Which treatment to prevent an imminent fracture?

Risk analysis for subsequent fracture of osteoporotic fractures in Chinese women over age 60: a nationwide cross-sectional study

Prevention of subsequent fracture is a major public health challenge in the field of osteoporosis prevention and treatment, and older women are at high risk for osteoporotic fractures. This study aimed to examine factors associated with subsequent fracture in older Chinese women with osteoporosis. We collected data on 9212 older female patients with osteoporotic fractures from 580 medical institutions in 31 provinces of China. Higher odds of subsequent fractures were associated with age of 70-79 years (OR 1.218, 95% CI 1.049-1.414), age ≥ 80 (OR 1.455, 95% CI 1.222-1.732), index fracture site was vertebrae (OR 1.472, 95% CI 1.194-1.815) and hip (OR 1.286, 95% CI 1.041-1.590), index fracture caused by fall (OR 1.822, 95% CI 1.281-2.591), strain (OR 1.587, 95% CI 1.178-2.139), no inducement (OR 1.541, 95% CI 1.043-2.277), and assessed as high risk of fracture (OR 1.865, 95% CI 1.439-2.416), BMD T-score ≤ -2.5 (OR 1.725, 95% CI 1.440-2.067), history of surgery (OR 3.941, 95% CI 3.475-4.471) and trauma (OR 8.075, 95% CI 6.941-9.395). Low risk of fall (OR 0.681, 95% CI 0.513-0.904), use of anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM, OR 0.801, 95% CI 0.693-0.926), and women who had received fall prevention health education (OR 0.583, 95% CI 0.465-0.730) associated with lower risk. The areas under the curve of the prediction model was 0.818. The sensitivity was 67.0% and the specificity was 82.0%. The prediction model showed a good ability to predict the risk of subsequent fracture in older women with osteoporotic fractures and are suitable for early self-measurement which may benefit post-fracture management.

[Osteoporosis - implications of the new guidelines in practice]

In September 2023, the guideline on the prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men was published as a completely revised guideline. The implications for practice include a change in the justifying indication for performing a bone density measurement, the time interval over which the fracture risk is determined, the level and number of therapy thresholds, and the recommendations for the therapeutic approach that are adapted to the individual fracture risk present. Risk assessment for the prediction of spine and hip fractures is essential in the context of osteoporosis diagnostics. In addition to age and gender, there are a total of 33 risk factors to determine the individual risk of fracture. Much more attention is paid to the assessment of the risk of falls and, depending on the result, combined with recommendations for muscle training and protein intake from the age of 65. Risk indicators must also be taken into account when determining the indication for osteoporosis diagnosis, as well as the risk factors of the imminent risk of fracture. The indication for baseline diagnostics has changed from the >20% 10-year fracture risk to diagnostics in postmenopausal women and in men aged 50 years and older, depending on the fracture risk factor profile. This eliminates a specific fracture risk threshold for basic diagnostics. Thus, in the young patient group (50-60 years), the risk factors considered medically relevant for the indication for osteoporosis diagnosis must be taken into account. New thresholds as an indication for initiating therapy is the determination of fracture risk using a risk calculator over 3 years instead of 10 years. The indication for drug therapy should be based on the threshold values of the DVO risk model. The data clearly suggests a significantly faster and more effective fracture risk-reducing effect of anabolic therapy. This is recommended in the first sequence in cases of a very high risk of fracture from 10%/3 years with osteoanabolic active substances (teriparatide or romosozumab). Such a therapy sequence should be initiated directly and not delayed due to upcoming dental procedures. Follow-up therapy to consolidate the reduction of fracture risk should be chosen individually.

Male-female disparity in clinical features and significance of mild vertebral fractures in community-dwelling residents aged 50 and over

This investigation examined the clinical implications of mild vertebral fractures in older community-dwelling residents. Focusing on the locomotion health of older individuals, the earlier reported Obuse study enrolled 415 randomly sampled Japanese residents aged between 50 and 89 years, 411 of whom underwent X-ray evaluations for pre-existing vertebral fractures. A blinded assessment of vertebral fractures based on Genant's criteria was conducted on the T5-L5 spine for rating on a severity scale. Grade 1 mild fractures were not linked to age in males, but increased with aging in females. Female participants had fewer Grade 1 and 2 fractures (P = 0.003 and 0.035, respectively) but more Grade 3 fractures (P = 0.013) than did males independently of age (Grade 1, 2, and 3: 25%, 16%, and 9% in females and 40%, 22%, and 6% in males, respectively). Weak negative correlations were observed between the number of fractures and bone mineral density in females for all fracture grades (Spearman's rho: 0.23 to 0.36, P < 0.05). Our study showed that Grade 1 mild vertebral fractures in males lacked pathological significance, while in females they potentially indicated fragility fractures and were related to poor lumbopelvic alignment.

Denosumab improves trabecular bone score in relationship with decrease in fracture risk of women exposed to aromatase inhibitors

PURPOSE

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a gray-level textural metric that has shown to correlate with risk of fractures in several forms of osteoporosis. The value of TBS in predicting fractures and the effects of bone-active drugs on TBS in aromatase inhibitors (AIs)-induced osteoporosis are still largely unknown. The primary objective of this retrospective study was to assess the effects of denosumab and bisphosphonates (BPs) on TBS and vertebral fractures (VFs) in women exposed to AIs.

METHODS

241 consecutive women (median age 58 years) with early breast cancer undergoing treatment with AIs were evaluated for TBS, bone mineral density (BMD) and morphometric VFs at baseline and after 18-24 months of follow-up. During the study period, 139 women (57.7%) received denosumab 60 mg every 6 months, 53 (22.0%) BPs, whereas 49 women (20.3%) were not treated with bone-active drugs.

RESULTS

Denosumab significantly increased TBS values (from 1.270 to 1.323; P < 0.001) accompanied by a significant decrease in risk of VFs (odds ratio 0.282; P = 0.021). During treatment with BPs, TBS did not significantly change (P = 0.849) and incidence of VFs was not significantly different from women untreated with bone-active drugs (P = 0.427). In the whole population, women with incident VFs showed higher decrease in TBS vs. non-fractured women (P = 0.003), without significant differences in changes of BMD at any skeletal site.

CONCLUSIONS

TBS variation predicts fracture risk in AIs treated women. Denosumab is effective to induce early increase of TBS and reduction in risk of VFs.

[Osteoporosis: treatment of high-risk patients]

Nowadays, different drugs are available for specific treatment of osteoporosis. On the one hand, antiresorptives (raloxifene, bisphosphonates, denosumab) and, on the other hand, bone anabolic drugs (teriparatide and romosozumab) can be used. For both bone anabolic agents, superiority over oral bisphosphonates in high-risk patients was shown in randomized comparative studies. High-risk patients represent a subgroup of osteoporosis patients requiring treatment with a particularly high fracture risk. The very high risk can be recognized by the clinical manifestation (hip or vertebral fracture), the very low T‑score and/or the clinical risk factors (exceeding the bone anabolic threshold of the DVO risk calculator). High-risk patients should be treated with bone anabolic drugs in the first line of treatment. Patients treated with antiresorptives, who develop a very high risk in the course of the disease should be escalated to bone anabolic compounds. Every bone anabolic treatment requires an antiresorptive follow-up treatment. Drug holidays are only possible in exceptional cases for high-risk patients.

[Development of the new guidelines on osteoporosis : Methodological and content development]

Since 2018, the present S3 guideline Prophylaxis, Diagnosis and Therapy of Osteoporosis (AWMF 183-001) has been updated following a previous update of the underlying PICO questions (Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome questions) for a systematic literature search. The focus of the guideline update, in addition to updating the evidence supporting literature along with recommendations, was the development of a risk calculator for vertebral fractures and femoral neck fractures. This is essential for managing risk assessment because of the multitude of risk factors that contribute to fracture risk. This article considers the development of the guideline update methodologically and substantively, the latter by reflecting on the core themes of the guideline update.

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.

Time-varying exposure to anti-osteoporosis drugs and risk of first-time hip fracture: a population wide study within the Norwegian Epidemiologic Osteoporosis Studies (NOREPOS)

We investigated the association between bisphosphonate and denosumab use and risk of hip fracture in Norway. These drugs protect against fractures in clinical trials, but their population-level effect is unknown. Our results showed lowered risk of hip fracture for treated women. Treatment of high-risk individuals could prevent future hip fractures.

PURPOSE

To investigate whether bisphosphonates and denosumab reduced the risk of first-time hip fracture in Norwegian women when adjusting for a medication-based comorbidity index.

METHODS

Norwegian women aged 50-89 in 2005-2016 were included. The Norwegian prescription database (NorPD) supplied data on exposures to bisphosphonates, denosumab, and other drugs for the calculation of the Rx-Risk Comorbidity Index. Information on all hip fractures treated in hospitals in Norway was available. Flexible parametric survival analysis was used with age as time scale and with time-varying exposure to bisphosphonates and denosumab. Individuals were followed until hip fracture or censoring (death, emigration, age 90 years), or 31 December 2016, whichever occurred first. Rx-Risk score was included as a time-varying covariate. Other covariates were marital status, education, and time-varying use of bisphosphonates or denosumab with other indications than osteoporosis.

RESULTS

Of 1,044,661 women 77,755 (7.2%) were ever-exposed to bisphosphonate and 4483 (0.4%) to denosumab. The fully adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.91-0.99) for bisphosphonate use and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.47-0.76) for denosumab use. Bisphosphonate treatment gave a significantly reduced risk of hip fracture compared with the population after 3 years and denosumab after 6 months. Fracture risk was lowest in denosumab users who had previously used bisphosphonate: HR 0.42 (95% CI: 0.29-0.61) compared with the unexposed population.

CONCLUSIONS

In population-wide real-world data, women exposed to bisphosphonates and denosumab had a lower hip fracture risk than the unexposed population after adjusting for comorbidity. Treatment duration and treatment history impacted fracture risk.

Selection for treatment of patients at high risk of fracture by the short versus long term prediction models - data from the Belgian FRISBEE cohort

Our imminent model was less sensitive but more selective than FRAX® in the choice of treatment to prevent imminent fractures. This new model decreased NNT by 30%, which could reduce the treatment costs. In the Belgian FRISBEE cohort, the effect of recency further decreased the selectivity of FRAX®.

PURPOSE

We analyzed the selection for treatment of patients at high risk of fracture by the Belgian FRISBEE imminent model and the FRAX® tool.

METHODS

We identified in the FRISBEE cohort subjects who sustained an incident MOF (mean age 76.5 ± 6.8 years). We calculated their estimated 10-year risk of fracture using FRAX® before and after adjustment for recency and the 2-year probability of fracture using the FRISBEE model.

RESULTS

After 6.8 years of follow-up, we validated 480 incident and 54 imminent MOFs. Of the subjects who had an imminent fracture, 94.0% had a fracture risk estimated above 20% by the FRAX® before correction for recency and 98.1% after adjustment, with a specificity of 20.2% and 5.9%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the FRISBEE model at 2 years were 72.2% and 55.4%, respectively, for a threshold of 10%. For these thresholds, 47.3% of the patients were identified at high risk in both models before the correction, and 17.2% of them had an imminent MOF. The adjustment for recency did not change this selection. Before the correction, 34.2% of patients were selected for treatment by FRAX® only, and 18.8% would have had an imminent MOF. This percentage increased to 47% after the adjustment for recency, but only 6% of those would suffer a MOF within 2 years.

CONCLUSION

In our Belgian FRISBEE cohort, the imminent model was less sensitive but more selective in the selection of subjects in whom an imminent fracture should be prevented, resulting in a lower NNT. The correction for recency in this elderly population further decreased the selectivity of FRAX®. These data should be validated in additional cohorts before using them in everyday practice.

Are there specific clinical risk factors for the occurrence of multiple fractures? The FRISBEE study

This study showed additional clinical risk factors for the occurrence of multiple fractures with regards to a single fracture, with often higher hazard ratios. It would be important to include the risk of the occurrence of multiple fractures in future prediction models.

PURPOSE

To identify clinical risk factors (CRFs) which would specifically increase the risk of multiple fractures.

METHODS

Data of the 3560 postmenopausal women of the FRISBEE study were analysed. The CRFs and the fractures are collected annually. The cohort was divided into three groups: those who had no incident fracture, those who had a single incident fracture and those who had 2 two or more incident fractures (i.e. multiple fractures). Statistical analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among the 3560 subjects (followed for 9.1 (7.2-10.6) years), 261 subjects had two or more validated fractures during follow-up (146 were major osteoporotic fractures (MOFs)), 628 had one fracture (435 MOFs), 2671 had no fracture (2979 had no MOF); 157 subjects had two or more central fractures, 389 had only one and 3014 had none. The risk factors for those with multiple fractures at any site were age, history of fracture, history of fall, total hip bone mineral density (BMD), spine BMD and rheumatoid arthritis. For those with multiple MOFs, significant CRFs were age, history of fracture, parental hip fracture, total hip BMD and rheumatoid arthritis.

CONCLUSION

We found in a prospective cohort study that there were more CRFs and higher hazard ratios for the occurrence of multiple fractures than for a single fracture.

Management of bone loss due to endocrine therapy during cancer treatment

Bone modifying agents BMAs (oral and IV bisphosphonates, denosumab) are used to treat bone loss due to endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR +) early breast cancer and non-metastatic prostate cancer (NMPC). Timely initiation of appropriate sequential therapy is imperative to reduce cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). This narrative review summarizes current literature regarding management of CTIBL in HR + early breast cancer and NMPC patients. Risk factors for fragility fractures, screening strategies, optimal timing for the treatment, dosing/duration of therapy, and post treatment monitoring have not been clearly defined in HR + early breast and NMPC patients receiving endocrine therapy. This review aims to discuss the utility of fracture risk assessment (FRAX) tool for the prevention and management of CTIBL, osteoanabolic therapy for imminent fracture risk reduction, and sequential therapy options. Using predefined terms, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies on CTIBL in HR + breast and NMPC patients. We included randomized clinical trials, meta-analysis, evidence-based reviews, observational studies, and clinical practice guidelines. Fracture risk assessment tools (FRAX) guide therapy for osteoporosis in patients with early HR + breast cancer and NMPC. BMAs to prevent bone loss should be initiated at higher T-score than recommended by FRAX in premenopausal HR + breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, oophorectomy and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy, post-menopausal women with HR + breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy, and NMPC patients with androgen deprivation therapy. Sequential therapy with osteoanabolic agents as first line treatment offers a potential therapeutic strategy in patients with high imminent fracture risk. Due to limited data in cancer patients regarding management of osteoporosis, a dosing schedule similar to osteoporosis is considered appropriate. Risk stratification to identify vulnerable patient population, choosing the appropriate sequential therapy, and close monitoring of patients at the risk of bone loss can potentially reduce the mortality, morbidity, and health care cost related to CTIBL.

Up-to-Date Knowledge on Osteoporosis Treatment Selection in Postmenopausal Women

The concept of a super-aged society has led to a steady increase in the average lifespan and hence, interest in a healthy life has increased. Aging is a major risk factor for many diseases, including osteoporosis. Osteoporotic fractures have a significant impact on the quality of life of the elderly and hence, it is pivotal to provide effective treatment of osteoporosis after menopause. Osteoporosis requires proper management and the treatment must be centered on long-term goals. New drugs with diverse mechanisms have been developed for treating osteoporosis. Current management of osteoporosis generally focuses on the importance of risk-based strategies to maximize the effectiveness of existing treatments and mitigate potential negative side-effects. Additionally, there is a need for sequential treatment of osteoporosis in the future. This review discusses the dynamic strategies for osteoporosis treatment and the importance of long-term management in postmenopausal women.