Search

Our study validated a claims‐based algorithm for the identification of incident and recurrent fractures in administrative data. We used Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) claims from 2005 to 2014 linked to the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) database. Case qualifying (CQ) fractures were identified among participants with ≥12 months of fee‐for‐service coverage before first fracture claim and ≥6 months after. Recurrent fractures were defined as the first CQ fracture that occurred following a clean period of at least 90 days from the last claim associated with the preceding incident fracture. We used medical records (discharge summary, imaging, and surgical report) to adjudicate fractures. We calculated positive predictive values (PPVs) for incident and recurrent fractures. Our study was not designed to assess the algorithm sensitivity or negative predictive value. We identified 2049 potential incident fractures from claims among 1650 participants. Record retrieval was attempted for 728 (35.5%) suspected incident fractures (prioritizing more recent CQ fractures associated with osteoporosis, but without explicitly requiring any osteoporosis ICD‐9 diagnosis code). Our final sample included 520 claims‐identified fractures with medical records, of which 502 (96.5%) were confirmed. The PPVs (95% CI) of the hip, wrist, humerus, and clinical vertebra—all exceeded 95%. We identified 117 beneficiaries with 292 ≥2 CQ fracture episodes at the same site, and attempted retrieval on 105 (36.0%) episodes. Our analytic sample included 72 (68.5%) CQ episodes from 33 participants. The PPVs for identifying recurrent clinical vertebral, hip/femur, and nonvertebral fractures with a 90‐day clean period exceeded 95%. Although we could not ascertain sensitivity, our updated fracture identification algorithms had high PPV for the identification of incident and recurrent fractures of the same site. Although medical record review and clinical adjudication remain a gold standard, our claims‐based algorithm provides an alternative approach to fracture ascertainment when high PPV is desired. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) provide large sample sizes and enhanced generalizability to assess therapeutic effectiveness, but efficient patient enrollment procedures are a challenge, especially for community physicians. Advances in technology may improve methods of patient recruitment and screening in PCTs. Our study looked at a tablet computer versus an integrated voice response system (IVRS) for patient recruitment and screening for an osteoporosis PCT in community physician offices. Materials and methods: We recruited women ⩾ 65 years of age from community physician offices to answer screening questions for a hypothetical osteoporosis active comparator PCT using a tablet computer or IVRS. We assessed the feasibility of these technologies for patient recruitment as well as for patient, physician, and office staff satisfaction with the process. We also evaluated the implications of these novel recruitment processes in determining the number of primary care practices and screened patients needed to conduct the proposed trial. Results: A total of 160 women (80% of those approached) agreed to complete the osteoporosis screening questions in ten family physicians' offices. Women using the tablet computer were able to complete all screening questions consistently and showed a nonsignificant trend towards greater ease of use and willingness to spend more time in their physician's office compared to those using IVRS. Using the proportion of women found to be eligible in this study (almost 20%) and other eligibility scenarios, we determined that between 240 and 670 community physician offices would be needed to recruit ample patients for our hypothetical study. Conclusion: We found good satisfaction and feasibility with a tablet computer interface for the recruitment and screening of patients for a hypothetical osteoporosis PCT in community office settings. In addition, we used this experience to estimate the number of research sites needed for such a study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of alendronic acid once weekly relative to risedronic acid once weekly on bone mineral density (BMD), markers of bone turnover and tolerability in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Methods: This was a randomised, double-masked, double-dummy multicentre international study (75 centres in 27 countries in Europe, the Americas and Asia-Pacific). A total of 1303 women were screened and 936 with low bone density (T-score ≤-2.0 at the spine, hip trochanter, total hip or femoral neck) were randomised; 91% (n = 854) completed the study. Patients were randomised to treatment with either active alendronic acid 70mg weekly (Fosamax®) and placebo identical to risedronic acid weekly or active risedronic acid 35mg weekly (Actonel®) and placebo identical to alendronic acid weekly for 12 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage change from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included the percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck BMD; biochemical markers of bone turnover (including serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [BSAP] and urinary type I collagen N-telopeptides [NTx]); and safety and tolerability as assessed by reporting of adverse experiences. Results: Alendronic acid produced greater increases in BMD than did risedronic acid at 12 months at all sites measured. Mean percentage increases from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at month 12 were 3.56% and 2.71% in the alendronic acid and risedronic acid groups, respectively (treatment difference [95% CI]: 0.83% [0.22, 1.45; p = 0.008]). Mean percentage increases from baseline were greater with alendronic acid than risedronic acid at the lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck BMD at month 12 (p = 0.002, p < 0.001, p = 0.039, respectively). Increases in BMD with alendronic acid compared with risedronic acid were also significantly greater at 6 months at the trochanter and total hip. There was a greater reduction in bone turnover with alendronic acid compared with risedronic acid: NTx decreased 58% with alendronic acid compared with 47% with risedronic acid at 12 months (p < 0.001); and BSAP decreased 45% with alendronic acid compared with 34% with risedronic acid at 12 months (p < 0.001). Overall tolerability and upper gastrointestinal tolerability were similar for both agents. Conclusions: Alendronic acid once weekly produced greater BMD increases at both hip and spine sites and greater reductions in bone turnover relative to risedronic acid once weekly. Both agents were well tolerated with no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal adverse experiences. Clinicians should consider these results when making treatment decisions for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Once weekly dosing of alendronate has been shown to provide equivalent efficacy to once daily dosing for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Whether patients will prefer weekly dosing to daily dosing for a chronic condition such as osteoporosis has not been studied. The aim of this international study was to assess preference for the weekly or daily dosing regimen of alendronate among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Methods: This randomised open-label crossover study was conducted at 45 study sites in 19 countries. Four hundred and six postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were assigned randomly to treatment with either alendronate 70 mg once weekly for 4 weeks followed by alendronate 10 mg once daily for 4 weeks or vice versa. The main outcome was the responses of the participants to the Dosing Regimen Questionnaire administered at the end of the study. Results: Of the participants expressing a preference, 84% preferred the once weekly dosing regimen with alendronate to the once daily dosing regimen. In addition, the once weekly regimen was considered by 87% of the participants to be more convenient and was the regimen most of the participants (84%) would be more willing to take for a long period of time (P<0.001 for each parameter). Conclusions: The majority of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis preferred the once weekly to the once daily dosing regimen of alendronate. Physicians should consider patient preference for dosing regimen when selecting the appropriate treatment for osteoporosis. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]