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.

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.

Candidate biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of drug-induced liver injury: An international collaborative effort.

Current blood biomarkers are suboptimal in detecting drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and predicting its outcome. We sought to characterize the natural variabilty and performance characteristics of 14 promising DILI biomarker candidates. Serum or plasma from multiple cohorts of healthy volunteers (n = 192 and n = 81), subjects who safely took potentially hepatotoxic drugs without adverse effects (n = 55 and n = 92) and DILI patients (n = 98, n = 28, and n = 143) were assayed for microRNA-122 (miR-122), glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH), total cytokeratin 18 (K18), caspase cleaved K18, glutathione S-transferase α, alpha-fetoprotein, arginase-1, osteopontin (OPN), sorbitol dehydrogenase, fatty acid binding protein, cadherin-5, macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor (MCSFR), paraoxonase 1 (normalized to prothrombin protein), and leukocyte cell-derived chemotaxin-2. Most candidate biomarkers were significantly altered in DILI cases compared with healthy volunteers. GLDH correlated more closely with gold standard alanine aminotransferase than miR-122, and there was a surprisingly wide inter- and intra-individual variability of miR-122 levels among healthy volunteers. Serum K18, OPN, and MCSFR levels were most strongly associated with liver-related death or transplantation within 6 months of DILI onset. Prediction of prognosis among DILI patients using the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease was improved by incorporation of K18 and MCSFR levels. Conclusion: GLDH appears to be more useful than miR-122 in identifying DILI patients, and K18, OPN, and MCSFR are promising candidates for prediction of prognosis during an acute DILI event. Serial assessment of these biomarkers in large prospective studies will help further delineate their role in DILI diagnosis and management.

Clinical evaluation of medicinal products for acceleration of fracture healing in patients with osteoporosis.

Pre-clinical studies indicate that pharmacologic agents can augment fracture union. If these pharmacologic approaches could be translated into clinical benefit and offered to patients with osteoporosis or patients with other risks for impaired fracture union (e.g. in subjects with large defects or open fractures with high complication rate), they could provide an important adjunct to the treatment of fractures. However, widely accepted guidelines are important to encourage the conduct of studies to evaluate bioactive substances, drugs, and new agents that may promote fracture union and subsequent return to normal function. A consensus process was initiated to provide recommendations for the clinical evaluation of potential therapies to augment fracture repair in patients with meta- and diaphyseal fractures. Based on the characteristics of fracture healing and fixation, the following study objectives of a clinical study may be appropriate: a) acceleration of fracture union, b) acceleration of return to normal function and c) reduction of fracture healing complications. The intended goal(s) should determine subsequent study methodology. While an acceleration of return to normal function or a reduction of fracture healing complications in and of themselves may be sufficient primary study endpoints for a phase 3 pivotal study, acceleration of fracture union alone is not. Radiographic evaluation may either occur at multiple time points during the healing process with the aim of measuring the time taken to reach a defined status (e.g. cortical bridging of three cortices or disappearance of fracture lines), or could be obtained at a single pre-determined timepoint, were patients are expected to reach a common clinical milestone (i.e. pain free full weight-bearing in weight-bearing fracture cases). Validated Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO's) measures will need to support the return to normal function co-primary endpoints. If reduction of complication rate (e.g. non-union) is the primary objective, the anticipated complications must be defined in the study protocol, along with their possible associations with the specified fracture type and fixation device. The study design should be randomized, parallel, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, and all fracture subjects should receive a standardized method of fracture fixation, defined as Standard of Care.

[European outbreak of Hepatitis A in Iceland in 2017. Common radiological changes of the gallbladder].

IAim The incidence of hepatitis A (HAV) in Iceland is low with about one case per year in the last decades. Since 2016, there has been an ongoing outbreak of HAV in men who have sex with men (MSM). The aim of this study was to inves-tigate whether cases diagnosed in Iceland during 2017 had any link to the HAV outbreak in Europe. Methods All cases of HAV in Iceland during 2017 were reviewed retrospectively. Results Four of five cases diagnosed during 2017 were MSM and one was a female. Three cases presented the same week in the summer 2017. The age of the patients was between 25 and 39 years. All the male patients had had sex with men from Europe and/or had travelled to Europe prior to admission. All cases had typical signs and symptoms of HAV infection and in all cases recent infection was confirmed by positive serology and exclusion of other causes of acute hepatitis. Four of five patients had radiological signs of changes in the gallbladder with thickening of the wall and oedema and one underwent later an elective cholecystectomy. Conclusion The outbreak of HAV in MSM Europe reached Iceland in the summer 2017, emphasizing the importance of vaccination in this risk group as recommended by the Icelandic Health Authorities. The review of these cases indicate that changes such as thickening of the gallbladder wall without gallstones in patients with HAV are common. It is important to discrimi-nate patients with these changes associated with HAV from patients with acute acalculus cholecystitis.

Increased rate of bone loss at the femoral neck in patients with chronic liver disease.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) have an increased prevalence of osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate prospectively the rate of bone loss and potential predictors of increased bone loss in a cohort of patients with CLD. DESIGN: Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at baseline and at follow-up by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the lumbar spine and the femoral neck. RESULTS: Forty-three patients (31 female, 12 male) were available for a second measurement of BMD, with a median of 25 months (range 18-41) between the measurements. Mean annual bone loss at the lumbar spine and the femoral neck, respectively, was 0.6 +/- 2.0% and 1.5 +/- 2.4% in females and 0.8 +/- 1.9% and 2.9 +/- 2.0% in males. The BMD Z score decreased significantly over time at the femoral neck (P = 0.005 and P = 0.02 for females and males, respectively). Bone loss was increased significantly at the lumbar spine in patients classified as Child-Pugh B + C compared with those classified as Child-Pugh A (P = 0.04). Serum levels of bilirubin correlated independently and positively, and 25-hydroxy vitamin D3 levels negatively, with bone loss at the femoral neck. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CLD have increased bone loss at the femoral neck. Advanced liver disease is associated with increased bone loss, and hyperbilirubinaemia and low levels of vitamin D3 are predictors of increased bone loss.

Causality assessment for suspected DILI during clinical phases of drug development.

Causality assessment is a critical step in establishing the diagnosis of drug induced liver injury (DILI) during drug development. DILI may resemble almost any type of liver disease, and often presents a serious challenge to clinical investigators and drug makers. The diagnosis of DILI is largely based upon a combination of a compatible clinical course, exclusion of all other reasonable causes, resemblance of clinical and pathological features to known features of liver injury due to the drug (i.e., "drug's signature"), and incidence of liver injury among patients treated with the drug compared to placebo or comparator. Causality assessment for suspected DILI is currently performed using either evaluation by physicians with expertise in liver disorders (i.e., expert opinion) or standardized scoring instruments such as the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM). Both approaches are widely used in the post marketing setting. Causality assessment based on expert opinion is considered superior to standardized instruments such as RUCAM, in the setting of drug development, and is currently the preferred approach during clinical trials. There is a need for a systematic revision of RUCAM that will render it more suitable for the setting of clinical trials and drug development. Careful monitoring and meticulous data collection during clinical trials are essential in all cases with established liver injury to allow for a proper causality assessment. A workshop was convened to discuss best practices for the assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in clinical trials. This publication is based on the conclusions of this workshop.

Recommendations for an update of 2003 European regulatory requirements for registration of drugs to be used in the treatment of RA.

Since 2003, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) document, 'Points to consider on clinical investigation of medicinal products other than NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis' has provided guidance for the clinical development of both biologic and non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In the last few years, several new products have been developed or are in development for the treatment of RA, which offer significant efficacy with regard to disease control, including prevention of structural damage and disability. Concurrently, novel insights have been gained with respect to the assessment of disease activity, joint damage and disability. New treatment strategies have been established which relate to early therapy, tight control and rapid switching of medication. Accordingly, several new EULAR/ACR recommendations have been or are being developed. Several important additions and changes are needed in the 2003 guidance to incorporate the current scientific knowledge into clinical trial design for the development of future products. Under the auspices of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES), a group of experts in the field of RA and clinical trial design met to provide a consensus recommendation for an update to the 2003 EMA guidance document.

[Hepatotoxicity associated with the use of Herbalife]. / Lifrarskadi tengdur notkun á Herbalife.

OBJECTIVE: Many herbal products are known to be hepatotoxic. In a recent survey in Iceland concerning adverse reactions related to herbal medicines, Herbalife products were implicated in the majority of the reported cases of hepatotoxicity. METHODS: The clinical presentations of five cases of Herbalife related liver injury during the period of 1999-2008 are analysed. Causality was assessed by using the WHO-UMC system for causality assessment and the RUCAM method. RESULTS: Of the five cases there were four females and one male; median age was 46 years (range 29-78). Herbalife had been used for 1 to 7 months prior to presentation. Four patients presented with a hepatocellular and one with a cholestatic reaction. Median values were for bilirubin 190 micromol/L (range: 26-311; ref. < 20 micromol/L), ALP 407 U/L (range: 149-712; ref. 35-105 U/L) and ALT 24 87 U/L (range: 456-2637; ref. 70 and 45 U/L for males and females, respectively). Liver biopsy was performed in 2 patients and was consistent with toxic hepatitis in both cases. Other causes of hepatitis were excluded by appropriate serological testing and ultrasound. Causality assessment according to RUCAM was probable in three cases and possible in two. Using the WHO-UMC criteria causality was certain in one case, probable in two and possible in two cases. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatotoxicity is probably associated with the use of Herbalife products. Hepatotoxicity due to herbal remedies is an important differential diagnosis in the diagnostic work-up of liver injury.