Search

Importance: Identifying and mitigating modifiable gaps in fracture preventive care for people with relapsing-remitting conditions such as eczema, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who are prescribed high cumulative oral corticosteroid doses may decrease fracture-associated morbidity and mortality., Objective: To estimate the association between different oral corticosteroid prescribing patterns and appropriate fracture preventive care, including treatment with fracture preventive care medications, among older adults with high cumulative oral corticosteroid exposure., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 65 195 participants with UK electronic medical record data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (January 2, 1998, to January 31, 2020) and 28 674 participants with Ontario, Canada, health administrative data from ICES (April 1, 2002, to September 30, 2020). Participants were adults 66 years or older with eczema, asthma, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease receiving prescriptions for oral corticosteroids with cumulative prednisolone equivalent doses of 450 mg or higher within 6 months. Data were analyzed October 22, 2020, to September 6, 2022., Exposures: Participants with prescriptions crossing the 450-mg cumulative oral corticosteroid threshold in less than 90 days were classified as having high-intensity prescriptions, and participants crossing the threshold in 90 days or more as having low-intensity prescriptions. Multiple alternative exposure definitions were used in sensitivity analyses., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was prescribed fracture preventive care. A secondary outcome was major osteoporotic fracture. Individuals were followed up from the date they crossed the cumulative oral corticosteroid threshold until their outcome or the end of follow-up (up to 1 year after index date). Rates were calculated for fracture preventive care and fractures, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from Cox proportional hazards regression models comparing high- vs low-intensity oral corticosteroid prescriptions., Results: In both the UK cohort of 65 195 participants (mean [IQR] age, 75 [71-81] years; 32 981 [50.6%] male) and the Ontario cohort of 28 674 participants (mean [IQR] age, 73 [69-79] years; 17 071 [59.5%] male), individuals with high-intensity oral corticosteroid prescriptions had substantially higher rates of fracture preventive care than individuals with low-intensity prescriptions (UK: 134 vs 57 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 2.19-2.51, and Ontario: 73 vs 48 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.29-1.72). People with high- and low-intensity oral corticosteroid prescriptions had similar rates of major osteoporotic fractures (UK: crude rates, 14 vs 13 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.98-1.15 and Ontario: crude rates, 20 vs 23 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.96). Results from sensitivity analyses suggested that reaching a high cumulative oral corticosteroid dose within a shorter time, with fewer prescriptions, or with fewer or shorter gaps between prescriptions, increased fracture preventive care prescribing., Conclusions: The results of this cohort study suggest that older adults prescribed high cumulative oral corticosteroids across multiple prescriptions, or with many or long gaps between prescriptions, may be missing opportunities for fracture preventive care.

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).)

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.)

Objectives: We aimed to develop and validate a fracture risk algorithm for the automatic identification of subjects at high risk of imminent and long-term fracture risk., Research, Design, and Methods: A cohort of subjects aged 50-85, between 2007 and 2017, was extracted from the Catalan information system for the development of research in primary care database (SIDIAP). Participants were followed until the earliest of death, transfer out, fracture, or 12/31/2017. Potential risk factors were obtained based on the existing literature. Cox regression was used to model 1 and 5-year risk of hip and major fracture. The original cohort was randomly split in 80:20 for development and internal validation purposes respectively. External validation was explored in a cohort extracted from the Spanish database for pharmaco-epidemiological research in primary care., Results: A total of 1.76 million people were included from SIDIAP (50.7 % women with mean age of 65.4 years). Hip and major fracture incidence rates were 3.57 [95%CI 3.53 to 3.60] and 11.61 [95%CI 11.54 to 11.68] per 1000 person-years, respectively. The derived model included 19 risk factors. Internal validity showed good results on calibration and discrimination. The 1-year C-statistic for hip and major fracture were 0.851 (95%CI 0.853 to 0.864), and 0.717 (95%CI 0.742 to 0.749) respectively. The 5-year C-statistic for hip and major fracture were 0.849 (95%CI 0.847 to 0.852) and 0.724 (95%CI 0.721 to 0.727) respectively. External validation showed good performance for hip and major fracture risk prediction., Conclusions: We have developed and validated a clinical prediction tool for 1- and 5-year hip and major osteoporotic fracture risks using electronic primary care data. The proposed algorithm can be automatically estimated at the population level using the available primary care records. Future work is needed on the cost-effectiveness of its use for population-based screening and targeted prevention of osteoporotic fractures., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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 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).)

This study demonstrates a substantial and persistent anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in men and women ≥50 years old who sustained major osteoporotic fracture(s) between 2005 and 2014 in Denmark. This was not substantially reduced by including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis treatments. Strengthened post-fracture organization of care and secondary fracture prevention is highly needed., Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Danish anti-osteoporosis treatment gap from 2005 to 2014 in patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), and to assess the impact of including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM) on the treatment gap among these patients., Methods: In this retrospective, registry-based study, we included men and women aged 50 years or older and living in Denmark, who sustained at least one MOF between 2005 and 2014. We applied a repeated cross-sectional design to generate cohorts of patients sustaining a first MOF, hip, vertebral, humerus, or forearm fracture, respectively, within each calendar year. We evaluated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients within each cohort not receiving treatment with AOM within 1 year of the fracture. Hospital-administered AOM was identified by SKS code., Results: The treatment gap among MOF patients decreased from 85% in 2005 to 79% in 2014. The gap was smaller among hip and vertebral fracture patients as compared to humerus and forearm fracture patients, and it was smaller in women than in men. The use of hospital-administered AOM was relatively uncommon, with a maximum of 0.9% of MOF patients initiating hospital-administered AOM (in 2012). We observed substantial variations in this proportion between fracture types and gender. Hospital-administered AOM was most commonly used among vertebral fracture patients., Conclusion: A significant treatment gap among patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture was present throughout our analysis, and including hospital-administered AOM did not significantly improve the treatment gap assessment. Improved secondary fracture prevention is urgently needed., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

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.)

This paper demonstrates a large post-fracture anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in the period 2005 to 2015. The gap was stable in Denmark at around 88-90%, increased in Catalonia from 80 to 88%, and started to increase in the UK towards the end of our study. Improved post-fracture care is needed., Introduction: Patients experiencing a fragility fracture are at high risk of subsequent fractures, particularly within the first 2 years after the fracture. Previous studies have demonstrated that only a small proportion of fracture patients initiate therapy with an anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM), despite the proven fracture risk reduction of such therapies. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the changes in this post-fracture treatment gap across three different countries from 2005 to 2015., Methods: This analysis, which is part of a multinational cohort study, included men and women, aged 50 years or older, sustaining a first incident fragility fracture. Using routinely collected patient data from three administrative health databases covering Catalonia, Denmark, and the United Kingdom, we estimated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients not treated with AOM within 1 year of their first incident fracture., Results: A total of 648,369 fracture patients were included. Mean age 70.2-78.9 years; 22.2-31.7% were men. In Denmark, the treatment gap was stable at approximately 88-90% throughout the 2005 to 2015 time period. In Catalonia, the treatment gap increased from 80 to 88%. In the UK, an initially decreasing treatment gap-though never smaller than 63%-was replaced by an increasing gap towards the end of our study. The gap was more pronounced in men than in women., Conclusion: Despite repeated calls for improved secondary fracture prevention, an unacceptably large treatment gap remains, with time trends indicating that the problem may be getting worse in recent years.

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.

The coordination of Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) with Primary Care (PC) is necessary for the continuity of care of patients with fragility fractures. This study proposes a Best Practice Framework (BPF) and performance indicators for the implementation and follow-up of FLS-PC coordination in clinical practice in Spain., Purpose: To develop a BPF for the coordination of FLS with PC in Spain and to improve the continuity of care for patients with fragility fractures., Methods: A Steering Committee selected experts from seven Spanish FLS and related PC doctors and nurses to participate in a best practice workshop. Selection criteria were an active FLS with an identified champion and prior contact with PC centres linked to the hospital. The main aim of the workshop was to review current FLS practices in Spain and their integration with PC. A BPF document with processes, tools, roles, and metrics was then generated., Results: Spanish FLS consists of a multidisciplinary team of physicians/nurses but with low participation of other professionals and PC staff. Evaluation and treatment strategies are widely variable. Four desired standards were agreed upon: (1) Effective channels for FLS-PC communication; (2) minimum contents of an FLS clinical report and its delivery to PC; (3) adherence monitoring 3 months after FLS baseline visit; and (4) follow-up by PC. Proposed key performance indicators are (a) number of FLS-PC communications, including consensus protocols; (b) confirmation FLS report received by PC; (c) medical/nursing PC appointment after FLS report received; and (d) number of training sessions in PC., Conclusions: The BPF provides a comprehensive approach for FLS-PC coordination in Spain, to promote the continuity of care in patients with fragility fractures and improve secondary prevention. The implementation of BPF recommendations and performance indicator tracking will benchmark best FLS practices in the future.

We aimed to determine the relationship between handgrip strength, smoking, and alcohol consumption in young men and fracture risk at middle age. Thus, we carried out a cohort study including young men undergoing conscription examination in Sweden from September 1969 to May 1970 at a typical age of 18 years. Data on muscle strength, height, weight, and lifestyle factors were linked to the National Patient Register 1987-2010. Handgrip strength was considered the main exposure and smoking and alcohol consumption as secondary exposures. Outcomes were all fractures (except face, skull, digits), major osteoporotic fractures (thoracic/lumbar spine, proximal humerus, distal forearm or hip), and major traumatic fractures (shaft of humerus, forearm, femur, or lower leg) based on ICD-9 and -10 codes. We used Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) according to handgrip strength as a continuous variable (per 1 SD), after adjustment for weight, height, parental education, smoking, and alcohol consumption. A total of 40,112 men were included, contributing 892,572 person-years. Overall, 3974 men fractured in middle age with the incidence rate (95% CI) of 44.5 (43.2-45.9) per 1000 person-years. The corresponding rates were12.2 and 5.6 per 1000 person-years for major osteoporotic and traumatic fractures, respectively. Handgrip strength-adjusted HR (95% CI) was 1.01 (0.98-1.05), 0.94 (0.88-1.00), and 0.98 (0.88-1.08) per SD for all, major osteoporotic, and major traumatic fractures, respectively. Adjusted HR (95% CI) for smokers (>21 cigarettes/d) was 1.44 (1.21, 1.71) for all fractures, while the association between alcohol consumption and hazards of fracture was J-shaped. Therefore, young adult handgrip strength was not associated with fracture risk in middle-age men, although smoking and high alcohol consumption did confer an increased risk. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research., (© 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Background: Limited evidence suggests increased fracture risk in people with atopic eczema. Any link could have substantial effect; atopic eczema is common, and fractures have associated morbidity and mortality., Objective: We sought to examine whether atopic eczema is associated with fracture and whether fracture risk varies with eczema severity., Methods: We performed a matched cohort study set in primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD 1998-2016) and linked hospital admissions data (Hospital Episode Statistics), including adults (≥18 years old) with atopic eczema matched (by age, sex, general practice, and cohort entry date) with up to 5 individuals without eczema. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) from stratified Cox regression comparing risk of major osteoporotic (hip, pelvis, spine, wrist, and proximal humerus) fractures individually and any fracture in those with and without atopic eczema., Results: We identified 526,808 people with atopic eczema and 2,569,030 people without atopic eczema. Those with eczema had increased risk of hip (HR, 1.10; 99% CI, 1.06-1.14), pelvic (HR, 1.10; 99% CI, 1.02-1.19), spinal (HR, 1.18; 99% CI, 1.10-1.27), and wrist (HR, 1.07; 99% CI, 1.03,-1.11) fractures. We found no evidence of increased proximal humeral (HR, 1.06; 99% CI, 0.97-1.15) fracture risk. Fracture risk increased with increasing eczema severity, with the strongest associations in people with severe eczema (compared with those without) for spinal (HR, 2.09; 99% CI, 1.66-2.65), pelvic (HR, 1.66; 99% CI, 1.26-2.20), and hip (HR, 1.50; 99% CI, 1.30-1.74) fractures. Associations persisted after oral glucocorticoid adjustment., Conclusions: People with atopic eczema have increased fracture risk, particularly major osteoporotic fractures., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Guidance is provided in an international setting on the assessment and specific treatment of postmenopausal women at low, high and very high risk of fragility fractures., Introduction: The International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2019. This manuscript seeks to apply this in an international setting, taking additional account of further categorisation of increased risk of fracture, which may inform choice of therapeutic approach., Methods: Clinical perspective and updated literature search., Results: The following areas are reviewed: categorisation of fracture risk and general pharmacological management of osteoporosis., Conclusions: A platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use to characterise fracture risk and direct interventions.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with an excess risk of fractures and overall mortality. This study compared hip fracture and post-hip fracture mortality in T2DM and non-diabetic subjects. The salient findings are that subjects in T2DM are at higher risk of dying after suffering a hip fracture., Introduction: Previous research suggests that individuals with T2DM are at an excess risk of both fractures and overall mortality, but their combined effect is unknown. Using multi-state cohort analyses, we estimate the association between T2DM and the transition to hip fracture, post-hip fracture mortality, and hip fracture-free all-cause death., Methods: Population-based cohort from Catalonia, Spain, including all individuals aged 65 to 80 years with a recorded diagnosis of T2DM on 1 January 2006; and non-T2DM matched (up to 2:1) by year of birth, gender, and primary care practice., Results: A total of 44,802 T2DM and 81,233 matched controls (53% women, mean age 72 years old) were followed for a median of 8 years: 23,818 died without fracturing and 3317 broke a hip, of whom 838 subsequently died. Adjusted HRs for hip fracture-free mortality were 1.32 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.37) for men and 1.72 (95% CI 1.65 to 1.79) for women. HRs for hip fracture were 1.24 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.43) and 1.48 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.60), whilst HRs for post-hip fracture mortality were 1.28 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.60) and 1.57 (95% CI 1.31 to 1.88) in men and women, respectively., Conclusion: T2DM individuals are at increased risk of hip fracture, post-hip fracture mortality, and hip fracture-free death. After adjustment, T2DM men were at a 28% higher risk of dying after suffering a hip fracture and women had 57% excess risk of post-hip fracture mortality.

Given the widespread practice of recommending drug holidays, we reviewed the impact of medication discontinuation of two common anti-osteoporosis therapies (bisphosphonates and denosumab). Trial evidence suggests the risk of new clinical fractures, and vertebral fracture increases when osteoporosis treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab is stopped., Introduction: The aim of this paper was to review the available literature to assess what evidence exists to inform clinical decision-making with regard to drug holidays following treatment with bisphosphonates (BiP) or denosumab., Methods: Systematic review., Results: Differing pharmacokinetics lead to varying outcomes on stopping therapy. Prospective and retrospective analyses report that the risk of new clinical fractures was 20-40% higher in subjects who stopped BiP treatment, and vertebral fracture risk was approximately doubled. Rapid bone loss has been well described following denosumab discontinuation with an incidence of multiple vertebral fractures around 5%. Studies have not identified risk factors for fracture after stopping treatment other than those that provide an indication for treatment (e.g. prior fracture and low BMD). Studies that considered long-term continuation did not identify increased fracture risk, and reported only very low rates of adverse skeletal events such as atypical femoral fracture., Conclusions: The view that patients on long-term treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab should always be offered a drug holiday is not supported by the existing evidence. Different pharmacokinetic properties for different therapies require different strategies to manage drug intermission. In contrast, long-term treatment with anti-resorptives is not associated with increased risk of fragility fractures and skeletal adverse events remain rare.

Purpose: Electronic medical records databases use pre-specified lists of diagnostic codes to identify fractures. These codes, however, are not specific enough to disentangle traumatic from fragility-related fractures. We report on the proportion of fragility fractures identified in a random sample of coded fractures in SIDIAP., Methods: Patients≥50 years old with any fracture recorded in 2012 (as per pre-specified ICD-10 codes) and alive at the time of recruitment were eligible for this retrospective observational study in 6 primary care centres contributing to the SIDIAP database (www.sidiap.org). Those with previous fracture/s, non-responders, and those with dementia or a serious psychiatric disease were excluded. Data on fracture type (traumatic vs fragility), skeletal site, and basic patient characteristics were collected., Results: Of 491/616 (79.7%) patients with a registered fracture in 2012 who were contacted, 331 (349 fractures) were included. The most common fractures were forearm (82), ribs (38), and humerus (32), and 225/349 (64.5%) were fragility fractures, with higher proportions for classic osteoporotic sites: hip, 91.7%; spine, 87.7%; and major fractures, 80.5%. This proportion was higher in women, the elderly, and patients with a previously coded diagnosis of osteoporosis., Conclusions: More than 4 in 5 major fractures recorded in SIDIAP are due to fragility (non-traumatic), with higher proportions for hip (92%) and vertebral (88%) fracture, and a lower proportion for fractures other than major ones. Our data support the validity of SIDIAP for the study of the epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. and Sociedad Española de Reumatología y Colegio Mexicano de Reumatología. All rights reserved.)

Hip fracture registries have helped improve quality of care and reduce variability, and several audits exist worldwide. The results of the Spanish National Hip Fracture Registry are presented and compared with 13 other national registries, highlighting similarities and differences to define areas of improvement, particularly surgical delay and early mobilization., Introduction: Hip fracture audits have been useful for monitoring current practice and defining areas in need of improvement. Most established registries are from Northern Europe. We present the results from the first annual report of the Spanish Hip Fracture Registry (RNFC) and compare them with other publically available audit reports., Method: Comparison of the results from Spain with the most recent reports from another ten established hip fracture registries highlights the differences in audit characteristics, casemix, management, and outcomes., Results: Of the patients treated in 54 hospitals, 7.208 were included in the registry between January and October 2017. Compared with other registries, the RNFC included patients ≥ 75 years old; in general, they were older, more likely to be female, had a worse prefracture ambulation status, and were more likely to have extracapsular fractures. A larger proportion was treated with intramedullary nails than in other countries, and spinal anesthesia was most commonly used. With a mean of 75.7 h, Spain had by far the longest surgical delay, and the lowest proportion of patients mobilized on the first postoperative day (58.5%). Consequently, development of pressure ulcers was high, but length of stay, mortality, and discharge to home remained in the range of other audits., Conclusions: National hip fracture registries have proved effective in changing clinical practice and our understanding of patients with this condition. Such registries tend to be based on an internationally recognized common dataset which would make comparisons between national registries possible, but variations such as age inclusion criteria and follow-up are becoming evident across the world. This variation should be avoided if we are to maximize the comparability of registry results and help different countries learn from each other's practice. The results reported in the Spanish RNFC, compared with those of other countries, highlight the differences between countries and detect areas of improvement, particularly surgical delay and early mobilization.

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.

We have characterised 997 hip fracture patients from a representative 45 Spanish hospitals, and followed them up prospectively for up to 4 months. Despite suboptimal surgical delays (average 59.1 hours), in-hospital mortality was lower than in Northern European cohorts. The secondary fracture prevention gap is unacceptably high at 85%., Purpose: To characterise inpatient care, complications, and 4-month mortality following a hip or proximal femur fracture in Spain., Methods: Design: prospective cohort study. Consecutive sample of patients ≥ 50 years old admitted in a representative 45 hospitals for a hip or proximal femur fragility fracture, from June 2014 to June 2016 and followed up for 4 months post-fracture. Patient characteristics, site of fracture, in-patient care (including secondary fracture prevention) and complications, and 4-month mortality are described., Results: A total of 997 subjects (765 women) of mean (standard deviation) age 83.6 (8.4) years were included. Previous history of fracture/s (36.9%) and falls (43%) were common, and 10-year FRAX-estimated major and hip fracture risks were 15.2% (9.0%) and 8.5% (7.6%) respectively. Inter-trochanteric (44.6%) and displaced intra-capsular (28.0%) were the most common fracture sites, and fixation with short intramedullary nail (38.6%) with spinal anaesthesia (75.5%) the most common procedures. Surgery and rehabilitation were initiated within a mean 59.1 (56.7) and 61.9 (55.1) hours respectively, and average length of stay was 11.5 (9.3) days. Antithrombotic and antibiotic prophylaxis were given to 99.8% and 98.2% respectively, whilst only 12.4% received secondary fracture prevention at discharge. Common complications included delirium (36.1 %) and kidney failure (14.1%), with in-hospital and 4-month mortality of 2.1% and 11% respectively., Conclusions: Despite suboptimal surgical delay, post-hip fracture mortality is low in Spanish hospitals. The secondary fracture prevention gap is unacceptably high at > 85%, in spite of virtually universal anti-thrombotic and antibiotic prophylaxis.

We conducted a nested case-control study to study the association between antidiabetic treatments (alone or in combination) use and fracture risk among incident type 2 Diabetes mellitus patients. We found an increased risk of bone fracture with insulin therapy compared to metformin monotherapy., Introduction: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have an increased risk of fragility fractures, to which antidiabetic therapies may contribute. We aimed to characterize the risk of fracture associated with different antidiabetic treatments as usually prescribed to T2DM patients in actual practice conditions., Methods: A case-control study was nested within a cohort of incident T2DM patients registered in 2006-2012 in the Information System for Research Development in Primary Care (Catalan acronym, SIDIAP), a database which includes records for > 5.5 million patients in Catalonia (Spain). Each case (incident major osteoporotic fracture) was risk-set matched with up to five same-sex controls by calendar year of T2DM diagnosis and year of birth (± 10 years). Study exposure included previous use of all antidiabetic medications (alone or in combination), as dispensed in the 6 months before the index date, with metformin (MTF) monotherapy, the most commonly used drug, as a reference group (active comparator)., Results: Data on 12,277 T2DM patients (2049 cases and 10,228 controls) were analyzed. Insulin use was associated with increased fracture risk (adjusted OR 1.63 (95% CI 1.30-2.04)), as was the combination of MTF and sulfonylurea (SU) (adjusted OR 1.29 (1.07-1.56)), compared with MTF monotherapy. Sensitivity analyses suggest possible causality for insulin therapy but not for the MTF + SU combination association. No significant association was found with any other antidiabetic medications., Conclusions: Insulin monotherapy was associated with an increased fracture risk compared to MTF monotherapy in T2DM patients. Fracture risk should be taken into account when starting a glucose-lowering drug as part of T2DM treatment.

Background: Some patients experience fractures while receiving oral bisphosphonates (BPs) treatment. Clinical risk factors, advanced bone density loss, and microarchitecture deterioration have been associated with such fractures but bone tissue properties other than bone mineral density (BMD) have not been assessed., Methods: In a cross-sectional study of postmenopausal women on bisphosphonates for at least 4years with good adherence to treatment, 21 patients with incident fractures were compared with 18 treated patients without new fractures. Demographic and clinical variables, BMD, laboratory tests, and bone material strength index (BMSi) assessed by impact microindentation at the tibial diaphysis were recorded for all participants., Results: Clinical and laboratory results did not differ between patients taking BPs with incident fractures and those without new fractures. However, BMSi was significantly lower (mean±SD) in those who fractured (73.76±6.49) than in no-fracture patients (81.64±6.26; p=0.001). Lumbar spine (LS) BMD was also lower in fractured patients (p=0.03). Adjusted models including age, body mass index, years on BP treatment, and LS-BMD confirmed an increase in fracture risk per BMSi standard deviation decrease: adjusted OR 23.5 [95% CI 2.16 to 255.66], p=0.01. ROC analyses showed an area under the curve of 0.82 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.95) for BMSi, higher than that for BMD at any location, which ranged from 0.64 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.82) for femoral neck (FN) BMD to 0.71 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.87) for LS-BMD., Conclusions: Patients who fracture while receiving BPs treatment have worse BMSi scores than BP-treated patients without fractures. The potential for BMSi to provide an additional osteoporosis treatment target should be explored., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Post-fracture mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients has been poorly studied. We report an absolute and relative excess all-cause mortality following a fracture in these patients compared to non-diabetic patients., Introduction: T2DM and osteoporotic fractures are independently associated with a reduced lifespan, but it is unknown if T2DM confers an excess post-fracture mortality compared to non-diabetic fracture patients. We report post-fracture all-cause mortality according to T2DM status., Methods: This is a population-based cohort study using data from the SIDIAP database. All ≥50 years old T2DM patients registered in SIDIAP in 2006-2013 and two diabetes-free controls matched on age, gender, and primary care center were selected. Study outcome was all-cause mortality following incident fractures. Participants were followed from date of any fracture (AF), hip fracture (HF), and clinical vertebral fracture (VF) until the earliest of death or censoring. Cox regression was used to calculate mortality according to T2DM status after adjustment for age, gender, body mass index, smoking, alcohol intake, and previous ischemic heart and cerebrovascular disease., Results: We identified 166,106 T2DM patients and 332,212 non-diabetic, of which 11,066 and 21,564, respectively, sustained a fracture and were then included. Post-fracture mortality rates (1000 person-years) were (in T2DM vs non-diabetics) 62.7 vs 49.5 after AF, 130.7 vs 112.7 after HF, and 54.9 vs 46.2 after VF. Adjusted HR (95% CI) for post-AF, post-HF, and post-VF mortality was 1.30 (1.23-1.37), 1.28 (1.20-1.38), and 1.20 (1.06-1.35), respectively, for T2DM compared to non-diabetics., Conclusions: T2DM patients have a 30% increased post-fracture mortality compared to non-diabetics and a remarkable excess in absolute mortality risk. More research is needed on the causes underlying such excess risk, and on the effectiveness of measures to reduce post-fracture morbi-mortality in T2DM subjects.

Fragility fractures of the hip have a major impact on the lives of patients and their families. This study highlights significant geographical variation in secondary fracture prevention with even the highest performing regions failing the majority of patients despite robust evidence supporting the benefits of diagnosis and treatment., Introduction: The purpose of the study is to describe the geographic variation in anti-osteoporosis drug therapy prescriptions before and after a hip fracture during 1999-2013 in the UK., Methods: We used primary care data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) to identify patients with a hip fracture and primary care prescriptions of any anti-osteoporosis drugs prior to the index hip fracture and up to 5 years after. Geographic variations in prescribing before and after availability of generic oral bisphosphonates were analysed. Multivariable logistic regression models were adjusted for gender, age and body mass index (BMI)., Results: Thirteen thousand sixty-nine patients (76 % female) diagnosed with a hip fracture during 1999-2013 were identified. Eleven per cent had any anti-osteoporosis drug prescription in the 6 months prior to the index hip fracture. In the 0-4 months following a hip fracture, 5 % of patients were prescribed anti-osteoporosis drugs in 1999, increasing to 51 % in 2011 and then decreasing to 39 % in 2013. The independent predictors (OR (95 % CI)) of treatment initiation included gender (male 0.42 (0.36-0.49)), BMI (0.98 per kg/m 2 increase (0.97-1.00)) and geographic region (1.29 (0.89-1.87) North East vs. 0.56 (0.43-0.73) South Central region). Geographic differences in prescribing persisted over the 5-year follow-up. If all patients were treated at the rate of the highest performing region, then nationally, an additional 3214 hip fracture patients would be initiated on therapy every year., Conclusions: Significant geographic differences exist in prescribing of anti-osteoporosis drugs after hip fracture despite adjustment for potential confounders. Further work examining differences in health care provision may inform strategies to improve secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture., Competing Interests: AS, SH and AD have no competing financial interests relevant to the submitted work. DPA, JL, 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, Stirling Anglia, Mereo Biopharma and Optasia. He 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. 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.

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.)

Unlabelled: Using a large cohort of hip fracture patients, we estimated hospital costs to be £14,163 and £2139 in the first and second year following fracture, respectively. Second hip and non-hip fractures were major cost drivers. There is a strong economic incentive to identify cost-effective approaches for hip fracture prevention., Introduction: The purpose of this study was to estimate hospital costs of hip fracture up to 2 years post-fracture and compare costs before and after the index fracture., Methods: A cohort of patients aged over 60 years admitted with a hip fracture in a UK region between 2003 and 2013 were identified from hospital records and followed until death or administrative censoring. All hospital records were valued using 2012/2013 unit costs, and non-parametric censoring methods were used to adjust for censoring when estimating average annual costs. A generalised linear model examined the main predictors of hospital costs., Results: A cohort of 33,152 patients with a hip fracture was identified (mean age 83 years (SD 8.2). The mean censor-adjusted 1- and 2-year hospital costs after index hip fracture were £14,163 (95 % confidence interval (CI) £14,008 to £14,317) and £16,302 (95 % CI £16,097 to £16,515), respectively. Index admission accounted for 61 % (£8613; 95 % CI £8565 to £8661) of total 1-year hospital costs which were £10,964 higher compared to the year pre-event (p < 0.001). The main predictors of 1-year hospital costs were second hip fracture, other non-hip fragility fractures requiring hospitalisation and hip fracture-related complications. Total UK annual hospital costs associated with incident hip fractures were estimated at £1.1 billion., Conclusions: Hospital costs following hip fracture are high and mostly occur in the first year after the index hip fracture. Experiencing a second hip fracture after the index fracture accounted for much of the increase in costs. There is a strong economic incentive to prioritise research funds towards identifying the best approaches to prevent both index and subsequent hip fractures.

Summary: There is scarce data on the association between early stages of type 2 diabetes and fracture risk. We report a 20% excess risk of hip fracture in the first years following disease onset compared to matched non-diabetic patients., Introduction: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic disease that affects several target organs. Data on the association between T2DM and osteoporotic fractures is controversial. We estimated risk of hip fracture in newly diagnosed T2DM patients, compared to matched non-diabetic peers., Methods: We conducted a population-based parallel cohort study using data from the Sistema d'Informació per al Desenvolupament de la Investigació en Atenció Primària (SIDIAP) database. Participants were all newly diagnosed T2DM patients registered in SIDIAP in 2006-2011 (T2DM cohort). Up to two diabetes-free controls were matched to each T2DM participant on age, gender, and primary care practice. Main outcome was incident hip fracture in 2006-2011, ascertained using the tenth edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes. We used Fine and Gray survival modelling to estimate risk of hip fracture according to T2DM status, accounting for competing risk of death. Multivariate models were adjusted for body mass index, previous fracture, and use of oral corticosteroids., Results: During the study period (median follow-up 2.63 years), 444/58,483 diabetic patients sustained a hip fracture (incidence rate 2.7/1,000 person-years) compared to 776/113,448 matched controls (2.4/1,000). This is equivalent to an unadjusted (age- and gender-matched) subhazard ratio (SHR) 1.11 [0.99-1.24], and adjusted SHR 1.20 [1.06-1.35]. The adjusted SHR for major osteoporotic and any osteoporotic fractures were 0.95 [0.89-1.01] and 0.97 [0.92-1.02]., Conclusions: Newly diagnosed T2DM patients are at a 20% increased risk of hip fracture even in early stages of disease, but no for all fractures. More data is needed on the causes for an increased fracture risk in T2DM patients as well as on the predictors of osteoporotic fractures among these patients.

Unlabelled: Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) leads to osteopenia/osteoporosis and spine rigidity. We conducted a case-control study and found that AS-affected patients have a 5-fold and 50% increased risk of clinical spine and all clinical fractures, respectively. Excess risk of both is highest in the first years and warrants an early bone health assessment after diagnosis., Introduction: Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is related to spine rigidity and reduced bone mass, but data on its impact on fracture risk are scarce. We aimed to study the association between AS and clinical fractures using a case-control design., Methods: From the Danish Health Registries, we identified all subjects who sustained a fracture in the year 2000 (cases) and matched up to three controls by year of birth, gender and region. Clinically diagnosed AS was identified using International Classification of Diseases, 8th revision (ICD-8; 71249), and International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10; M45) codes. We also studied the impact of AS duration. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for non-traumatic fractures (any site, clinical spine and non-vertebral) according to AS status and time since AS diagnosis. Multivariate models were adjusted for fracture history, socio-economic status, previous medical consultations, alcoholism and use of oral glucocorticoids., Results: We identified 139/124,655 (0.11%) AS fracture cases, compared to 271/373,962 (0.07%) AS controls. Unadjusted (age- and gender-matched) odds ratio (OR) were 1.54 [95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.26-1.89] for any fracture, 5.42 [2.50-11.70] for spine and 1.39 [1.12-1.73] for non-vertebral fracture. The risk peaked in the first 2.5 years following AS diagnosis: OR 2.69 [1.84-3.92] for any fracture., Conclusions: Patients with AS have a 5-fold higher risk of clinical spine fracture and a 35% increased risk of non-vertebral fracture. This excess risk peaks early, in the first 2.5 years of AS disease. Patients should be assessed for fracture risk early after AS diagnosis.

Unlabelled: We used a large population-based health care database to determine the impact of common co-morbidities on hip fracture risk amongst elderly men. We demonstrated that diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, renal failure, HIV infection, dementia, and cerebrovascular disease are independent predictors of hip fracture, as is a Charlson score of ≥ 3., Introduction: Risk factors for hip fractures in men are still unclear. We aimed to identify common co-morbidities (amongst those in the Charlson index) that confer an increased risk of hip fracture amongst elderly men., Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study using data from the SIDIAP (Q) database. SIDIAP(Q) contains primary care and hospital inpatient records of a representative 30% of the population of Catalonia, Spain (>2 million people). All men aged ≥ 65 years registered on 1 January 2007 were followed up until 31 December 2009. Both exposure (co-morbidities in the Charlson index) and outcome (incident hip fractures) were ascertained using ICD codes. Poisson regression models were fitted to estimate the effect of (1) each individual co-morbidity and (2) the composite Charlson index score, on hip fracture risk, after adjustment for age, body mass index, smoking, alcohol drinking, and use of oral glucocorticoids., Results: We observed 186,171 men for a median (inter-quartile range) of 2.99 (2.37-2.99) years. In this time, 1,718 (0.92%) participants had a hip fracture. The following co-morbidities were independently associated with hip fractures: diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), renal failure, HIV infection, dementia, and cerebrovascular disease. A Charlson score of ≥ 3 conferred an increased hip fracture risk., Conclusion: Common co-morbidities including diabetes, COPD, cerebrovascular disease, renal failure, and HIV infection are independently associated with an increased risk of hip fracture in elderly men. A Charlson score of 3 or more is associated with a 50% higher risk of hip fracture in this population.

Unlabelled: Patients with cognitive impairment (CI) often do not receive secondary fracture prevention. Use of zoledronic acid led to a similar reduction in re-fracture risk but the survival benefit was limited to those without CI., Introduction: We tested whether the effects of zoledronic acid (Zol) on re-fracture and mortality differed in patients presenting with a hip fracture by cognitive status., Methods: We used data from the Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly Recurrent Fracture Trial, of yearly intravenous 5 mg Zol vs. placebo in patients presenting with a hip fracture. Primary outcome was new fracture and secondary outcome mortality. Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) with a cut-point of >2 was used to identify CI. Fine-Gray models for competing events were fitted to study the effect of Zol on re-fracture and Cox regression for death. A multiplicative term was introduced to study a potential interaction between treatment and cognitive status on outcomes., Results: Baseline SPMSQ of 1,966/2,127 (92.4%) patients was measured. Three hundred fifty (17.8%) had CI, balanced between treatment arms. In the placebo arm, there was similar fracture incidence between those with and without CI (15.4 vs. 12.3%, p = 0.26). There was no significant interaction for the effect of CI on Zol and re-fracture (p = 0.66). CI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (12.6 vs. 4.3%, p < 0.001) and the interaction was bordering significance (interaction, p = 0.066). Zol prolonged survival only in patients with normal cognitive status [HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.40-0.80)] and not in those with CI [HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.59-1.38)]., Conclusions: While these results require confirmation, the findings support the use of bisphosphonates in patients with osteoporotic fracture and CI expected to live for more than 6 months.

Summary: Antidepressants have been associated with fractures. In a case-control study, increasing age was associated with more fractures in users of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants, whereas for anxiolytics and sedatives, more fractures were seen among the younger users. Depression per se did not seem associated with fractures., Introduction: This study aims to study the effects of age and dose of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), tricyclic antidepressants (TCA) and anxiolytics/sedatives on fracture risk., Methods: The study was designed as a case-control study. From the Danish National Health Service, we identified 124,655 fracture cases and 373,962 age- and gender-matched controls. Crude odds ratios were estimated, and propensity score adjustment was used to minimise confounding by indication., Results: A higher risk of fractures was associated with an increasing dose of anxiolytics and sedatives; the highest excess risk was present in the age stratum below 40 years of age (p < 0.01), and thereafter, the excess risk of fractures declined with age. For SSRI, a growing excess risk of fractures was seen with both increasing dose and age. Regarding TCA, no particular trend with age was present. However, an increasing risk of fractures was associated with increasing TCA dose in the age group above 60 years. Finally, for other antidepressants, no particular trend with age or dose was observed. In our data, a hospital diagnosis of depression or manic depression was associated with fewer fractures., Conclusion: Caution should be shown upon prescription of SSRI to older subjects. A hospital diagnosis of depression or manic depression and thus potentially a more severe disease was not a risk factor for fractures.

Unlabelled: The objective of this study was to describe the incidence and consequences of pelvic fractures in a community cohort. The incidence of pelvic fractures increases with age with a protective effect of higher body mass index. Almost 60% of those with a pelvic fracture required an inpatient stay, with a median of 9 days. There was a higher 3-year mortality in those admitted (17%) vs. those not admitted (6.3%). Given the substantial health burden, further work is required to identify the optimal post-fracture therapeutic strategy to improve outcomes., Introduction: The burden of pelvis fractures is projected to increase, but there is a paucity of community-based studies describing rates, mortality and future fracture risk. We therefore estimated the age, gender and BMI-specific incidence of pelvis fracture in Catalonia (North-East Spain), and assessed hospital stay and mortality following fracture., Methods: The SIDIAP(Q) database contains validated clinical information from computerised medical records of a representative sample of 30% of the population of Catalonia. We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all subjects aged ≥ 40 in SIDIAP(Q) and linked to the regional Hospital Admissions Database from 2007 to 2009. Pelvis fractures were ascertained using ICD-10 codes. Incidence and mortality rates were calculated., Results: A total of 1,118,173 patients (582,820 women) were observed for 3 years and 1,356 had a pelvic fracture. The rate for pelvic fracture was 4.35/10,000 person-years (pyar) [95% CI 4.13-4.59] (men-2.73 [2.48-3.01]; women-5.82 [5.46-6.20]). This increased with age, peaking in those over 90 years: 29.41 [25.74-33.59]. Higher BMI was protective (HR 0.75 per SD BMI; [0.69-0.82]). Moreover, 59.1% of fractured patients were hospitalised with a median (IQR) stay of 9 (5-16) days, and after the 3-year follow-up 13.9% died (mortality rate 10.7/100 pyar [9.3-12.3]) with higher rates in those hospitalised (17.0%)., Conclusions: Pelvic fractures are associated with high rates of hospitalisation and mortality. Given this, further work is required to identify the optimal post-fracture therapeutic strategy to improve outcomes in this elderly patient group.

Background: The WHO has recently published the FRAX® tool to determine the absolute risk of osteoporotic fracture at 10 years. This tool has not yet been validated in Spain., Methods/design: A prospective observational study was undertaken in women in the FRIDEX cohort (Barcelona) not receiving bone active drugs at baseline. Baseline measurements: known risk factors including those of FRAX® and a DXA. Follow up data on self-reported incident major fractures (hip, spine, humerus and wrist) and verified against patient records. The calculation of absolute risk of major fracture and hip fracture was by FRAX® website. This work follows the guidelines of the STROBE initiative for cohort studies. The discriminative capacity of FRAX® was analyzed by the Area Under Curve (AUC), Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The predictive capacity was determined using the ratio of observed fractures/expected fractures by FRAX® (ObsFx/ExpFx)., Results: The study subjects were 770 women from 40 to 90 years of age in the FRIDEX cohort. The mean age was 56.8 ± 8 years. The fractures were determined by structured telephone questionnaire and subsequent testing in medical records at 10 years. Sixty-five (8.4%) women presented major fractures (17 hip fractures). Women with fractures were older, had more previous fractures, more cases of rheumatoid arthritis and also more osteoporosis on the baseline DXA. The AUC ROC of FRAX® for major fracture without bone mineral density (BMD) was 0.693 (CI 95%; 0.622-0.763), with T-score of femoral neck (FN) 0.716 (CI 95%; 0.646-0.786), being 0.888 (CI 95%; 0.824-0.952) and 0.849 (CI 95%; 0.737-0.962), respectively for hip fracture. In the model with BMD alone was 0.661 (CI 95%; 0.583-0.739) and 0.779 (CI 95%; 0.631-0.929). In the model with age alone was 0.668 (CI 95%; 0.603-0.733) and 0.882 (CI 95%; 0.832-0.936). In both cases there are not significant differences against FRAX® model. The overall predictive value for major fracture by ObsFx/ExpFx ratio was 2.4 and 2.8 for hip fracture without BMD. With BMD was 2.2 and 2.3 respectively. Sensitivity of the four was always less than 50%. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed a good correlation only after calibration with ObsFx/ExpFx ratio., Conclusions: The current version of FRAX® for Spanish women without BMD analysed by the AUC ROC demonstrate a poor discriminative capacity to predict major fractures but a good discriminative capacity for hip fractures. Its predictive capacity does not adjust well because leading to underdiagnosis for both predictions major and hip fractures. Simple models based only on age or BMD alone similarly predicted that more complex FRAX® models.

The mechanism whereby poor intrauterine growth increases risk of adult hip fracture is unclear. We report the association between birth weight and proximal femoral geometry and density in community-dwelling elderly men. We used self-reported birth weight, measured adult height and weight and proximal femoral quantitative computed tomography (QCT) measurements of femoral neck axis length, cross-sectional area, and volumetric BMD (vBMD) among the participants in the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS), a cohort study of community-dwelling US men aged 65 and older. We compared men with birth weight <7 pounds (lower birth weight [LBW]; n = 501) and ≥ 9 pounds (higher birth weight [HBW]; n = 262) with those weighing 7-8.9 pounds (medium birth weight [MBW], referent group; n = 1068) using linear regression adjusting for current age, height, and BMI. The mean age of the 1831 men who had both birth weight and QCT measurements was 73 years (SD 5.9). Compared with the referent MBW, HBW men had concordantly longer femoral neck (+0.16 SD; p = .028) and cross-sectional area (+0.24 SD, p = .001). LBW men had a smaller cross-sectional (-0.26 SD, p < .001) but longer femoral neck for their height (+0.11 SD, p = .05). Neither cortical nor trabecular vBMD at the femoral neck was associated with birth weight. These findings support the hypothesis that the skeletal envelope, but not density, is set, in part, at birth. Further research exploring the association between early developmental factors and lifetime fracture risk is needed and may inform primary preventative strategies for fracture prevention., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.)

Summary: We have shown that patients with osteoarthritis are at increased risk of fracture after total knee replacement (TKR). We conducted a population-based cohort study to assess the effect of bisphosphonate use on their post-surgery fracture risk. Cox regression adjusted by propensity score suggested a 50-55% reduction in risk of fracture post-surgery., Introduction: Patients with osteoarthritis have a higher bone mass but similar or higher risk of fracture. We recently demonstrated that patients have an elevated fracture risk after TKR, but it is unknown if bisphosphonate therapy in this patient group would reduce fracture risk. We aimed to assess the effect of bisphosphonate prescription to patients undergoing a TKR, on their risk of fracture after surgery., Methods: From the General Practice Research Database, all patients ≥ 40 years old, who received a TKR from 1986 to 2006 for knee osteoarthritis were eligible. We identified bisphosphonate use (BPU) as the main exposure. Propensity scores (equivalent to the estimated conditional probability of being treated given the individual's covariates) were calculated using logistic regression and used to reduce observed confounding. We fitted Cox models to study the effect of BPU on post-surgery fracture occurrence. Analyses were stratified by history of previous fracture: no fracture, osteoporotic fracture (hip, wrist, humerus, spine), and other fractures., Results: The hazard ratio (HR) associated with BPU in non-previously fractured patients was 0.50 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.68; propensity-adjusted model), and 0.48 (0.35-0.65; matched analysis). In subjects with osteoporotic and with other previous fracture, BPU was associated with a propensity-adjusted HR of 0.46 (0.30 to 0.71) and 0.47 (0.26-0.85), respectively, and with a propensity-matched HR of 0.45 (0.29 to 0.70) and 0.45 (0.25-0.82)., Conclusion: Our results suggest that BPU in primary prevention could reduce post-operative risk of fracture by 50% and by 55% in secondary prevention.