXTRACTION

Abstracted by 1 reviewer and verified by a second. Independent, dual assessments of risk of bias and certainty of evidence (CoE).

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 34 RCTs (in 100 publications) and 36 observational studies. Bisphosphonates and denosumab reduced hip, clinical and radiographic vertebral, and other clinical fractures in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis (moderate to high CoE). Bisphosphonates for 36 months or more may increase the risk for atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), but the absolute risks were low. Abaloparatide and teriparatide reduced clinical and radiographic vertebral fractures but increased the risk for withdrawals due to adverse events (WAEs; moderate to high CoE). Raloxifene and bazedoxifene for 36 months or more reduced radiographic vertebral but not clinical fractures (low to moderate CoE). Abaloparatide, teriparatide, and sequential romosozumab, then alendronate, may be more effective than bisphosphonates in reducing clinical fractures for 17 to 24 months in older postmenopausal females at very high fracture risk (low to moderate CoE). Bisphosphonates may reduce clinical fractures in older females with low bone mass (low CoE) and radiographic vertebral fractures in males with osteoporosis (low to moderate CoE).

LIMITATION

Few studies examined participants with low bone mass, males, or Black-identifying persons, sequential therapy, or treatment beyond 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Bisphosphonates, denosumab, abaloparatide, teriparatide, and romosozumab, followed by alendronate, reduce clinical fractures in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis. Abaloparatide and teriparatide increased WAEs; longer duration bisphosphonate use may increase AFF and ONJ risk though these events were rare.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42021236220).

Executive summary: Italian guidelines for diagnosis, risk stratification, and care continuity of fragility fractures 2021

Background

Fragility fractures are a major public health concern owing to their worrying and growing burden and their onerous burden upon health systems. There is now a substantial body of evidence that individuals who have already suffered a fragility fracture are at a greater risk for further fractures, thus suggesting the potential for secondary prevention in this field.

Purpose

This guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for recognizing, stratifying the risk, treating, and managing patients with fragility fracture. This is a summary version of the full Italian guideline.

Methods

The Italian Fragility Fracture Team appointed by the Italian National Health Institute was employed from January 2020 to February 2021 to (i) identify previously published systematic reviews and guidelines on the field, (ii) formulate relevant clinical questions, (iii) systematically review literature and summarize evidence, (iv) draft the Evidence to Decision Framework, and (v) formulate recommendations.

Results

Overall, 351 original papers were included in our systematic review to answer six clinical questions. Recommendations were categorized into issues concerning (i) frailty recognition as the cause of bone fracture, (ii) (re)fracture risk assessment, for prioritizing interventions, and (iii) treatment and management of patients experiencing fragility fractures. Six recommendations were overall developed, of which one, four, and one were of high, moderate, and low quality, respectively.

Conclusions

The current guidelines provide guidance to support individualized management of patients experiencing non-traumatic bone fracture to benefit from secondary prevention of (re)fracture. Although our recommendations are based on the best available evidence, questionable quality evidence is still available for some relevant clinical questions, so future research has the potential to reduce uncertainty about the effects of intervention and the reasons for doing so at a reasonable cost.

High Rates of Imminent Subsequent Fracture After Femoral Neck Fracture in the Elderly

BACKGROUND

Fragility fractures of the hip are known to be followed frequently by subsequent fragility fractures, including second hip fractures. Data on subsequent fractures are available for aggregated index femoral neck and intertrochanteric femoral fractures, grouped generically as hip fractures, but not specifically for femoral neck fractures. There is increasing recognition that a subsequent fracture often occurs early after a hip fracture in the elderly, creating an emphasis on the concept of "imminent fracture risk." Since 2000, there have been many reports on the care gap in interventions after a fragility fracture, with concern regarding the slow uptake of appropriate systemic treatments designed to prevent a subsequent fracture in high-risk patients.

METHODS

As planned a priori, we performed an analysis of subsequent fractures after an index femoral neck fracture in 2 prospective clinical trials involving 2,520 patients from 90 sites on 5 continents. We recorded the incidence and time of occurrence of all secondary fragility fractures as well as the reported use of bone-protective medication in all subjects.

RESULTS

In the 24 months following the index femoral neck fracture, 226 (9.0%) of 2,520 patients sustained at least 1 subsequent fragility fracture, including 113 hip fractures (4.5%). The median interval from the index fracture to a subsequent fracture was approximately 9.0 months. Only 25.2% (634) of the 2,520 patients reported using bone-protective medications at any time during follow-up. Female patients, those with nondisplaced index fractures, and those treated with arthroplasty, were more likely to have received protective medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Subsequent fractures, including second hip fractures, occurred frequently and early following an index femoral neck fracture in 2 large global cohorts. Interventions to prevent a subsequent fracture were instituted in only 1 of 4 patients, even though a focused directive was included in both study protocols.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Fractures reduction with osteoporotic treatments in patients over 75-year-old: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Osteoporosis consists in the reduction of bone mineral density and increased risk of fracture. Age is a risk factor for osteoporosis. Although many treatments are available for osteoporosis, there is limited data regarding their efficacy in older people.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of osteoporosis treatments in patients over 75 years old.

Methods: We reviewed all published studies in MEDLINE, Cochrane and EMBASE including patients over 75 years old, treated by osteoporosis drugs, and focused on vertebral fractures or hip fractures.

Results: We identified 4,393 records for review; 4,216 were excluded after title/abstract review. After full text review, 19 records were included in the systematic review. Most studies showed a reduction in vertebral fracture with osteoporosis treatments, but non-significant results were observed for hip fractures. Meta-analysis of 10 studies showed that lack of treatment was significantly associated with an increased risk of vertebral fractures at one (OR = 3.67; 95%CI = 2.50–5.38) and 3 years (OR = 2.19; 95%CI = 1.44–3.34), and for hip fractures at one (OR = 2.14; 95%CI = 1.09–4.22) and 3 years (OR = 1.31, 95%CI = 1.12–1.53).

Conclusion: A reduction in the risk of vertebral fractures with osteoporosis treatments was observed in most of the studies included and meta-analysis showed that lack of treatment was significantly associated with an increased risk of vertebral fractures. Concerning hip fractures, majority of included studies did not show a significant reduction in the occurrence of hip fractures with osteoporotic treatments, but meta-analysis showed an increased risk of hip fractures without osteoporotic treatment. However, most of the data derived from post hoc and preplanned analyses or observational studies.

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.

Diabetes Mellitus and the Benefit of Antiresorptive Therapy on Fracture Risk

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with increased risk of fractures. However, it is unclear whether current osteoporosis treatments reduce fractures in individuals with diabetes. The aim of the study was to determine whether presence of T2D influences the efficacy of antiresorptive treatment for osteoporosis using the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH)-American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)-Study to Advance Bone Mineral Density (BMD) as a Regulatory Endpoint (SABRE) cohort, which includes individual patient data from randomized trials of osteoporosis therapies. In this study we included 96,385 subjects, 6.8% of whom had T2D, from nine bisphosphonate trials, two selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) trials, two trials of menopausal hormone therapy, one denosumab trial, and one odanacatib trial. We used Cox regression to obtain the treatment hazard ratio (HR) for incident nonvertebral, hip, and all fractures and logistic regression to obtain the treatment odds ratio (OR) for incident morphometric vertebral fractures, separately for T2D and non-DM. We used linear regression to estimate the effect of treatment on 2-year change in BMD (n = 49,099) and 3-month to 12-month change in bone turnover markers (n = 12,701) by diabetes status. In all analyses, we assessed the interaction between treatment and diabetes status. In pooled analyses of all 15 trials, we found that diabetes did not impact treatment efficacy, with similar reductions in vertebral, nonvertebral, all, and hip fractures, increases in total hip and femoral neck BMD, and reductions in serum C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide (CTX), urinary N-telopeptide of type I collagen/creatinine (NTX/Cr) and procollagen type 1 N propeptide (P1NP) (all interactions p > 0.05). We found similar results for the pooled analysis of bisphosphonate trials. However, when we considered trials individually, we found a few interactions within individual studies between diabetes status and the effects of denosumab and odanacatib on fracture risk, change in BMD or bone turnover markers (BTMs). In sum, these results provide strong evidence that bisphosphonates and most licensed antiresorptive drugs are effective at reducing fracture risk and increasing BMD irrespective of diabetes status. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

The Dietary and Non-Dietary Management of Osteoporosis in Adult-Onset Celiac Disease: Current Status and Practical Guidance

Impaired bone mineral density (BMD) is a frequent complication of adult-onset celiac disease (CeD). This is usually due to malabsorption of nutrients, changes in bone metabolism in association with inflammation, and to a lesser extent, decreased overall physical health and mobility. This review aims to highlight the current status concerning surveillance, prevention, and treatment strategies for bone disease in CeD. A practical guidance on these matters is suggested. The available published research on the prevention and treatment of decreased BMD in relation to CeD is scarce. In general, publications were based on expert opinions or extrapolation from studies on postmenopausal women or inflammatory bowel disease. Optimal dietary treatment and an adequate supply of calcium and vitamin D are the cornerstones for the reduction in fracture risk in patients with CeD. In adults with low BMD or fragility fractures, CeD needs to be considered and specifically approached. When osteoporosis is documented, start treatment with an antiresorptive agent; these agents are proven to result in a long-term reduction in fracture risk in high-risk individuals. However, there are some important differences between the management of male and female patients, particularly premenopausal women, that need to be addressed. In patients with persisting diarrhea and malabsorption, parenteral medications may be preferable. Future research specifically focusing on celiac disease and the associated disorders in bone mineralization is mandatory to provide evidence-based recommendations in this field.

The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is the most common metabolic bone disease in the USA and the world. It is a subclinical condition until complicated by fracture(s). These fractures place an enormous medical and personal burden on individuals who suffer from them and take a significant economic toll. Any new fracture in an adult aged 50 years or older signifies imminent elevated risk for subsequent fractures, particularly in the year following the initial fracture. What a patient perceives as an unfortunate accident may be seen as a sentinel event indicative of bone fragility and increased future fracture risk even when the result of considerable trauma. Clinical or subclinical vertebral fractures, the most common type of osteoporotic fractures, are associated with a 5-fold increased risk for additional vertebral fractures and a 2- to 3-fold increased risk for fractures at other sites. Untreated osteoporosis can lead to a vicious cycle of recurrent fracture(s), often resulting in disability and premature death. In appropriate patients, treatment with effective antifracture medication prevents fractures and improves outcomes. Primary care providers and medical specialists are critical gatekeepers who can identify fractures and initiate proven osteoporosis interventions. Osteoporosis detection, diagnosis, and treatment should be routine practice in all adult healthcare settings. The Bone Health and Osteoporosis Foundation (BHOF) - formerly the National Osteoporosis Foundation - first published the Clinician's Guide in 1999 to provide accurate information on osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Since that time, significant improvements have been made in diagnostic technologies and treatments for osteoporosis. Despite these advances, a disturbing gap persists in patient care. At-risk patients are often not screened to establish fracture probability and not educated about fracture prevention. Most concerning, the majority of highest risk women and men who have a fracture(s) are not diagnosed and do not receive effective, FDA-approved therapies. Even those prescribed appropriate therapy are unlikely to take the medication as prescribed. The Clinician's Guide offers concise recommendations regarding prevention, risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men aged 50 years and older. It includes indications for bone densitometry as well as fracture risk thresholds for pharmacologic intervention. Current medications build bone and/or decrease bone breakdown and dramatically reduce incident fractures. All antifracture therapeutics treat but do not cure the disease. Skeletal deterioration resumes sooner or later when a medication is discontinued-sooner for nonbisphosphonates and later for bisphosphonates. Even if normal BMD is achieved, osteoporosis and elevated risk for fracture are still present. The diagnosis of osteoporosis persists even if subsequent DXA T-scores are above - 2.5. Ongoing monitoring and strategic interventions will be necessary if fractures are to be avoided. In addition to pharmacotherapy, adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D, avoidance of smoking and excessive alcohol intake, weight-bearing and resistance-training exercise, and fall prevention are included in the fracture prevention armamentarium. Where possible, recommendations in this guide are based on evidence from RCTs; however, relevant published data and guidance from expert clinical experience provides the basis for recommendations in those areas where RCT evidence is currently deficient or not applicable to the many osteoporosis patients not considered for RCT participation due to age and morbidity.

Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Literature Review

A substantial proportion of the population of females in India falls in the perimenopausal and postmenopausal age groups. One of the complications associated with older age in women is the weakening of bones and the fall in bone mineral density (BMD). This has a severe debilitating consequence in a woman’s life and leads to reduced quality of life along with a greater incidence of fractures. If the fracture involves the hip or the vertebrae, it can cause immobility and be devastating. Postmenopausal osteoporosis is linked with the deficiency of estrogen that occurs with the cessation of the function of the ovaries as age progresses. The function of estrogen in the bone remodeling process is very well understood after years of research; estrogen plays a part in both the formation of bone as well as the prevention of the resorption of bone. A diagnosis can be made by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). It is the gold standard and can spot low bone density at particular sites. The treatment options are selected according to the severity and rate of progression and factors pertaining to each patient. All postmenopausal women should be made aware of this disorder, and they should be encouraged to cultivate a healthy lifestyle through the implementation of a proper diet and inculcation of a regular exercise routine. Smoking and drinking alcohol should be limited, and calcium and vitamin D supplementation should be started in all women of the postmenopausal age group with or without osteoporosis. In patients who have been diagnosed with the disorder, pharmacological intervention is done. Drugs should be selected based on their side effects and contradictions. Follow-up is essential, and patient compliance should be carefully monitored. This article attempts to review the existing literature on this very prevalent disorder to spread awareness about it so that all postmenopausal women can take the necessary steps to prevent the weakening of their bones, and deal with its progression.

How to implement guidelines and models of care

In subjects older than 50 years, the presence of clinical risk factors (CRFs) for fractures or a recent fracture is the cornerstone for case finding. In patients who are clinically at high short- and long-term risk of fractures (those with a recent clinical fracture or with multiple CRFs), further assessment with bone mineral density (BMD) measurement using dual-energy absorptiometry (DXA), imaging of the spine, fall risk evaluation and laboratory examination contributes to treatment decisions according to the height and modifiability of fracture risk. Treatment is available with anti-resorptive and anabolic drugs, and from the start of treatment a lifelong strategy is needed to decide about continuous, intermittent, and sequential therapy. Implementation of guidelines requires further initiatives for improving case finding, public awareness about osteoporosis and national policies on reimbursement of assessment and therapy.

Osteoporosis and Fragility Fractures: currently available pharmacological options and future directions

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue, with a consequent increase in bone fragility and susceptibility to fracture. The average lifetime risk of a 50-year-old woman to suffer a fracture of the spine, hip, proximal humerus, or distal forearm has been estimated at close to 50%. In general, pharmacological treatment is recommended in patients who suffered a fragility fracture because their risk of suffering a subsequent fracture is increased dramatically. Therefore, many guidelines recommend pharmacological treatment in patients without a prevalent fracture if their fracture probability is comparable to or higher than that of a person of the same age with a prevalent fracture. The present review aims to highlight currently available pharmacological treatment options and their antifracture efficacy including safety aspects. Drug classes discussed comprise bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone peptides and derivatives, humanized monoclonal antibodies, and estrogens and gestagens and their combinations. Furthermore, a brief glimpse is provided into a potentially promising treatment option that involves mesenchymal stem cells.

Two-year risedronate treatment for osteoporosis in patients with esophageal varices: a non-randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are the mainstay of osteoporosis treatment, but their use for patients with esophageal varices has been avoided due to the risk of esophagitis, which may cause variceal bleeding. Since most clinical trials assessing osteoporosis treatment last 2-3 years, this study aimed to evaluate a 2-year risedronate treatment for patients with esophageal varices and liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

The study received Institutional Review Board approval, and the sample was divided into two groups according to bone mineral density (BMD). Cirrhosis severity and endoscopic findings at baseline were similar between the groups. The intervention group had 51 patients with osteoporosis, who received oral risedronate 35 mg weekly plus calcium and vitamin D supplements. The control group had 51 patients with osteopenia, receiving only the supplements. Scheduled esophagogastroduodenoscopies and BMD measurements were carried out.

RESULTS

The adjusted esophagitis risk was higher in the intervention group; however, none of the subjects had digestive bleeding. Lumbar spine BMD increased in the intervention group (- 3.06 ± 0.71 to - 2.33 ± 0.90; p < 0.001) and in the control group (- 1.38 ± 0.77 to - 1.10 ± 1.05; p = 0.012). Femoral neck BMD did not change in the intervention group (- 1.64 ± 0.91 to - 1.71 ± 0.95; p = 0.220), but tended to decrease in the control group (- 1.00 ± 0.74 to - 1.09 ± 0.82; p = 0.053).

CONCLUSION

Oral risedronate was effective and did not cause gastrointestinal bleeding in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices under endoscopic surveillance.

Aminobisphosphonates: Reconsideration 25 years after their approval for the treatment of osteoporosis

Aminobisphosphonates are widely used in the treatment of osteoporosis. They have a high affinity for hydroxyapatite, binding primarily to resorbing surfaces, but also to forming surfaces and to some extent to resting surfaces. They inhibit osteoclasts, thereby decreasing remodelling units. Consequently, they increase bone mass and reduce stress risers. This decreases the risk of fractures. If this decrease is sufficient, they can be temporarily withdrawn (drug holidays), which prevents serious complications (atypical femoral fracture). They probably reduce mortality. Virtually all patients with osteoporosis can benefit from them at some point in the course of their disease (at the beginning of treatment or after the administration of anabolics, selective estrogen receptor modulators or denosumab). If well tolerated orally, alendronate and risedronate are preferable. Otherwise, zoledronate is preferred. Their efficacy vs. cost-safety-convenience ratio makes aminobisphosphonates reference drugs in the field of osteoporosis.

Cardiovascular Safety and Effectiveness of Bisphosphonates: From Intervention Trials to Real-Life Data

Both osteoporosis with related fragility fractures and cardiovascular diseases are rapidly outspreading worldwide. Since they are often coexistent in elderly patients and may be related to possible common pathogenetic mechanisms, the possible reciprocal effects of drugs employed to treat these diseases have to be considered in clinical practice. Bisphosphonates, the agents most largely employed to decrease bone fragility, have been shown to be overall safe with respect to cardiovascular diseases and even capable of reducing cardiovascular morbidity in some settings, as mainly shown by real life studies. No randomized controlled trials with cardiovascular outcomes as primary endpoints are available. While contradictory results have emerged about a possible BSP-mediated reduction of overall mortality, it is undeniable that these drugs can be employed safely in patients with high fracture risk, since no increased mortality has ever been demonstrated. Although partial reassurance has emerged from meta-analysis assessing the risk of cardiac arrhythmias during bisphosphonates treatment, caution is warranted in administering this class of drugs to patients at risk for atrial fibrillation, possibly preferring other antiresorptives or anabolics, according to osteoporosis guidelines. This paper focuses on the complex relationship between bisphosphonates use and cardiovascular disease and possible co-management issues.

An open-label randomized study of the relative absorption of gastro-resistant risedronate taken fasted or with food versus immediate-release risedronate

Patients with osteoporosis often take oral bisphosphonates with food, rendering these medications ineffective. This study compared the relative absorption of four formulations of gastro‐resistant (GR; formulations 1–4) risedronate 35 mg versus immediate‐release (IR) risedronate 35 mg taken fasted. Secondarily, it compared the relative absorption of GR formulations administered fed and fasted, and determined the site of disintegration. Healthy participants (N = 160) were randomized to one of nine treatment groups: IR risedronate taken fasted (group A) or formulations 1–4 taken fasted or fed (groups B–I). Fasted groups fasted for 8 h pre‐dose and 4 h post‐dose. Fed groups fasted for 7.5 h, then took risedronate with breakfast. Urine was collected until 72 h post‐dose and analyzed using liquid chromatography. From each group, up to seven participants underwent scintigraphic monitoring to assess tablet disintegration. The percentage of total dose recovered in urine (A’_e) was ~0.5% for group A. The A’_e of formulations 1–4 taken fasted was 0.220% (90% confidence interval 0.124–0.389), 0.298% (0.122–0.730), 0.154% (0.090–0.264), and 0.108% (0.051–0.231), respectively. With food, the A’_e of formulation 1 decreased least versus fasted (−27%) compared with the A’_e of formulations 2, 3, and 4 (−73%, −80%, and −65%, respectively). Formulations 1–3 disintegrated in the small intestine, formulation 4 closer to the large intestine. All GR formulations were well tolerated and in line with the known safety profile for IR risedronate. Formulation 2 had the highest absorption when taken fasted, whereas the absorption of formulation 1 was least affected by food.

Bisphosphates for Osteoporosis: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Most Cited Articles

Osteoporosis has become a major public health problem and bisphosphates treatment for osteoporosis is a rapidly developing research field. Every year, plenty of studies devoted to the treatment of osteoporosis are published, giving clinicians a new perspective on bisphosphates treatment for osteoporosis. However, the quality of the scientific papers in this area is unclear. The aim of the present study was to characterize the 100 top-cited articles regarding bisphosphates treatment for osteoporosis. This analysis provides an accessible list for practitioners of endocrinology, pharmacy, epidemiology, imaging, surgery, and scientific research to identify the most frequently cited literature and better understand the future direction.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Bisphosphonate treatment is associated with decreased mortality rates in patients after osteoporotic vertebral fracture

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of bisphosphonate (BP) on mortality after osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF). BP medication (hazard ratios = 0.593; 95%CI: 0.361-0.976) was significantly associated with reduced all-cause mortality after OVF.

PURPOSE

Osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) is the most common type of fragility fracture. Bisphosphonate (BP) medication was suggested to have positive effects on both fracture prevention and recovery outcomes. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of BP on mortality after OVF.

METHODS

This cohort study involved 535 patients (170 males and 365 females), aged ≥ 65 years (mean age: 82.6 ± 7.0 years, mean follow-up periods: 33.0 ± 25.8 months) who were hospitalized after OVF from January 2011 to December 2019 at a public hospital. Patients treated with PTH (parathyroid hormone), PTH or PTHrp analogues, denosumab, and selective estrogen receptor modulators were excluded. Kaplan-Meier survival curves on mortality of patients with OVF with and without BP treatment were prepared, and log-rank tests were performed. Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify factors associated with mortality after OVF.

RESULTS

This study included 163 (30.5%) patients treated with BP. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that the mortality rate after OVF was significantly lower in patients treated with BP (P < 0.001). Cox proportional hazards model showed that older age (hazard ratios [HR] = 1.066; 95%CI:1.035-1.103), male sex (HR = 2.248; 95%CI:1.427-3.542), malnutrition (geriatric nutritional risk index < 92) (HR = 1.691; 95%CI:1.005-2.846), BP medication (HR = 0.593; 95%CI: 0.361-0.976), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association score at discharge (HR = 0.941; 95%CI: 0.892-0.993) were significantly associated with all-cause mortality after OVF.

CONCLUSIONS

BP medication is beneficial not only for fracture prevention but also for mortality after OVF.

Steric hindrance effect on the excited-state proton transfer process: TDDFT study on the fluorescent sensing mechanism of a fluoride sensor

An understanding of the excited-state process and the sensing mechanism for specific anions can be helpful for the design and synthesis of fluorescent sensors in analytical chemistry and biotechnology. Here, we theoretically investigated the fluorescent response mechanism of a reported acylhydrazone-based fluorescent sensor (Soft Matter, 2019, 15, 6690) for fluoride recognition using the time-dependent density functional theory approach. At the M06/TZVP/SCM level, the vertical excitation energies, which were calculated based on the ground state and first singlet-state geometries of the sensor molecule, agreed well with the experimental ultraviolet-visible and fluorescence spectra. Therefore, the time-dependent density functional theory method was considered reasonable and effective. According to the frontier orbital analysis and an excited-state potential energy scan, we proposed an excited-state proton transfer mechanism for the sensor-fluorine complex, where the steric hindrance leads to a high potential barrier. The excited-state proton transfer process facilitates sensor molecule deprotonation, alleviates its steric hindrance effect and expands its conjugated system. As a result, the fluorescence emission band of the sensor molecule was red-shifted significantly with the addition of fluoride anion. Based on this fluorescence difference, the sensor could be used for fluoride anion identification. This work provides a strategy to study sensor-analyte interactions in the excited state and offers an approach to tune the fluorescence emission wavelength of sensor molecules in anionic environments.

UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis

The National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) has revised the UK guideline for the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50 years and older. Accredited by NICE, this guideline is relevant for all healthcare professionals involved in osteoporosis management.

INTRODUCTION

The UK National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) first produced a guideline on the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in 2008, with updates in 2013 and 2017. This paper presents a major update of the guideline, the scope of which is to review the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50 years and older.

METHODS

Where available, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials were used to provide the evidence base. Conclusions and recommendations were systematically graded according to the strength of the available evidence.

RESULTS

Review of the evidence and recommendations are provided for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, fracture-risk assessment and intervention thresholds, management of vertebral fractures, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, including duration and monitoring of anti-resorptive therapy, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, and models of care for fracture prevention. Recommendations are made for training; service leads and commissioners of healthcare; and for review criteria for audit and quality improvement.

CONCLUSION

The guideline, which has received accreditation from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), provides a comprehensive overview of the assessment and management of osteoporosis for all healthcare professionals involved in its management. This position paper has been endorsed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation and by the European Society for the Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases.

Osteoporosis and fractures in women: the burden of disease

Osteoporosis is a disease characterized by impaired bone microarchitecture and reduced bone mineral density (BMD) resulting in bone fragility and increased risk of fracture. In western societies, one in three women and one in five men will sustain an osteoporotic fracture in their remaining lifetime from the age of 50 years. Fragility fractures, especially of the spine and hip, commonly give rise to increased morbidity and mortality. In the five largest European countries and Sweden, fragility fractures were the cause of 2.6 million disability-adjusted life years in 2016 and the fracture-related costs increased from €29.6 billion in 2010 to €37.5 billion in 2017. In the European Union and the USA, only a small proportion of women eligible for pharmacological treatment are being prescribed osteoporosis medication. Secondary fracture prevention, using Fracture Liaison Services, can be used to increase the rates of fracture risk assessment, BMD testing and use of osteoporosis medication in order to reduce fracture numbers. Additionally, established primary prevention strategies, based on case-finding methods utilizing fracture prediction tools, such as FRAX, to identify women without fracture but with elevated risk, are recommended in order to further reduce fracture numbers.

Relationship between Change in Bone Mineral Density of Lumbar Spine and Risk of New Vertebral and Nonvertebral Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

Studies have shown that the change in lumbar spine bone mineral density with different osteoporosis drugs had a beneficial effect on the frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal females, but their results were conflicting. This meta‐analysis was performed to evaluate this relationship. A systematic literature search up to May 2020 was performed and 20 studies with 73,390 postmenopausal females were included; of them, a total of 41,980 were treated with osteoporosis drugs and 31,410 with placebo. They reported relationships between the change in lumbar spine bone mineral density and the frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal females. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated comparing the osteoporosis drugs to placebo effect on the frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal females using the dichotomous method with a random or fixed‐effect model. Treatment with osteoporosis drugs had significantly lower frequency of new vertebral fractures (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.45–0.63, P < 0.001) and nonvertebral fractures (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78–0.87, P < 0.001) compared to placebo in postmenopausal females. Treatment with osteoporosis drugs had a significantly lower frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures compared to placebo in postmenopausal females. This relationship forces us to recommend osteoporosis drugs in postmenopausal females to avoid any possible new fractures. A cost‐effective study is recommended.

Time to Benefit of Bisphosphonate Therapy for the Prevention of Fractures Among Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

The clinical decision to initiate bisphosphonate therapy for the treatment of osteoporosis requires balancing shorter-term harms and burdens (eg, gastroesophageal irritation or severe musculoskeletal pain) with longer-term benefits in reducing potential fractures.

Objective

To assess the time to benefit (TTB) of bisphosphonate therapy for the prevention of nonvertebral and other fractures among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Data Sources

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified from systematic reviews commissioned by the US Preventive Services Task Force (1 review), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1 review), the Cochrane Library (2 reviews), and the Endocrine Society (1 review).

Study Selection

Studies selected were RCTs involving postmenopausal women with a diagnosis of osteoporosis based on existing vertebral fractures or bone mineral density T scores of -2.5 or lower. The selection process was focused on studies of alendronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid because they are guideline-recommended first-line agents for reducing nonvertebral fractures. Studies were excluded if they did not focus on women with a primary diagnosis of osteoporosis, had no placebo arm, or had a lack of data on time to fracture.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Random-effects Weibull survival curves were fitted and Markov chain Monte Carlo methods were used to estimate the absolute risk reduction (ARR) and TTB for each study. These estimates were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the time to 3 different ARR thresholds (0.002, 0.005, and 0.010) for the first nonvertebral fracture. Secondary outcomes included the time to 4 ARR thresholds (0.001, 0.002, 0.005, and 0.010) for hip fracture, any clinical fracture, and clinical vertebral fracture.

Results

Of 67 full-text articles identified, 10 RCTs comprising 23 384 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were included either as the original RCT or part of subsequently published pooled analyses. Among the studies, the number of participants ranged from 994 to 7765, with mean (SD) age ranging from 63 (7) years to 74 (3) years and follow-up duration ranging from 12 to 48 months. The pooled meta-analysis found that 12.4 months (95% CI, 6.3-18.4 months) were needed to avoid 1 nonvertebral fracture per 100 postmenopausal women receiving bisphosphonate therapy at an ARR of 0.010. To prevent 1 hip fracture, 200 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis would need to receive bisphosphonate therapy for 20.3 months (95% CI, 11.0-29.7 months) at an ARR of 0.005. In addition, 200 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis would need to receive bisphosphonate therapy for 12.1 months (95% CI, 6.4-17.8 months) to avoid 1 clinical vertebral fracture at an ARR of 0.005.

Conclusions and Relevance

This meta-analysis found that the TTB of bisphosphonate therapy was 12.4 months to prevent 1 nonvertebral fracture per 100 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. These results suggest that bisphosphonate therapy is most likely to benefit postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who have a life expectancy greater than 12.4 months.

Real-world treatment and fracture incidence in postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis at high risk of fracture: a retrospective claims data analysis

Background: Osteoporosis (OP) and its associated fractures have a significant impact on patients' quality of life and are impacting their morbidity and mortality. For OP patients at high risk of fracture, guidelines recommend a pharmacological OP treatment. The aim of this study was to describe the real-world medication treatment of postmenopausal women with severe OP at high risk of fracture, their risk to experience a new fracture after having at least one previous fracture, and to assess the associated healthcare resource use (HCRU). Methods: This retrospective cohort study was based on anonymized German claims data (AOK PLUS). All included OP patients were female, ≥55 years old, and had a vertebral and/or femoral fracture. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis in 2018 and a longitudinal analysis, starting with an incident vertebral/femoral fracture (after or simultaneously with the first observed OP diagnosis). In both analyses, patient characteristics, rate of new incident fractures, OP treatment patterns, and HCRU associated with the treatment of patients were investigated. Results: In the cross-sectional setting, 12,180 patients with a mean age of 83.59 years were observed. Of these patients, 14.30% sustained at least one new incident fracture and 34.54% received a pharmaceutical OP treatment during 2018. In this year, 58.50% of the patients had at least one OP-related outpatient visit, and 26.35% had a fracture-related visit. In 160 patients (1.31%), at least one OP-related hospitalization was documented, and in 1,293 patients (10.62%) a fracture-related hospitalization in 2018. In the longitudinal setting, 10,323 patients with a mean age of 83.22 years were included. Of these, 18.96% experienced at least one new incident fracture within the first 12 months after the index fracture, and in total 30.85% in the entire follow-up period (mean 2.03 years). During the 12-month baseline period, 22.12% of the patients received an OP treatment. Three months after the index fracture, the proportion of treated patients remained at 22.30%. During the total follow-up time, 35.54% were prescribed with an OP treatment. Conclusion: We observed a considerable proportion of untreated patients and a high rate of subsequent fractures. The awareness for a proper risk assessment and the appropriate use of available treatments should be increased.

Calcium and vitamin D supplementation: when and why

Osteoporosis is a common disease, with fragility fractures representing its dreaded complications. The role of calcium and vitamin D supplementation needs to be addressed in the context of a heavy health burden, with a massive impact on individuals, healthcare systems, and societies as a whole. Calcium and vitamin D are often discussed together as interventions for promoting bone health. Still, it is essential to remember that they are quite distinct entities that play different roles in mineral metabolism. Insufficient calcium intake and vitamin D deficiency are common and widespread. Furthermore, a strong association between vitamin D deficiency and extra-skeletal outcomes has emerged over the last decades. When dietary intake is insufficient, with little room for improvement, several supplementation strategies have proved to be effective and safe. Adequate calcium intake and vitamin D serum levels should be pursued efficiently in the general population, and deficiency should be considered unacceptable in subsets particularly at risk. The aim of this narrative review was to present an overview of calcium and vitamin D intake and their supplementation.

Effect of bisphosphonate on hip fracture in patients with osteoporosis or osteopenia according to age: a meta-analysis and systematic review

This meta-analysis and systematic review investigated the efficacy of bisphosphonates on the incidence of hip fracture (IHF) in patients of different ages with osteoporosis or osteopenia. We searched Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Database, and PubMed from inception to January 10, 2021, for trials reporting the effects of bisphosphonates on the IHF. We included only randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials. We pooled data using a random-effects meta-analysis with risk ratios (RRs) and reported 95% CIs. We also used the Cochran Q and I² statistics to assess the heterogeneity in the results of individual studies. The primary endpoints were the total numbers of people in the bisphosphonates and placebo groups and the numbers of IHFs during the follow-up periods. Bisphosphonates reduced the IHF with an overall effect (RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.77; zoledronic acid: RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.78; risedronate: RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.94, and alendronate: RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.95). The result of the heterogeneity assessment was I²=0, p=0.97. In all age groups (all ages, ≥55 years old, ≥65 years old), bisphosphonates reduced the IHF. In the ≥55 years old and ≥65 years old age groups, the RR and 95% CI were 0.63 and 0.43 to 0.93, and 0.60 and 0.44 to 0.81, respectively. Bisphosphonate reduced the IHF in the general population and all age groups (≥55 years old and ≥65 years old). Zoledronic acid, risedronate and alendronate reduced the IHF in osteoporosis or osteopenia populations. The association between bisphosphonate and the IHF does not appear to be influenced by age.