RESUMEN
A retrospective analysis comparing a teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) with reference teriparatide for osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal women at high fracture risk found them to be therapeutically equivalent. Both provided significant improvements in lumber spine BMD, TBS, and other parameters of bone health, assessed using multiple diagnostic methods. PURPOSE: To compare the therapeutic efficacy of a teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) with reference teriparatide for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at very high fracture risk. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 25 postmenopausal female patients treated for osteoporosis with RGB-10 for 24 months and a matched cohort of 25 patients treated with reference teriparatide. The following outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12 and 24 months: bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and integral, trabecular and cortical volumetric and surface BMD using 3D-SHAPER® imaging, trabecular bone score (TBS), quantitative ultrasound (QUS) measurements, and high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HRpQCT) imaging of the radius and tibia. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between treatment groups in any of the measured parameters of BMD or bone health at baseline as well as in any timepoint when assessed using these various diagnostic methods. Both compounds provided equivalent significant improvements from baseline in measures of osteoporosis and fracture risk. CONCLUSION: The results of the analysis demonstrate the therapeutic equivalence of the teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) to reference teriparatide for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at very high risk of fracture.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness, tolerability and application of estradiol metered-dose transdermal spray (EMDTS) in postmenopausal women during real-world use. METHODS: This was a prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, observational phase IV cohort study. The Menopause Rating Scale II (MRS II) was used to assess symptoms and clinical response. Safety was assessed by the occurrence of adverse events and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). RESULTS: A total of 451 postmenopausal women were enrolled at 52 gynecological practices across Germany; 383 patients were evaluated for effectiveness and 430 patients for safety. Mean age was 54.3 ± 7.4 years. In total, 228 patients (59.5%) received EMDTS monotherapy and 155 patients (40.5%) received EMDTS plus progestogens. Significant improvements (p < 0.0001) from baseline in symptom severity were recorded for all 11 items of the MRS II at 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment. At 12 months, 81.4% of patients reported improvement in hot flushes/sweating. At final visit, 73% of patients and 77% of physicians were 'satisfied/very pleased' with EMDTS. Most common ADRs were headache (n = 6), nausea (n = 4), dizziness (n = 4) and pruritus (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: EMDTS is an effective, well tolerated and easily applied hormone replacement therapy for women experiencing postmenopausal symptoms.
RESUMEN
Osteoporosis is the most common bone disorder. Our data gives an estimate of around 5.87 million cases of osteoporosis in the general German population in 2018. Only 30% of insured individuals who suffered an osteoporotic fracture and/or had a confirmed diagnosis of osteoporosis, received an appropriate prescription. PURPOSE: Osteoporosis is the most common bone disorder. It particularly affects elderly people and increases the risk of atraumatic fractures. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of osteoporosis in the general German population aged ≥ 50 years and to collect data on the frequency of prescription of osteoporosis-specific medication in order to assess the treatment gap. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of anonymized data of individuals aged ≥ 50 years insured under statutory healthcare schemes from the database of the Institute for Applied Health Research Berlin (InGef) for 2018 (study population). Insured individuals with osteoporosis were identified based on osteoporosis diagnoses, osteoporosis-specific prescriptions, or osteoporotic fractures. Thus, we estimated the prevalence of osteoporosis in the general German population aged ≥ 50 years. The prevalence of diagnoses, fractures, and prescriptions was determined for the study population and stratified by age and gender. RESULTS: Within the study population of 1,599,299 insured individuals, a prevalence of osteoporosis of 15.9% was determined. This estimated approximately 5.87 million cases of osteoporosis for the general German population. 81.6% of the cases were women. Osteoporosis-specific prescriptions were received by 30.0% of the insured individuals in the study population who had been diagnosed with osteoporosis and/or suffered an osteoporotic fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Germany has a high prevalence of osteoporosis. Only a small portion of individuals who may require osteoporosis-specific treatment actually receive it.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Óseas , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Anciano , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Osteoporosis/epidemiología , Alemania/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
The overarching goal of osteoporosis management is to prevent fractures. A goal-directed approach to long-term management of fracture risk helps ensure that the most appropriate initial treatment and treatment sequence is selected for individual patients. Goal-directed treatment decisions require assessment of clinical fracture history, vertebral fracture identification (using vertebral imaging as appropriate), measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) and consideration of other major clinical risk factors. Treatment targets should be tailored to each patient's individual risk profile and based on the specific indication for beginning treatment, including recency, site, number and severity of prior fractures, and BMD levels at the total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine. Instead of first-line bisphosphonate treatment for all patients, selection of initial treatment should focus on reducing fracture risk rapidly for patients at very high and imminent risk, such as in those with recent fractures. Initial treatment selection should also consider the probability that a BMD treatment target can be attained within a reasonable period of time and the differential magnitude of fracture risk reduction and BMD impact with osteoanabolic versus antiresorptive therapy. This position statement of the ASBMR/BHOF Task Force on Goal-Directed Osteoporosis Treatment provides an overall summary of the major clinical recommendations about treatment targets and strategies to achieve those targets based on the best evidence available, derived primarily from studies in older postmenopausal women of European ancestry.
Goal-directed treatment can help healthcare providers recommend the best treatments for individual patients to prevent fractures. The goal-directed strategy considers the site, number and recency of prior fractures. This may require imaging for spine fractures, which may not have caused pain. Treatment decisions also require bone mineral density (BMD) measurement and consideration of other major risk factors. In contrast to the standard approach, same first treatment for all, treatment selection is tailored to an individual's risk. In patients with recent fractures of the spine, hip or pelvis, fracture risk is very high and treatment should rapidly reduce that risk. For others, the target is a specific BMD level and should consider the likelihood that the treatment target can be attained within a reasonable period of time, which differs for osteoporosis medications. After initial therapy, BMD should be assessed to determine if the target has been achieved. If so, strategies should focus on maintaining BMD. If the target is not yet achieved, treatment should be intensified, or continued if it is already the most potent option. This position statement represents a consensus of expert recommendations about treatment targets and strategies to achieve those targets based on the best available evidence.
RESUMEN
Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (gBRCA1/2) are required for a PARP inhibitor therapy in patients with HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC). However, little is known about the prognostic impact of gBRCA1/2 mutations in aBC patients treated with chemotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the frequencies and prognosis of germline and somatic BRCA1/2 mutations in HER2- aBC patients receiving the first chemotherapy in the advanced setting. Patients receiving their first chemotherapy for HER2- aBC were retrospectively selected from the prospective PRAEGNANT registry (NCT02338167). Genotyping of 26 cancer predisposition genes was performed with germline DNA of 471 patients and somatic tumor DNA of 94 patients. Mutation frequencies, progression-free and overall survival (PFS, OS) according to germline mutation status were assessed. gBRCA1/2 mutations were present in 23 patients (4.9%), and 33 patients (7.0%) had mutations in other cancer risk genes. Patients with a gBRCA1/2 mutation had a better OS compared to non-mutation carriers (HR: 0.38; 95%CI: 0.17-0.86). PFS comparison was not statistically significant. Mutations in other risk genes did not affect prognosis. Two somatic BRCA2 mutations were found in 94 patients without gBRCA1/2 mutations. Most frequently somatic mutated genes were TP53 (44.7%), CDH1 (10.6%) and PTEN (6.4%). In conclusion, aBC patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations had a more favorable prognosis under chemotherapy compared to non-mutation carriers. The mutation frequency of ~5% with gBRCA1/2 mutations together with improved outcome indicates that germline genotyping of all metastatic patients for whom a PARP inhibitor therapy is indicated should be considered.
RESUMEN
Background With more effective therapies for patients with advanced breast cancer (aBC), therapy sequences are becoming increasingly important. However, some patients might drop out of the treatment sequence due to deterioration of their life status. Since little is known about attrition in the real-world setting, this study assessed attrition in the first three therapy lines using a real-world registry. Methods Patients with information available on the first three therapy lines were selected from the German PRAEGNANT registry (NCT02338167). Attrition was determined for each therapy line using competing risk analyses, with the start of the next therapy line or death as endpoints. Additionally, a simple attrition rate was calculated based on the proportion of patients who completed therapy but did not start the next therapy line. Results Competitive risk analyses were performed on 3988 1st line, 2651 2nd line and 1866 3rd line patients. The probabilities of not starting the next therapy line within 5 years after initiation of 1st, 2nd and 3rd line therapy were 30%, 24% and 24% respectively. Patients with HER2-positive disease had the highest risk for attrition, while patients with HRpos/HER2neg disease had the lowest risk. Attrition rates remained similar across molecular subgroups in the different therapy lines. Conclusion Attrition affects a large proportion of patients with aBC, which should be considered when planning novel therapy concepts that specifically address the sequencing of therapies. Taking attrition into account could help understand treatment effects resulting from sequential therapies and might help develop treatment strategies that specifically aim at maintaining quality of life.