Search

Purpose: Patients with osteoporosis are at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Several antiosteoporosis medications have been demonstrated with the benefit of preventing osteoporosis. Our aim is to assess the CVD risks associated with antiosteoporosis medications using the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan between 2000 and 2016. Methods: Among 41,102 patients of 40+ years old with newly diagnosed osteoporosis, 69.1% (N = 28,387) of patients were included in the user cohort of antiosteoporosis medicines, of whom 13, 472 developed CVD by the end of 2016, while 14,915 did not. Using the nested case--control analysis in the user cohort (88.0% women and 77.4% elderly), we applied conditional logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of eight types of CVD for the users of denosumab, bisphosphonate, teriparatide, and hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Results: The adjusted ORs of overall CVDs were 0.13 (95% CI: 0.12--0.15) for denosumab users, 0.52 (95% CI: 0.45--0.61) for teriparatide users, and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.76--0.85) for bisphosphonate users. The HRT users were at higher odds of coronary artery and peripheral artery diseases, heart failure, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis. Conclusion: Denosumab, teriparatide, and bisphosphonate may have more protective effects against CVD than hormone therapy. Physicians may take subsequent cardiovascular risks into account when choosing an adequate antiosteoporosis medication for patients with osteoporosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Alendronate is effective in preventing second hip fracture in osteoporotic patients. However, no consensus exists on the duration that is effective in preventing a second hip fracture. Our study demonstrated that risk can be reduced when the prescription is ≥ 6 months for the year following the index hip fracture. Introduction: Alendronate is effective in preventing second hip fracture in osteoporotic patients. However, no consensus exists on the accurate medication possession ratio (MPR) that is effective in preventing a second hip fracture. Our objective was to compare the risk of second hip fracture in patients treated with different MPR of alendronate. Methods: In this population-based cohort study, data from National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan were analyzed. Patients 50 years and older who had an index hip fracture and were not receiving any osteoporotic medications before their fracture during 2000–2010 were included. The cohort consisted of 88,320 patients who were new alendronate users (n = 9278) and non-users (n = 79,042). Those without alendronate were matched 4:1 as the control group. Patients were subdivided into those with no medication, MPR < 25%, MPR 25–50%, MPR 50–75%, and MPR 75–100%. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate the adjusted hazard ratios for different MPRs of alendronate. Results: After matching, 38,675 patients were included in this study; 20,363 (52.7%) were women, and 30,940 (80%) patients were without medication of alendronate. During follow-up on December 31, 2012, 2392 patients had a second hip fracture, for an incidence of 1449/100,000 person-years. Patients with alendronate MPR 50–75% had a lower risk of a second hip fracture compared to non-users (hazard ratio 0.66). When the MPR increased to 75–100%, the hazard ratio decreased to 0.61. Conclusions: In this population-based cohort study, risk of a second hip fracture can be reduced when the alendronate MPR is ≥ 50% for the year following the index hip fracture. As the MPR increases, the risk of a second hip fracture decreases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/purpose: The Taiwanese FRAX® calculator was launched in 2010. However, cost-effectiveness thresholds for the prescription of antiosteoporosis medications were not established. This study aims to establish and evaluate FRAX®-based probability thresholds in Taiwan.Methods: Using previous data from Taiwan and literature, we determined cost-effectiveness thresholds for prevention of osteoporotic fractures by alendronate with a Markov model, as well as using two other translational approaches. Sensitivity analysis was applied using different alendronate prices. A clinical sample was used to test these Taiwan-specific thresholds by determining the percentages of high-risk patients who would be qualified for current National Health Insurance reimbursement.Results: With the Markov model, the intervention threshold for hip fracture was 7% for women and 6% for men; for major osteoporotic fracture, it was 15% for women and 12.5% for men. Both translational approach models were cost effective only for certain age groups. However, if branded alendronate was reimbursed at 60% of the current price, they became cost effective in almost all age groups. This clinical screening study showed that the National Health Insurance Administration model identified the highest proportion (44%) of patients qualified for National Health Insurance reimbursements, followed by the Markov model (30%), and the United States model (22%).Conclusion: Three FRAX®-based models of alendronate use were established in Taiwan to help optimize treatment strategies. The government is encouraged to incorporate FRAX®-based approaches into the reimbursement policy for antiosteoporosis medicines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Bone remodeling has been linked to glucose metabolism in animal studies, but the results of human trials were inconclusive. Bisphosphonates may play a role in glucose metabolism through their impacts on bone remodeling enzymes. In this study, we aimed to examine the influence of alendronate usage on the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) among osteoporotic patients. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was designed to include osteoporotic patients without DM from a population-based cohort containing 1,000,000 subjects. Patients treated with alendronate (exposed group, N=1,011) were compared with those who received no treatment (age and gender matched non-exposed group, N=3,033). Newly diagnosed DM was identified from medical records by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9CM) code. The incidence of DM in both groups was calculated for comparison. Results: The non-exposed group had a significantly higher incidence of DM (Odds ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.03~1.41) when compared with the exposed group. In subgroup analysis, the DM risk reduction in exposed group was only significant among those younger than 65 years and those without hypertension or dyslipidemia. Patients who were prescribed alendronate more than or equal to 3 times had demonstrated a significant reduction in DM risk. Conclusions: Our study showed alendronate might yield a protective effect for incident DM. This effect became insignificant in patients with older age, dyslipidemia or hypertension. The underlying mechanism needs further exploration with prospective data for confirmation of the observed findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Patients receiving alendronate for osteoporosis carry a significantly higher risk of developing upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and lower GIB (hazard ratio 1.32 and 1.84, respectively) after adjusting for potential confounding factors such as age, gender, co-morbidity, and some medications. The risk factors associated with GIB were further analyzed. Introduction: Patients receiving alendronate, a type of bisphosphonate, for osteoporosis have a higher risk of developing upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Whether patients receiving alendronate also have a higher risk of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) has not been studied. In this study, we investigated the association between GIB and alendronate use and to identify the possible risk factors of GIB among alendronate users. Methods: Using the National Health Insurance (NHI) Research Database of Taiwan, 3,000 alendronate users and 12,000 age-, sex-, and enrollment time-matched controls were extracted for analysis from a cohort data set of 1,000,000 randomly sampled subjects. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to identify the risk factors for UGIB and LGIB in all enrollees and alendronate users after adjustments for age, gender, comorbidity (hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease, heart failure, chronic renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, peptic ulcer, and cirrhosis), and medications (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], aspirin, steroids, clopidogrel, ticlopidine, warfarin, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). Results: During a median of 1.30-year follow-up, patients receiving alendronate had significant higher risk of UGIB and LGIB after adjusting for age, gender, and potential confounding factors such as comorbidity and medications. Age, chronic renal disease, NSAID, and clopidogrel use may be independent risk factors for UGIB among alendronate users. Age, male gender, clopidogrel, and ticlopidine use may be independent risk factors for LGIB among alendronate users. Conclusion: Patients receiving alendronates seemed to carry a higher risk for UGIB and LGIB, respectively, after adjustment for age, sex, underlying comorbidity, and certain medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Evidence of the incidence and risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in Asian osteoporosis populations receiving different osteoporosis medications is lacking. We found that there is no excess incidence of or risk for ONJ in osteoporosis patients >50 years old using alendronate as compared with patients using raloxifene or calcitonin under real-world conditions in Taiwan. Introduction: To provide information on ONJ in Asian populations, this study compares the incidence and risk of ONJ between patients receiving alendronate and those receiving non-bisphosphonate osteoporosis medications in Taiwan. Methods: Enrollees in the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) from 2003 to 2007, aged above 50 years, with vertebral/hip fracture, and new to osteoporosis therapy were recruited. Patients with Paget's disease or cancer during the baseline period were excluded. Patients were classified into either the alendronate or the calcitonin/raloxifene (control) group according to their exposure during follow-up. Previously proposed possible ONJ diagnosis codes were adopted as potential ONJ cases, but qualifying cases also had a repeated ONJ diagnosis within 8 weeks of the first diagnosis and received one or more broad-spectrum oral antibiotics. Cox modeling compared the risk of ONJ between the alendronate and the control groups, which were matched using propensity scores. Results were examined in series sensitivity analyses, including different cumulative dose groups. Results: We found 25 potential ONJ cases in the alendronate ( N = 18,030) and 21 in the control groups ( N = 25,615). Over the 6-year follow-up period, no increased risk of ONJ in the alendronate group in the original (hazard ratio (HR), 0.87; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.47-1.58) or propensity score-matched cohorts (HR, 0.86; 95 % CI, 0.44-1.69) was found. All comparison groups exhibited a similar incidence of ONJ, ranging from 6.9 to 8.2/10,000 person-years. Conclusion: Under real-world conditions, there is no excess risk for ONJ in osteoporosis patients >50 years old using alendronate as compared with patients using raloxifene or calcitonin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: While alendronate inhibits atherosclerosis experimentally, its effect on lower limb ischemia risk is unknown. Our results suggest that alendronate reduces the risk of lower limb ischemic vascular events requiring surgical interventions, including amputation. Our results are relevant for patients at risk of lower limb ischemia undergoing fragility fracture treatment. Introduction: This study aimed to determine the association between alendronate therapy and the risk of lower limb ischemic vascular events (i.e., bypass surgery, endovascular stenting, and major lower limb amputation for lower limb ischemia). Methods: We used a nationwide population-based cohort of patients aged over 50 years diagnosed with a vertebral or hip fracture between January 1999 and June 2010. We compared the risk of lower limb ischemic vascular events between patients undergoing treatment with alendronate ( n = 3,731) and an age- and sex-matched comparison group ( n = 7,462) over 5 years of follow-up. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional regression analysis with adjustment for treatment status, comorbidities, and other variables. Results: Ten patients (0.3 %) in the alendronate treatment group had a lower limb ischemic vascular event compared with 51 patients (0.7 %) in the comparison group. The incidence of lower limb ischemic vascular events was 8.4 (95 % CI, 4.0-15.5) per 10,000 person-years in the alendronate group and 21.8 (95 % CI, 16.2-28.7) per 10,000 person-years in the comparison group. The risk of a lower limb ischemic vascular event in the alendronate treatment group was lower (adjusted HR, 0.41; 95 % CI, 0.21-0.82). Conclusion: Alendronate treatment was associated with a reduced risk of lower limb ischemic vascular events among hip or vertebral fragility fracture patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Bisphosphonates have been used for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis since the early 1990s and studies show that compliant patients experience a lower fracture rate. This cohort study showed that the compliance of Taiwanese patients was poor and the refracture risk was related to compliance with bisphosphonate therapy. Introduction: Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of osteoclast activity, and reduce bone turnover by inhibiting bone resorption. According to Taiwanese reimbursement guidelines, patients with osteoporosis-related fractures are eligible for bisphosphonate treatment. This study aimed to elucidate the relationship of refracture risk with compliance/persistence with bisphosphonate therapy in Taiwan. Methods: This was a retrospective, administrative, database analysis measuring the adherence status and impact of poor adherence to bisphosphonate therapy in Taiwan. Study data derived from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) were used to assemble a cohort of all osteoporosis patients who initiated bisphosphonate treatment between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2005. Patients were followed until death, end of registration in NHIRD, or end of study period (December 31, 2006), whichever occurred first. Compliance was calculated as medication possession ratio (MPR; sum of days of supply of osteoporosis medications divided by follow-up duration). Results: The refracture rates for osteoporosis patients were 5.15 %, 7.36 %, and 8.49 % in the first, second, and third year, respectively, and were significantly lower for patients with >80 % compliance than with <80 % compliance ( p < 0.05). Nearly 50 % patients were noncompliant (MPR < 80 %) at 3 months, and only around 30 % patients were adherent at 1 year. Refracture risk increased with MPR < 80 %, age, and co-morbidities like diabetes mellitus or dementia. Patients with concomitant statin medication had significantly lower refracture risk. Conclusions: The compliance of Taiwanese patients with osteoporosis medication is poor, and refracture risk is related to compliance with bisphosphonate therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Controversy still exists regarding whether alendronate (ALN) use increases the risk of esophageal cancer or breast cancer. Methods: This paper explores the possible association between the use of oral ALN in osteoporosis patients and subsequent cancer risk using the National Health Insurance (NHI) system database of Taiwan with a Cox proportional-hazard regression analysis. The exposure cohort contained 5,624 osteoporosis patients used ALN and randomly frequency-matched by age and gender of 3 osteoporosis patients without any kind of anti-osteoporosis drugs in the same period. Results: For a dose ≥1.0 g/year, the risk of developing overall cancer was significantly higher (hazard ratio: 1.69, 95% confidence ratio: 1.39-2.04) than in osteoporosis patients without any anti-osteoporosis drugs. The risks for developing liver, lung, and prostate cancers and lymphoma were also significantly higher than in the control group. Conclusions: This population-based retrospective cohort study did not find a relationship between ALN use and either esophageal or breast cancer, but unexpectedly discovered that use of ALN with dose $1.0 g/year significantly increased risks of overall cancer incidence, as well as liver, lung, and prostate cancers and lymphoma. Further large population-based unbiased studies to enforce our findings are required before any confirmatory conclusion can be made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Osteonecrosis is one of the major debilitating skeletal disorders. Most patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head eventually need surgery, usually total hip arthroplasty (THA), within a few years of onset. Previous studies showed that alendronate has a pharmacologic effect in reducing osteoclast activity and that it significantly reduced the incidence of collapse of the femoral head in the osteonecrotic hip. The purpose of this study was to determine the cumulative incidence of THA in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head and the time-to-event after treatment with alendronate versus placebo during the study period. Methods A 2-year multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind study was performed. From June 2005 to December 2006, 64 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the alendronate or placebo group. In patients with bilateral hip osteonecrosis who met the inclusion criteria, both hips were counted in the analyses. Five patients were excluded from the analysis because they did not comply with any of the study regimens. Seven patients were ineligible because they were not diagnosed as having stage IIC or stage IIIC disease according to the University of Pennsylvania system. Thus, a total of 52 patients (65 hips) were assessed in this study. Disease progression was evaluated by radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The Harris Hip Score and the Short Form 36 health survey were used to rate hip function and quality of life, respectively. Results There was no significant difference in radiographic and MRI data between the 2 study groups. Four of 32 hips in the alendronate treatment group underwent THA, while 5 of 33 hips in the placebo group had THA ( P = 0.837). No differences were noted in disease progression, Harris Hip Scores, or Short Form 36 scores between the 2 groups. Conclusion Alendronate has no obvious effect on preventing the necessity for THA, reducing disease progression, or improving life quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: A link between the use of alendronate and atypical diaphyseal femoral fracture has been suggested. Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the benefits of alendronate in preventing rehospitalization due to hip fractures and whether its use increases risk of hospitalization for atypical diaphyseal femoral fractures in Taiwan. Methods: Using Taiwan''s National Health Insurance database, we identified women with osteoporosis with a first-ever hospitalization for vertebral or hip fractures between 2001 and 2007, which consisted of all patients receiving alendronate, raloxifene, calcitonin salmon, or teriparatide after the index fracture hospitalization. Data of untreated women were obtained as the untreated cohort. Study outcomes were defined as a rehospitalization due to hip fracture or a new hospitalization for subtrochanteric or diaphyseal femoral fracture. Results: Among 11,278 women identified (mean age, 77 years), 2425 (21.5%) received alendronate, 2694 (23.9%) received other antiosteoporosis drugs, and 6159 (54.6%) were untreated. Patients in each group were comparable in fracture history and major comorbidities; untreated patients were more likely to have stroke (11.2%; P = 0.01) and those treated with alendronate were more likely to have a history of hyperlipidemia (16.2%; P = 0.03). Compared with the untreated patient cohort, our analysis suggested that patients prescribed alendronate were associated with decreased risk of rehospitalization due to hip fracture (hazard ratio = 0.67 [95% CI, 0.54–0.82]). Neither patients prescribed alendronate, nor those prescribed other antiosteoporosis drugs, differed significantly from the untreated patient cohort in terms of risk of hospitalization for atypical femoral fracture (adjusted hazard ratios = 0.77 and 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40–1.47 and 0.22–1.12], respectively). Consistent with these data, short- or long-term alendronate use was not found to be significantly associated with higher risk of atypical femoral fractures. Conclusions: This study in Taiwanese patients suggests that alendronate use was associated with a reduction in risk of rehospitalization due to hip fracture. We did not find a significant association between alendronate use and risk of hospitalization for atypical femoral fracture. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of weekly alendronate administration on male osteoporosis in Taiwan. This 6-month, randomized, open-label controlled trial enrolled 46 men with osteoporosis who were randomized to either 70 mg alendronate once weekly (n = 23) or control (n = 23). Bone mineral density (BMD) of lumbar spine and hip and biochemical bone turnover markers were measured; adverse events and tolerability were assessed. Subjects treated with alendronate showed a significant increase in BMD of 5.5% (vs. 2% in control group) at the lumbar spine and 2.7% (vs. 0.7%) at the femoral neck (P < 0.05) at 6 months, respectively. There were also significant decreases in serum level of bone formation marker (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) and urinary excretion of bone resorption marker (deoxypyridinoline) at 3 and 6 months. Thus, alendronate showed anti-osteoporotic effects by increasing BMD and decreasing the concentrations of bone markers. The adverse events were mild and showed no significant difference between the two groups on safety assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bisphosphonates are used as first-line treatment for the prevention of fragility fracture (FF); they act by inhibiting osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. The timing of their administration after FF surgery is controversial; thus, we compared the incidence of second FF, surgery for second FF, and adverse events associated with early initiation of bisphosphonates (EIBP, within 3 months of FF surgery) and late initiation of bisphosphonates (LIBP, 3 months after FF surgery) in bisphosphonate-naïve patients. This retrospective population-based cohort study used data from Taiwan's Health and Welfare Data Science Center (2004–2012). A total of 298,377 patients received surgeries for FF between 2006 and 2010; of them, 1209 (937 EIBP and 272 LIBP) received first-time bisphosphonates (oral alendronate, 70 mg, once a week). The incidence of second FF (subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) = 0.509; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.352–0.735), second FF surgery (SHR = 0.452; 95% CI: 0.268–0.763), and adverse events (SHR = 0.728; 95% CI: 0.594–0.893) was significantly lower in the EIBP group than in the LIBP group. Our findings indicate that bisphosphonates should be initiated within 3 months after surgery for FF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented which is concerned with a nationwide population based study in Taiwan that was concerned with alendronate and the risk of esophageal cancer.

A correlation between impaired bone metabolism, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) has been suggested. This study aimed to compare the effects of denosumab and alendronate, two anti-resorptive agents, on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in osteoporotic patients. Propensity score-matched cohort study comparing denosumab to alendronate users between January 2005 and December 2017 was conducted from a large medical organization in Taiwan. Risks of CVD development and renal function decline were estimated using Cox proportional hazard regression. A total 2523 patients were recruited in each group. No significant difference in cardiovascular events was found between the two groups over a 5-year study period. Stratified analysis results showed that denosumab was likely to exert protective effects against composite CVD in patients with medication possession rate ≥60% (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR), 0.74; p = 0.0493) and myocardial infraction (AHR, 0.42; p = 0.0415). Denosumab was associated with increased risk of renal function decline in male patients (AHR, 1.78; p = 0.0132), patients with renal insufficiency (AHR, 1.5; p = 0.0132), and patients with acute kidney injury during the study period (AHR, 1.53; p = 0.0154). Conclusively, denosumab may exert cardiovascular benefits in patients with good adherence but may have renal disadvantages in certain conditions and thus must be used with caution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]