Search

Evidence on the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments is heterogeneous. This may be attributed to different populations and clinical practice, but also to differing methodologies ensuring comparability of treatment groups before treatment effect estimation and the amount of residual confounding by indication. This study assessed the comparability of denosumab vs oral bisphosphonate (OBP) groups using propensity score (PS) methods and negative control outcome (NCO) analysis. A total of 280 288 women aged ≥50 yr initiating denosumab or OBP in 2011-2018 were included from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and the Danish National Registries (DNR). Balance of observed covariates was assessed using absolute standardized mean difference (ASMD) before and after PS weighting, matching, and stratification, with ASMD >0.1 indicating imbalance. Residual confounding was assessed using NCOs with ≥100 events. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95%CI between treatment and NCO were estimated using Cox models. Presence of residual confounding was evaluated with 2 approaches (1) >5% of NCOs with 95% CI excluding 1, (2) >5% of NCOs with an upper CI <0.75 or lower CI >1.3. The number of imbalanced covariates before adjustment (CPRD 22/87; DNR 18/83) decreased, with 2%-11% imbalance remaining after weighting, matching, or stratification. Using approach 1, residual confounding was present for all PS methods in both databases (≥8% of NCOs), except for stratification in DNR (3.8%). Using approach 2, residual confounding was present in CPRD with PS matching (5.3%) and stratification (6.4%), but not with weighting (4.3%). Within DNR, no NCOs had HR estimates with upper or lower CI limits beyond the specified bounds indicating residual confounding for any PS method. Achievement of covariate balance and determination of residual bias were dependent upon several factors including the population under study, PS method, prevalence of NCO, and the threshold indicating residual confounding., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

We studied the characteristics of patients prescribed osteoporosis medication and patterns of use in European databases. Patients were mostly female, older, had hypertension. There was suboptimal persistence particularly for oral medications. Our findings would be useful to healthcare providers to focus their resources on improving persistence to specific osteoporosis treatments., Purpose: To characterise the patients prescribed osteoporosis therapy and describe the drug utilization patterns., Methods: We investigated the treatment patterns of bisphosphonates, denosumab, teriparatide, and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) in seven European databases in the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark, Spain, and Germany. In this cohort study, we included adults aged ≥ 18 years, with ≥ 1 year of registration in the respective databases, who were new users of the osteoporosis medications. The study period was between 01 January 2018 to 31 January 2022., Results: Overall, patients were most commonly initiated on alendronate. Persistence decreased over time across all medications and databases, ranging from 52-73% at 6 months to 29-53% at 12 months for alendronate. For other oral bisphosphonates, the proportion of persistent users was 50-66% at 6 months and decreased to 30-44% at 12 months. For SERMs, the proportion of persistent users at 6 months was 40-73% and decreased to 25-59% at 12 months. For parenteral treatment groups, the proportions of persistence with denosumab were 50-85% (6 month), 30-63% (12 month) and with teriparatide 40-75% (6 month) decreasing to 21-54% (12 month). Switching occurred most frequently in the alendronate group (2.8-5.8%) and in the teriparatide group (7.1-14%). Switching typically occurred in the first 6 months and decreased over time. Patients in the alendronate group most often switched to other oral or intravenous bisphosphonates and denosumab., Conclusion: Our results show suboptimal persistence to medications that varied across different databases and treatment switching was relatively rare., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

This narrative review summarises the recommendations of a Working Group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) for the conduct and reporting of real-world evidence studies with a focus on osteoporosis research., Purpose: Vast amounts of data are routinely generated at every healthcare contact and activity, and there is increasing recognition that these real-world data can be analysed to generate scientific evidence. Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly used to delineate the natural history of disease, assess real-life drug effectiveness, understand adverse events and in health economic analysis. The aim of this work was to understand the benefits and limitations of this type of data and outline approaches to ensure that transparent and high-quality evidence is generated., Methods: A ESCEO Working Group was convened in December 2022 to discuss the applicability of RWE to osteoporosis research and approaches to best practice., Results: This narrative review summarises the agreed recommendations for the conduct and reporting of RWE studies with a focus on osteoporosis research., Conclusions: It is imperative that research using real-world data is conducted to the highest standards with close attention to limitations and biases of these data, and with transparency at all stages of study design, data acquisition and curation, analysis and reporting to increase the trustworthiness of RWE study findings., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

In this international study, we examined the incidence of hip fractures, postfracture treatment, and all-cause mortality following hip fractures, based on demographics, geography, and calendar year. We used patient-level healthcare data from 19 countries and regions to identify patients aged 50 years and older hospitalized with a hip fracture from 2005 to 2018. The age- and sex-standardized incidence rates of hip fractures, post-hip fracture treatment (defined as the proportion of patients receiving anti-osteoporosis medication with various mechanisms of action [bisphosphonates, denosumab, raloxifene, strontium ranelate, or teriparatide] following a hip fracture), and the all-cause mortality rates after hip fractures were estimated using a standardized protocol and common data model. The number of hip fractures in 2050 was projected based on trends in the incidence and estimated future population demographics. In total, 4,115,046 hip fractures were identified from 20 databases. The reported age- and sex-standardized incidence rates of hip fractures ranged from 95.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.8-95.4) in Brazil to 315.9 (95% CI 314.0-317.7) in Denmark per 100,000 population. Incidence rates decreased over the study period in most countries; however, the estimated total annual number of hip fractures nearly doubled from 2018 to 2050. Within 1 year following a hip fracture, post-hip fracture treatment ranged from 11.5% (95% CI 11.1% to 11.9%) in Germany to 50.3% (95% CI 50.0% to 50.7%) in the United Kingdom, and all-cause mortality rates ranged from 14.4% (95% CI 14.0% to 14.8%) in Singapore to 28.3% (95% CI 28.0% to 28.6%) in the United Kingdom. Males had lower use of anti-osteoporosis medication than females, higher rates of all-cause mortality, and a larger increase in the projected number of hip fractures by 2050. Substantial variations exist in the global epidemiology of hip fractures and postfracture outcomes. Our findings inform possible actions to reduce the projected public health burden of osteoporotic fractures among the aging population. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

Risk prediction tools are increasingly popular aids in clinical decision-making. However, the underlying models are often trained on data from general patient cohorts and may not be representative of and suitable for use with targeted patient groups in actual clinical practice, such as in the case of osteoporosis patients who may be at elevated risk of mortality. We developed and internally validated a cardiovascular mortality risk prediction model tailored to individuals with osteoporosis using a range of machine learning models. We compared the performance of machine learning models with existing expert-based models with respect to data-driven risk factor identification, discrimination, and calibration. The proposed models were found to outperform existing cardiovascular mortality risk prediction tools for the osteoporosis population. External validation of the model is recommended.Clinical Relevance- This study presents the performance of machine learning models for cardiovascular death prediction among osteoporotic patients as well as the risk factors identified by the models to be important predictors.

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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare support from UCB and Amgen for the submitted work: MNH, IC, CvB, JFR, AU, SMN, and RC report grants from UCB and Amgen paid to the Parker Institute to conduct the study; J-JB reports personal fees from UCB during the conduct of the study and personal fees from UCB and Sandoz outside the submitted work; MLB reports fees as honorarium, speaker, grants, and consultant from Amgen, Bruno Farmaceutici, Calcilytix, Kyowa Kirin, UCB, Abiogen, Alexion, Echolight, Eli Lilly, Kyowa Kirin, SPA, Theramex, and Amolyt outside the submitted work; AD-P has received speaker fees from Amgen, Lilly, and Theramex and is a shareholder of Active Life; PH reports personal fees from UCB during the conduct of the study and personal fees from UCB, Amgen, Gedeon Richter, Stada, and Theramex outside the submitted work; MKJ reports personal fees and non-financial support from UCB during the conduct of the study, and grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Amgen and UCB outside the submitted work; MKJ was also supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and the views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health; WFL reports speakers fee/advisory board from UCB, Amgen, Pfizer, and Lilly; XN has received fees for consulting from UCB and Amgen and for lectures from UCB, Amgen, and Lilly; CR reports personal fees from UCB during the conduct of the study, and grants and personal fees from Alexion, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Amgen outside the submitted work; SM reports fees as speaker and advisory board from Abiogen, Amgen, Bruno Farmaceutici, Diasorin, Eli Lilly, Shire, Sandoz, Takeda, Abiogen, Kyowa Kirin, Pfizer and UCB outside the submitted work; TT reports personal fees from UCB during the conduct of the study, personal fees from Amgen, Arrow, and Biogen, personal fees from Grunenthal, Jansen, LCA, Lilly, MSD, Nordic, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Thuasne, and Theramex, grants and personal fees from Chugai and UCB, and grants from Bone Therapeutics outside the submitted work; SLF reports grants from Amgen, consulting and lecture honorarium from UCB, consulting honorarium from Radius, and grants and consulting honorarium from Agnovos outside the submitted work; DP-A's department received consultancy fees related to this work, DP-A reports grants and fees for speaker services and advisory board membership from Amgen, grants, non-financial support, and fees for consultancy services from UCB Biopharma, grants from Les Laboratoires Servier and UCB outside the submitted work, DP-A is an HTA Funding Committee membership, and Janssen, on behalf of Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) funded European Health Data and Evidence Network (EHDEN) and European Medical Information Framework (EMIF) consortiums, and Synapse Management Partners, have supported training programmes organised by DP-A's department that are open to external participants; BL reports personal fees from UCB during the conduct of the study and BL has received funding to her institution from Amgen and Novo Nordisk and personal fees from Amgen, UCB, Eli Lilly, Gedeon-Richter, and Gilead outside the submitted work; BA reports personal fees from UCB during the conduct of the study, grants and personal fees from UCB and Kyowa-Kirin UK, personal fees from Amgen, grants from Novartis, and grants and personal fees from Pharmacosmos outside the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To estimate the risk of developing comorbidities in patients after physician-diagnosed knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA)., Methods: This was a cohort study using Swedish longitudinal health care register data; we studied residents in the Skåne region age ≥35 years on January 1, 2010 who were free from diagnosed hip or knee OA (n = 548,681). We then identified subjects with at least 1 new diagnosis of knee or hip OA (incident OA) between 2010 and 2017 (n = 50,942 considered exposed). Subjects without diagnosed OA were considered unexposed. From January 2010 both unexposed and exposed subjects were observed for the occurrence of 18 different predefined comorbidities until either relocation outside of the region, death, occurrence of the comorbidity, or December 2017, whichever came first. We calculated unadjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and adjusted HRs of comorbidities using Cox models with knee and hip OA as time-varying exposures., Results: Subjects with incident knee or hip OA had 7% to 60% higher adjusted HRs (range 1.07-1.60) of depression, cardiovascular diseases, back pain, and osteoporosis than individuals without an OA diagnosis. An increased risk of diabetes mellitus was found only for knee OA (adjusted HR 1.19 [95% confidence interval 1.13-1.26]). For the rest of the diagnoses, we found either no increased risk or estimates with wide confidence intervals, excluding clear interpretations of the direction or size of effects., Conclusion: Incident physician-diagnosed knee and hip OA is associated with an increased risk of depression, cardiovascular diseases, back pain, osteoporosis, and diabetes mellitus. However, the latter was only found for knee OA., (© 2021 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Introduction: The risk factors for a second nonsimultaneous hip fracture are unclear, and in general, it is empirically assumed that they are similar to those associated with the first hip fracture. We aimed to determine the incidence of a second hip fracture and define the characteristics of the patients sustaining the event in a prospective cohort study in a Spanish population., Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicentric, prospective cohort study in a representative sample of 45 hospitals from 15 autonomic regions in Spain. In total, the study included 994 patients. One hundred and one patients presented a nonsimultaneous contralateral hip fracture, constituting the intervention group. The remaining 893 patients presenting with a hip fracture formed the control group. The main outcome measures of this study were sociodemographic characteristics of the patient, comorbid conditions, and baseline and postfracture clinical outcomes (inpatient complications and acute mortality)., Results: The key fracture risk factors were a history of fragility fractures, the need for assistance when walking outdoors and a history of falls. There were no associations between the groups in any of the common fragility risk factors, including rheumatoid arthritis, secondary osteoporosis, or steroid consumption. The results showed that patients suffering a nonsimultaneous hip fracture had an increased risk of mortality after discharge compared with the control group., Conclusion: A nonsimultaneous second hip fracture leads to a near-significant increase in four-month mortality. In our study, this fracture was associated with a history of falls, prior fragility fractures, and the need for a walking aid., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of acute myocardial infarction in patients taking osteoporosis medication. Patients were taken from the SIDIAP or CPRD database and were matched using propensity scores. Patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease taking SERMs were at an increased risk. The results favour the cardiovascular safety of alendronate as a first-line choice for osteoporosis treatment., Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the comparative safety of anti-osteoporosis drugs based on the observed risk of acute myocardial infarction while on treatment in a primary care setting., Methods: This is a propensity-matched cohort study and meta-analysis. This study was conducted in two primary care record databases covering UK NHS (CPRD) and Catalan healthcare (SIDIAP) patients during 1995-2014 and 2006-2014, respectively. The outcome was acute myocardial infarction while on treatment. Users of alendronate (reference group) were compared to those of (1) other oral bisphosphonates (OBP), (2) strontium ranelate (SR), and (3) selective oestrogen receptor modulator (SERM), after matching on baseline characteristics (socio-demographics, fracture risk factors, comorbidities, and concomitant drug use) using propensity scores. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing data on confounders and competing risk modelling for the calculation of relative risk (sub-distribution hazard ratios (SHR)) according to therapy. Country-specific data were analysed individually and meta-analysed., Results: A 10% increased risk of acute myocardial infarction was found in users of other bisphosphonates as compared to alendronate users within CPRD. The meta-analysis of CPRD and SIDIAP results showed a 9% increased risk in users of other bisphosphonate as compared to alendronate users. Sensitivity analysis showed SERMS users with diabetes and chronic kidney disease were at an elevated risk., Conclusions: This study provides additional data on the risk of acute myocardial infarction in patients receiving osteoporosis treatment. The results favour the cardiovascular safety of alendronate as a first-line choice for osteoporosis treatment., (© 2022. International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation.)

The IOF Epidemiology and Quality of Life Working Group has reviewed the potential role of population screening for high hip fracture risk against well-established criteria. The report concludes that such an approach should strongly be considered in many health care systems to reduce the burden of hip fractures., Introduction: The burden of long-term osteoporosis management falls on primary care in most healthcare systems. However, a wide and stable treatment gap exists in many such settings; most of which appears to be secondary to a lack of awareness of fracture risk. Screening is a public health measure for the purpose of identifying individuals who are likely to benefit from further investigations and/or treatment to reduce the risk of a disease or its complications. The purpose of this report was to review the evidence for a potential screening programme to identify postmenopausal women at increased risk of hip fracture., Methods: The approach took well-established criteria for the development of a screening program, adapted by the UK National Screening Committee, and sought the opinion of 20 members of the International Osteoporosis Foundation's Working Group on Epidemiology and Quality of Life as to whether each criterion was met (yes, partial or no). For each criterion, the evidence base was then reviewed and summarized., Results and Conclusion: The report concludes that evidence supports the proposal that screening for high fracture risk in primary care should strongly be considered for incorporation into many health care systems to reduce the burden of fractures, particularly hip fractures. The key remaining hurdles to overcome are engagement with primary care healthcare professionals, and the implementation of systems that facilitate and maintain the screening program., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Blood pressure and bone metabolism appear to share commonalities in their physiologic regulation. Specific antihypertensive drug classes may also influence bone mineral density. However, current evidence from existing observational studies and randomised trials is insufficient to establish causal associations for blood pressure and use of blood pressure-lowering drugs with bone health outcomes, particularly with the risks of osteoporosis and fractures. The availability and access to relevant large-scale biomedical data sources as well as developments in study designs and analytical approaches provide opportunities to examine the nature of the association between blood pressure and bone health more reliably and in greater detail than has ever been possible. It is unlikely that a single source of data or study design can provide a definitive answer. However, with appropriate considerations of the strengths and limitations of the different data sources and analytical techniques, we should be able to advance our understanding of the role of raised blood pressure and its drug treatment on the risks of low bone mineral density and fractures. As elevated blood pressure is highly prevalent and blood pressure-lowering drugs are widely prescribed, even small effects of these exposures on bone health outcomes could be important at a population level., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

We estimated and characterized the imminent fracture risk (1-2 years) of high-risk fracture patients through a multinational (UK, Spain, Denmark) cohort study. Older individuals with newly diagnosed osteoporosis and individuals who had a fracture while on treatment with a bisphosphonate were at a high risk of imminent fracture., Purpose: To characterize and estimate 1- to 2-year fracture risk in high-risk fracture patients., Methods: Multi-cohort study in (database/study period) UK (CPRD/1995-2017), Spain (SIDIAP/2006-2016) and Denmark (DHR/1995-2016) including individuals ≥ 50 years old in NDO (newly diagnosed osteoporosis), OFx (incident osteoporotic fracture), BP (incident oral bisphosphonates use) or FWOT (fracture while on treatment with bisphosphonates). Outcomes (ICD-10/READ): hip, clinical spine, non-hip, non-spine and hip/humerus/distal forearm fracture., Follow-Up: from cohort entry until death, migration/transfer or end of the study., Statistics: baseline characteristics and incidence rate (IR per 1000 persons). RESULTS (1-YEAR IR): NDO included 69,899 (UK), 37,901 (Spain) and 158,191 (Denmark) individuals. Spanish-IR was lowest for hip (4.7), clinical spine (2.5) and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) (17.3) and highest in Denmark (74.2, 26.0 and 120.1, respectively). OFx included 83,514 (UK), 51,044 (Spain) and 509,551 (Denmark) individuals. IR in Denmark was highest for hip (24.1) and MOF (47.2), in Spain was highest for the clinical spine (9.4) and lowest for hip (9.5) and in the UK was lowest for the clinical spine (2.8) and MOF (20.7). BP included 148,507 (UK), 52,037 (Spain) and 204,010 (Denmark) individuals. Spanish-IR was lowest for hip (5.0) and MOF (21.1) and highest in Denmark (20.3 and 48.6, respectively). FWOT included 28,930 (UK), 1,865 (Spain) and 31,882 (Denmark) individuals. Clinical spine-IR was highest for Spain (12.0). Hip-IR was lowest for Spain (7.6) and highest for Denmark (33.6). Comparing young subjects, those who have FWOT started with an increased fracture rate., Conclusion: OFx and FWOT individuals experience higher re-fracture incidence rates than those with osteoporosis with or without treatment., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) CKD-MBD working group, in collaboration with the Committee of Scientific Advisors of the International Osteoporosis Foundation, published a position paper for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in patients with CKD stages 4-5D (eGFR < 30 ml/min 1.73 m 2 ). The present article reports and summarizes the main recommendations included in this 2021 document. The following areas are reviewed: diagnosis of osteoporosis; risk factors for fragility fractures; fracture risk assessment; intervention thresholds for pharmacological intervention; general and pharmacological management of osteoporosis; monitoring of treatment, and systems of care, all in patients with CKD stages 4-5D. Guidance is provided for clinicians caring for CKD stages 4-5D patients with osteoporosis, allowing for a pragmatic individualized diagnostic and therapeutic approach as an alternative to current variations in care and treatment nihilism., (© 2021. International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation.)

The availability of anti-osteoporosis medications with rapid onset and high potency requires tools to identify patients at high imminent fracture risk (IFR). There are few tools that predict a patient's IFR. We aimed to develop and validate tools for patients with a recent fracture and for patients initiating oral bisphosphonate therapy. Models for two separate cohorts, those with incident fragility fracture (IFx) and with incident oral bisphosphonate prescription (OBP), were developed in primary care records from Spain (SIDIAP database), UK (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD), and Denmark (Danish Health Registries). Separate models were developed for hip, major, and any fracture outcomes. Only variables present in all databases were included in Lasso regression models for the development and logistic regression models for external validation. Discrimination was tested using area under curve (AUC) and calibration was assessed using observed versus predicted risk plots stratified by age, sex, and previous fracture history. The development analyses included 35,526 individuals in the IFx and 41,401 in the OBP cohorts, with 671,094 in IFx and 330,256 in OBP for the validation analyses. Both the IFx and OBP models demonstrated similarly good performance for hip fracture at 1 year (with AUCs of 0.79 [95% CI 0.75 to 0.82] and 0.87 [0.83 to 0.91] in Spain, 0.71 [0.71 to 0.72] and 0.73 [0.72 to 0.74] in the UK, and 0.70 [0.70 to 0.70] and 0.69 [0.68 to 0.70] in Denmark), and lower discrimination for major osteoporotic and any fracture sites. Calibration was good across all three countries. Discrimination and calibration for the 2-year models was similar. The proposed IFR prediction models could be used to identify more precisely patients at high imminent risk of fracture and inform anti-osteoporosis treatment selection. The freely available model parameters permit local validation and implementation. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

Bisphosphonates are the first-line treatment for preventing fractures in osteoporosis patients. However, their use is contraindicated or to be used with caution in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, primarily because of a lack of information about their safety and effectiveness. We aimed to investigate the safety of oral bisphosphonates in patients with moderate to severe CKD, using primary-care electronic records from two cohorts, CPRD GOLD (1997-2016) and SIDIAP (2007-2015) in the UK and Catalonia, respectively. Both databases were linked to hospital records. SIDIAP was also linked to end-stage renal disease registry data. Patients with CKD stages 3b to 5, based on two or more estimated glomerular filtration rate measurements less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , aged 40 years or older were identified. New bisphosphonate users were propensity score-matched with up to five non-users to minimize confounding within this population. Our primary outcome was CKD stage worsening (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] decline or renal replacement therapy). Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury, gastrointestinal bleeding/ulcers, and severe hypocalcemia. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression and Fine and Gray sub-HRs were calculated for competing risks. We matched 2447 bisphosphonate users with 8931 non-users from CPRD and 1399 users with 6547 non-users from SIDIAP. Bisphosphonate use was associated with greater risk of CKD progression in CPRD (sub-HR [95% CI]: 1.14 [1.04, 1.26]) and SIDIAP (sub-HR: 1.15 [1.04, 1.27]). No risk differences were found for acute kidney injury, gastrointestinal bleeding/ulcers, or hypocalcemia. Hence, we can conclude a modest (15%) increased risk of CKD progression was identified in association with bisphosphonate use. No other safety concerns were identified. Our findings should be considered before prescribing bisphosphonates to patients with moderate to severe CKD. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)., (© 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).)

Controlling the excessive fracture burden in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) Stages G4-G5D remains an impressive challenge. The reasons are 2-fold. First, the pathophysiology of bone fragility in patients with CKD G4-G5D is complex and multifaceted, comprising a mixture of age-related (primary male/postmenopausal), drug-induced and CKD-related bone abnormalities. Second, our current armamentarium of osteoporosis medications has not been developed for, or adequately studied in patients with CKD G4-G5D, partly related to difficulties in diagnosing osteoporosis in this specific setting and fear of complications. Doubts about the optimal diagnostic and therapeutic approach fuel inertia in daily clinical practice. The scope of the present consensus paper is to review and update the assessment and diagnosis of osteoporosis in patients with CKD G4-G5D and to discuss the therapeutic interventions available and the manner in which these can be used to develop management strategies for the prevention of fragility fracture. As such, it aims to stimulate a cohesive approach to the management of osteoporosis in patients with CKD G4-G5D to replace current variations in care and treatment nihilism., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved.)

The incidence of osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease increases with age, and there are potentially shared mechanistic associations between the two conditions. It is therefore highly relevant to understand the cardiovascular implications of osteoporosis medications. These are presented in this narrative review. Calcium supplementation could theoretically cause atheroma formation via calcium deposition, and in one study was found to be associated with myocardial infarction, but this has not been replicated. Vitamin D supplementation has been extensively investigated for cardiac benefit, but no consistent effect has been found. Despite findings in the early 21st century that menopausal hormone therapy was associated with coronary artery disease and venous thromboembolism (VTE), this therapy is now thought to be potentially safe (from a cardiac perspective) if started within the first 10 years of the menopause. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are associated with increased risk of VTE and may be related to fatal strokes (a subset of total strokes). Bisphosphonates could theoretically provide protection against atheroma. However, data from randomised trials and observational studies have neither robustly supported this nor consistently demonstrated the potential association with atrial fibrillation. Denosumab does not appear to be associated with cardiovascular disease and, although parathyroid hormone analogues are associated with palpitations and dizziness, no association with a defined cardiovascular pathology has been demonstrated. Finally, romosozumab has been shown to have a possible cardiovascular signal, and therefore post-market surveillance of this therapy will be vital.

Context: The cardiovascular (CV) safety of oral bisphosphonates (oBPs) is uncertain., Objective: Determine the risk of CV events in oBP users referred for bone mineral density (BMD) testing compared with matched controls., Design: Cohort study., Setting: Danish national prescription registry enriched with local hospital data from Odense., Participants: Individuals aged ≥45 years referred for BMD testing., Exposure: oBP., Outcomes: Hospitalization for any CV event. Secondary study outcomes were specific CV events. Negative (inguinal hernia surgery and ingrown toenail) and positive (fragility fracture) control outcomes assessed systemic bias. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals., Results: There were 2565 oBP users (82.6% women) and 4568 (82.3% women) propensity score-matched controls. Alendronate accounted for 96% of oBP prescription. A total of 406 (15.8%) CV events occurred in oBP users (rate = 73.48 [66.67-80.98]); rate = events divided by person-time; and 837 (18.3%) events in controls (rate = 104.73 [97.87-112.07]) with an adjusted HR of 0.68 (95% CI 0.60-0.77). Additional adjustment for BMD did not attenuate estimates (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.58-0.78]. Similar results were seen for secondary outcomes where risk reductions were seen regarding atrial fibrillation, stroke, heart failure, and aneurysms. Positive and negative control outcome analyses identified minimal residual confounding., Conclusion: Oral BP users experienced a 33% reduced risk of CV events. This observational real-world study adds to a growing body of evidence for cardioprotection by oBP that warrants testing in a randomized setting., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Endocrine Society 2020.)

Background: Management of osteoporosis given reduced renal function is one of the largest challenges in the bone clinic., Objectives: Identify the cut-off for renal function below which there would be no overall BMD benefit associated with bisphosphonate use. Track safety outcomes resulting in hospital encounters., Methods: Population-based, observational register-linked study of BMD trajectories in adults from the island of Funen (pop 465,000) as a function of estimated creatinine clearance (CKD-epi), treatment and adherence to oBP. One laboratory performed all the biochemical analyses for the area while all DXA scans were in a central facility. For inclusion, patients were required to have both a DXA scan and an eGFR measurement (CKD-EPI) within 1 year prior to their study index date. Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) was calculated from national data., Results: Out of 6176 incident BP users, 1789 had eGFR and DXA measurements at appropriate timepoints for the planned analysis, while this was the case for 3908 of 29,336 non-users. Users of oBPs exhibited progressively smaller gains in BMD with decreasing renal function. However, for CKD stage 3A and better, the annual change in BMD was significantly more positive than in the non-user group at similar levels of renal function. In non-users, the average annual change in BMD was negative but largely unaffected by renal function down to stage 3B. There were no new cases of acute renal injury, glomerulonephritis or dialysis. The rate of new kidney transplantation was zero in non-users and 0.26 per 1000 PY in the BP user population. Hypocalcaemia encounters did not differ significantly from that seen in non-users., Conclusions: The BMD changes observed in real-world users of oBP in this population based single-clinic are consistent with those observed in the original RCTs of alendronate. We noted a gradual decrease in the absolute gains in BMD in oBP users with decreasing renal function though there was no significant interaction - largely explained by low numbers of treated patients with poor renal function - between CKD stage and adherence driven BMD change. There were no cases of acute renal injury resulting in hospital encounters. More data is needed on the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonates in CKD stage 3B to 5 and prescribers should reconsider the low use of DXA in patients with renal function impairment now that a wider range of treatment options are available., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest BA: Consulting and speakers fees Amgen, UCB, Kyowa-Kirin UK. Institutional research contracts UCB and Novartis. DPA: Grants and other support from AMGEN, grants, non-financial support and other from UCB Biopharma, grants from Laboratoires Servier, outside the submitted work; and Janssen, on behalf of IMI-funded EHDEN and EMIF consortiums, and Synapse Management Partners have supported training programmes organised by DPA's department and open for external participants. APH: Consulting and speakers fees Amgen, UCB. Institutional research contracts Kyowa-Kirin UK and Shire. CDS, MTE, MN, KHR: None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The field of osteoporosis research has been active for the past 20 years and has allowed significant advancement in the management of osteoporosis. This review will give an overview of the latest data from international cohorts that relate to current and recent osteoporosis research., Recent Findings: The clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis relies heavily on bone mineral density (BMD) measured at femoral neck or spine and although BMD has excellent predictive value for future fractures, fracture risk assessment has evolved over the years, resulting in the birth of fracture prediction tools. Fracture risk factors not currently featured in these tools are being considered for inclusion, including imminent risk fracture following a sentinel fracture, number of falls, and previous vertebral fractures. Data from groups with comorbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are helping us understand how to best manage patients with multiple comorbidities. Finally, the prevalence of vertebral fracture in the older general population and other selected populations has been explored, alongside the global burden of osteoporosis and its consequences., Summary: Our understanding of osteoporosis continues to expand, but knowledge gaps remain.

Oral bisphosphonates (oBPs) have been associated with reduced fractures and mortality. However, their risks and benefits are unclear in patients with moderate-severe CKD. This study examined the association between oBPs and all-cause mortality in G3B-5D CKD. This is a population-based cohort study including all subjects with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <45/mL/min/1.73 m 2 (G3B: eGFR <45/mL/min/1.73 m 2 G4: eGFR 15-29/mL/min/1.73 m 2 G5: eGFR <15/mL/min/1.73 m 2 G5D: hemodialysis) aged 40+ years from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and the Catalan Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP). Previous and current users of other anti-osteoporosis drugs were excluded. oBP use was modeled as a time-varying exposure to avoid immortal time bias. Treatment episodes in oBP users were created by concatenating prescriptions until patients switched or stopped therapy or were censored or died. A washout period of 180 days was added to (date of last prescription +180 days). Propensity scores (PSs) were calculated using prespecified predictors of mortality including age, gender, baseline eGFR, socioeconomic status, comorbidities, previous fracture, co-medications, and number of hospital admissions in the previous year. Cox models were used for PS adjustment before and after PS trimming (the first and last quintiles). In the CPRD, of 19,351 oBP users and 210,954 non-oBP users, 5234 (27%) and 85,105 (40%) deaths were recorded over 45,690 and 915,867 person-years of follow-up, respectively. oBP users had 8% lower mortality risk compared to non-oBP users (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89 to 0.95). Following PS trimming, this became nonsignificant (HR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.04). In the SIDIAP, of 4146 oBP users and 86,127 non-oBP users, 1330 (32%) and 36,513 (42%) died, respectively. oBPs were not associated with mortality in PS adjustment and trimming (HR 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.1 and HR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.01). In this observational, patient-based cohort study, oBPs were not associated with increased mortality among patients with moderate-severe CKD. However, further studies are needed on other effects of oBPs in CKD patients. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Aromatase inhibitors have been associated with accelerated bone loss and an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures. Currently, bisphosphonates are recommended to reduce fracture risk in these patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the fracture risk in breast cancer patients receiving aromatase inhibitors, compared to tamoxifen users, and to assess the effectiveness of oral bisphosphonates in reducing fracture risk. We performed an observational cohort study up to 10 years of follow-up. Data were extracted from primary care records in a population database. Women diagnosed with breast cancer between 2006 and 2015 and treated with tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors (n = 36,472) were stratified according to low (without osteoporosis diagnosis nor bisphosphonates exposure) or high (with osteoporosis and/or treated with bisphosphonates) fracture risk. Cox models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR [95% CI]) of fracture from the propensity score-matched patients. Sensitivity analyses account for competing risk of death were performed (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] [95% CI]). In postmenopausal women, fracture risk in aromatase inhibitor users showed an HR 1.40 [95% CI,1.05 to 1.87] and SHR 1.48 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.98], compared to tamoxifen. Observing aromatase inhibitors patients at high risk of fracture, bisphosphonate-treated patients had an HR 0.73 [95% CI, 0.51 to 1.04] and SHR 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.98] compared to nontreated. In conclusion, fracture risk in postmenopausal women during aromatase inhibitor treatment, in real-life conditions, was >40% compared to tamoxifen, corroborating previous randomized controlled trials results. In high-risk patients, bisphosphonate users had lower significant fracture incidence during aromatase inhibitor therapy than nonbisphosphonate users. Monitoring fracture risk and related risk factors in aromatase inhibitor patients is advisable. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Importance: Head-to-head randomized clinical trials showed greater efficacy of denosumab vs alendronate in improving bone mineral density. Although there is an association of changes in bone mineral density with reductions in fracture risk, the magnitude of the association is not well established., Objective: To compare the risk of hip and any fracture in patients treated with denosumab and alendronate in routine practice settings., Design, Setting, and Participants: This Danish nationwide, population-based, historical cohort study of a population with universal access to health care used prospectively collected, individually linked data from Danish health registries with complete follow-up. Cohorts consisted of 92 355 individuals 50 years or older who were new users of denosumab (n = 4624) or alendronate (n = 87 731) from May 2010 to December 2017 after at least 1 year without an antiosteoporosis medication dispensing., Exposures: Initiation of denosumab or alendronate., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was hospitalization for hip fracture, and the secondary outcome was hospitalization for any fracture. Inverse probability of treatment weights and the intention-to-treat approach were used to calculate cumulative incidences and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% CIs., Results: Of the 92 355 included patients, 75 046 (81.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 71 (10) years. The denosumab cohort had a lower proportion of men than the alendronate cohort (12.7% [589] vs 19.0% [16 700]), while age distributions were similar in the 2 cohorts. Within 3 years of follow-up, initiation of denosumab or alendronate was associated with cumulative incidences of 3.7% and 3.1%, respectively, for hip fracture and 9.0% and 9.0%, respectively, for any fracture. Overall, the aHRs for denosumab vs alendronate were 1.08 (95% CI, 0.92-1.28) for hip fracture and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.83-1.02) for any fracture. The aHR of denosumab vs alendronate for hip fracture was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) among patients with a history of any fracture and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.83-1.32) among patients without history of fracture. The aHR for any fracture for denosumab vs alendronate was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.71-0.98) among patients with a history of any fracture and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.64-0.93) among patients with no history of fracture., Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with denosumab and alendronate was associated with similar risks of hip or any fracture over a 3-year period, regardless of fracture history.

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of densitometric osteoporosis and vertebral fractures in Spanish men aged ≥50 years, and to study how the relationship between them may change depending on how osteoporosis is diagnosed. A community-based population of 1003 men aged ≥50 years was studied. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by DXA at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip. Vertebral fractures were assessed by lateral thoracic and lumbar spine radiographs. The prevalence of osteoporosis was estimated with both the World Health Organization (WHO) (T-score of <-2.5 at the femoral neck, calculated using the young white female normal reference database) and the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) criteria (T-score of <-2.5 at the femoral neck, total hip or lumbar spine, calculated using the young white male normal reference database). The prevalence of osteoporosis using the WHO criterion was 1.1% and using the NOF criterion was 13%, while that of vertebral fractures was 21.3%. The area under the curve (AUC) for the relationship between BMD and vertebral fracture prevalence was 0.64. The odds ratio for osteoporosis using the WHO definition was 2.57 (p = 0.13), and 1.78 (p = 0.007) using the NOF definition. Vertebral fracture prevalence rose with age. The prevalence of osteoporosis increased only moderately in men aged >70 years with the WHO criterion, and showed no change using the NOF definition. The prevalence of osteoporosis in Spanish men using the WHO definition is too small to have any meaningful clinical use. Although the figure is higher using the NOF definition, it would seem that population-based studies of BMD in men are of questionable value.

Among 95,057 patients ≥50 years with new anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM) (2001-2013) in primary care, 1-year cessation was 51% (28%-68%), higher in men, smokers, patients with missing lifestyle data, and out normal BMI, and lower in those aged 60-79, with recent fractures or other anti-osteoporotics, suggesting non-severe osteoporosis and less risk awareness., Purpose: Low compliance to anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM) has been previously reported. We aimed to estimate 1-year cessation rates of different AOMs as used in Spanish healthcare settings, and to identify associated risk factors., Methods: A cohort study was performed using primary care records data (BIFAP). Patients entered the cohort when aged 50 years in 2001-2013, with ≥1 year of data available, and identified as incident users of AOM (1-year washout). Participants were divided into six cohorts: alendronate, other oral bisphosphonates, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, strontium ranelate, teriparatide, and denosumab. Patients were followed from therapy initiation to the earliest of cessation (90-day refill gap), switching (to alternative AOM), loss to follow-up, death, or end of 2013. One-year therapy cessation was estimated using life tables. Hazard ratios (of cessation) according to age, sex, lifestyle factors, morbidity, and co-medication were estimated after stepwise backwards selection., Results: A total of 95,057 AOM users were identified (91% women; mean age 68). One-year cessation was 51% overall, highest for strontium ranelate (68%), and lowest for denosumab (28%). Cessation probability was higher in men (14% to 2.1-fold), smokers (>6%), and patients with missing BMI (19-28%) or smoking (6-20%) data, and overweight/obese/underweight (7% to 2.6-fold increase compared to normal weight). Patients aged 60-79 years, with a recent fracture or other drugs used for osteoporosis, had better persistence., Conclusions: Over half of the patients initiating AOM stopped therapy within the first year after initiation. The described risk factors for cessation could be proxies for non-severe osteoporosis, and/or disease/risk awareness, which could inform the targeting of high-risk patients for monitoring and/or interventions aimed at improving persistence.

Objective: Different regulatory actions for anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) were taken during the last years, including marketing of new drugs, safety warnings, or restrictions on the indications. We aimed to characterise the secular trends of AOM use in Spain from 2001 to 2013., Methods: A cohort study using the Spanish Database for Pharmacoepidemiological Research in Primary Care (BIFAP), was performed. BIFAP includes anonym records for 4million patients. Participants entered the study when aged ≥50years in 2001-2013 and after 1year of data available, and were followed to an AOM prescription (including alendronate, other bisphosphonates, SERM (selective estrogen receptor modulators), strontium ranelate, teriparatide or denosumab), death, lost or the end of December 2013. Prevalence (%) and incidence rate (IR/1000person-years (py)) of AOM users were computed by years and sex., Results: Out of 1.5million participants, 135,410 received AOM treatment during 2001-2013. Prevalence was 6.1% (women) and 1.1% (men), that increased from 2001 (2.0%) to 2009 (7.6%) to decrease thereafter. Out of them, 95,057 were incident. The IR was 24.90 (women) and 2.77 (men), that increased from 2001 (21.25 and 1.96) to 2007 (35.84 and 3.64), and decreased to 12.48 and 1.81 (2013). IRs were highest for bisphosphonates along the years (ranging 3.70-14.73 and 0.57-1.75 in women and men respectively), followed by SERM up to 2005 (6.51-9.02 and 0.06-0.07), and strontium ranelate from 2006 (4.66 and 0.45) to 2012 (2.05 and 0.26). IR for teriparatide increased from marketing in 2004 (0.10-1.01 and 0.02-0.29), as was denosumab from marketing in 2011 (0.03-2.64 and 0.09-0.15)., Conclusions: Population-based estimates of AOM use in Spain peaked in 2007-2009 and decreased thereafter, irrespective of age and sex. New treatments were ten times higher in women than men. Bisphosphonates were the most frequently prescribed class, followed by SERM in women before 2006, strontium otherwise till 2012, and denosumab in women or teriparatide in men in 2013. Changes in the osteoporosis criteria, fracture risk assessment strategies, and regulatory actions for AOM around the time, may explain that trend., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is rare (2.53/10,000 person-years) among alendronate users, but long-term and compliant use are associated with an increased risk of surgically treated ONJ. Risk of surgically treated ONJ is higher in patients with rheumatoid diseases and use of proton pump inhibitors., Introduction: ONJ is a rare event in users of oral bisphosphonates. Our aims were to evaluate if the risk of surgically treated ONJ increases with longer or more compliant treatment with alendronate for osteoporosis and to identify risk factors for surgically treated ONJ., Methods: Open nationwide register-based cohort study containing one nested case-control study. Patients were treatment-naïve incident users of alendronate 1996-2007 in Denmark, both genders, aged 50-94 at the time of beginning treatment (N = 61,990). Participants were followed to 31 December 2013., Results: Over a mean of 6.8 years, 107 patients received surgery for ONJ or related conditions corresponding to an incidence rate of 2.53 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.08 to 3.05) per 10,000 patient years. Recent use was associated with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) 4.13 (95% CI 1.94 to 8.79) compared to past use. Similarly, adherent users (medication possession ratio (MPR) >50%) were at two to threefold increased risk of ONJ compared to low adherence (MPR <50%), and long-term (>5 years) use was related with higher risk (adjusted OR 2.31 (95% CI (1.14 to 4.67)) than shorter-term use. History of rheumatoid disorders and use of proton pump inhibitors were independently associated with surgically treated ONJ., Conclusions: Our data suggest that recent, long-term, and compliant uses of alendronate are associated with an increased risk of surgically treated ONJ. Nevertheless, the rates remain low, even in long-term adherent users. ONJ risk appears higher in patients with conditions likely to indirectly affect the oral mucosa.

Bone health is assessed by bone mineral density (BMD). Other techniques such as trabecular bone score and microindentation could improve the risk of fracture's estimation. Our chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients presented worse bone health (density, microarchitecture, mechanical properties) than controls. More than BMD should be done to evaluate patients at risk of fracture., Introduction: BMD measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is used to assess bone health in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Recently, trabecular bone score (TBS) and microindentation that can measure microarchitectural and mechanical properties of bone have demonstrated better correlation with fractures than DXA in different populations. We aimed to characterize bone health (BMD, TBS, and strength) and calcium/phosphate metabolism in a cohort of 53 ESRD patients undergoing kidney transplantation (KT) and 94 controls with normal renal function., Methods: Laboratory workout, lumbar spine/hip BMD measurements (using DXA), lumbar spine TBS, and bone strength were carried out. The latter was assessed with an impact microindentation device, standardized as percentage of a reference value, and expressed as bone material strength index (BMSi) units. Multivariable linear regression was used to study differences between cases and controls adjusted by age, gender, and body mass index., Results: Among cases, serum calcium was 9.6 ± 0.7 mg/dl, phosphorus 4.4 ± 1.2 mg/dl, and intact parathyroid hormone 214 pg/ml [102-390]. Fourteen patients (26.4%) had prevalent asymptomatic fractures in spinal X-ray. BMD was significantly lower among ESRD patients compared to controls: lumbar 0.966 ± 0.15 vs 0.982 ± 0.15 (adjusted p = 0.037), total hip 0.852 ± 0.15 vs 0.902 ± 0.13 (adjusted p < 0.001), and femoral neck 0.733 ± 0.15 vs 0.775 ± 0.12 (adjusted p < 0.001), as were TBS (1.20 [1.11-1.30] vs 1.31 [1.19-1.43] (adjusted p < 0.001)) and BMSi (79 [71.8-84.2] vs 82. [77.5-88.9] (adjusted p = 0.005))., Conclusions: ESRD patients undergoing transplant surgery have damaged bone health parameters (density, microarchitecture, and mechanical properties) despite acceptably controlled hyperparathyroidism. Detecting these abnormalities may assist in identifying patients at high risk of post-transplantation fractures.

Gaucher disease (GD), one of the most common lysosomal disorders (a global population incidence of 1:50,000), is characterized by beta-glucocerebrosidase deficiency. Some studies have demonstrated bone infiltration in up to 80% of patients, even if asymptomatic. Bone disorder remains the main cause of morbidity in these patients, along with osteoporosis, avascular necrosis, and bone infarcts. Enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has been shown to improve these symptoms. This cross-sectional study included patients with type 1 Gaucher disease (GD1) selected from the Catalan Study Group on GD. Clinical data were collected and a general laboratory workup was performed. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at the lumbar spine and hip using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Patients with bone infarcts or any other focal lesion in the area of indentation visible on imaging were excluded. Bone Material Strength index (BMSi) was measured by bone impact microindentation using an Osteoprobe instrument. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models were fitted to adjust for age, sex, weight, and height. Sixteen patients with GD1 and 29 age- and sex-matched controls were included. GD1 was associated with significantly lower BMSi (adjusted beta -9.30; 95% CI, -15.18 to -3.42; p = 0.004) and reduced lumbar BMD (adjusted beta -0.14; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.06; p = 0.002) and total hip BMD (adjusted beta -0.09; 95% CI, -0.15 to -0.03; p = 0.006), compared to GD1-free controls. Chitotriosidase levels were negatively correlated with BMSi (linear R 2  = 51.6%, p = 0.004). Bone tissue mechanical characteristics were deteriorated in patients with GD1. BMSi was correlated with chitotriosidase, the marker of GD activity. Bone disorder requires special consideration in this group of patients, and microindentation could be an appropriate tool for assessing and managing their bone health. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

In January 2005, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England and Wales provided new guidance on the use of antiosteoporosis therapies for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures. This was shortly followed in the same year by market authorization of a generic form of alendronic acid within the UK. We here set out to estimate the actual practice impact of these events among hip fracture patients in terms of antiosteoporosis medication prescribing and subsequent fracture incidence using primary care data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) from 1999 to 2013. Changes in level and trend of prescribing and subsequent fracture following publication of NICE guidance and availability of generic alendronic acid were estimated using an interrupted time series analysis. Both events were considered in combination within a 1-year "intervention period." We identified 10,873 primary hip fracture patients between April 1999 and Sept 2012. Taking into account prior trend, the intervention period was associated with an immediate absolute increase of 14.9% (95% CI, 10.9 to 18.9) for incident antiosteoporosis prescriptions and a significant and clinically important reduction in subsequent major and subsequent hip fracture: -0.19% (95% CI, -0.28 to -0.09) and -0.17% (95% CI, -0.26 to -0.09) per 6 months, respectively. This equated to an approximate 14% (major) and 22% (hip) reduction at 3 years postintervention relative to expected values based solely on preintervention level and trend. We conclude that among hip fracture patients, publication of NICE guidance and availability of generic alendronic acid was temporally associated with increased prescribing and a significant decline in subsequent fractures. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JL, DPA, NKA, CC, MKJ and AJ received grants from NIHR HS&DR during the conduct of the study. Outside the submitted work, MKJ reports personal fees from Lilly UK, Amgen, Sevier, Merck, Medtronic, Internis, Consilient Health and serves on the Scientific Committee of the National Osteoporosis Society and International Osteoporosis Foundation; DPA received grants from Bioiberica S.A. and Amgen Spain S.A.; CC received personal fees from Servier, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Medtronic and Novartis. NKA reports personal fees from Merck, Smith and Nephew, Q-Med, Nicox, Flexion, Bioiberica, Servier and grants and personal fees from Roche. AJ has received consultancy, lecture fees and honoraria from Servier, UK Renal Registry, Oxford Craniofacial Unit, IDIAP Jordi Gol, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, has held advisory board positions (which involved receipt of fees) from Anthera Pharmaceuticals, INC., and received research sponsorship from ROCHE. SH and AD have no competing financial interests relevant to the submitted work., (© 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Low bone mineral density (BMD) in HIV-infected individuals has been documented in an increasing number of studies. However, it is not clear whether it is the infection itself or the treatment that causes bone impairment. Microindentation measures bone material strength (Bone Material Strength index) directly. We recruited 85 patients, 50 infected with HIV and 35 controls. Median Bone Material Strength index was 84.5 (interquartile range 83-87) in HIV-infected patients and 90 (88.5-93) in controls (P < 0.001). No significant differences in BMD between cases and controls at any of the sites examined (total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine). HIV infection is associated with bone damage, independently of BMD.

Objectives:  To determine the skeletal safety and efficacy of long term (≥10 years) alendronate use in patients with osteoporosis., Design:  Open register based cohort study containing two nested case control studies., Setting:  Nationwide study of population of Denmark., Participants:  61 990 men and women aged 50-94 at the start of treatment, who had not previously taken alendronate, 1996-2007., Interventions:  Treatment with alendronate., Main Outcome Measures:  Incident fracture of the subtrochanteric femur or femoral shaft (ST/FS) or the hip. Non-fracture controls from the cohort were matched to fracture cases by sex, year of birth, and year of initiation of alendronate treatment. Conditional logistic regression models were fitted to calculate odds ratios with and without adjustment for comorbidity and comedications. Sensitivity analyses investigated subsequent treatment with other drugs for osteoporosis., Results:  1428 participants sustained a ST/FS (incidence rate 3.4/1000 person years, 95% confidence interval 3.2 to 3.6), and 6784 sustained a hip fracture (16.2/1000 person years, 15.8 to 16.6). The risk of ST/FS was lower with high adherence to treatment with alendronate (medication possession ratio (MPR, a proxy for compliance) >80%) compared with poor adherence (MPR <50%; odds ratio 0.88, 0.77 to 0.99; P=0.05). Multivariable adjustment attenuated this association (adjusted odds ratio 0.88, 0.77 to 1.01; P=0.08). The risk was no higher in long term users (≥10 dose years; 0.70, 0.44 to 1.11; P=0.13) or in current compared with past users (0.91, 0.79 to 1.06; P=0.22). Similarly, MPR >80% was associated with a decreased risk of hip fracture (0.73, 0.68 to 0.78; P<0.001) as was longer term cumulative use for 5-10 dose years (0.74, 0.67 to 0.83; P<0.001) or ≥10 dose years (0.74, 0.56 to 0.97; P=0.03)., Conclusions:  These findings support an acceptable balance between benefit and risk with treatment with alendronate in terms of fracture outcomes, even for over 10 years of continuous use., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

The aim of the study was to evaluate the progression of bone mineral density (BMD) during 3 years of aromatase inhibitors (AI) therapy in actual practice conditions. This prospective, clinical cohort study of Barcelona-Aromatase induced Bone Loss in Early breast cancer (B-ABLE) assessed BMD changes during 3 years of AI treatment in women with breast cancer. Patients with osteoporosis (T score < -2.5 or T score ≤ -2.0) and a major risk factor and/or prevalent fragility fractures were treated with oral bisphosphonates (BPs). Of 685 women recruited, 179 (26.1%) received BP treatment. By the third year of AI therapy, this group exhibited increased BMD in the lumbar spine (LS; 2.59%) and femoral neck (FN; 2.50%), although the increase was significant only within the first year (LS: 1.99% and FN: 2.04%). Despite BP therapy, however, approximately 15% of these patients lost more than 3% of their baseline bone mass. At 3 years, patients without BP experienced BMD decreases in the LS (-3.10%) and FN (-2.79%). In this group, BMD changes occurred during the first (LS: -1.33% and FN: -1.25%), second (LS: -1.19% and FN: -0.82%), and third (LS: -0.57% and FN: -0.65%) years of AI treatment. Increased BMD (>3%) was observed in just 7.6% and 10.8% of these patients at the LS and FN, respectively. Our data confirm a clinically relevant bone loss associated with AI therapy amongst nonusers of preventative BPs. We further report on the importance of BMD monitoring as well as calcium and 25-hydroxy vitamin D supplementation in these patients., (© 2016 Society for Endocrinology.)

Oral bisphosphonates (BPs) are highly effective in preventing fractures and are recommended first-line therapies for patients with osteoporosis. We identified the incidence and predictors of oral BP treatment failure, defined as the incidence of two or more fractures while on treatment (≥2 FWOT) among users with high adherence. Fractures were considered from 6 months after treatment initiation and up to 6 months after discontinuation. Data from computerized records and pharmacy invoices were obtained from Sistema d'Informació per al Desenvolupament de l'Investigació en Atenció Primària (SIDIAP; Catalonia, Spain) and Danish Health Registries (Denmark) for all incident users of oral BPs in 2006-2007 and 2000-2001, respectively. Fine and Gray survival models using backward-stepwise selection (p-entry 0.049; p- exit 0.10) and accounting for the competing risk of therapy cessation were used to identify predictors of ≥2 FWOT among patients having persisted with treatment ≥6 months with overall medication possession ratio (MPR) ≥80%. Incidence of ≥2 FWOT was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 3.2) and 1.7 (95% CI, 1.2 to 2.2) per 1000 patient-years (PYs) within Catalonia and Denmark, respectively. Older age was predictive of ≥2 FWOT in both Catalonian and Danish cohorts: subhazard ratio (SHR) = 2.28 (95% CI, 1.11 to 4.68) and SHR = 2.61 (95% CI, 0.98 to 6.95), respectively, for 65 to <80 years; and SHR = 3.19 (95% CI, 1.33 to 7.69) and SHR = 4.88 (95% CI, 1.74 to 13.7), respectively, for ≥80 years. Further significant predictors of ≥2 FWOT identified within only one cohort were dementia, SHR = 4.46 (95% CI, 1.02 to 19.4) (SIDIAP); and history of recent or older fracture, SHR = 3.40 (95% CI, 1.50 to 7.68) and SHR = 2.08 (95% CI: 1.04-4.15), respectively (Denmark). Even among highly adherent users of oral BP therapy, a minority sustain multiple fractures while on treatment. Older age was predictive of increased risk within both study populations, as was history of recent/old fracture and dementia within one but not both populations. Additional and/or alternative strategies should be investigated for these patients., (© 2015 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Bisphosphonates are the mainstay of osteoporosis treatment but also play a fundamental role in treating other bone diseases such as Osteogenesis Imperfecta, Pagets' disease, and in the prevention of adverse skeletal effects in certain cancers such as prostate cancer or multiple myeloma. In the last decades, the refinement of bisphosphonates and an increase in the number of new bisphosphonates commercialized has altered the clinical management of these diseases. Despite differences between randomized controlled trials and observational studies, overall all bisphosphonates licensed have proven to reduce the risk of fracture through the inhibition of bone resorption. Other beneficial effects include pain reduction in bone metastasis and potentially a decrease in mortality. However, the chronic nature of most of these disorders implies long-term treatments, which can be associated with long-term adverse effects. Some of the adverse effects identified include an increased risk of atypical femur fractures, osteonecrosis of the jaw, gastrointestinal side effects, or atrial fibrillation. The harm/benefit thinking and the constant update regarding these medications are vital in the day-to-day decision-making in clinical practices. The aims of this review are to compile the basic characteristics of these drugs and outline the most important benefits and side effects and provide a clinical context as well as a research agenda to fill the gaps in our knowledge., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Although a number of reports suggest very low persistence with oral bisphosphonates, there is limited data on persistence with other anti-osteoporosis medications. We compare rates of early discontinuation (in the first year) with all available outpatient anti-osteoporosis drugs in Catalonia, Spain. We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using data from the SIDIAP database. SIDIAP contains computerized primary care records and pharmacy dispensing data for >80 % of the population of Catalonia (>5 million people). All SIDIAP participants starting an anti-osteoporosis drug between 1/1/2007 and 30/06/2011 (with 2 years wash-out) were included. We modelled persistence as the time between first prescription and therapy discontinuation (refill gap of at least 6 months) using Fine and Gray survival models with competing risk for death. We identified 127,722 patients who started any anti-osteoporosis drug in the study period. The most commonly prescribed drug was weekly alendronate (N = 55,399). 1-Year persistence ranges from 40 % with monthly risedronate to 7.7 % with daily risedronate, and discontinuation was very common [from 49.5 % (monthly risedronate) to 84.4 % (daily risedronate)] as was also switching in the first year of therapy [from 2.8 % (weekly alendronate) to 10 % (daily alendronate)]. Multivariable-adjusted models showed that only monthly risedronate had better one-year persistence than weekly alendronate and teriparatide equivalent, whilst all other therapies had worse persistence. Early discontinuation with available anti-osteoporosis oral drugs is very common. Monthly risedronate, weekly alendronate, and daily teriparatide are the drugs with the best persistence, whilst daily oral drugs have 40-60 % higher first-year discontinuation rates compared to weekly alendronate.

Glucocorticoids, widely used in inflammatory disorders, rapidly increase bone fragility and, therefore, fracture risk. However, common bone densitometry measurements are not sensitive enough to detect these changes. Moreover, densitometry only partially recognizes treatment-induced fracture reductions in osteoporosis. Here, we tested whether the reference point indentation technique could detect bone tissue property changes early after glucocorticoid treatment initiation. After initial laboratory and bone density measurements, patients were allocated into groups receiving calcium + vitamin D (Ca+D) supplements or anti-osteoporotic drugs (risedronate, denosumab, teriparatide). Reference point indentation was performed on the cortical bone layer of the tibia by a handheld device measuring bone material strength index (BMSi). Bone mineral density was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Although Ca+D-treated patients exhibited substantial and significant deterioration, risedronate-treated patients exhibited no significant change, and both denosumab- and teriparatide-treated participants exhibited significantly improved BMSi 7 weeks after initial treatment compared with baseline; these trends remained stable for 20 weeks. In contrast, no densitometry changes were observed during this study period. In conclusion, our study is the first to our knowledge to demonstrate that reference point indentation is sensitive enough to reflect changes in cortical bone indentation after treatment with osteoporosis therapies in patients newly exposed to glucocorticoids., (© 2015 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

With the advent of high active antiretroviral therapy there was a significant improvement on HIV subjects survival. Thus, bone changes related to HIV became an important aspect of these individuals. HIV affects bone remodeling causing bone fragility. In addition, antiretroviral therapy may also negatively affect bone metabolism. Several studies describe an increased incidence of fractures in these patients when compared with controls without the disease. The European Society of AIDS (EACS), and other societies, have included guidance on management of osteoporosis in HIV-infected patients emphasizing the identification of patients with low bone mass. Supplementation of calcium and vitamin D and the use of alendronate in these individuals should be recommended on a case base.

Osteoarthritis and osteoporosis are both common conditions in the elderly but their association has long remained obscure. Recently published studies show that patients with osteoarthritis have higher bone mass but no corresponding decrease in fracture risk. This has been proposed to be due to an increased rate of falls in these patients. Multi-disciplinary interventions, vitamin D supplementation and bisphosphonates can play a role on preventing fractures among osteoarthritis patients, but evidence on their efficacy is scarce and of poor quality., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier España, S.L. All rights reserved.)

Background: Knowledge on the epidemiology of non-hip fractures in Spain is limited and somewhat outdated. Using computerized primary care records from the SIDIAP database, we derived age and sex-specific fracture incidence rates for the region of Catalonia during the year 2009., Methods: The SIDIAP database contains quality-checked clinical information from computerized medical records of a representative sample of >5,800,000 patients (80% of the population of Catalonia). We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all patients aged ≥50 years, and followed them from January 1 to December 31, 2009. Major osteoporotic fractures registered in SIDIAP were ascertained using ICD-10 codes and validated by comparing data to hospital admission and patient-reported fractures records. Incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated., Results: In total, 2,011,430 subjects were studied (54.6% women). Overall fracture rates were 10.91/1,000 person-years (py) [95%CI 10.89-10.92]: 15.18/1,000 py [15.15-15.21] in women and 5.78/1,000 py [5.76-5.79] in men. The most common fracture among women was wrist/forearm (3.86/1,000 py [3.74-3.98]), while among men it was clinical spine (1.25/1,000 py [1.18-1.33]). All fracture rates increased with age, but varying patterns were observed: while most of the fractures (hip, proximal humerus, clinical spine and pelvis) increased continuously with age, wrist and multiple rib fractures peaked at age 75-80 and then reached a plateau., Conclusions: Our study provides local estimates of age, sex and site-specific fracture burden in primary health care, which will be helpful for health-care planning and delivery. A proportion of fractures are not reported in primary care records, leading to underestimation of fracture incidence rates in these data.

Background and Objective: Osteoporotic fractures involve a significant consumption of health resources. Bone densitometry has been essential in the management of osteoporosis. However, for fracture absolute risk prediction, other important clinical risk factors are also important. WHO published a risk estimation tool (FRAX), and the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) reported thresholds for densitometry assessment based on cost-effectivity criteria. Our goal is to determine the diagnostic predictive validity of FRAX in our population, and to assess how its use (according to NOGG guidelines) would modify the current number of referrals to DXA scan in our health system., Subjects and Methods: Diagnostic validation study in a consecutive sample of 1,650 women, 50 to 90 years old, under no treatment with anti-resortives, from the FRIDEX cohort. DXA and a questionnaire regarding risk factors were performed. ROC curve and area under the curve (AUC) were used to assess FRAX's diagnostic validity for femoral neck osteoporosis (FNOP). Risk of fracture was calculated using FRAX pre and postDXA, and women were classified according to their risk, following NOGG recommendations., Results: FRAX's ROC AUC for FNOP was 0.812 for major fracture and 0.832 for hip fracture. Using FRAX according to NOGG would result in performing only 25.2% of the current tests. If we added previous fracture antecedent to the algorithm, 49.4% of the tests performed would be advised., Conclusions: The use of NOGG thresholds applied to FRAX would reduce about 50% the current number of referrals to DXA scan in our population. FRAX has a good diagnostic validity for FNOP., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier España, S.L. All rights reserved.)

Objective: It is estimated that in one year between 50-60% of patients treated with osteoporosis drugs are non-compliant. There are different indirect methods of assessing compliance. Our objective is to test a single determination of the carboxyterminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) to assess compliance in patients treated with bisphosphonates, either on its own or together with the Morinsky-Green questionnaire. Material and method: A diagnostic assessment study was carried out in 10 centers in Catalonia. Through consecutive sampling, postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were selected and treated with the same antiresorptive drug in the last year. Those treated with a drug other than bisphosphonate, with cognitive impairment, terminal illness, advanced renal failure or fracture in the previous year, were excluded. Data were collected on the diagnosis of osteoporosis and type of treatment. Analysis was requested with CTX determination. As a gold standard, the medication possession rate (MPR) was used. Using the ROC curve methodology, the theoretical CTX cut-off point was established. Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were calculated to estimate therapeutic compliance. Results: 100 patients were included, of which more than half were being treated with alendronate. According to the MPR, 70% were compliant. The mean CTX value was 0.193±0.146 ng/ml. It was lower in the compliant patients. A value of 0.196 ng/ml was established as a cut-off point to assess compliance. The joint assessment of the CTX together with the Morinsky-Green questionnaire showed greater discriminatory capacity. Conclusions: Carrying out a single determination of CTX (<0.196 ng/ml) along with the Morinsky-Green questionnaire allows us to more accurately assess the therapeutic compliance in patients treated with bisphosphonates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Osteoporosis & Mineral Metabolism / Revista de Osteoporosis y Metabolismo Mineral (Spanish edition) is the property of Ibanez y Plaza and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)