Women's Values and Preferences Regarding Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review

Incorporating postmenopausal women's perspectives into osteoporosis clinical guidelines: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the inclusion of individuals' perspectives in the development of osteoporosis Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for primary fracture prevention in postmenopausal women.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We performed a comprehensive systematic search across guideline databases and (CPGs) developing organizations websites. Using the AGREE II tool, we assessed the quality of the guidelines, with particular emphasis on the inclusion of patients, or representatives in the development process. We also examined if women's perspectives were considered at the recommendations level and explored the potential association between the inclusion of patients' values and preferences with the quality of the CPGs.

RESULTS

We retrieved a total of 491 eligible CPGs, of which 33 were finally included. The majority of the CPGs were developed by scientific societies (63.6%), primarily from Europe (39.4%) and North America (30.3%). One in every four (24.2%) guidelines explicitly included individuals' perspectives in their development, and one in ten (12.1%) included research evidence about this aspect to support their recommendations. The domains with the lowest mean scores in the quality assessment were applicability (42.4%), rigor of development (44.7%), and stakeholder involvement (45.7%), and 61% were recommended for use according to our assessment. Guidelines of higher quality were more likely to include women's perspective in their development (mean difference 39.31, P = .003).

CONCLUSION

The incorporation of women's perspectives into the process of developing guidelines for primary fracture prevention in osteoporosis remains inadequate. Our findings serve as a call for guideline developers to improve this situation, and for users, and policymakers to be aware of these limitations, when using or implementing guidelines in this field.

Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies demonstrate associations between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and a variety of common disorders, including musculoskeletal, metabolic, cardiovascular, malignant, autoimmune, and infectious diseases. Although a causal link between serum 25(OH)D concentrations and many disorders has not been clearly established, these associations have led to widespread supplementation with vitamin D and increased laboratory testing for 25(OH)D in the general population. The benefit-risk ratio of this increase in vitamin D use is not clear, and the optimal vitamin D intake and the role of testing for 25(OH)D for disease prevention remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To develop clinical guidelines for the use of vitamin D (cholecalciferol [vitamin D3] or ergocalciferol [vitamin D2]) to lower the risk of disease in individuals without established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, along with experts in guideline methodology and systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 14 clinically relevant questions related to the use of vitamin D and 25(OH)D testing to lower the risk of disease. The panel prioritized randomized placebo-controlled trials in general populations (without an established indication for vitamin D treatment or 25[OH]D testing), evaluating the effects of empiric vitamin D administration throughout the lifespan, as well as in select conditions (pregnancy and prediabetes). The panel defined "empiric supplementation" as vitamin D intake that (a) exceeds the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) and (b) is implemented without testing for 25(OH)D. Systematic reviews queried electronic databases for publications related to these 14 clinical questions. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and guide recommendations. The approach incorporated perspectives from a patient representative and considered patient values, costs and resources required, acceptability and feasibility, and impact on health equity of the proposed recommendations. The process to develop this clinical guideline did not use a risk assessment framework and was not designed to replace current DRI for vitamin D.

RESULTS

The panel suggests empiric vitamin D supplementation for children and adolescents aged 1 to 18 years to prevent nutritional rickets and because of its potential to lower the risk of respiratory tract infections; for those aged 75 years and older because of its potential to lower the risk of mortality; for those who are pregnant because of its potential to lower the risk of preeclampsia, intra-uterine mortality, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and neonatal mortality; and for those with high-risk prediabetes because of its potential to reduce progression to diabetes. Because the vitamin D doses in the included clinical trials varied considerably and many trial participants were allowed to continue their own vitamin D-containing supplements, the optimal doses for empiric vitamin D supplementation remain unclear for the populations considered. For nonpregnant people older than 50 years for whom vitamin D is indicated, the panel suggests supplementation via daily administration of vitamin D, rather than intermittent use of high doses. The panel suggests against empiric vitamin D supplementation above the current DRI to lower the risk of disease in healthy adults younger than 75 years. No clinical trial evidence was found to support routine screening for 25(OH)D in the general population, nor in those with obesity or dark complexion, and there was no clear evidence defining the optimal target level of 25(OH)D required for disease prevention in the populations considered; thus, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in all populations considered. The panel judged that, in most situations, empiric vitamin D supplementation is inexpensive, feasible, acceptable to both healthy individuals and health care professionals, and has no negative effect on health equity.

CONCLUSION

The panel suggests empiric vitamin D for those aged 1 to 18 years and adults over 75 years of age, those who are pregnant, and those with high-risk prediabetes. Due to the scarcity of natural food sources rich in vitamin D, empiric supplementation can be achieved through a combination of fortified foods and supplements that contain vitamin D. Based on the absence of supportive clinical trial evidence, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in the absence of established indications. These recommendations are not meant to replace the current DRIs for vitamin D, nor do they apply to people with established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Further research is needed to determine optimal 25(OH)D levels for specific health benefits.

Actualisation 2023 des lignes directrices de pratique clinique pour la prise en charge de l’ostéoporose et la prévention des fractures au Canada

Contexte:

Au Canada, plus de 2 millions de personnes vivent avec l’ostéoporose, une maladie qui accroît le risque de fracture, ce qui fait augmenter la morbidité et la mortalité, et entraîne une perte de qualité de vie et d’autonomie. La présente actualisation des lignes directrices vise à accompagner les professionnelles et professionnels de la santé au Canada dans la prestation de soins visant à optimiser la santé osseuse et à prévenir les fractures chez les femmes ménopausées et les hommes de 50 ans et plus.

Méthodes:

Le présent document fournit une actualisation des lignes directrices de pratique clinique de 2010 d’Ostéoporose Canada sur le diagnostic et la prise en charge de l’ostéoporose au pays. Nous avons utilisé l’approche GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) et effectué l’assurance de la qualité conformément aux normes de qualité et de présentation des rapports de la grille AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation). Les médecins de premier recours et les patientes et patients partenaires ont été représentés à tous les niveaux des comités et des groupes ayant participé à l’élaboration des lignes directrices, et ont participé à toutes les étapes du processus pour garantir la pertinence des informations pour les futurs utilisateurs et utilisatrices. Le processus de gestion des intérêts concurrents a été entamé avant l’élaboration des lignes directrices et s’est poursuivi sur toute sa durée, selon les principes du Réseau international en matière de lignes directrices. Dans la formulation des recommandations, nous avons tenu compte des avantages et des risques, des valeurs et préférences de la patientèle, des ressources, de l’équité, de l’acceptabilité et de la faisabilité; la force de chacune des recommandations a été déterminée en fonction du cadre GRADE.

Recommandations:

Les 25 recommandations et les 10 énoncés de bonne pratique sont répartis en sections : activité physique, alimentation, évaluation du risque de fracture, instauration du traitement, interventions pharmacologiques, durée et séquence du traitement, et monitorage. La prise en charge de l’ostéoporose devrait se fonder sur le risque de fracture, établi au moyen d’une évaluation clinique réalisée avec un outil d’évaluation du risque de fracture validé. L’activité physique, l’alimentation et la pharmacothérapie sont des éléments essentiels à la stratégie de prévention des fractures, qui devraient être personnalisés.

Interprétation:

Les présentes lignes directrices ont pour but d’outiller les professionnelles et professionnels de la santé et la patientèle afin qu’ensemble ils puissent parler de l’importance de la santé osseuse et du risque de fracture tout au long de la vie adulte avancée. La détection et la prise en charge efficace de la fragilité osseuse peuvent contribuer à réduire les fractures et à préserver la mobilité, l’autonomie et la qualité de vie.

Clinical practice guideline for management of osteoporosis and fracture prevention in Canada: 2023 update

BACKGROUND

In Canada, more than 2 million people live with osteoporosis, a disease that increases the risk for fractures, which result in excess mortality and morbidity, decreased quality of life and loss of autonomy. This guideline update is intended to assist Canadian health care professionals in the delivery of care to optimize skeletal health and prevent fractures in postmenopausal females and in males aged 50 years and older.

METHODS

This guideline is an update of the 2010 Osteoporosis Canada clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and quality assurance as per Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) quality and reporting standards. Primary care physicians and patient partners were represented at all levels of the guideline committees and groups, and participated throughout the entire process to ensure relevance to target users. The process for managing competing interests was developed before and continued throughout the guideline development, informed by the Guideline International Network principles. We considered benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, resources, equity, acceptability and feasibility when developing recommendations; the strength of each recommendation was assigned according to the GRADE framework.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The 25 recommendations and 10 good practice statements are grouped under the sections of exercise, nutrition, fracture risk assessment and treatment initiation, pharmacologic interventions, duration and sequence of therapy, and monitoring. The management of osteoporosis should be guided by the patient's risk of fracture, based on clinical assessment and using a validated fracture risk assessment tool. Exercise, nutrition and pharmacotherapy are key elements of the management strategy for fracture prevention and should be individualized.

INTERPRETATION

The aim of this guideline is to empower health care professionals and patients to have meaningful discussions on the importance of skeletal health and fracture risk throughout older adulthood. Identification and appropriate management of skeletal fragility can reduce fractures, and preserve mobility, autonomy and quality of life.

Patient and Physician Decisional Factors Regarding Hypercalcemia of Malignancy Treatment: A Novel Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Integrating shared decision making between patients and physicians and incorporating their values and preferences in the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is of critical importance to optimize CPG implementation and treatment adherence. This applies to many debilitating diseases, including hypercalcemia of malignancy (HCM).

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate patient and physician values, preferences, and attitudes to better inform CPGs to treat HCM in adults.

METHODS

We followed a mixed-methods approach. We conducted a systematic review using 5 databases to identify studies reporting on patient and physician values, costs and resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity regarding HCM treatment. We also gathered data from different countries on the cost of multiple treatment modalities. We collected data on outcome prioritization from the CPG Working Group. Similarly, we collected data from patients with HCM regarding outcome prioritization and administered a questionnaire to evaluate their attitudes and perceptions toward treatment as well as treatment acceptability and feasibility.

RESULTS

In the systematic review, we included 2 cross-sectional surveys conducted on the same population of physicians who agreed that treating HCM alleviates symptoms and improves quality of life; however, harms and benefits should be thoroughly considered when deciding on the duration of treatment. We also included 2 studies on cost showing that intravenous (IV) bisphosphonate is more cost-effective than a combination of IV bisphosphonate and calcitonin and administration of IV zoledronic acid at home is more cost-effective than other IV bisphosphonates. The cost of zoledronic acid, denosumab, and cinacalcet varied widely among countries and types (brand vs generic). Both the CPG Working Group and patients with HCM agreed that the most important outcomes when deciding on treatment were survival and resolution of HCM, but there was some variability in the ratings for other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Using mixed methods, CPG developers can obtain meaningful information regarding evidence to decision criteria. In the case of HCM CPGs, this approach has provided the required contextual information and supported the development of evidence-based recommendations.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Primary Osteoporosis or Low Bone Mass to Prevent Fractures in Adults: A Living Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION

This guideline updates the 2017 American College of Physicians (ACP) recommendations on pharmacologic treatment of primary osteoporosis or low bone mass to prevent fractures in adults.

METHODS

The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on an updated systematic review of evidence and graded them using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system.

AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION

The audience for this guideline includes all clinicians. The patient population includes adults with primary osteoporosis or low bone mass.

RECOMMENDATION 1A

ACP recommends that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (strong recommendation; high-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 1B

ACP suggests that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2A

ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2B

ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 3

ACP suggests that clinicians use the sclerostin inhibitor (romosozumab, moderate-certainty evidence) or recombinant PTH (teriparatide, low-certainty evidence), followed by a bisphosphonate, to reduce the risk of fractures only in females with primary osteoporosis with very high risk of fracture (conditional recommendation).

RECOMMENDATION 4

ACP suggests that clinicians take an individualized approach regarding whether to start pharmacologic treatment with a bisphosphonate in females over the age of 65 with low bone mass (osteopenia) to reduce the risk of fractures (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

Disease Burden and Treatment Preferences Amongst Postmenopausal Women with Severe Osteoporosis in Greece

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to elicit self-reported health status, quantify osteoporosis-related burden, and understand preferences for treatment attributes among postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis in Greece.

METHODS

Postmenopausal women with self-reported severe osteoporosis, defined as having suffered at least one osteoporotic fracture and reporting a T-score of ≤-2.5, were asked to evaluate their health status, osteoporosis management, and disease-related physical, emotional, and financial burden. Participants were also asked to rate a series of treatment attributes and state their preference for unlabeled anabolic treatments, based on scenarios describing key treatment characteristics.

RESULTS

Approximately one third (31%) of the 186 participants who responded to the survey in full had been living with severe osteoporosis for more than 10 years. Three quarters of participants (72%) considered their overall quality of life (QoL) to be worse than it had been 10 years prior, and the vast majority (89%) attributed this deterioration to osteoporosis. Direct, out of pocket, disease-related costs of at least €100 per month were reported by 86% of participants. Patients attached the greatest value to a treatment that would decrease probability of future fractures, followed by increase in bone density, safety, and mode and frequency of administration. When asked to select their preferred treatment scenario between two anabolic treatments, 70% of participants opted for the scenario that shared treatment characteristics with romosozumab over a scenario that shared treatment characteristics with teriparatide.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that osteoporosis placed a considerable burden on QoL for postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis in Greece. Patients reported valuing treatment efficacy, measured through reduction in future fractures and increase in bone density, and safety, as key treatment attributes.

Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Systematic reviews of discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) are being increasingly conducted. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and describe the methodologies that have been used to summarize results across DCEs.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to March 18, 2021, to identify English-language systematic reviews of patient preferences that included at least two DCEs and extracted data on attribute importance. The methods used to summarize results across DCEs were classified into narrative, semi-quantitative, and quantitative (meta-analytic) approaches and compared. Approaches to characterize the extent of preference heterogeneity were also described.

RESULTS

From 7362 unique records, we identified 54 eligible reviews from 2010 to Mar 2021, across a broad range of health conditions. Most (83%) used a narrative approach to summarize findings of DCEs, often citing differences in studies as the reason for not formally pooling findings. Semi-quantitative approaches included summarizing the frequency of the most important attributes, the frequency of attribute statistical significance, or tabulated comparisons of attribute importance for each pair of attributes. One review conducted a meta-analysis using the maximum acceptable risk. While reviews often commented on the heterogeneity of patient preferences, few (6%) addressed this systematically across studies.

CONCLUSION

While not commonly used, several semi-quantitative and one quantitative approach for synthesizing results of DCEs were identified, which may be useful for generating summary estimates across DCEs when appropriate. Further work is needed to assess the validity and usefulness of these approaches.

Current situation of shared decision making in osteoporosis: A comprehensive literature review of patient decision aids and decision drivers

Background and Aims

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease characterized by low bone mass and microstructural deterioration of bone tissues, resulting in bone fragility and increased fracture risk. It is the most common bone-related disease in the population. However, the proportion of patients who start treatment but discontinue it during the first year is very high (around 50%). Endeavors are made to promote patient participation in treatment by implementing patient decision aids (PDA), whose function is to help the patient make disease-related decisions. We aim to summarize the characteristics of the currently available PDA for osteoporosis, as well as deciding factors.

Methods

Comprehensive review of the literature.

Results

Currently, eleven PDAs can be found for osteoporosis. These PDA have different characteristics or options such as information about treatments tailored to patient needs, graphic information of the results (to facilitate understanding), personal histories (learning), tests to check the knowledge acquired, provision of evidence, clinical practice guidelines or a final summary to share with their doctor. Only five of these PDAs can be considered complete since they provide relevant disease information and therapeutic options to the patient, promote patient's reflection and foment patient-physician discussion.

Conclusions

This study provides an update on the current state of decision making on osteoporosis and available PDA, which can help engage the patient through shared decision-making by considering, among other things, patient preferences. Physicians should consider PDA, as it may promote adherence and effectiveness of treatment.

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.

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

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

Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: ACOG Clinical Practice Guideline No. 2

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

TARGET POPULATION

Postmenopausal patients with primary osteoporosis.

METHODS

This guideline was developed using an a priori protocol in conjunction with a writing team consisting of two specialists in obstetrics and gynecology appointed by the ACOG Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines-Gynecology and one external subject matter expert. ACOG medical librarians completed a comprehensive literature search for primary literature within Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE. Studies that moved forward to the full-text screening stage were assessed by two authors from the writing team based on standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent quality assessment, and a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) evidence-to-decision framework was applied to interpret and translate the evidence into recommendation statements.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This Clinical Practice Guideline includes updated recommendations on who should receive osteoporosis pharmacotherapy, the benefits and risks of available pharmacotherapy options, treatment monitoring and follow-up, and the role of calcium and vitamin D in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Recommendations are classified by strength and evidence quality. Ungraded Good Practice Points are included to provide guidance when a formal recommendation could not be made because of inadequate or nonexistent evidence.

Meta-analysis of clinical fracture risk reduction of anti-osteoporosis drugs: direct and indirect comparisons and meta-regressions

OBJECTIVE

Anti-osteoporotic drug (AOD) trials have variabilities in duration and fracture risks. This study evaluated AOD's versus controls regarding reduction in relative rates (rr) and rate differences (rd) of vertebral and hip fractures and comparative costs.

METHODS

Primary randomized-controlled trials (RCT's) of AOD's in post-menopausal women with documentation of vertebral fracture rates (VFR) or hip fracture rates (HFR) were extracted from meta-analyses and PubMed through February 2021. Direct and indirect meta-analysis and meta-regression analyzed fracture reductions.

RESULTS

There were 24 RCT's of drug-versus-placebo (73,862 women) and 10 drug-versus-drug trials. Reduction in rr of VFR were significant for anti-resorptive (alendronate, risedronate, zoledronate, denosumab, raloxifene) and anabolic (teriparatide, abaloparatide, romosozumab) drugs. Denosumab, teriparatide and abaloparatide were more effective in reducing VFR compared to oral bisphosphates (all p <0.05) but not to zoledronate. Reduction in HFR were significant for alendronate, denosumab and zoledronate (all p <0.05), without significant differences among drugs. Anabolic drugs did not show significant HFR reduction. Meta-regression of rd's allowed for calculation of costs per vertebral fracture prevented, which were estimated at >$100,000 for anabolic drugs and between $2,289-$28,947 for anti-resorptive drugs. Drug-versus-drug trials were underpowered to demonstrate changes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests goal-directed, cost-effective therapy relative to a patient's risk for vertebral and hip fractures. Anabolic drugs are better at preventing vertebral fractures compared to oral bisphosphonates. Anabolic drugs are not superior to zoledronate or denosumab, and at substantially higher cost. In comparing drugs which prevented hip fractures, there was no statistical benefit of any drug.

Health Literacy of Osteoporosis Risks among Caregivers Serving in Disability Care Facilities

Osteoporosis is a global public health issue and its consequent effects are a growing concern worldwide. Caregivers generally experience occupational physical ailments and they have less of a tendency to engage in preventive health behaviors, leading them to be in a higher risk group for osteoporosis. This study aims to present a general profile of health literacy related to osteoporosis risks and identify its associated factors among disability institutional caregivers. A cross-sectional study with a structured questionnaire was used to collect information on 465 caregivers from seven disability care institutions regarding their awareness of the health literacy related to osteoporosis risks. The results indicate that the average literacy score related to osteoporosis risks among the respondents was 60 points (full score is 80 points), with 50–59 being the most common range (51.9%), followed by 60–69 points (43.5%), and 4.4% of cases had more than 70 points. A multivariate logistic regression model revealed that respondents’ age (40–49 vs. 18–29; odds ratio (OR) = 2.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.31–4.87), education level (senior high vs. primary and junior high, OR = 2.00, 95% CI = 1.03–3.89; college and above vs. primary and junior high, OR = 3.66, 95% CI = 1.84–7.31), experience in undergoing a bone density test (OR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.28–2.93), and poor physical fitness status (OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.43–0.95) were the significant predictors of the osteoporosis health literacy level. The osteoporosis health literacy of institutional caregivers is moderate, and there are many items that are worthy of attention in future health promotion programs. This study highlights risk factors related to a lower level of osteoporosis healthy literacy such as older age, less education, no experience of bone density test, and poor physical fitness that highlight the need to raise further awareness in order to improve caregivers’ bone health.

Osteoporosis in the age of COVID-19

As the world grapples with the crisis of COVID-19, established economies and healthcare systems have been brought to their knees. Tough decisions regarding redirection of resources away from the management of conditions deemed "nonessential" are being made. How can we balance urgent resourcing of our acute crisis while not abandoning the real need of patients with osteoporosis? This article offers a few practical solutions.

The Belgian Bone Club 2020 guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence-based guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women in Belgium.

METHODS

The Belgian Bone Club (BBC) gathered a guideline developer group. Nine "Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome" (PICO) questions covering screening, diagnosis, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, and monitoring were formulated. A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was performed to find network meta-analyses, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, guidelines, and recommendations from scientific societies published in the last 10 years. Manual searches were also performed. Summaries of evidence were provided, and recommendations were further validated by the BBC board members and other national scientific societies' experts.

RESULTS

Of the 3840 references in the search, 333 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 129 met the inclusion criteria. Osteoporosis screening using clinical risk factors should be considered. Patients with a recent (<2 years) major osteoporotic fracture were considered at very high and imminent risk of future fracture. The combination of bone mineral density measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and 10-year fracture risk was used to categorize patients as low or high risk. Patient education, the combination of weight-bearing and resistance training, and optimal calcium intake and vitamin D status were recommended. Antiresorptive and anabolic osteoporosis treatment should be considered for patients at high and very high fracture risk, respectively. Follow-up should focus on compliance, and patient-tailored monitoring should be considered.

CONCLUSION

BBC guidelines and 25 guideline recommendations bridge the gap between research and clinical practice for the screening, diagnosis, and management of osteoporosis.

Pharmacological Management of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women: An Endocrine Society Guideline Update

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to provide an update of the 2019 Pharmacological Management of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline for the pharmacological management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women using romosozumab.

CONCLUSIONS

We reviewed findings from the meta-analysis and primary clinical trials assessing the efficacy of romosozumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting sclerostin, for the prevention of fractures and concluded that this agent can be considered a treatment option for postmenopausal women at very high risk for osteoporotic fracture. The romosozumab label has a boxed warning, recommending careful consideration by the treating clinician as to cardiovascular risk profile in the individual woman who might receive this agent, since clinical trial data from an active comparator study show an imbalance in serious cardiovascular adverse events between romosozumab and alendronate.

Pharmacological Management of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Women: An Endocrine Society* Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to formulate clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from clinical trials and insights from clinical experience with pharmacologic therapies for osteoporosis were critically evaluated in formulating this guideline for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Patient preferences, data on adherence and persistence, and risks and benefits from the patient and provider perspectives were also considered in writing committee deliberations. A consensus by the Writing Committee members was achieved for four management principles: (i) The risk of future fractures in postmenopausal women should be determined using country-specific assessment tools to guide decision-making. (ii) Patient preferences should be incorporated into treatment planning. (iii) Nutritional and lifestyle interventions and fall prevention should accompany all pharmacologic regimens to reduce fracture risk. (iv) Multiple pharmacologic therapies are capable of reducing fracture rates in postmenopausal women at risk with acceptable risk-benefit and safety profiles.

Women's Values and Preferences Regarding Osteoporosis Treatments: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Several treatments are available to reduce the risk of fragility fractures associated with osteoporosis. The choice of treatment requires knowledge of patients' values and preferences. The aim of the present study was to summarize what is known about the values and preferences relevant to the management of osteoporosis in women.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases for studies reported in any language that had included women who had already started or were about to start any pharmacological therapy for osteoporosis. Pairs of reviewers independently selected the studies and extracted the data. The results were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

We included 26 studies reporting on 15,348 women (mean age, 66 years). The women considered the effectiveness and adverse events equally, followed by the convenience of taking the drug and its effect on daily routine (less frequent dosing was preferred, the oral route was preferred, and the injectable route was preferred over oral if given less frequently). The treatment cost and duration were less important factors for decision making. Fear of breast cancer and fear of resuming uterine bleeding were common reasons for not choosing estrogen therapy. Calcium and vitamin D were viewed as safe and natural. Across the studies, the preferences were not affected by age, previous drug exposure, or employment status.

CONCLUSIONS

Women starting osteoporosis medications value effectiveness and side effects equally and prefer medications given less frequently. Injectable drugs appear acceptable if given less frequently. More research on patient values and preferences is needed to guide decision making in osteoporosis.