Effect of risedronate on the risk of hip fracture in elderly women. Hip Intervention Program Study Group

Introduction of an order set after hip fracture improves osteoporosis medication initiation and persistence: a population-based before-after analysis

We found that a standardized order set after hip fracture increased initiation of anti-osteoporosis medication and increased persistence at 1 year, but did not reduce secondary fractures.

BACKGROUND

A treatment gap exists after osteoporosis-related fractures. Introducing standardized care can improve treatment. We evaluated the impact of a hip fracture order set (OS) on anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) initiation, persistence, and secondary fracture prevention.

METHODS

In 2015, one hospital in Manitoba, Canada, introduced a hip fracture OS including recommendations for the initiation of AOM (OS group). A control group was identified from the other hospitals in the same region. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using linked administrative health data. All individuals 50 + years with surgical treatment for low-energy hip fracture between 2010 and 2019 were included and followed for AOM initiation, medication persistence at 1 year, and secondary fractures. Between-group differences for each year were assessed using chi-square tests. Logistic regression models tested the impact of socio-demographic and clinical factors on initiation, persistence of AOM. Cox regression tested the risk of secondary fracture.

RESULTS

No baseline differences between OS group (813 patients) and control group (2150 patients) were observed in demographics, socioeconomic factors, or comorbidities. An increase in post-fracture AOM initiation was seen with OS introduction (OS group year before 16.7% versus year after 48.6%, p < 0.001). No change was seen in the control group. Persistence on AOM also increased (OS group year before 17.7% versus year after 28.4%, p < 0.001). No difference in secondary fractures was observed (OS group 19.8% versus control group 18.8%, p = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

Introduction of a hip fracture OS significantly increased AOM initiation and persistence at 1-year post-fracture. There was no significant difference in secondary fractures.

Is there a femoral morphology at risk of a cervical or pertrochanteric fracture? Description and validation of the "Neck shaft ratio" and the "Intertrochanteric distal ratio" after analyzing a continuous cohort of 126 bilateral fractures of the proximal femur

BACKGROUND

Proximal femur fractures constitute a public health concern given their high frequency and the aging population. The frequency of a contralateral fracture occurring can reach up to 15% of cases. Certain historical or demographic factors constitute risk factors for refracture, but the type of fracture, either of the femoral neck (FN) or pertrochanteric (PT), cannot be predicted. The objectives of this retrospective study were: firstly, to analyze several anatomical markers in order to determine whether they predispose to a certain type of fracture in the event of contralateral refracture, and secondly, to determine the predictive power of these possible radiological markers for the type of contralateral fracture.

HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis was that the "Neck shaft ratio" (NSR) and the "Intertrochanteric distal ratio" (ITDR) made it possible to determine a proximal femoral morphology at risk of FN and/or PT fracture in the event of a second fracture.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This continuous retrospective single-center series from January 2011 to December 2019 of patients who presented with bilateral fractures of the proximal femurs was analyzed. Radiographs, taken after the first fracture, of the contralateral femur were studied. Morphological measurements previously described in the literature were carried out as well as the NSR (ratio of the medial cortical thicknesses of the femoral neck at its narrowest and basicervical level) and the ITDR (ratio of the medial diaphyseal cortical thicknesses at 5mm and 20mm from the distal portion of the lesser trochanter). One hundred and twenty-six patients were included: 46/126 (36.5%) had bilateral FN, 50/126 (39.7%) bilateral PT and 30/126 (23.8%) one of each.

RESULTS

Only NSR and ITDR were significant predictive measures for FN or PT fracture type [0.54±0.11 vs. 0.81±0.16 (p<0.0001) and 0. 85±0.1 vs. 0.68±0.1 (p<0.0001), respectively]. These two ratios had an excellent predictive value for the type of fracture occurring on the contralateral side [NSR: AUC ROC = 0.91 (95% CI; 0.86-0.96); ITDR: AUC ROC = 0.81 (95% CI; %, 0.74-0.89)]. The NSR had excellent intra- and inter-observer reproducibility with an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.93 [95% CI: 0.86-0.97] and 0.91 [95% CI: 0.82-0.96] respectively, the same also applied for the ITDR with interclass correlation coefficient values of 0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-0.97] and 0.86 [95% CI: 0.73-0.93] respectively.

DISCUSSION

The NSR and ITDR ratios offer a simple and reproducible means to predict a morphological predisposition to a certain fracture type, respectively an FN and PT on the side contralateral to an initial osteoporotic proximal femur fracture. A prospective cohort study would be useful in defining a possible prognostic nature on the occurrence and/or time until refracture.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; retrospective control case.

Total knee arthroplasty and periprosthetic distal femoral fracture: looking beyond the osteoporosis to previous osteoporotic fracture

Osteoporosis increases the risk of periprosthetic distal femoral fractures after TKA, especially in patients with a history of osteoporotic fractures. Therefore, careful assessment and proper treatment of osteoporosis need and the importance of taking osteoporotic medication needs to be recognized by the patients following primary TKA.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis is a risk factor for fractures, including those of the hip, vertebrae, and distal radius; however, the association between osteoporosis and periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has not been much investigated. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the association of the presence of systemic osteoporosis with periprosthetic fractures after TKA.

METHODS

This study included 34 patients with periprosthetic fractures following primary TKA and 106 controls matched for age and sex. Bone mineral density was evaluated at the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine using dual X-ray absorptiometry. Medical records were reviewed for age; sex; body mass index; smoking; rheumatoid arthritis, endocrine diseases, and cardiovascular diseases; history of glucocorticoid use; medication for osteoporosis; and history of previous osteoporotic fracture. In addition, anterior femoral notching after TKA was evaluated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to determine factors associated with periprosthetic fracture.

RESULTS

The prevalence of osteoporosis in the fracture group was higher than that in the control group (61.8% vs. 40.6%, p=0.045). The rate of medication for osteoporosis was significantly low in the fracture group (47.6 % vs 76.7%, p=0.026). History of previous osteoporotic fracture (odds ratio [OR], 9.1; p=0.015) and osteoporosis (OR, 3.6; p=0.013) were significant risk factors for periprosthetic fractures after TKA. Medication for osteoporosis could decrease the risk of periprosthetic fracture (OR 0.3; p=0.020).

CONCLUSION

Osteoporosis is a major risk factor for periprosthetic distal femoral fractures after TKA. Therefore, careful assessment and proper treatment of osteoporosis need and the importance of taking osteoporotic medication needs to be recognized to the patients following primary TKA, especially in patients with a history of osteoporotic fracture.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level III.

Factors Impacting Fall Severity in Hospitalized Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objectives: This retrospective case-controlled study aimed to evaluate the association between the severity of fall-related injuries and fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs) in hospitalized patients. Methods: Data were collected from Changhua Christian Hospital, Taiwan, of all adult inpatients who experienced falls between January 2017 and December 2021, and were divided into two groups based on whether they sustained severe fall-related injuries. Retrospective data that may affect the severity of fall-related injuries and the use of FRIDs were investigated. Results: Among 1231 documented cases of falls, 26 patients sustained severe fall-related injuries. Older patients and those with osteoporosis were more susceptible to more severe injuries from a fall. The use of mobility aids and osteoporosis medications showed protective effects against fall injuries. No significant association was observed between fall-related injuries and comorbidities or FRIDs. Multivariate analysis confirmed the inverse correlation between the use of mobility aids, osteoporosis medications, and fall severity. Patients with osteoporosis exhibited significantly higher odds of sustaining more severe injuries with a fall (odds ratio = 3.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.21-7.53). Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of addressing risk factors associated with fall severity among hospitalized patients. Providing mobility aids to persons at greater risk.

Bilateral Atypical Femoral Fracture in a Bisphosphonate-Naïve Patient with Prior Long-Term Denosumab Therapy: A Case Report of the Management Strategy and a Literature Review

The benefits of denosumab as an antiresorptive therapy and in reducing fragility fractures are well documented. However, its association with atypical femur fractures (AFFs), especially in the absence of prior bisphosphonate use, remains poorly understood and warrants further investigation. This case report presents a rare instance of bilateral AFFs in a 78-year-old bisphosphonate-naïve patient with a history of long-term denosumab therapy for previous metastatic breast cancer. Management involved intramedullary nail fixation after initial presentation with a unilateral AFF and a recommendation to cease denosumab therapy. However, the patient subsequently experienced a contralateral periprosthetic AFF below a total hip implant 5 months thereafter and was treated with open reduction internal fixation. This case report highlights the critical need for orthopedic surgeons to maintain a high level of suspicion and vigilance in screening for impending AFFs, especially in patients with a prolonged history of denosumab therapy without prior bisphosphonate use. Furthermore, the growing report of such cases emphasizes the urgent need for comprehensive research aimed at refining treatment protocols that balance the therapeutic benefits of denosumab and its associated risks of AFFs.

Treatment Sequence for Osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is a chronic progressive disease that requires lifelong monitoring and treatment. Sequencing from one treatment to another at different ages and stages of disease is an approach that can maximize benefits and avoid potential risks from long-term treatment with a single agent.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews clinical trial data in postmenopausal women that evaluate the effects of antiresorptive agents followed by other antiresorptives, osteoanabolic agents followed by antiresorptives, and antiresorptives followed by osteoanabolic medications.

METHODS

Literature review and discussion.

RESULTS

When medications are discontinued, in the absence of sequential therapy, bone turnover rates return to baseline or above baseline, and bone loss occurs. The rate of bone loss differs for different treatments, with a very slow decline after stopping bisphosphonates and a particularly rapid decline after stopping denosumab. Careful attention to osteoporosis medication transitions can mitigate bone density loss and its consequences. For women who remain at high risk, switching from bisphosphonates to the more potent antiresorptive, denosumab, will result in further improvement in bone mineral density (BMD). When indicated, stopping denosumab can be accomplished safely by transition to an adequate bisphosphonate regimen. For high- and very-high-risk patients, treating with osteoanabolic agents first, followed by antiresorptive agents, produces substantially larger BMD gains than the reverse treatment sequence, with the biggest differences seen for BMD of the hip.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of the importance of treatment sequences can help improve osteoporosis care across the postmenopausal lifespan.

Refracture following vertebral fragility fracture when bone fragility is not recognized: summarizing findings from comparator arms of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

Since vertebral fragility fractures (VFFs) might increase the risk of subsequent fractures, we evaluated the incidence rate and the refracture risk of subsequent vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures (nVFFs) in untreated patients with a previous VFF.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to February 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that analyzed the occurrence of subsequent fractures in untreated patients with prior VFFs. Two authors independently extracted data and appraised the risk of bias in the selected studies. Primary outcomes were subsequent VFFs, while secondary outcomes were further nVFFs. The outcome of refracture within ≥ 2 years after the index fracture was measured as (i) rate, expressed per 100 person-years (PYs), and (ii) risk, expressed in percentage.

RESULTS

Forty RCTs met our inclusion criteria, ranging from medium to high quality. Among untreated patients with prior VFFs, the rate of subsequent VFFs and nVFFs was 12 [95% confidence interval (CI) 9-16] and 6 (95% CI 5-8%) per 100 PYs, respectively. The higher the number of previous VFFs, the higher the incidence. Moreover, the risk of VFFs and nVFFs increased within 2 (16.6% and 8%) and 4 years (35.1% and 17.4%) based on the index VFF.

CONCLUSION

The highest risk of subsequent VFFs or nVFFs was already detected within 2 years following the initial VFF. Thus, prompt interventions should be designed to improve the detection and treatment of VFFs, aiming to reduce the risk of future FFs and properly implement secondary preventive measures.

A meta-analysis of previous falls and subsequent fracture risk in cohort studies

The relationship between self-reported falls and fracture risk was estimated in an international meta-analysis of individual-level data from 46 prospective cohorts. Previous falls were associated with an increased fracture risk in women and men and should be considered as an additional risk factor in the FRAX® algorithm.

INTRODUCTION

Previous falls are a well-documented risk factor for subsequent fracture but have not yet been incorporated into the FRAX algorithm. The aim of this study was to evaluate, in an international meta-analysis, the association between previous falls and subsequent fracture risk and its relation to sex, age, duration of follow-up, and bone mineral density (BMD).

METHODS

The resource comprised 906,359 women and men (66.9% female) from 46 prospective cohorts. Previous falls were uniformly defined as any fall occurring during the previous year in 43 cohorts; the remaining three cohorts had a different question construct. The association between previous falls and fracture risk (any clinical fracture, osteoporotic fracture, major osteoporotic fracture, and hip fracture) was examined using an extension of the Poisson regression model in each cohort and each sex, followed by random-effects meta-analyses of the weighted beta coefficients.

RESULTS

Falls in the past year were reported in 21.4% of individuals. During a follow-up of 9,102,207 person-years, 87,352 fractures occurred of which 19,509 were hip fractures. A previous fall was associated with a significantly increased risk of any clinical fracture both in women (hazard ratio (HR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33-1.51) and men (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.41-1.67). The HRs were of similar magnitude for osteoporotic, major osteoporotic fracture, and hip fracture. Sex significantly modified the association between previous fall and fracture risk, with predictive values being higher in men than in women (e.g., for major osteoporotic fracture, HR 1.53 (95% CI 1.27-1.84) in men vs. HR 1.32 (95% CI 1.20-1.45) in women, P for interaction = 0.013). The HRs associated with previous falls decreased with age in women and with duration of follow-up in men and women for most fracture outcomes. There was no evidence of an interaction between falls and BMD for fracture risk. Subsequent risk for a major osteoporotic fracture increased with each additional previous fall in women and men.

CONCLUSIONS

A previous self-reported fall confers an increased risk of fracture that is largely independent of BMD. Previous falls should be considered as an additional risk factor in future iterations of FRAX to improve fracture risk prediction.

Clinical therapeutic trials

The term clinical trial implies an investigation of a therapeutic intervention in the pursuit of evidence of benefit, short or sustained, and observations on the possibility of toxicity related to the therapeutic intervention. It is possible that the first clinical trial took place in the court of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar circa 600 BC, as recorded in Chapter 1 of the Book of Daniel, verse 3-20. However, it is in the last 500 years that there has been good written documentation at attempts to interpret therapeutic benefit from the use of treatments. Lind's demonstration on the usefulness of oranges and lemons in the treatment of scurvy in 1747, and the unethical experiment by Edward Jenner (1749-1823) on the inoculation in 1796, of an 8-year-old boy, with cow pox obtained from a milk maid, followed by an attempt to give the young boy smallpox by direct inoculation 18 days later, are striking examples of clinical trials. Human ethics, strict clinical observations, statistics, the governed scientific purity of therapeutic agents, and safety testing of therapeutics, devices, and physical interventions, have created the basis for the modern clinical trial.

Bisphosphonate Use May be Associated With an Increased Risk of Periprosthetic Hip Fracture

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is common among patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of bisphosphonate treatment on osteoporotic patients undergoing primary THA.

METHODS

Using a national database, 30,137 patients who had osteoporosis before primary elective THA were identified during 2010 to 2020. Patients undergoing nonelective THA and those using corticosteroids or other medications for osteoporosis were excluded. Bisphosphonate users and bisphosphonate naïve patients were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, Elixhauser comorbidity index, and a history of obesity, rheumatoid arthritis, tobacco use, and alcohol abuse. Kaplan-Meier and multivariate analyses were used to compare 2-year outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

Among matched cohorts of 9,844 patients undergoing primary THA, bisphosphonate use was associated with a significantly higher 2-year rate of periprosthetic fracture (odds ratio 1.29, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.61, P = .022). There was a trend toward increased risk of any revision with bisphosphonate use (odds ratio 1.19, confidence interval 1.00 to 1.41, P = .056). Rates of infection, aseptic loosening, dislocation, and mortality were not statistically different between bisphosphonate users and bisphosphonate-naïve patients.

CONCLUSION

In osteoporotic patients, bisphosphonate use before primary THA is an independent risk factor for periprosthetic fracture. Additional longer-term data are needed to determine the underlying mechanism for this association and identify preventative measures.

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.

Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a common systemic skeletal disorder resulting in bone fragility and increased fracture risk. Evidence-based screening strategies improve identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from drug treatment to prevent fracture. In addition, careful consideration of when pharmacotherapy should be started, choice of medication, and duration of treatment maximizes the benefits of fracture prevention while minimizing potential harms of long-term drug exposure.

Management of High-Risk Ankle Fractures

Successful outcomes in the surgical treatment of the fractured ankle require methods that respect the soft tissue envelope and establish a stable mortise for functional rehabilitation. Ankle fractures in patients with osteopenia and in diabetic patients with deranged bone remodeling constitute high-risk injuries that may result in catastrophic complications. These patients present unique care challenges and should not be approached in the same manner as their healthy counterparts. We present the principles of treatment in high-risk ankle fractures, operative treatment philosophy illustrating techniques frequently used at our institution, and a review of current literature.

Dementia, osteoporosis and fragility fractures: Intricate epidemiological relationships, plausible biological connections, and twisted clinical practices

Dementia, osteoporosis, and fragility fractures are chronic diseases, often co-existing in older adults. These conditions pose severe morbidity, long-term disability, and mortality, with relevant socioeconomic implications. While in the research arena, the discussion remains on whether dementia is the cause or the consequence of fragility fractures, healthcare professionals need a better understanding of the interplay between such conditions from epidemiological and physiological standpoints. With this review, we summarized the available literature surrounding the relationship between cognitive impairment, dementia, and both low bone mineral density (BMD) and fragility fractures. Given the strength of the bi-directional associations and their impact on the quality of life, we shed light on the biological connections between brain and bone systems, presenting the main mediators, including gut microbioma, and pathological pathways leading to the dysregulation of bone and brain metabolism. Ultimately, we synthesized the evidence about the impact of available pharmacological treatments for the prevention of fragility fractures on cognitive functions and individuals' outcomes when dementia coexists. Vice versa, the effects of symptomatic treatments for dementia on the risk of falls and fragility fractures are explored. Combining evidence alongside clinical practice, we discuss challenges and opportunities related to the management of older adults affected by cognitive impairment or dementia and at high risk for fragility fracture prevention, which leads to not only an improvement in patient health-related outcomes and survival but also a reduction in healthcare cost and socio-economic burden.

Non-biological Antiresorptive: Bisphosphonates

Background

Bisphosphonates, synthetic analogs of endogenous pyrophosphates, are pivotal in managing various bone disorders, primarily osteoporosis, which affects millions globally. While osteoporosis, especially postmenopausal osteoporosis, significantly benefits from bisphosphonate therapy, considerations arise regarding their administration and potential side effects.

Clinical application of Bisphosphonates

Bisphosphonates, divided into nitrogen-containing and non-nitrogenous groups, exert their influence through distinct mechanisms, with the former being notably more potent. The role of bisphosphonates in other diseases, such as Paget's bone and skeletal metastasis disease is also discussed. Detailed information on the administration routes, dosage regimens, and considerations for drug holidays is provided. The article navigates through the chemical structure, generations, and mechanism of action of bisphosphonates. The article covers administration routes, dosage regimens, and drug holidays, in addition to discussing potential adverse effects and contraindications.

Conclusions

Bisphosphonates hold an unrivaled legacy in the management of osteoporosis. The ubiquitous availability and the cost-effectiveness of these time-tested medications make them an invaluable asset in the osteoporosis treatment landscape, especially in developing nations like India.

Effect of a single dose of zoledronic acid on bone mineral density and trabecular bone score in Indian postmenopausal osteoporotic women with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus - A prospective cohort pilot study

PURPOSE

The objectives were to study the effect of a single dose of intravenous (IV) zoledronic acid (ZA) on changes in bone mineral density (BMD) (lumbar spine (LS), hip, & distal forearm), trabecular bone score (TBS) and bone turnover markers (BTMs) in postmenopausal osteoporotic women with and without diabetes over 12 months.

METHODS

Patients were divided into two groups: type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) (n = 40) and non-DM (n = 40). Both groups received a single dose of 4 mg IV ZA at baseline. The BMD with TBS and BTMs (β-CTX, sclerostin, P1NP) were measured at baseline, six months, and 12 months.

RESULTS

At baseline, BMD in all three sites was similar in both groups. T2DM patients were older and had lower BTMs than non-DM patients. The mean increase in LS-BMD (gram/cm2) at 12 months in T2DM and the non-DM group was 3.6 ± 4.7% and 6.2 ± 4.7 %, respectively (P = 0.01). However, the age adjusted mean difference in LS BMD increment between two groups at one year was - 2.86 % (-5.02% to -0.69%), P = 0.01. There was a comparable change in BMD at other two sites, BTMs, and TBS in both the groups over one year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The gain in the LS-BMD was significantly lower in T2DM group compared to non-DM subjects over 12 months after a single IV infusion of 4 mg ZA. The explanation for this could be low bone turnover in diabetes subjects at baseline.

Melatonin and bone-related diseases: an updated mechanistic overview of current evidence and future prospects

PURPOSE

Bone diseases account for an enormous cost burden on health systems. Bone disorders are considered as age-dependent diseases. The aging of world population has encouraged scientists to further explore the most effective preventive modalities and therapeutic strategies to overcome and reduce the high cost of bone disorders. Herein, we review the current evidence of melatonin's therapeutic effects on bone-related diseases.

METHODS

This review summarized evidences from in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies regarding the effects of melatonin on bone-related diseases, with a focus on the molecular mechanisms. Electronically, Scopus and MEDLINE®/PubMed databases were searched for articles published on melatonin and bone-related diseases from inception to June 2023.

RESULTS

The findings demonstrated that melatonin has beneficial effect in bone- and cartilage-related disorders such as osteoporosis, bone fracture healing, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis, in addition to the control of sleep and circadian rhythms.

CONCLUSION

A number of animal and clinical studies have indicated that various biological effects of melatonin may suggest this molecule as an effective therapeutic agent for controlling, diminishing, or suppressing bone-related disorders. Therefore, further clinical studies are required to clarify whether melatonin can be effective in patients with bone-related diseases.

Osteoporosis and Fracture Risk among Older US Asian Adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes the current knowledge regarding osteoporosis and fracture among older US Asian adults.

RECENT FINDINGS

Asian adults have lower (areal) bone density than non-Hispanic White adults and thus are more likely to be diagnosed and treated for osteoporosis, despite their lower risk of hip fracture. The latter may relate to favorable characteristics in hip geometry, volumetric bone density, and bone microarchitecture; lower risk of falls; and other clinical factors. The fracture risk calculator FRAX accounts for the lower risk of hip fracture among US Asian adults. However, data on major osteoporotic fracture risk remain limited. Fracture rates also vary by Asian subgroup, which may have implications for fracture risk assessment. Furthermore, among women receiving bisphosphonate drugs, Asian race is a risk factor for atypical femur fracture, an uncommon complication associated with treatment duration. Recent clinical trial efficacy data pertaining to lower bisphosphonate doses and longer dosing intervals may be relevant for Asian adults. More research is needed to inform osteoporosis care of US Asian adults, including risk-benefit considerations and the optimal duration of bisphosphonate treatment. Greater evidence-based guidance for primary fracture prevention among US Asian adults will ensure health equity in the prevention of osteoporotic fractures.

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.

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.

Screening for the primary prevention of fragility fractures among adults aged 40 years and older in primary care: systematic reviews of the effects and acceptability of screening and treatment, and the accuracy of risk prediction tools

BACKGROUND

To inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, we reviewed evidence on the benefits, harms, and acceptability of screening and treatment, and on the accuracy of risk prediction tools for the primary prevention of fragility fractures among adults aged 40 years and older in primary care.

METHODS

For screening effectiveness, accuracy of risk prediction tools, and treatment benefits, our search methods involved integrating studies published up to 2016 from an existing systematic review. Then, to locate more recent studies and any evidence relating to acceptability and treatment harms, we searched online databases (2016 to April 4, 2022 [screening] or to June 1, 2021 [predictive accuracy]; 1995 to June 1, 2021, for acceptability; 2016 to March 2, 2020, for treatment benefits; 2015 to June 24, 2020, for treatment harms), trial registries and gray literature, and hand-searched reviews, guidelines, and the included studies. Two reviewers selected studies, extracted results, and appraised risk of bias, with disagreements resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. The overview of reviews on treatment harms relied on one reviewer, with verification of data by another reviewer to correct errors and omissions. When appropriate, study results were pooled using random effects meta-analysis; otherwise, findings were described narratively. Evidence certainty was rated according to the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

We included 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 controlled clinical trial (CCT) for the benefits and harms of screening, 1 RCT for comparative benefits and harms of different screening strategies, 32 validation cohort studies for the calibration of risk prediction tools (26 of these reporting on the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool without [i.e., clinical FRAX], or with the inclusion of bone mineral density (BMD) results [i.e., FRAX + BMD]), 27 RCTs for the benefits of treatment, 10 systematic reviews for the harms of treatment, and 12 studies for the acceptability of screening or initiating treatment. In females aged 65 years and older who are willing to independently complete a mailed fracture risk questionnaire (referred to as "selected population"), 2-step screening using a risk assessment tool with or without measurement of BMD probably (moderate certainty) reduces the risk of hip fractures (3 RCTs and 1 CCT, n = 43,736, absolute risk reduction [ARD] = 6.2 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 9.0-2.8 fewer, number needed to screen [NNS] = 161) and clinical fragility fractures (3 RCTs, n = 42,009, ARD = 5.9 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 10.9-0.8 fewer, NNS = 169). It probably does not reduce all-cause mortality (2 RCTs and 1 CCT, n = 26,511, ARD = no difference in 1000, 95% CI 7.1 fewer to 5.3 more) and may (low certainty) not affect health-related quality of life. Benefits for fracture outcomes were not replicated in an offer-to-screen population where the rate of response to mailed screening questionnaires was low. For females aged 68-80 years, population screening may not reduce the risk of hip fractures (1 RCT, n = 34,229, ARD = 0.3 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 4.2 fewer to 3.9 more) or clinical fragility fractures (1 RCT, n = 34,229, ARD = 1.0 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 8.0 fewer to 6.0 more) over 5 years of follow-up. The evidence for serious adverse events among all patients and for all outcomes among males and younger females (<65 years) is very uncertain. We defined overdiagnosis as the identification of high risk in individuals who, if not screened, would never have known that they were at risk and would never have experienced a fragility fracture. This was not directly reported in any of the trials. Estimates using data available in the trials suggest that among "selected" females offered screening, 12% of those meeting age-specific treatment thresholds based on clinical FRAX 10-year hip fracture risk, and 19% of those meeting thresholds based on clinical FRAX 10-year major osteoporotic fracture risk, may be overdiagnosed as being at high risk of fracture. Of those identified as being at high clinical FRAX 10-year hip fracture risk and who were referred for BMD assessment, 24% may be overdiagnosed. One RCT (n = 9268) provided evidence comparing 1-step to 2-step screening among postmenopausal females, but the evidence from this trial was very uncertain. For the calibration of risk prediction tools, evidence from three Canadian studies (n = 67,611) without serious risk of bias concerns indicates that clinical FRAX-Canada may be well calibrated for the 10-year prediction of hip fractures (observed-to-expected fracture ratio [O:E] = 1.13, 95% CI 0.74-1.72, I² = 89.2%), and is probably well calibrated for the 10-year prediction of clinical fragility fractures (O:E = 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20, I² = 50.4%), both leading to some underestimation of the observed risk. Data from these same studies (n = 61,156) showed that FRAX-Canada with BMD may perform poorly to estimate 10-year hip fracture risk (O:E = 1.31, 95% CI 0.91-2.13, I² = 92.7%), but is probably well calibrated for the 10-year prediction of clinical fragility fractures, with some underestimation of the observed risk (O:E 1.16, 95% CI 1.12-1.20, I² = 0%). The Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada Risk Assessment (CAROC) tool may be well calibrated to predict a category of risk for 10-year clinical fractures (low, moderate, or high risk; 1 study, n = 34,060). The evidence for most other tools was limited, or in the case of FRAX tools calibrated for countries other than Canada, very uncertain due to serious risk of bias concerns and large inconsistency in findings across studies. Postmenopausal females in a primary prevention population defined as <50% prevalence of prior fragility fracture (median 16.9%, range 0 to 48% when reported in the trials) and at risk of fragility fracture, treatment with bisphosphonates as a class (median 2 years, range 1-6 years) probably reduces the risk of clinical fragility fractures (19 RCTs, n = 22,482, ARD = 11.1 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 15.0-6.6 fewer, [number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome] NNT = 90), and may reduce the risk of hip fractures (14 RCTs, n = 21,038, ARD = 2.9 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 4.6-0.9 fewer, NNT = 345) and clinical vertebral fractures (11 RCTs, n = 8921, ARD = 10.0 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 14.0-3.9 fewer, NNT = 100); it may not reduce all-cause mortality. There is low certainty evidence of little-to-no reduction in hip fractures with any individual bisphosphonate, but all provided evidence of decreased risk of clinical fragility fractures (moderate certainty for alendronate [NNT=68] and zoledronic acid [NNT=50], low certainty for risedronate [NNT=128]) among postmenopausal females. Evidence for an impact on risk of clinical vertebral fractures is very uncertain for alendronate and risedronate; zoledronic acid may reduce the risk of this outcome (4 RCTs, n = 2367, ARD = 18.7 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 25.6-6.6 fewer, NNT = 54) for postmenopausal females. Denosumab probably reduces the risk of clinical fragility fractures (6 RCTs, n = 9473, ARD = 9.1 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 12.1-5.6 fewer, NNT = 110) and clinical vertebral fractures (4 RCTs, n = 8639, ARD = 16.0 fewer in 1000, 95% CI 18.6-12.1 fewer, NNT=62), but may make little-to-no difference in the risk of hip fractures among postmenopausal females. Denosumab probably makes little-to-no difference in the risk of all-cause mortality or health-related quality of life among postmenopausal females. Evidence in males is limited to two trials (1 zoledronic acid, 1 denosumab); in this population, zoledronic acid may make little-to-no difference in the risk of hip or clinical fragility fractures, and evidence for all-cause mortality is very uncertain. The evidence for treatment with denosumab in males is very uncertain for all fracture outcomes (hip, clinical fragility, clinical vertebral) and all-cause mortality. There is moderate certainty evidence that treatment causes a small number of patients to experience a non-serious adverse event, notably non-serious gastrointestinal events (e.g., abdominal pain, reflux) with alendronate (50 RCTs, n = 22,549, ARD = 16.3 more in 1000, 95% CI 2.4-31.3 more, [number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome] NNH = 61) but not with risedronate; influenza-like symptoms with zoledronic acid (5 RCTs, n = 10,695, ARD = 142.5 more in 1000, 95% CI 105.5-188.5 more, NNH = 7); and non-serious gastrointestinal adverse events (3 RCTs, n = 8454, ARD = 64.5 more in 1000, 95% CI 26.4-13.3 more, NNH = 16), dermatologic adverse events (3 RCTs, n = 8454, ARD = 15.6 more in 1000, 95% CI 7.6-27.0 more, NNH = 64), and infections (any severity; 4 RCTs, n = 8691, ARD = 1.8 more in 1000, 95% CI 0.1-4.0 more, NNH = 556) with denosumab. For serious adverse events overall and specific to stroke and myocardial infarction, treatment with bisphosphonates probably makes little-to-no difference; evidence for other specific serious harms was less certain or not available. There was low certainty evidence for an increased risk for the rare occurrence of atypical femoral fractures (0.06 to 0.08 more in 1000) and osteonecrosis of the jaw (0.22 more in 1000) with bisphosphonates (most evidence for alendronate). The evidence for these rare outcomes and for rebound fractures with denosumab was very uncertain. Younger (lower risk) females have high willingness to be screened. A minority of postmenopausal females at increased risk for fracture may accept treatment. Further, there is large heterogeneity in the level of risk at which patients may be accepting of initiating treatment, and treatment effects appear to be overestimated.

CONCLUSION

An offer of 2-step screening with risk assessment and BMD measurement to selected postmenopausal females with low prevalence of prior fracture probably results in a small reduction in the risk of clinical fragility fracture and hip fracture compared to no screening. These findings were most applicable to the use of clinical FRAX for risk assessment and were not replicated in the offer-to-screen population where the rate of response to mailed screening questionnaires was low. Limited direct evidence on harms of screening were available; using study data to provide estimates, there may be a moderate degree of overdiagnosis of high risk for fracture to consider. The evidence for younger females and males is very limited. The benefits of screening and treatment need to be weighed against the potential for harm; patient views on the acceptability of treatment are highly variable.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42019123767.

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.

Organized mineralized cellulose nanostructures for biomedical applications

Cellulose is the most abundant naturally-occurring polymer, and possesses a one-dimensional (1D) anisotropic crystalline nanostructure with outstanding mechanical robustness, biocompatibility, renewability and rich surface chemistry in the form of nanocellulose in nature. Such features make cellulose an ideal bio-template for directing the bio-inspired mineralization of inorganic components into hierarchical nanostructures that are promising in biomedical applications. In this review, we will summarize the chemistry and nanostructure characteristics of cellulose and discuss how these favorable characteristics regulate the bio-inspired mineralization process for manufacturing the desired nanostructured bio-composites. We will focus on uncovering the design and manipulation principles of local chemical compositions/constituents and structural arrangement, distribution, dimensions, nanoconfinement and alignment of bio-inspired mineralization over multiple length-scales. In the end, we will underline how these cellulose biomineralized composites benefit biomedical applications. It is expected that this deep understanding of design and fabrication principles will enable construction of outstanding structural and functional cellulose/inorganic composites for more challenging biomedical applications.

A retrospective analysis of nonresponse to denosumab after hip fractures

Denosumab is an effective antiresorptive drug commonly prescribed for the treatment of osteoporosis. However, some patients do not respond well to denosumab treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors underlying treatment nonresponses to denosumab in elderly patients following hip fracture. This retrospective study included 130 patients treated with denosumab after osteoporotic hip fracture between March 2017 and March 2020. The patients were categorized as denosumab nonresponders if they had a T-score <-3 that persisted between dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans, a >3% decrease in bone mineral density (BMD), or an incident fracture on denosumab therapy. We examined the baseline characteristics associated with blunted BMD responses and compared the groups following denosumab treatment for 12 months. Of 130 patients with baseline data, 105 patients (80.8%) were considered responders. No difference in baseline vitamin D, calcium, BMI, age, gender, prior fracture history, or bisphosphonate use was observed between responders and nonresponders. A longer interval between denosumab injections was associated with suboptimal BMD response at both spine and total hip (p<0.001 and p=0.04, respectively). The overall L-BMD and H-BMD were significantly increased compared with pretreatment levels after denosumab treatment (5.7% and 2.5%, respectively). This study revealed that nonresponse was not strongly associated with certain baseline variables and it appears that the reponders and nonresponders were reasonably comparable in this study population. The results of our study highlight the importance of timely denosumab administration when using this drug for osteoporosis management. Physicians should keep these results in mind in clinical practice so that they can improve utilization of 6-month denosumab.

A summary of the Russian clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis

Key statements of the Russian clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis are summarized. They were developed by a task force representing the key Russian professional associations involved in the management of osteoporosis and approved by the Russian Ministry of Health.

PURPOSE

To summarize key statements of the Russian clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis.

METHODS

The Russian clinical guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis were developed by a task force representing the key Russian professional associations involved in the management of osteoporosis: These comprised the Russian Association of Endocrinologists, the Russian Association for Osteoporosis, the Association of Rheumatologists of Russia, the Association of Orthopedic surgeons and Traumatologists of Russia, the Russian Association of Gynecologists-Endocrinologists, and the Russian Association of Gerontologists and Geriatrics. The guidelines are based on a systematic literature review and principles of evidence-based medicine and were compiled in accordance with the requirements for clinical recommendations developed by the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation.

RESULTS

Key statements included in the Russian guidelines of osteoporosis approved by the Russian Ministry of Health in 2021 are summarized. The statements are graded based on levels of evidence and supported by short comments. The guidelines are focused on the current approach to screening, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines are a practical tool for general practitioners, as well as medical specialists, primarily endocrinologists, rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, and other physicians who are involved in the management of patients with osteoporosis.

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.

General Comorbidity Indicators Contribute to Fracture Risk Independent of FRAX: Registry-Based Cohort Study

CONTEXT

FRAX® estimates 10-year fracture probability from osteoporosis-specific risk factors. Medical comorbidity indicators are associated with fracture risk but whether these are independent from those in FRAX is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized Johns Hopkins Aggregated Diagnosis Groups (ADG®) score or recent hospitalization number may be independently associated with increased risk for fractures.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included women and men age ≥ 40 in the Manitoba BMD Registry (1996-2016) with at least 3 years prior health care data and used linked administrative databases to construct ADG scores along with number of hospitalizations for each individual. Incident Major Osteoporotic Fracture and Hip Fracture was ascertained during average follow-up of 9 years; Cox regression analysis determined the association between increasing ADG score or number of hospitalizations and fractures.

RESULTS

Separately, hospitalizations and ADG score independently increased the hazard ratio for fracture at all levels of comorbidity (hazard range 1.2-1.8, all P < 0.05), irrespective of adjustment for FRAX, BMD, and competing mortality. Taken together, there was still a higher than predicted rate of fracture at all levels of increased comorbidity, independent of FRAX and BMD but attenuated by competing mortality. Using an intervention threshold of major fracture risk >20%, application of the comorbidity hazard ratio multiplier to the patient population FRAX scores would increase the number of treatment candidates from 8.6% to 14.4%.

CONCLUSION

Both complex and simple measures of medical comorbidity may be used to modify FRAX-based risk estimates to capture the increased fracture risk associated with multiple comorbid conditions in older patients.

Asia-pacific consensus on osteoporotic fracture prevention in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis but no fragility fractures

Postmenopausal women are at significant risk for osteoporotic fractures due to their rapid bone loss. Half of all postmenopausal women will get an osteoporosis-related fracture over their lifetime, with 25% developing a spine deformity and 15% developing a hip fracture. By 2050, more than half of all osteoporotic fractures will occur in Asia, with postmenopausal women being the most susceptible. Early management can halt or even reverse the progression of osteoporosis. Consequently, on October 31, 2020, the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association hosted the Asia-Pacific (AP) Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention (POFP) consensus meeting, which was supported by the Asian Federation of Osteoporosis Societies (AFOS) and the Asia Pacific Osteoporosis Foundation (APOF). International and domestic experts developed ten applicable statements for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis but no fragility fractures in the AP region. The experts advocated, for example, that postmenopausal women with a high fracture risk be reimbursed for pharmaceutical therapy to prevent osteoporotic fractures. More clinical experience and data are required to modify intervention tactics.

[Impact of osteoporosis on physical performance parameters of middle-aged and elderly individuals-a cross-sectional study]

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis (OP) in the elderly is accompanied by reduced muscle mass and reduced muscle strength, also known as sarcopenia. This results in functional limitations and a high risk of falls and injuries. The determination of physical performance parameters such as grip strength and trunk strength on the one hand, and balance abilities on the other, provide information about the individual's general neuromuscular condition and serve as an indicator of physical performance in the elderly. The extent to which previous osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VFs) restrict an individual's physical performance has not been adequately investigated yet.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In total, 118 persons, with a mean age of 71.5 ± 9 years, participated in the clinical trial (ethics committee approval number A2020-0041). Patients were divided into an OP group (58 patients) and a control group (CG; 60 patients). OP patients with (VFs) and without vertebral fractures (0VFs) were viewed separately in the subgroup analysis. Data concerning physical status, including hand grip strength (HGS), the chair-rising test (CRT), tandem stance (TS), tandem gait (TG), and single-leg stance (SLS) were available for all patients. All data were analyzed using SPSS, Version 23.0.

RESULTS

No significant difference (p > 0.05) was registered between the OP and CG groups with regard of HGS, CRT, TG, TS, and SLS. In the subgroup analysis, OP patients with VFs had a lower HGS than OP patients without 0 VFx (VFs 24.3 ± 10.2 kg vs. 0 VFs 29.7 ± 9.5 kg, p = 0.026). TS was maintained longer by OP patients 0 VFs (VFs 7.8 ± 3.2 s vs. 0 VFs 9.5 ± 1.8 s, p = 0.008). The latter were also able to maintain their balance in TG over more numerous steps (VFs 4.8 ± 3.0 vs. 0 VFs 6.7 ± 2.4, p = 0.011). In a regression analysis, body size, gender, and age were shown to be independent factors influencing HGS (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patient age, constitution, and gender have a relevant influence on HGS, with baseline conditions after diagnosed OP at comparable levels in this age group. In a subgroup of OP patients with VFs, there is a close relationship between bone and muscle with an increasing deterioration of the musculoskeletal system. For prophylaxis of osteosarcopenia, early training seems reasonable.

Osteoporosis: An Update on Screening, Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment

Osteoporosis screening, diagnosis, and treatment have gained much attention in the health care community over the past 2 decades. During this time, creation of multispecialty awareness programs (eg, "Own the Bone," American Orthopedic Association; "Capture the Fracture," International Osteoporosis Foundation) and improvements in diagnostic protocols have been evident. Significant advances in technology have elucidated elements of genetic predisposition for decreased bone mineral density in the aging population. Additionally, several novel drug therapies have entered the market and provide more options for primary care and osteoporosis specialists to medically manage patients at risk for fragility fractures. Despite this, adherence to osteoporosis screening and treatment protocols has been surprisingly low by health care practitioners, including orthopedic surgeons. Continued awareness and education of this skeletal disorder is crucial to effectively care for our aging population. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):e20-e26.].

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.

Improving osteoporosis treatment rates in inpatients admitted with hip fracture: A healthcare improvement initiative in a tertiary referral hospital

Objective

This healthcare improvement initiative was designed to increase inpatient osteoporosis treatment after hip fracture.

Methods

A new protocol was developed by Geriatric Medicine and Endocrinology departments at a tertiary care hospital in Sydney. Its aim was to standardize assessment and treatment of osteoporosis in patients admitted with hip fracture. Eligible inpatients would receive intravenous zoledronic acid during their admission. A 6-month sample of hip fracture patients admitted after the protocol's implementation was compared to a group admitted before. Data collected included demographics, biochemistry, treatment rates, adverse effects, and admission survival.

Results

There was a considerable increase in osteoporosis treatment after introducing the protocol. Before the protocol's introduction, none of 36 eligible patients received treatment. After the intervention 79% (23 out of 29) of eligible patients were treated.All treated patients had renal function and serum calcium levels checked post-infusion with no adverse outcomes. Eight patients developed flu-like symptoms within 24 h of the infusion. There were no instances of arrhythmias, ocular inflammation, or death. The cost per patient treated was AUD $87.

Conclusion

Adopting a standardized protocol for osteoporosis treatment in patients admitted for hip fracture was effective in improving treatment rates whilst being relatively safe and inexpensive.

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).

Menopausal hormone therapy reduces the risk of fracture regardless of falls risk or baseline FRAX probability-results from the Women's Health Initiative hormone therapy trials

In a combined analysis of 25,389 postmenopausal women aged 50-79 years, enrolled in the two Women's Health Initiative hormone therapy trials, menopausal hormone therapy vs. placebo reduced the risk of fracture regardless of baseline FRAX fracture probability and falls history.

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine if the anti-fracture efficacy of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) differed by baseline falls history or fracture risk probability as estimated by FRAX, in a combined analysis of the two Women's Health Initiative (WHI) hormone therapy trials.

METHODS

A total of 25,389 postmenopausal women aged 50-79 years were randomized to receive MHT (n = 12,739) or matching placebo (n = 12,650). At baseline, questionnaires were used to collect information on falls history, within the last 12 months, and clinical risk factors. FRAX 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) was calculated without BMD. Incident clinical fractures were verified using medical records. An extension of Poisson regression was used to investigate the relationship between treatment and fractures in (1) the whole cohort; (2) those with prior falls; and (3) those without prior falls. The effect of baseline FRAX probability on efficacy was investigated in the whole cohort.

RESULTS

Over 4.3 ± 2.1 years (mean ± SD), MHT (vs. placebo) significantly reduced the risk of any clinical fracture (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72 [95% CI, 0.65-0.78]), MOF (HR 0.60 [95% CI, 0.53-0.69]), and hip fracture (0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.96]). Treatment was effective in reducing the risk of any clinical fracture, MOF, and hip fracture in women regardless of baseline FRAX MOF probability, with no evidence of an interaction between MHT and FRAX (p > 0.30). Similarly, there was no interaction (p > 0.30) between MHT and prior falls.

CONCLUSION

In the combined WHI trials, compared to placebo, MHT reduces fracture risk regardless of FRAX probability and falls history in postmenopausal women.

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.

A Review on Management of Insufficiency Fractures of the Pelvis and Acetabulum

"Insufficiency fractures of the pelvis and acetabulum are occurring at increasing rates. Osteoporosis is the most prevalent risk fracture. Diagnosis begins with plain radiographs followed by advanced imaging with computed tomography and/or MRI. Pelvic ring fragility injuries are classified by the Fragility fractures of the pelvis system. Elderly acetabular fractures may be classified by the Letournel system. Management of these injuries is primarily nonoperative with early immobilization when allowed by fracture characteristics. When warranted, percutaneous fixation and open reduction internal fixation are options for both. Both acute and delayed total hip arthroplasty are options for acetabular fractures."

Proceedings of the 2022 Santa Fe Bone Symposium: Current Concepts in the Care of Patients with Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Diseases

The 22^nd Annual Santa Fe Bone Symposium (SFBS) was a hybrid meeting held August 5-6, 2022, with in-person and virtual attendees. Altogether, over 400 individuals registered, a majority of whom attended in-person, representing many states in the USA plus 7 other countries. The SFBS included 10 plenary presentations, 2 faculty panel discussions, satellite symposia, Bone Health & Osteoporosis Foundation Fracture Liaison Service Boot Camp, and a Project ECHO workshop, with lively interactive discussions for all events. Topics of interest included fracture prevention at different stages of life; how to treat and when to change therapy; skeletal health in cancer patients; advanced imaging to assess bone strength; the state of healthcare in the USA; osteosarcopenia; vitamin D update; perioperative bone health care; new guidelines for managing primary hyperparathyroidism; new concepts on bone modeling and remodeling; and an overview on the care of rare bone diseases, including hypophosphatasia, X-linked hypophosphatemia, tumor induced osteomalacia, osteogenesis imperfecta, fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva, and osteopetrosis. The SFBS was preceded by the Santa Fe Fellows Workshop on Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Diseases, a collaboration of the Endocrine Fellows Foundation and the Osteoporosis Foundation of New Mexico. From the Workshop, 4 participating fellows were selected to give oral presentations at the bone symposium. These proceedings represent the clinical highlights of 2022 SFBS presentations and the discussions that followed, all with the aim of optimizing skeletal health and minimizing the consequences of fragile bones.

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.

Update of the fracture risk prediction tool FRAX: a systematic review of potential cohorts and analysis plan

We describe the collection of cohorts together with the analysis plan for an update of the fracture risk prediction tool FRAX with respect to current and novel risk factors. The resource comprises 2,138,428 participants with a follow-up of approximately 20 million person-years and 116,117 documented incident major osteoporotic fractures.

INTRODUCTION

The availability of the fracture risk assessment tool FRAX® has substantially enhanced the targeting of treatment to those at high risk of fracture with FRAX now incorporated into more than 100 clinical osteoporosis guidelines worldwide. The aim of this study is to determine whether the current algorithms can be further optimised with respect to current and novel risk factors.

METHODS

A computerised literature search was performed in PubMed from inception until May 17, 2019, to identify eligible cohorts for updating the FRAX coefficients. Additionally, we searched the abstracts of conference proceedings of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, European Calcified Tissue Society and World Congress of Osteoporosis. Prospective cohort studies with data on baseline clinical risk factors and incident fractures were eligible.

RESULTS

Of the 836 records retrieved, 53 were selected for full-text assessment after screening on title and abstract. Twelve cohorts were deemed eligible and of these, 4 novel cohorts were identified. These cohorts, together with 60 previously identified cohorts, will provide the resource for constructing an updated version of FRAX comprising 2,138,428 participants with a follow-up of approximately 20 million person-years and 116,117 documented incident major osteoporotic fractures. For each known and candidate risk factor, multivariate hazard functions for hip fracture, major osteoporotic fracture and death will be tested using extended Poisson regression. Sex- and/or ethnicity-specific differences in the weights of the risk factors will be investigated. After meta-analyses of the cohort-specific beta coefficients for each risk factor, models comprising 10-year probability of hip and major osteoporotic fracture, with or without femoral neck bone mineral density, will be computed.

CONCLUSIONS

These assembled cohorts and described models will provide the framework for an updated FRAX tool enabling enhanced assessment of fracture risk (PROSPERO (CRD42021227266)).

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.

Risk assessment tools for osteoporosis and fractures in 2022

Osteoporosis is one of the frequently encountered non-communicable diseases in the world today. Several hundred million people have osteoporosis, with many more at risk. The clinical feature is a fragility fracture (FF), which results in major reductions in the quality and quantity of life, coupled with a huge financial burden. In recognition of the growing importance, the World Health Organisation established a working group 30 years ago tasked with providing a comprehensive report to understand and assess the risk of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely endorsed technology for assessing the risk of fracture or diagnosing osteoporosis before a fracture occurs, but others are available. In clinical practice, important distinctions are essential to optimise the use of risk assessments. Traditional tools lack specificity and were designed for populations to identify groups at higher risk using a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. Much has changed, though the purpose of risk assessment tools remains the same. In 2022, many tools are available to aid the identification of those most at risk, either likely to have osteoporosis or suffer the clinical consequence. Modern technology, enhanced imaging, proteomics, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big data science will greatly advance a more personalised risk assessment into the future. Clinicians today need to understand not only which tool is most effective and efficient for use in their practice, but also which tool to use for which patient and for what purpose. A greater understanding of the process of risk assessment, deciding who should be screened, and how to assess fracture risk and prognosis in older men and women more comprehensively will greatly reduce the burden of osteoporosis for patients, society, and healthcare systems worldwide. In this paper, we review the current status of risk assessment, screening and best practice for osteoporosis, summarise areas of uncertainty, and make some suggestions for future developments, including a more personalised approach for individuals.

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.