New Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) Antibody Formation and Creatinine Elevation With Abaloparatide in Kidney Transplant Recipient.

A 39-year-old female with a history of kidney transplant presented to the endocrinology clinic for osteoporosis evaluation after sustaining an ankle fracture from a fall. Her kidney transplant regimen (mycophenolate mofetil 360 mg twice a day, tacrolimus 0.5 mg every morning and 0.5-1 mg every evening, prednisone 5 mg/day) and baseline creatinine (1.0-1.2 mg/dL) had been stable for several years. After an appropriate secondary workup, she was started on abaloparatide 80 µg subcutaneous daily injections for osteoporosis. She had a good initial biochemical response to therapy. However, 5 months after abaloparatide initiation she was found to have a new elevation in serum creatinine (1.17 to 1.69 mg/dL) despite stable serum tacrolimus trough levels, and two new human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies (anti-HLA antibodies detected to Cw7 and DP28). Abaloparatide was stopped due to concern for immunogenicity. There was no evidence of rejection on kidney biopsy and she was restabilized on her transplant regimen with a new baseline creatinine of 1.3-1.6 mg/dL. The patient was subsequently started on teriparatide 20 µg daily subcutaneous injections for 2 years with good biochemical response, significant improvement in bone mineral density, and stable transplant regimen without additional signs of immunogenicity or rejection. This is the first case report to raise concern about immunogenicity with abaloparatide in solid organ transplant recipients. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Best Practice Guidelines for Assessment and Management of Osteoporosis in Adult Patients Undergoing Elective Spinal Reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN: Expert consensus study. OBJECTIVE: This expert panel was created to establish best practice guidelines to identify and treat patients with poor bone health prior to elective spinal reconstruction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Currently, no guidelines exist for the management of osteoporosis and osteopenia in patients undergoing spinal reconstructive surgery. Untreated osteoporosis in spine reconstruction surgery is associated with higher complications and worse outcomes. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel with 18 experts was assembled including orthopedic and neurological surgeons, endocrinologists, and rheumatologists. Surveys and discussions regarding the current literature were held according to Delphi method until a final set of guidelines was created with over 70% consensus. RESULTS: Panelists agreed that bone health should be considered in every patient prior to elective spinal reconstruction. All patients above 65 and those under 65 with particular risk factors (chronic glucocorticoid use, high fracture risk or previous fracture, limited mobility, and eight other key factors) should have a formal bone health evaluation prior to undergoing surgery. DXA scans of the hip are preferable due to their wide availability. Opportunistic CT Hounsfield Units of the vertebrae can be useful in identifying poor bone health. In the absence of contraindications, anabolic agents are considered first line therapy due to their bone building properties as compared with antiresorptive medications. Medications should be administered preoperatively for at least 2 months and postoperatively for minimum 8 months. CONCLUSION: Based on the consensus of a multidisciplinary panel of experts, we propose best practice guidelines for assessment and treatment of poor bone health prior to elective spinal reconstructive surgery. Patients above age 65 and those with particular risk factors under 65 should undergo formal bone health evaluation. We also established guidelines on perioperative optimization, utility of various diagnostic modalities, and the optimal medical management of bone health in this population.Level of Evidence: 5.

Use of Bone Health Evaluation in Orthopedic Surgery: 2019 ISCD Official Position.

This position development conference (PDC) Task Force examined the assessment of bone status in orthopedic surgery patients. Key questions included which orthopedic surgery patients should be evaluated for poor bone health prior to surgery and which subsets of patients are at high risk for poor bone health and adverse outcomes. Second, the reliability and validity of using bone densitometry techniques and measurement of specific geometries around the hip and knee before and after arthroplasty was determined. Finally, the use of computed tomography (CT) attenuation coefficients (Hounsfield units) to estimate bone quality at anatomic locations where orthopedic surgery is performed including femur, tibia, shoulder, wrist, and ankle were reviewed. The literature review identified 665 articles of which 198 met inclusion exclusion criteria and were selected based on reporting of methodology, reliability, or validity results. We recommend that the orthopedic surgeon be aware of established ISCD guidelines for determining who should have additional screening for osteoporosis. Patients with inflammatory arthritis, chronic corticosteroid use, chronic renal disease, and those with history of fracture after age 50 are at high risk of osteoporosis and adverse events from surgery and should have dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) screening before surgery. In addition to standard DXA, bone mineral density (BMD) measurement along the femur and proximal tibia is reliable and valid around implants and can provide valuable information regarding bone remodeling and identification of loosening. Attention to positioning, selection of regions of interest, and use of special techniques and software is required. Plain radiographs and CT provide simple, reliable methods to classify the shape of the proximal femur and to predict osteoporosis; these include the Dorr Classification, Cortical Index, and critical thickness. Correlation of these indices to central BMD is moderate to good. Many patients undergoing orthopedic surgery have had preoperative CT which can be utilized to assess regional quality of bone. The simplest method available on most picture archiving and communications systems is to simply measure a regions of interest and determine the mean Hounsfield units. This method has excellent reliability throughout the skeleton and has moderate correlation to DXA based on BMD. The prediction of outcome and correlation to mechanical strength of fixation of a screw or implant is unknown.

Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry Monitoring with Trabecular Bone Score: 2019 ISCD Official Position.

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a textural index that evaluates pixel gray-level variations in the lumbar spine image by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. It provides an indirect assessment of trabecular microarchitecture that is an independent predictor of fracture risk. TBS does not appear to be clinically useful to monitor the skeletal effects of bisphosphonates and denosumab, but is potentially useful as a component of monitoring the skeletal effects of teriparatide and abaloparatide. The least significant change (LSC) for TBS can be conservatively estimated to be about 5.8% (the largest LSC in published data) or calculated by a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry facility using the same methodology that is used for bone mineral density (BMD) precision assessment to calculate BMD LSC. A review of the best available evidence at the 2019 ISCD Position Development Conference concluded that the role of TBS in monitoring antiresorptive therapy is unclear and that TBS is potentially useful for monitoring anabolic therapy. For patients treated with teriparatide or abaloparatide, a statistically significant increase in TBS may represent a clinically meaningful improvement in trabecular structure. A significant decrease of TBS may represent a worsening of trabecular structure, suggesting the need for further clinical assessment and possible change in treatment strategies. Since BMD measures bone quantity and TBS measures bone quality, these tests can be considered complementary in assessing fracture risk and response to therapy in appropriate patients.

Proceedings of the 2018 Santa Fe Bone Symposium: Advances in the Management of Osteoporosis.

The Santa Fe Bone Symposium is an annual meeting devoted to clinical applications of recent advances in skeletal research. The 19th Santa Fe Bone Symposium convened August 3-4, 2018, in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA. Attendees included physicians of many specialties, fellows in training, advanced practice providers, clinical researchers, and bone density technologists. The format consisted of lectures, case presentations by endocrinology fellows, and panel discussions, with all involving extensive interactive discussions. Topics were diverse, including an evolutionary history of calcium homeostasis, osteoporosis treatment in the very old, optimizing outcomes with orthopedic surgery, microbiome and bone, new strategies for combination and sequential therapy of osteoporosis, exercise as medicine, manifestations of parathyroid hormone excess and deficiency, parathyroid hormone as a therapeutic agent, cell senescence and bone health, and managing patients outside clinical practice guidelines. The National Bone Health Alliance conducted a premeeting on development of fracture liaison services. A workshop was devoted to Bone Health TeleECHO (Bone Health Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes), a strategy of ongoing medical education for healthcare professions to expand capacity to deliver best practice skeletal healthcare in underserved communities and reduce the osteoporosis treatment gap.

Examining the Effect of Medication Adherence on Risk of Subsequent Fracture Among Women with a Fragility Fracture in the U.S. Medicare Population.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, osteoporosis affects approximately 10 million people, of whom 80% are women, and it contributes a significant clinical burden to the community. Poor adherence to osteoporosis medications adds to the overall burden of illness. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of osteoporosis medication adherence and the risk of a subsequent fracture among Medicare-enrolled women with a previous fragility fracture. METHODS: This study was a retrospective observational analysis of U.S. administrative claims data among female Medicare beneficiaries who had a nontrauma closed fragility fracture between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2011. Patients were required to have continuous medical and pharmacy enrollment 12 months pre- and postfracture date. In addition, patients were required to have an osteoporosis medication prescription for a bisphosphonate (alendronate, risedronate, pamidronate, etidronate, zoledronate, and tiludronate), calcitonin, denosumab, raloxifene, or teriparatide during the follow-up period. Adherence was calculated using cumulative medication possession ratio (MPR) from the treatment initiation date in 30-day increments. MPR was stratified into high adherence (MPR ≥ 80%), moderate adherence (50% ≤ MPR > 80%), and low adherence (MPR < 50%). Outcomes included first subsequent fracture after treatment initiation; patients were censored at treatment discontinuation, or end of the 12-month period posttreatment initiation. Covariates included demographics, comorbidities, osteoporosis medications, medications associated with falls, and health care utilization. Cox regression was used to model subsequent fractures with time-dependent cumulative MPR. RESULTS: Of the 1,292,248 Medicare enrollees who had a fracture in 2011, a total of 103,852 (8.0%) women aged ≥ 65 years with a fragility fracture were identified. Overall, 27,736 (26.7%) patients were treated with osteoporosis medication within 12 months of the fragility fracture (mean time to treatment initiation was 85.0 ± 84.6 days). Over half of the patients were highly adherent (MPR ≥ 80%) to osteoporosis medications during the follow-up (n = 14,112; 50.9%). Almost a third of the patients had low adherence (MPR < 50%; n = 9,022, 32.5%), followed by patients with moderate adherence (50% ≤ MPR > 80%; n = 4,602, 16.6%). After adjusting for demographics and clinical characteristics, patients with low and moderate adherence to osteoporosis medications were 33% (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.33; 95% CI = 1.17-1.50, P < 0.001) and 19% (HR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.02-1.38, P = 0.026) more likely to have a subsequent fracture, respectively, compared with patients with high adherence. Low adherence patients had a 32% and 34% increased risk for a hip/pelvis/femur fracture (HR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.09-1.59, P = 0.005) and a clinical vertebral fracture (HR = 1.34; 95% CI = 1.09-1.63, P = 0.005), respectively, compared with high adherence patients. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare-enrolled women with low and moderate adherence to osteoporosis medications had a higher risk of a subsequent fracture compared with high adherence patients. These results highlight the importance of improving osteoporosis medication adherence among women enrolled in Medicare. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Eli Lilly. Xie, Keshishian, and Baser are employees of STATinMED Research, a paid consultant to Eli Lilly in connection with the study design, data analysis, and development of the manuscript for this study. Boytsov, Burge, Lombard, and Zhang are employees and stock owners of Eli Lilly. At the time of research, Krohn was an employee of Eli Lilly. Study concept and design were contributed by Burge and Lombard, along with the other authors. Xie, Baser, and Keshishian took the lead in data collection, assisted by the other authors. Data interpretation was performed by Krohn and Zhang, with assistance from the other authors. The manuscript was written by Keshishian and Boytsov, along with the other authors, and revised by Boytsov, Keshishian, and Burge, along with the other authors.

Trabecular Bone Score in Patients With Chronic Glucocorticoid Therapy-Induced Osteoporosis Treated With Alendronate or Teriparatide.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of alendronate (ALN) and teriparatide on trabecular bone score (TBS) in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. METHODS: Patients with chronic glucocorticoid therapy-induced osteoporosis (median 7.5 mg/day prednisone equivalent for ≥90 days) were randomized to receive oral ALN 10 mg/day (n = 214) or subcutaneous teriparatide 20 µg/day (n = 214) for 36 months; 118 patients in the ALN group and 123 patients in the teriparatide group completed treatment. Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results for 53 patients receiving ALN and 56 patients receiving teriparatide who had DXA scans with adequate resolution to perform TBS analysis and completed 36 months of therapy were blindly analyzed for TBS at baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months. RESULTS: In teriparatide-treated patients, TBS was significantly increased at 18 months compared to baseline, and by 36 months had increased 3.7% (P < 0.05). In ALN-treated patients, there was not a significant change in TBS compared to baseline at any time point. Changes in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) measured by DXA in the subgroup with TBS data were similar to BMD results in the overall study population. At 36 months, increases in lumbar spine BMD were 5.5% and 10.3% in patients treated with ALN and teriparatide, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, both ALN and teriparatide increased lumbar spine BMD. However, trabecular bone score significantly increased with teriparatide but did not significantly change with ALN. The pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is predominantly reduced bone formation. TBS may represent a sensitive measure to discriminate treatment effects of an anabolic versus an antiresorptive drug in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Does Teriparatide Improve Femoral Neck Fracture Healing: Results From A Randomized Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a medical need for therapies that improve hip fracture healing. Teriparatide (Forteo(®)/ Forsteo(®), recombinant human parathyroid hormone) is a bone anabolic drug that is approved for treatment of osteoporosis and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in men and postmenopausal women at high fracture risk. Preclinical and preliminary clinical data also suggest that teriparatide may enhance bone healing. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We wished to test the hypotheses that treatment with teriparatide versus placebo would improve femoral neck fracture healing after internal fixation as measured by (1) frequency of revision surgery, (2) radiographic fracture healing, and (3) other outcomes including pain control, gait speed, and safety. METHODS: We initiated two separate, but identically designed, clinical trials to meet FDA requirements to provide substantial evidence to support approval of a new indication. The two prospective, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III studies were designed to evaluate the effect of subcutaneous teriparatide (20 µg/day) for 6 months versus placebo on fracture healing at 24 months. The trials were conducted concurrently with a planned enrollment of 1220 patients per trial. However, enrollment was stopped owing to very slow patient accrual, and an a priori decision was made to pool the results of those studies for statistical analyses before study completion; pooling was specified in both protocols. Randomization was stratified by fixation (sliding hip screw or multiple cancellous screws) and fracture type (displaced or nondisplaced). An independent Central Adjudication Committee reviewed revision surgical procedures and radiographs. A total of 159 patients were randomized in the two trials (81 placebo, 78 teriparatide). The combined program had very low power to detect the originally expected treatment effect but had approximately 80% power to detect a larger difference of 12% between treatment groups for risk of revision surgery. RESULTS: The proportion of patients undergoing revision surgery at 12 months was 14% (11 of 81) in the placebo group versus 17% (13 of 78) in the teriparatide group. Central Adjudication Committee review excluded two of these patients treated with placebo from the primary analysis. After exclusions, the proportion of patients who did not undergo revision surgery at 12 months (primary endpoint) was not different between the study and placebo groups, at 88% in the placebo group (90% CI, 0.79-0.93) versus 84% in the teriparatide group (90% CI, 0.75-0.90; p = 0.743). There also were no differences between groups in the proportion of patients achieving radiographic fracture healing at 12 months (75% [61 of 81] placebo versus 73% [57 of 78] teriparatide; odds ratio, 0.89; 90% CI, 0.46-1.72; p = 0.692) or in measures of pain control (such as pain during ambulation, 92% [55 of 62] placebo versus 91% [52 of 57] teriparatide; odds ratio, 0.91; 90% CI, 0.25-3.37; p = 0.681). The frequency of patients reporting adverse events was 49% [40 of 81] in the placebo group versus 45% [35 of 78] in the teriparatide group (p = 0.634) during the 6-month treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: The small sample size limited this study's power to detect potential differences, and the results are exploratory. With the patients available, teriparatide did not decrease the risk of revision surgery, improve radiographic signs of fracture healing, or decrease pain compared with the placebo. The adverse event data observed were consistent with the teriparatide safety profile. Functional and health outcome data from the studies may help improve our understanding of patients recovering from femoral neck fractures. Further large controlled studies are required to determine the effect of teriparatide on fracture healing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective study.

Relationship Between Vertebral Fracture Burden, Height Loss, and Pulmonary Function in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis.

The purpose of this analysis was to assess the association of osteoporosis-related vertebral fracture burden and pulmonary function. This study also examined the relationship between vertebral fracture burden and height loss, estimated by arm span - height. This was a single-site and single-visit study. Patients had a history of at least 1 moderate or severe vertebral fracture. Vertebral fracture burden was quantified using the spinal deformity index (SDI). Pulmonary function during inspiration was determined by spirometry. Forty-one women aged 70-91 completed the study. Vertebral fracture burden negatively correlated with forced inspiratory vital capacity and inspiratory time. For each unit increase in SDI, forced inspiratory vital capacity decreased by 1.62%, and inspiratory time decreased by 2.39%. There was no correlation between SDI and measures of inspiratory flow. For each unit increase in SDI, height decreased by about 0.5 cm. Vertebral fractures were associated with decreased lung volume and height loss.

Characteristics of Latinas in Puerto Rico and the US mainland receiving teriparatide in the DANCE observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The Direct Assessment of Nonvertebral Fractures in Community Experience (DANCE) study investigated the use of teriparatide in men and women with osteoporosis in the United States (US) and Puerto Rico (PR). In a sub-analysis, we evaluated whether the baseline characteristics of Latinas differed from those of white women in the study population and whether any patient attributes affected physicians' decisions to prescribe teriparatide. METHODS: We assessed 3 patient cohorts treated with teriparatide 20 microg once daily for up to 24 months: 1) PR Latinas, 2) US Latinas, and 3) white women on the US mainland (white women). We analyzed differences related to ethnicity (Latina vs. white) and geography (PR vs. US mainland). RESULTS: Overall, 302 of the 3243 women (9%) enrolled in DANCE were Latina (205 of these 302 Latinas resided in PR). Significant differences were observed in 7 of 11 baseline characteristics. White women had more prior fragility fractures and family history of hip fracture than Latinas, while PR Latinas were generally older than US Latinas and had more comorbid conditions. A similar proportion of subjects in each cohort had received prior osteoporosis therapy. Physicians prescribed teriparatide more often for Latinas based on multiple risk factors for fracture and intolerance to previous osteoporosis therapy and to white women based on inadequate response to previous therapy or new (incident) fractures. Overall, Latinas were less persistent with teriparatide therapy than white women. CONCLUSION: We observed significant differences related to ethnicity and geography in the baseline demographics of Latinas enrolled in the DANCE study, criteria cited by physicians for initiating teriparatide therapy, and treatment persistence.

Assessing the Effects of Teriparatide Treatment on Bone Mineral Density, Bone Microarchitecture, and Bone Strength.

BACKGROUND: To gain insight into how teriparatide affects various bone health parameters, we assessed the effects of teriparatide treatment with use of standard DXA (dual x-ray absorptiometry) technology and two newer technologies, high-resolution MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and finite element analysis of quantitative CT (computed tomography) scans. METHODS: In this phase-4, open-label study, postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis received 20 µg/day of teriparatide. Assessments included (1) changes in areal BMD (bone mineral density) (in g/cm2) at the radius, spine, and hip on DXA, (2) changes in volumetric BMD (in mg/cm3) at the spine and hip on quantitative CT scans, (3) changes in bone microarchitecture at the radius on high-resolution MRI, (4) estimated changes in spine and hip strength according to finite element analysis of quantitative CT scans, (5) changes in bone turnover markers in serum, and (6) safety. RESULTS: Thirty-five subjects were enrolled; thirty completed eighteen months and twenty-five completed an optional six-month extension. No significant changes were observed for the primary outcome, high-resolution MRI at the distal aspect of the radius. At month eighteen, the least-squares mean percentage change from baseline in total volumetric BMD at the spine was 10.05% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.83% to 13.26%; p < 0.001), and estimated spine strength increased 17.43% (95% CI, 12.09% to 22.76%; p < 0.001). Total volumetric BMD at the hip increased 2.22% (95% CI, 0.37% to 4.06%; p = 0.021), and estimated hip strength increased 2.54% (95% CI, 0.06% to 5.01%; p = 0.045). Areal BMD increased at the lumbar spine and femoral neck, was unchanged for the total hip and at the distalmost aspect of the radius, and decreased at a point one-third of the distance between the wrist and elbow. Bone turnover markers increased at months three, six, and twenty-four (all p < 0.05). No unexpected adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: High-resolution MRI failed to identify changes in bone microarchitecture at the distal aspect of the radius, a non-weight-bearing site that may not be suitable for assessing effects of an osteoanabolic agent. Teriparatide increased areal BMD at the spine and femoral neck and volumetric BMD at the spine and hip. Estimated vertebral and femoral strength also increased. These findings and increases in bone turnover markers through month twenty-four are consistent with the known osteoanabolic effect of teriparatide. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Osteoporosis medication use after hip fracture in U.S. patients between 2002 and 2011.

Hip fractures are common, morbid, costly, and associated with subsequent fractures. Historically, postfracture osteoporosis medication use rates have been poor, but have not been recently examined in a large-scale study. We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study based on U.S. administrative insurance claims data for beneficiaries with commercial or Medicare supplemental health insurance. Eligible participants were hospitalized for hip fracture between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2011, and aged 50 years or older at admission. The outcome of interest was osteoporosis medication use within 12 months after discharge. Patients were censored after 12 months, loss to follow-up, or a medical claim for cancer or Paget's disease, whichever event occurred first. During the study period, 96,887 beneficiaries met the inclusion criteria; they had a mean age of 80 years and 70% were female. A total of 34,389 (35.5%) patients were censored before reaching 12 months of follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier estimated probability of osteoporosis medication use within 12 months after discharge was 28.5%. The rates declined significantly from 40.2% in 2002, to 20.5% in 2011 (p for trend <0.001). In multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, a number of patient characteristics were associated with reduced likelihood of osteoporosis medication use, including older age and male gender. However, the predictor most strongly and most positively associated with osteoporosis medication use after fracture was osteoporosis medication use before the fracture (hazard ratio = 7.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.23-7.69). Most patients suffering a hip fracture do not use osteoporosis medication in the subsequent year and treatment rates have worsened.

Association between teriparatide adherence and healthcare utilization and costs among hip fracture patients in the United States.

PURPOSE: This study examined the association between teriparatide (TPTD) adherence, and healthcare utilization and costs among hip fracture (HFx) patients. METHODS: Individuals aged 50years and older with an HFx between 1/1/2002-12/31/2010 were identified from a large US administrative claims database. The first HFx date during this period was designated as the index. Selected patients had at least 6months of pre-index continuous enrollment (baseline) and no baseline TPTD use, cancer, or Paget's disease. Patients initiating TPTD post-index were followed until censoring at switch to bisphosphonates, disenrollment, 36months post-index, or diagnosis of cancer or Paget's disease. Teriparatide adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC) by TPTD prescriptions, during the follow-up period, to construct three adherence groups: low (PDC≤0.5), medium (0.50.8) adherence. Outcome measures were repeated HFx, number of inpatient admissions, and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) healthcare costs. Multivariable generalized linear models examined the association between the TPTD adherence groups and the outcomes, adjusting for cross-group differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 824 patients (mean age 75years, 90% female) were included: 30% low, 27% medium, and 44% high adherence. In multivariable analyses, high adherence was significantly (all p<0.05) directly associated with increased PPPM pharmacy costs ($621 low, $1093 medium, and $1572 high), but also with the lowest inpatient ($963 low, $960 medium, and $629 high) and outpatient ($1087 low, $1068 medium, and $776 high) costs, leading to the highest total costs in the medium adherence group but similar costs in the high and low adherence groups ($2599 low, $3163 medium, and $2869 high). The high adherence group also had the lowest number of inpatient admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly increased pharmacy costs associated with the high TPTD adherence group were offset by significantly fewer inpatient admissions, fewer repeated HFx, and lower inpatient and outpatient costs.

Hip and spine strength effects of adding versus switching to teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with prior alendronate or raloxifene.

Many postmenopausal women treated with teriparatide for osteoporosis have previously received antiresorptive therapy. In women treated with alendronate (ALN) or raloxifene (RLX), adding versus switching to teriparatide produced different responses in areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and biochemistry; the effects of these approaches on volumetric BMD (vBMD) and bone strength are unknown. In this study, postmenopausal women with osteoporosis receiving ALN 70 mg/week (n = 91) or RLX 60 mg/day (n = 77) for ≥18 months were randomly assigned to add or switch to teriparatide 20 µg/day. Quantitative computed tomography scans were performed at baseline, 6 months, and 18 months to assess changes in vBMD; strength was estimated by nonlinear finite element analysis. A statistical plan specifying analyses was approved before assessments were completed. At the spine, median vBMD and strength increased from baseline in all groups (13.2% to 17.5%, p < 0.01); there were no significant differences between the Add and Switch groups. In the RLX stratum, hip vBMD and strength increased at 6 and 18 months in the Add group but only at 18 months in the Switch group (Strength, Month 18: 2.7% Add group, p < 0.01 and 3.4% Switch group, p < 0.05). In the ALN stratum, hip vBMD increased in the Add but not in the Switch group (0.9% versus -0.5% at 6 months and 2.2% versus 0.0% at 18 months, both p ≤ 0.004 group difference). At 18 months, hip strength increased in the Add group (2.7%, p < 0.01) but not in the Switch group (0%); however, the difference between groups was not significant (p = 0.076). Adding or switching to teriparatide conferred similar benefits on spine strength in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis pretreated with ALN or RLX. Increases in hip strength were more variable. In RLX-treated women, strength increased more quickly in the Add group; in ALN-treated women, a significant increase in strength compared with baseline was seen only in the Add group.

The effects of group cycling on gait and pain-related disability in individuals with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a community-based program of stationary group cycling on gait, pain, and physical function in individuals with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA). BACKGROUND: Knee pain and disability are common symptoms in individuals with knee OA. Though exercise for knee OA has acknowledged benefits, it has the potential to aggravate symptoms in some instances. METHODS: Thirty-seven subjects (27 women, 10 men) with a mean ± SD age of 57.7 ± 9.8 years were randomly assigned to a cycling (n = 19) or control (n = 18) group for a 12-week intervention study. Outcome variables, measured at baseline and 12 weeks, included preferred and maximal gait velocity, a visual analog pain scale at rest and following a 6-minute walk test, muscle strength, and functional-outcome questionnaires. Data were analyzed using mixed-model analyses of variance for group and time differences. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, the individuals receiving the cycling intervention showed significantly greater improvements (P<.05) for preferred gait velocity (mean difference between groups, 8.7 cm/s; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2, 15.1), visual analog pain scale on the 6-minute walk test (mean difference, 16.5 mm; 95% CI: 2.1, 31.0), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain subscale (mean difference, 14.9 points; 95% CI: 2.6, 27.0) and stiffness subscale (mean difference, 10.8 points; 95% CI: 0.7, 21.3), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain subscale (mean difference, 13.3 points; 95% CI: 3.4, 23.3), and the Knee Outcome Survey activities of daily living subscale (mean difference, 13.9 points; 95% CI: 2.0, 25.9) compared to controls. CONCLUSION: Stationary group cycling may be an effective exercise option for individuals with mild-to-moderate knee OA and may reduce pain with walking. US trial registration NCT00917618. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b-.

Femoral strength in osteoporotic women treated with teriparatide or alendronate.

To gain insight into the clinical effect of teriparatide and alendronate on the hip, we performed non-linear finite element analysis of quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scans from 48 women who had participated in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing the effects of 18-month treatment of teriparatide 20 µg/d or alendronate 10mg/d. The QCT scans, obtained at baseline, 6, and 18 months, were analyzed for volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) of trabecular bone, the peripheral bone (defined as all the cortical bone plus any endosteal trabecular bone within 3 mm of the periosteal surface), and the integral bone (both trabecular and peripheral), and for overall femoral strength in response to a simulated sideways fall. At 18 months, we found in the women treated with teriparatide that trabecular volumetric BMD increased versus baseline (+4.6%, p<0.001), peripheral volumetric BMD decreased (-1.1%, p<0.05), integral volumetric BMD (+1.0%, p=0.38) and femoral strength (+5.4%, p=0.06) did not change significantly, but the ratio of strength to integral volumetric BMD ratio increased (+4.0%, p=0.04). An increase in the ratio of strength to integral volumetric BMD indicates that overall femoral strength, compared to baseline, increased more than did integral density. For the women treated with alendronate, there were small (<1.0%) but non-significant changes compared to baseline in all these parameters. The only significant between-treatment difference was in the change in trabecular volumetric BMD (p<0.005); related, we also found that, for a given change in peripheral volumetric BMD, femoral strength increased more for teriparatide than for alendronate (p=0.02). We conclude that, despite different compartmental volumetric BMD responses for these two treatments, we could not detect any overall difference in change in femoral strength between the two treatments, although femoral strength increased more than integral volumetric BMD after treatment with teriparatide.

Persistence with biologic therapies in the Medicare coverage gap.

OBJECTIVES: To describe persistence with teriparatide and other biologic therapies in Medicare Part D plans with and without a coverage gap. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective (2006) cohort study of Medicare Part D prescription drug plan beneficiaries from a large benefits company. Two plans with a coverage gap (defined as "basic") were combined and compared with a single plan with coverage for generic and branded medications (defined as "complete"). METHODS: Patients taking alendronate (nonbiologic comparator), teriparatide, etanercept, adalimumab, interferon ß-1a, or glatiramer acetate were selected for the study. For patients with complete coverage, equivalent financial thresholds were used to define the "gap."The definition of discontinuation was failure to fill the index prescription after reaching the gap. RESULTS: For alendronate, 27% of 133,260 patients had enrolled in the complete plan. Patients taking biologic therapies had more commonly enrolled in complete plans: teriparatide (66% of 6221), etanercept (58% of 1469), adalimumab (52% of 824), interferon ß-1a (60% of 438), and glatiramer acetate (53% of 393). For patients taking either alendronate or teriparatide, discontinuation rates were higher in the basic, versus complete, plan (adjusted odds ratios, 2.02 and 3.56, respectively). Discontinuation did not significantly vary by plan type for etanercept, adalimumab, interferon ß-1a, or glatiramer acetate. CONCLUSIONS: For patients who reached the coverage gap, discontinuation was more likely for patients taking osteoporosis (OP) medication. Not having a coverage gap was associated with improved persistence with OP treatment.

Factors Associated with Persistence with Teriparatide Therapy: Results from the DANCE Observational Study.

Purpose. Determine patient-reported reasons for discontinuation with teriparatide. Methods. Patients taking teriparatide in a multicenter, prospective, and observational study were given three questionnaires: baseline, follow-up questionnaire 1 (QF1, 2 to 6 months), and follow-up questionnaire 2 (QF2, 12 months). Discontinuation reported at QF1 and QF2 was defined as "early" and "late," respectively, and remaining patients were considered persistent. Cochran-Armitage trend test was used to identify factors associated with discontinuation. Results. Side effects, concern about improper use, injection difficulties, and several patient-perceived physician issues were associated with early discontinuation. Low patient-perceived importance of continuing treatment, side effects, difficulty paying, and low patient-perceived physician knowledge were associated with late discontinuation. The most common specific reasons selected for discontinuing treatment were "concerns about treatment outweighing the benefits" (n = 53) and "difficulty paying" (n = 47). Conclusions. Persistence with teriparatide is dependent on managing side effects, addressing financial challenges, proper training, and obtaining support from the healthcare provider.

Baseline glucocorticoid dose and bone mineral density response with teriparatide or alendronate therapy in patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVE: This post-hoc analysis studied the effect of baseline glucocorticoid dose on the 18-month bone mineral density (BMD) response to teriparatide 20 microg/day or alendronate 10 mg/day in 387 patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) from a randomized, double-blind trial. METHODS: Lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN), and total hip (TH) BMD were measured at baseline and 18 months. Mean baseline glucocorticoid dose was categorized as low (< or = 5 mg/day), medium (> 5 and < 15 mg/day), or high (> or = 15 mg/day). RESULTS: Baseline LS, FN, and TH BMD were similar between groups, and between glucocorticoid dose categories within each group. LS BMD increases at the low, medium, and high glucocorticoid doses were 8.1%, 6.6%, and 4.6%, respectively, with teriparatide, and 3.6%, 2.8%, and 2.3% with alendronate. Analyzed as a continuous variable, higher glucocorticoid doses had a negative, but non-significant, effect on the percentage increase in LS BMD in both groups. Glucocorticoid dose did not significantly affect FN or TH BMD increases in either group. Across the 3 glucocorticoid dose categories, the overall LS BMD increases were different for both treatments combined (p = 0.033), but the relative differences between the treatment groups were not different (interaction, p = 0.52). CONCLUSION: Teriparatide and alendronate increased LS and hip BMD across a range of baseline glucocorticoid doses. LS BMD increases with teriparatide were greater in the low-dose category than in the high-dose category. Overall LS BMD increases were significantly greater with teriparatide compared with alendronate, which may reflect the respective anabolic and antiresorptive mechanisms of action. Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT00051558.