Search

Osteoporosis treatment rates are declining, even among those with past fractures. Novel, low-cost approaches are needed to improve osteoporosis care. We conducted a parallel group, controlled, randomized clinical trial evaluating a behavioral intervention for improving osteoporosis medication use. A total of 2684 women with self-reported fracture history after age 45 years not using osteoporosis therapy from US Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) sites were randomized 1:1 to receive a multimodal, tailored, direct-to-patient, video intervention versus usual care. The primary study outcome was self-report of osteoporosis medication use at 6 months. Other outcomes included calcium and vitamin D supplementation, bone mineral density (BMD) testing, readiness for behavioral change, and barriers to treatment. In intent-to-treat analyses, there were no significant differences between groups (intervention versus control) in osteoporosis medication use (11.7% versus 11.4%, p = 0.8), calcium supplementation (31.8% versus 32.6%, p = 0.7), vitamin D intake (41.3% versus 41.9%, p = 0.8), or BMD testing (61.8% versus 57.1%, p = 0.2). In the intervention group, fewer women were in the precontemplative stage of behavior change, more women reported seeing their primary care provider, had concerns regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw, and difficulty in taking/remembering to take osteoporosis medications. We found differences in BMD testing among the subgroup of women with no prior osteoporosis treatment, those who provided contact information, and those with no past BMD testing. In per protocol analyses, women with appreciable exposure to the online intervention (n = 257) were more likely to start nonbisphosphonates (odds ratio [OR] = 2.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-5.79) compared with the usual care group. Although our intervention did not increase the use of osteoporosis therapy at 6 months, it increased nonbisphosphonate medication use and BMD testing in select subgroups, shifted participants' readiness for behavior change, and altered perceptions of barriers to osteoporosis treatment. Achieving changes in osteoporosis care using patient activation approaches alone is challenging. © 2018 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

ObjectiveTo develop an innovative and effective educational intervention to inform patients about the need for osteoporosis treatment and to determine factors associated with its online uptake.MethodsPostmenopausal women with a prior fracture and not currently using osteoporosis therapy were eligible to be included in the Activating Patients at Risk for OsteoPOroSis (APROPOS). Four nominal groups with a total of 18 racially/ethnically diverse women identified osteoporosis treatment barriers. We used the Information, Motivation, Behavior Skills conceptual model to develop a direct-to-patient intervention to mitigate potentially modifiable barriers to osteoporosis therapy. The intervention included videos tailored by participants' race/ethnicity and their survey responses: ranked barriers to osteoporosis treatment, deduced barriers to treatment, readiness to behavior change, and osteoporosis treatment history. Videos consisted of "storytelling" narratives, based on osteoporosis patient experiences and portrayed by actresses of patient-identified race/ethnicity. We also delivered personalized brief phone calls followed by an interactive voice-response phone messages aimed to promote uptake of the videos.ResultsTo address the factors associated with online intervention uptake, we focused on participants assigned to the intervention arm (n = 1342). These participants were 92.9% Caucasian, with a mean (SD) age 74.9 (8.0) years and the majority (77.7%) had some college education. Preference for natural treatments was the barrier ranked #1 by most (n = 130; 27%), while concern about osteonecrosis of the jaw was the most frequently reported barrier (at any level; n = 322; 67%). Overall, 28.1% (n = 377) of participants in the intervention group accessed the videos online. After adjusting for relevant covariates, the participants who provided an email address had 6.07 (95% CI 4.53-8.14) higher adjusted odds of accessing their online videos compared to those who did not.ConclusionWe developed and implemented a novel tailored multi-modal intervention to improve initiation of osteoporosis therapy. An email address provided on the survey was the most important factor independently associated with accessing the intervention online. The design and uptake of this intervention may have implications for future studies in osteoporosis or other chronic diseases.

The FRAX calculator is a major achievement in terms of our understanding of measuring fracture risk. Along with being an easily accessible web-based tool, it is the only model based on extensive data on multiple cohorts. FRAX will help clinicians identify individuals who need osteoporosis treatments, while also screening out those who do not require osteoporosis treatments. However, FRAX is limited by a number of factors. Although it is web based, few physicians have the means to access it. It also assumes that body mass index and mortality are constant across different racial and ethnic groups. FRAX is further limited by the exclusion of variables known to be associated with fracture risk, lack of dose-response relationships for variables, increased subsequent fracture risk after initial fracture, restriction to only one bone mineral density site, racial and ethnic differences that may influence fracture risk, and availability of racial and ethnic fracture risk data to be used in the FRAX calculator. Finally, the values obtained from FRAX should not take the place of good clinical judgment.

Osteoporosis is a well-recognized disease with severe consequences if left untreated. Randomized controlled trials are the most rigorous method for determining the efficacy and safety of therapies. Nevertheless, randomized controlled trials underrepresent the real-world patient population and are costly in both time and money. Modern technology has enabled researchers to use information gathered from large health-care or medical-claims databases to assess the practical utilization of available therapies in appropriate patients. Observational database studies lack randomization but, if carefully designed and successfully completed, can provide valuable information that complements results obtained from randomized controlled trials and extends our knowledge to real-world clinical patients. Randomized controlled trials comparing fracture outcomes among osteoporosis therapies are difficult to perform. In this regard, large observational database studies could be useful in identifying clinically important differences among therapeutic options. Database studies can also provide important information with regard to osteoporosis prevalence, health economics, and compliance and persistence with treatment. This article describes the strengths and limitations of both randomized controlled trials and observational database studies, discusses considerations for observational study design, and reviews a wealth of information generated by database studies in the field of osteoporosis.

Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) or estrogen agonists/antagonists have shown promise in osteoporosis in that they have the potential to reduce the risk of fracture, and also reduce the risk of breast cancer. SERMs maybe classified according to their core structure, which is typically a variation of the 17 beta-estradiol template and subclassified according to the side chain at the helix 12 affector region. The best known are the triphenylethylenes such as tamoxifen, used in the management of breast cancer. However, the clinical application of this class of SERMs has been limited due to endometrial stimulation. A second class is the benzothiophenes such as raloxifene and arzoxifene, which have skeletal benefit with little, if any, uterine stimulation. Indole-based SERMs such as bazedoxifene have a 2-phenyl ring system that serves as a core binding unit. Other classes include benzopyrans and naphthalenes (eg, lasofoxifene). In this review article, I will discuss raloxifene and three new SERMs—arzoxifene, bazedoxifene, and lasofoxifene—that have been recently studied. I will discuss their effect on bone, breast, and the cardiovascular system, as well as on safety.

The striking clinical benefits of intermittent parathyroid hormone in osteoporosis have begun a new era of skeletal anabolic agents. Recombinant human parathyroid hormone (rhPTH) (1–34) is the first US Food and Drug Administration–approved anabolic therapy. Its use has been limited by the need for subcutaneous injection. Newer delivery systems include transdermal and oral preparations. Newer anabolic therapies include monoclonal antibody to sclerostin, a potent inhibitor of osteoblastogenesis; and use of bone morphogenetic proteins and parathyroid hormone–related protein PTHrP, a calcium-regulating hormone similar to PTH.