Evidence-Based Guideline for the management of osteoporosis in men.

Historically, osteoporosis has been viewed as a disease of women, with research, trials of interventions and guidelines predominantly focused as such. It is apparent, however, that this condition causes a substantial health burden in men also, and that its assessment and management must ultimately be addressed across both sexes. In this article, an international multidisciplinary working group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases presents GRADE-assessed recommendations for the diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of osteoporosis in men. The recommendations are based on a comprehensive review of the latest research related to diagnostic and screening approaches for osteoporosis and its associated high fracture risk in men, covering disease burden, appropriate interpretation of bone densitometry (including the use of a female reference database for densitometric diagnosis in men) and absolute fracture risk, thresholds for treatment, and interventions that can be used therapeutically and their health economic evaluation. Future work should specifically address the efficacy of anti-osteoporosis medications, including denosumab and bone-forming therapies.

Inclusion of functional measures and frailty in the development and evaluation of medicines for older adults.

The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) E7, the guidance for the conduct of clinical trials in people older than age 65 years, dates from 1994. Since then, the inclusion of older people in clinical trials has hardly improved, particularly for the oldest old age group (individuals older than age 75 years), which is the fastest growing demographic bracket in the EU. Even though most medications are taken by this group, relevant endpoints and safety outcomes for this cohort are rarely included and reported, both in clinical trials and regulatory approval documents. To improve the critical appraisal and the regulatory review of medicines taken by frail older adults, eight recommendations are presented and discussed in this Health Policy. These recommendations are brought together from different perspectives and experience of the treatment of older patients. On one side, the perspective of medical practitioners from various clinical disciplines, with their direct experience of clinical decision making; on the other, the perspective of regulators assessing the data submitted in medicine registration dossiers, their relevance to the risk-benefit balance for older patients, and the communication of the findings in the product information. Efforts to improve the participation of older people in clinical trials have been in place for more than a decade, with little success. The recommendations presented here are relevant for stakeholders, authorities, pharmaceutical companies, and researchers alike, as the implementation of these measures is not under the capacity of a single entity. Improving the inclusion of frail older adults requires awareness, focus, and action on the part of those who can effect a much needed change.

Real-world evidence: new opportunities for osteoporosis research. Recommendations from a Working Group from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).

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

Measuring health-related quality of life in sarcopenia: summary of the SarQoL psychometric properties.

Patient perspectives are now widely recognized as a key element in the evaluation of health interventions. Therefore, the provision of specific and validated Patient Reported Outcome Measures that emphasize the lived experience of patients suffering from specific diseases is very important. In the field of sarcopenia, the only validated specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument available is the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire (SarQoL). This self-administrated HRQoL questionnaire, developed in 2015, consists of 55 items arranged into 22 questions and has currently been translated into 35 languages. Nineteen validation studies performed on SarQoL have consensually confirmed the capacity of SarQoL to detect difference in HRQoL between older people with and without sarcopenia, its reliability and its validity. Two further observational studies have also indicated its responsiveness to change. A short form SarQoL, including only 14 items has further been developed and validated to reduce the potential burden of administration. Research on the psychometric properties of SarQoL questionnaire is still encouraged as the responsiveness to change of SarQoL has not yet been measured in the context of interventional studies, as limited prospective data currently exist and as there is still not cut-off score to define a low HRQoL. In addition, SarQoL has mainly been used in community-dwelling older individuals with sarcopenia and would benefit to be studied in other types of populations. This review aims to provide to researchers, clinicians, regulators, pharmaceutical industries and other stakeholders a clear summary of comprehensive evidence on the SarQoL questionnaire published up to January 2023Query.

Biochemical Markers of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging to be Assessed in Clinical Trials of Drugs Aiming at the Treatment of Sarcopenia: Consensus Paper from an Expert Group Meeting Organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) and the Centre Académique de Recherche et d'Expérimentation en Santé (CARES SPRL), Under the Auspices of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center for the Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Conditions and Aging.

In clinical trials, biochemical markers provide useful information on the drug's mode of action, therapeutic response and side effect monitoring and can act as surrogate endpoints. In pharmacological intervention development for sarcopenia management, there is an urgent need to identify biomarkers to measure in clinical trials and that could be used in the future in clinical practice. The objective of the current consensus paper is to provide a clear list of biochemical markers of musculoskeletal health and aging that can be recommended to be measured in Phase II and Phase III clinical trials evaluating new chemical entities for sarcopenia treatment. A working group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) proposed classifying biochemical markers into 2 series: biochemical markers evaluating musculoskeletal status and biochemical markers evaluating causal factors. For series 1, the group agreed on 4 biochemical markers that should be assessed in Phase II or Phase III trials (i.e., Myostatin-Follistatin, Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor, N-terminal Type III Procollagen and Serum Creatinine to Serum Cystatin C Ratio - or the Sarcopenia Index). For series 2, the group agreed on 6 biochemical markers that should be assessed in Phase II trials (i.e., the hormones insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-I), dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate, and cortisol, and the inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α), and 2 in Phase III trials (i.e., IGF-I and CRP). The group also proposed optional biochemical markers that may provide insights into the mode of action of pharmacological therapies. Further research and development of new methods for biochemical marker assays may lead to the evolution of these recommendations.

Assessing Medicines for Use in the Geriatric Population.

The aging processes alter the body's response to a medicine's pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and susceptibility to adverse effects. In addition, older adults, especially the oldest age category (85+ years) or those with multiple chronic health conditions, polypharmacy, or frailty, are under-represented in clinical trials of new medicines. Evidence-based prescribing guidelines based on these trials might result in inappropriate prescription, increasing the risk of drug interactions and adverse drug reactions. Regulators face a conundrum between acquiring sufficient data and putting susceptible patients at risk in the early stages of a development program, when little is known about a medicine's effects. Healthcare professionals and patients deserve to have access to clear information on the knowledge and evidence gaps leading to the approval of a new medicinal product. This should also include proper consideration of the population of older patients. In the present article, we outline the approach taken by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) regulators in the assessment of a new medicine's dossier.

Role of vitamin D supplementation in the management of musculoskeletal diseases: update from an European Society of Clinical and Economical Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) working group.

Vitamin D is a key component for optimal growth and for calcium-phosphate homeostasis. Skin photosynthesis is the main source of vitamin D. Limited sun exposure and insufficient dietary vitamin D supply justify vitamin D supplementation in certain age groups. In older adults, recommended doses for vitamin D supplementation vary between 200 and 2000 IU/day, to achieve a goal of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (calcifediol) of at least 50 nmol/L. The target level depends on the population being supplemented, the assessed system, and the outcome. Several recent large randomized trials with oral vitamin D regimens varying between 2000 and 100,000 IU/month and mostly conducted in vitamin D-replete and healthy individuals have failed to detect any efficacy of these approaches for the prevention of fracture and falls. Considering the well-recognized major musculoskeletal disorders associated with severe vitamin D deficiency and taking into account a possible biphasic effects of vitamin D on fracture and fall risks, an European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) working group convened, carefully reviewed, and analyzed the meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials on the effects of vitamin D on fracture risk, falls or osteoarthritis, and came to the conclusion that 1000 IU daily should be recommended in patients at increased risk of vitamin D deficiency. The group also addressed the identification of patients possibly benefitting from a vitamin D loading dose to achieve early 25-hydroxyvitamin D therapeutic level or from calcifediol administration.

Multimodal Multidisciplinary Management of Patients with Moderate to Severe Pain in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Need to Meet Patient Expectations.

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and disabling medical conditions. In the case of moderate to severe pain, a single intervention may not be sufficient to allay symptoms and improve quality of life. Examples include first-line, background therapy with symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA (SYSADOAs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Therefore, the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) performed a review of a multimodal/multicomponent approach for knee OA therapy. This strategy is a particularly appropriate solution for the management of patients affected by knee OA, including those with pain and dysfunction reaching various thresholds at the different joints. The multimodal/multicomponent approach should be based, firstly, on different combinations of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Potential pharmacological combinations include SYSADOAs and NSAIDs, NSAIDs and weak opioids, and intra-articular treatments with SYSADOAs/NSAIDs. Based on the available evidence, most combined treatments provide benefit beyond single agents for the improvement of pain and other symptoms typical of knee OA, although further high-quality studies are required. In this work, we have therefore provided new, patient-centered perspectives for the management of knee OA, based on the concept that a multimodal, multicomponent, multidisciplinary approach, applied not only to non-pharmacological treatments but also to a combination of the currently available pharmacological options, will better meet the needs and expectations of patients with knee OA, who may present with various phenotypes and trajectories.

Management of hand osteoarthritis: from an US evidence-based medicine guideline to a European patient-centric approach.

Hand osteoarthritis is the most common joint condition and is associated with significant morbidity. It is of paramount importance that patients are thoroughly assessed and examined when complaining of hand stiffness, pain, deformity or disability and that the patient's concerns and expectations are addressed by the healthcare professional. In 2019 the American College of Rheumatology and Arthritis Foundation (ACR/AF) produced guidelines which included recommendations for the treatment of hand osteoarthritis. An ESCEO expert working group (including patients) was convened and composed this paper with the aim to assess whether these guidelines were appropriate for the treatment of hand osteoarthritis therapy in Europe and whether they met with the ESCEO patient-centered approach. Indeed, patients are the key stakeholders in healthcare and eliciting the patient's preference is vital in the context of an individual consultation but also for informing research and policy-making. The patients involved in this working group emphasised the often-neglected area of aesthetic changes in hand osteoarthritis, importance of developing pharmacological therapies which can alleviate pain and disability and the need of the freedom to choose which approach (out of pharmacological, surgical or non-pharmacological) they wished to pursue. Following robust appraisal, it was recommended that the ACR/AF guidelines were suitable for a European context (as described within the body of the manuscript) and it was emphasised that patient preferences are key to the success of individual consultations, future research and future policy-making.

Interdisciplinary management of FGF23-related phosphate wasting syndromes: a Consensus Statement on the evaluation, diagnosis and care of patients with X-linked hypophosphataemia.

X-linked hypophosphataemia (XLH) is the most frequent cause of hypophosphataemia-associated rickets of genetic origin and is associated with high levels of the phosphaturic hormone fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23). In addition to rickets and osteomalacia, patients with XLH have a heavy disease burden with enthesopathies, osteoarthritis, pseudofractures and dental complications, all of which contribute to reduced quality of life. This Consensus Statement presents the outcomes of a working group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases, and provides robust clinical evidence on management in XLH, with an emphasis on patients' experiences and needs. During growth, conventional treatment with phosphate supplements and active vitamin D metabolites (such as calcitriol) improves growth, ameliorates leg deformities and dental manifestations, and reduces pain. The continuation of conventional treatment in symptom-free adults is still debated. A novel therapeutic approach is the monoclonal anti-FGF23 antibody burosumab. Although promising, further studies are required to clarify its long-term efficacy, particularly in adults. Given the diversity of symptoms and complications, an interdisciplinary approach to management is of paramount importance. The focus of treatment should be not only on the physical manifestations and challenges associated with XLH and other FGF23-mediated hypophosphataemia syndromes, but also on the major psychological and social impact of the disease.

Identifiability of Biologicals: An Analysis Using EudraVigilance, the European Union's Database of Reports of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions.

The relevance of biological therapies for an increasing number of conditions is on the rise. Following the expiry of the initial period of market exclusivity, many of these successful therapies have seen the arrival of biosimilars on the market. The clear identification of the precise medicine responsible for an adverse drug reaction (ADR) report is an important element for pharmacovigilance, allowing timely detection of potential product-specific safety signals. We looked at the identifiability of biologicals up to the level of commercial product name in ADR reports received from European clinical practice between 2011 and December 2019. A good level of identification (91.5%) was observed overall, but at the same time a downward trend was observed in the last 5 years. This reduction in the level of identifiability of biological products (originators and biosimilars) at the commercial name level in general was driven by five widely used substances, whereas the identification of all other biologics stayed consistent over time (at over 90%). We observed that those five substances were used mostly within oncology. The introduction of the first biosimilar in the market did not appear to affect their identifiability. These results show that although the general level of identification at the commercial product name level in ADRs in Europe is robust and generally stable over time, decreasing trends can be down to a few commonly used substances, which need to be monitored to reverse the trend.

Update on the ESCEO recommendation for the conduct of clinical trials for drugs aiming at the treatment of sarcopenia in older adults.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, an expert working group was convened under the auspices of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) and formulated consensus recommendations for the conduct of clinical trials for drugs to prevent or treat sarcopenia. AIMS: The objective of the current paper is to provide a 2020 update of the previous recommendations in accordance with the evidence that has become available since our original recommendations. METHODS: This paper is based on literature reviews performed by members of the ESCEO working group and followed up with face to face meetings organized for the whole group to make amendments and discuss further recommendations. RESULTS: The randomized placebo-controlled double-blind parallel-arm drug clinical trials should be the design of choice for both phase II and III trials. Treatment and follow-up should run at least 6 months for phase II and 12 months for phase III trials. Overall physical activity, nutrition, co-prescriptions and comorbidity should be recorded. Participants in these trials should be at least 70-years-old and present with a combination of low muscle strength and low physical performance. Severely malnourished individuals, as well as bedridden patients, patients with extremely limited mobility or individuals with physical limitations clearly attributable to the direct effect of a specific disease, should be excluded. Multiple outcomes are proposed for phase II trials, including, as example, physical performance, muscle strength and mass, muscle metabolism and muscle-bone interaction. For phase III trials, we recommend a co-primary endpoint of a measure of functional performance and a Patient Reported Outcome Measure. CONCLUSION: The working group has formulated consensus recommendations on specific aspects of trial design, and in doing so hopes to contribute to an improvement of the methodological robustness and comparability of clinical trials. Standardization of designs and outcomes would advance the field by allowing better comparison across studies, including performing individual patient-data meta-analyses, and different pro-myogenic therapies.

Achieving equal and timely access to innovative anticancer drugs in the European Union (EU): summary of a multidisciplinary CECOG-driven roundtable discussion with a focus on Eastern and South-Eastern EU countries.

The Central European Cooperative Oncology Group (CECOG) and 'ESMO Open-Cancer Horizons' roundtable discussion brought together stakeholders from several European Union (EU) countries involved in drug development, drug authorisation and reimbursement or otherwise affected by delayed and unequal access to innovative anticancer drugs. The approval process of drugs is well established and access delays can be caused directly or indirectly by national or regional decision-making processes on reimbursement. The two key aspects for those involved in reimbursement decisions are first the level of evidence required to decide and second pricing, which can be challenging for some innovative oncology compounds, especially in Eastern and South-Eastern European countries. Other important factors include: available healthcare budget; the structure and sophistication of healthcare authorities and health technology assessment processes; societal context and political will. From the point of view of the pharmaceutical industry, better alignment between stakeholders in the process and adaptive pathway initiatives is desirable. Key aspects for patients are improved access to clinical trials, preapproval availability and reports on real-world evidence. Restricted access limits oncologists' daily work in Eastern and South-Eastern EU countries. The roundtable discussion suggested considering the sequencing of regulatory approval and reimbursement decisions together with more flexible contracting as a possible way forward. The panel concluded that early and regular dialogue between all stakeholders including regulators, payers, patient stakeholders and industry is required to improve the situation.

Algorithm for the Use of Biochemical Markers of Bone Turnover in the Diagnosis, Assessment and Follow-Up of Treatment for Osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION: Increased biochemical bone turnover markers (BTMs) measured in serum are associated with bone loss, increased fracture risk and poor treatment adherence, but their role in clinical practice is presently unclear. The aim of this consensus group report is to provide guidance to clinicians on how to use BTMs in patient evaluation in postmenopausal osteoporosis, in fracture risk prediction and in the monitoring of treatment efficacy and adherence to osteoporosis medication. METHODS: A working group with clinical scientists and osteoporosis specialists was invited by the Scientific Advisory Board of European Society on Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO). RESULTS: Serum bone formation marker PINP and resorption marker ßCTX-I are the preferred markers for evaluating bone turnover in the clinical setting due to their specificity to bone, performance in clinical studies, wide use and relatively low analytical variability. BTMs cannot be used to diagnose osteoporosis because of low sensitivity and specificity, but can be of value in patient evaluation where high values may indicate the need to investigate some causes of secondary osteoporosis. Assessing serum levels of ßCTX-I and PINP can improve fracture prediction slightly, with a gradient of risk of about 1.2 per SD increase in the bone marker in addition to clinical risk factors and bone mineral density. For an individual patient, BTMs are not useful in projecting bone loss or treatment efficacy, but it is recommended that serum PINP and ßCTX-I be used to monitor adherence to oral bisphosphonate treatment. Suppression of the BTMs greater than the least significant change or to levels in the lower half of the reference interval in young and healthy premenopausal women is closely related to treatment adherence. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the currently available evidence indicates that the principal clinical utility of BTMs is for monitoring oral bisphosphonate therapy.

Gut microbiota and osteoarthritis management: An expert consensus of the European society for clinical and economic aspects of osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and musculoskeletal diseases (ESCEO).

The prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) increases not only because of longer life expectancy but also because of the modern lifestyle, in particular physical inactivity and diets low in fiber and rich in sugar and saturated fats, which promote chronic low-grade inflammation and obesity. Adverse alterations of the gut microbiota (GMB) composition, called microbial dysbiosis, may favor metabolic syndrome and inflammaging, two important components of OA onset and evolution. Considering the burden of OA and the need to define preventive and therapeutic interventions targeting the modifiable components of OA, an expert working group was convened by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) to review the potential contribution of GMB to OA. Such a contribution is supported by observational or dietary intervention studies in animal models of OA and in humans. In addition, several well-recognized risk factors of OA interact with GMB. Lastly, GMB is a critical determinant of drug metabolism and bioavailability and may influence the response to OA medications. Further research targeting GMB or its metabolites is needed to move the field of OA from symptomatic management to individualized interventions targeting its pathogenesis.

Correction to: Is There Enough Evidence for Osteosarcopenic Obesity as a Distinct Entity? A Critical Literature Review.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in one of the co-author's name. The co-author Cyrus Cooper's degree "FMedSci" was incorrectly tagged as family name. This has been corrected with this erratum.

Is There Enough Evidence for Osteosarcopenic Obesity as a Distinct Entity? A Critical Literature Review.

The co-existence of impaired bone health (osteopenia/osteoporosis), reduced muscle mass and strength (sarcopenia), and increased adiposity (obesity) in middle-aged and older people has been identified in recent studies, leading to a proposal for the existence of "osteosarcopenic obesity" as a distinct entity. Evidence for the pathophysiological overlap of these conditions is mounting, although a causal relationship is yet to be established. Each component condition occurs frequently with increasing age, and with shared risk factors in many instances, thus, an overlap of these three conditions is not surprising. However, whether the concurrent existence of sarcopenia, osteoporosis and obesity leads to an increased risk of adverse musculoskeletal outcomes and mortality above and beyond the risks associated with the sum of the component parts remains to be proven and is a question of research interest. In this article, we review evidence for the existence of osteosarcopenic obesity including the current operational definition of osteosarcopenic obesity, prevalence, pathophysiology, outcomes and exploratory approaches to the management of components. We conclude that, there is insufficient evidence to support a discrete clinical entity of osteosarcopenic obesity at this time. To expand knowledge and understanding in this area, there is a need for consensus on a definition of osteosarcopenic obesity which will allow for identification, further epidemiological studies and comparisons between studies. Additionally, studies should assess whether the clinical outcomes associated with osteosarcopenic obesity are worse than the mere addition of those linked with its components. This will help to determine whether defining a person as having this triad will eventually result in a more effective treatment than addressing each of the three conditions separately.

Practical guidance for engaging patients in health research, treatment guidelines and regulatory processes: results of an expert group meeting organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).

There is increasing emphasis on patient-centred research to support the development, approval and reimbursement of health interventions that best meet patients' needs. However, there is currently little guidance on how meaningful patient engagement may be achieved. An expert working group, representing a wide range of stakeholders and disciplines, was convened by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Through a structured, collaborative process the group generated practical guidance to facilitate optimal patient engagement in clinical development and regulatory decisions. Patient engagement is a relational process. The principles outlined in this report were based on lessons learned through applied experience and on an extensive dialogue among the expert participants. This practice guidance forms a starting point from which tailoring of the approach to suit different chronic diseases may be undertaken.