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.

Garetosmab in fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial

Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) is a rare disease characterized by heterotopic ossification (HO) in connective tissues and painful flare-ups. In the phase 2 LUMINA-1 trial, adult patients with FOP were randomized to garetosmab, an activin A-blocking antibody (n = 20) or placebo (n = 24) in period 1 (28 weeks), followed by an open-label period 2 (28 weeks; n = 43). The primary end points were safety and for period 1, the activity and size of HO lesions. All patients experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event during period 1, notably epistaxis, madarosis and skin abscesses. Five deaths (5 of 44; 11.4%) occurred in the open-label period and, while considered unlikely to be related, causality cannot be ruled out. The primary efficacy end point in period 1 (total lesion activity by PET-CT) was not met (P = 0.0741). As the development of new HO lesions was suppressed in period 1, the primary efficacy end point in period 2 was prospectively changed to the number of new HO lesions versus period 1. No placebo patients crossing over to garetosmab developed new HO lesions (0% in period 2 versus 40.9% in period 1; P = 0.0027). Further investigation of garetosmab in FOP is ongoing. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03188666 .

Garetosmab Reduces Flare-ups in Patients With Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva

Background: Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) is an ultra-rare, autosomal dominant disorder driven by mutations in ACVR1 that render it responsive to Activin A. FOP is characterized by progressive heterotopic ossification (HO) and distressing inflammatory events called “flare-ups.” Flare-ups can precede new HO; however, limited prospective data exists on this phenomenon. Garetosmab (GAR), an investigational human monoclonal antibody against Activin A, blocks formation of new HO in FOP. Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of LUMINA-1 (NCT03188666) a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, which evaluated the safety and efficacy of GAR (10 mg/kg/week IV) versus placebo (PBO) in adult patients with FOP over 28 weeks. Patient-reported flare-ups were collected via a patient diary and severity level was reported as mild, moderate or severe. Clinician-reported flare-ups were collected as adverse events in the trial. HO lesions were imaged by 18F-NaF positron emission tomography (PET) and whole-body low-dose X-ray computed tomography (CT). Results: There was a two-fold higher proportion of patients who reported one or more flare-ups on PBO 17/24 (71%) compared with GAR 7/20 (35%). Clinicians reported a four-fold higher proportion of patients experiencing one or more flare-ups on PBO 10/24 (42%) compared with GAR 2/20 (10%). Overall rates of flare-up events were two-fold higher on PBO vs. GAR (1.4 vs. 0.65 events/patient/28 weeks) for patient-reported events and eight-fold higher on PBO vs. GAR by clinician report (0.83 vs. 0.10 events/patient/28 weeks). Most flare-ups occurred on the extremities and back; pain was the most commonly reported symptom. Patient-reported flare-ups on PBO were more frequently reported as severe (29.4%) compared with GAR (7.7%). Among subjects with at least 12 weeks of follow-up from start of patient-reported flare-up, development of new HO near the site was 5/27 (18.5%) on PBO and (0%) on GAR. Of all new HO lesions, 41% on PBO and 0% on GAR occurred with spatial and temporal relation to flare-up. Conclusions: Approximately two-thirds of patients on PBO reported flare-ups over 28 weeks. GAR was associated with reductions in frequency and severity of flare-ups. Fewer than 20% of patient-reported flare-ups were associated with new HO, indicating frequent discordance of these phenomena, and compatible with previous reports. GAR’s ability to reduce patient- and clinician-reported flare-ups, as well as new HO lesions may provide an important therapeutic option.

Atypical femur fractures: current understanding and approach to management

Osteoporosis and resulting osteoporotic fractures are responsible for significant morbidity, excess mortality, and health care costs in the developed world. Medical therapy for osteoporosis has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials to reduce the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures and hip fractures, and in some studies bisphosphonate medications have been associated with improved survival. Although the overall benefit to risk ratio of osteoporosis medications remains favorable, there have been concerns raised about the long-term safety of these treatments. Atypical femur fracture, which is a rare type of fracture that has been associated with the long-term use of potent antiresorptive bone medications, is a potentially devastating consequence of osteoporosis treatment. This paper reviews our current understanding of atypical femur fractures, their relationship to antiresorptive osteoporosis medications, and proposed strategies for management, in order to inform clinical decision making about the optimal use and duration of medical therapy for the treatment of patients with osteoporosis or at high risk for osteoporotic fractures.

Odanacatib for the treatment of osteoporosis

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are important public health concerns. Cathepsin K inhibitors, including odanacatib , are a novel class of medications for osteoporosis whose mechanism of action is to directly inhibit bone resorption without killing osteoclasts, thereby permitting the complex coupling between bone resorption and formation to continue.

AREAS COVERED

The physiological basis for the mechanism of action of cathepsin K inhibitors is covered in addition to a review of the preclinical, Phase I, Phase II and preliminary Phase III trial data of odanacatib.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence suggests that odanacatib has similar efficacy to bisphosphonates at increasing bone mineral density and decreasing risk of fragility fractures. Although odanacatib may preferentially inhibit bone resorption more than formation, the clinical significance of this difference in mechanism of action is not yet known. A careful analysis of the Phase III trial data is needed with specific attention to adverse events.

Bone density and structure in healthy postmenopausal women treated with exemestane for the primary prevention of breast cancer: a nested substudy of the MAP.3 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Exemestane can prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Because of potential widespread use, we examined the safety of exemestane on bone health.

METHODS

In this nested safety substudy of the MAP.3 trial (a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of exemestane 25 mg a day for the primary prevention of breast cancer), we included postmenopausal women from five centres who were eligible to participate in MAP.3, not osteoporotic, not receiving drugs for bone-related disorders, with baseline lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck T-scores above -2·0. The primary endpoint was percent change from baseline to 2 years in total volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) at the distal radius by high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT. The primary analysis was per protocol using a non-inferiority margin. This analysis was done earlier than originally planned because of the impending announcement of MAP.3 results and subsequent unmasking of patients to treatment assignment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01144468, and has been extended to 5 years of unmasked follow-up.

FINDINGS

351 women (176 given exemestane, 175 given placebo; median age 61·3 years [IQR 59·2-64·9]) met our inclusion criteria and completed baseline assessment. At the time of clinical cutoff, 242 women had completed 2-year follow-up (124 given exemestane, 118 given placebo). From baseline to 2 years, the mean percent change in total volumetric BMD at the distal radius was -6·1% (95% CI -7·0 to -5·2) in the exemestane group and -1·8% (-2·4 to -1·2) in the placebo group (difference -4·3%, 95% CI -5·3 to -3·2; p<0·0001). The lower limit of the 95% CI was lower than our non-inferiority margin of negative 4% (one-sided test for non-inferiority p=0·70), meaning the hypothesis that exemestane was inferior could not be rejected. At the distal tibia, the mean percent change in total volumetric BMD from baseline to 2 years was -5·0% (95% CI -5·5 to -4·4) in the exemestane group and -1·3% (-1·7 to -1·0) in the placebo group (difference -3·7%, 95% CI -4·3 to -3·0; p<0·0001). The mean percent change in cortical thickness was -7·9% (SD 7·3) in the exemestane group and -1·1% (5·7) in the placebo group at the distal radius (difference -6·8%, 95% CI -8·5 to -5·0; p<0·0001) and -7·6% (SD 5·9) in the exemestane group and -0·7% (4·9) in the placebo group at the distal tibia (difference -6·9%, -8·4 to -5·5; p<0·0001). Decline in areal BMD, as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, in the exemestane group compared with the placebo group occurred at the lumbar spine (-2·4% [95% CI -3·1 to -1·7] exemestane vs -0·5% [-1·1 to 0·2] placebo; difference -1·9%, 95% CI -2·9 to -1·0; p<0·0001), total hip (-1·8% [-2·3 to -1·2] exemestane vs -0·6% [-1·1 to -0·1] placebo; difference -1·2%, -1·9 to -0·4; p=0·004), and femoral neck (-2·4% [-3·2 to -1·7] exemestane vs -0·8% [-1·5 to 0·1] placebo; difference -1·6%, -2·7 to -0·6; p=0·002).

INTERPRETATION

2 years of treatment with exemestane worsens age-related bone loss in postmenopausal women despite calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Women considering exemestane for the primary prevention of breast cancer should weigh their individual risks and benefits. For women taking exemestane, regular bone monitoring plus adequate calcium and vitamin D supplementation are important. To assess the effect of our findings on fracture risk, long-term follow-up is needed.

FUNDING

Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance (Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Canadian Cancer Society).

Vitamin K supplementation in postmenopausal women with osteopenia (ECKO trial): a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Vitamin K has been widely promoted as a supplement for decreasing bone loss in postmenopausal women, but the long-term benefits and potential harms are unknown. This study was conducted to determine whether daily high-dose vitamin K1 supplementation safely reduces bone loss, bone turnover, and fractures.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This single-center study was designed as a 2-y randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, extended for earlier participants for up to an additional 2 y because of interest in long-term safety and fractures. A total of 440 postmenopausal women with osteopenia were randomized to either 5 mg of vitamin K1 or placebo daily. Primary outcomes were changes in BMD at the lumbar spine and total hip at 2 y. Secondary outcomes included changes in BMD at other sites and other time points, bone turnover markers, height, fractures, adverse effects, and health-related quality of life. This study has a power of 90% to detect 3% differences in BMD between the two groups. The women in this study were vitamin D replete, with a mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level of 77 nmol/l at baseline. Over 2 y, BMD decreased by -1.28% and -1.22% (p = 0.84) (difference of -0.06%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.67% to 0.54%) at the lumbar spine and -0.69% and -0.88% (p = 0.51) (difference of 0.19%; 95% CI -0.37% to 0.75%) at the total hip in the vitamin K and placebo groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in changes in BMD at any site between the two groups over the 2- to 4-y period. Daily vitamin K1 supplementation increased serum vitamin K1 levels by 10-fold, and decreased the percentage of undercarboxylated osteocalcin and total osteocalcin levels (bone formation marker). However, C-telopeptide levels (bone resorption marker) were not significantly different between the two groups. Fewer women in the vitamin K group had clinical fractures (nine versus 20, p = 0.04) and fewer had cancers (three versus 12, p = 0.02). Vitamin K supplements were well-tolerated over the 4-y period. There were no significant differences in adverse effects or health-related quality of life between the two groups. The study was not powered to examine fractures or cancers, and their numbers were small.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily 5 mg of vitamin K1 supplementation for 2 to 4 y does not protect against age-related decline in BMD, but may protect against fractures and cancers in postmenopausal women with osteopenia. More studies are needed to further examine the effect of vitamin K on fractures and cancers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT00150969) and Current Controlled Trials (#ISRCTN61708241).