The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis is the most common metabolic bone disease in the USA and the world. It is a subclinical condition until complicated by fracture(s). These fractures place an enormous medical and personal burden on individuals who suffer from them and take a significant economic toll. Any new fracture in an adult aged 50 years or older signifies imminent elevated risk for subsequent fractures, particularly in the year following the initial fracture. What a patient perceives as an unfortunate accident may be seen as a sentinel event indicative of bone fragility and increased future fracture risk even when the result of considerable trauma. Clinical or subclinical vertebral fractures, the most common type of osteoporotic fractures, are associated with a 5-fold increased risk for additional vertebral fractures and a 2- to 3-fold increased risk for fractures at other sites. Untreated osteoporosis can lead to a vicious cycle of recurrent fracture(s), often resulting in disability and premature death. In appropriate patients, treatment with effective antifracture medication prevents fractures and improves outcomes. Primary care providers and medical specialists are critical gatekeepers who can identify fractures and initiate proven osteoporosis interventions. Osteoporosis detection, diagnosis, and treatment should be routine practice in all adult healthcare settings. The Bone Health and Osteoporosis Foundation (BHOF) - formerly the National Osteoporosis Foundation - first published the Clinician's Guide in 1999 to provide accurate information on osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Since that time, significant improvements have been made in diagnostic technologies and treatments for osteoporosis. Despite these advances, a disturbing gap persists in patient care. At-risk patients are often not screened to establish fracture probability and not educated about fracture prevention. Most concerning, the majority of highest risk women and men who have a fracture(s) are not diagnosed and do not receive effective, FDA-approved therapies. Even those prescribed appropriate therapy are unlikely to take the medication as prescribed. The Clinician's Guide offers concise recommendations regarding prevention, risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men aged 50 years and older. It includes indications for bone densitometry as well as fracture risk thresholds for pharmacologic intervention. Current medications build bone and/or decrease bone breakdown and dramatically reduce incident fractures. All antifracture therapeutics treat but do not cure the disease. Skeletal deterioration resumes sooner or later when a medication is discontinued-sooner for nonbisphosphonates and later for bisphosphonates. Even if normal BMD is achieved, osteoporosis and elevated risk for fracture are still present. The diagnosis of osteoporosis persists even if subsequent DXA T-scores are above - 2.5. Ongoing monitoring and strategic interventions will be necessary if fractures are to be avoided. In addition to pharmacotherapy, adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D, avoidance of smoking and excessive alcohol intake, weight-bearing and resistance-training exercise, and fall prevention are included in the fracture prevention armamentarium. Where possible, recommendations in this guide are based on evidence from RCTs; however, relevant published data and guidance from expert clinical experience provides the basis for recommendations in those areas where RCT evidence is currently deficient or not applicable to the many osteoporosis patients not considered for RCT participation due to age and morbidity.

Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT) for clinical assessment of osteoporosis.

The surgeon general of the USA defines osteoporosis as "a skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone strength, predisposing to an increased risk of fracture." Measuring bone strength, Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT), namely, finite element analysis of a patient's clinical-resolution computed tomography (CT) scan, is now available in the USA as a Medicare screening benefit for osteoporosis diagnostic testing. Helping to address under-diagnosis of osteoporosis, BCT can be applied "opportunistically" to most existing CT scans that include the spine or hip regions and were previously obtained for an unrelated medical indication. For the BCT test, no modifications are required to standard clinical CT imaging protocols. The analysis provides measurements of bone strength as well as a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-equivalent bone mineral density (BMD) T-score at the hip and a volumetric BMD of trabecular bone at the spine. Based on both the bone strength and BMD measurements, a physician can identify osteoporosis and assess fracture risk (high, increased, not increased), without needing confirmation by DXA. To help introduce BCT to clinicians and health care professionals, we describe in this review the currently available clinical implementation of the test (VirtuOst), its application for managing patients, and the underlying supporting evidence; we also discuss its main limitations and how its results can be interpreted clinically. Together, this body of evidence supports BCT as an accurate and convenient diagnostic test for osteoporosis in both sexes, particularly when used opportunistically for patients already with CT. Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT) uses a patient's CT scan to measure both bone strength and bone mineral density at the hip or spine. Performing at least as well as DXA for both diagnosing osteoporosis and assessing fracture risk, BCT is particularly well-suited to "opportunistic" use for the patient without a recent DXA who is undergoing or has previously undergone CT testing (including hip or spine regions) for an unrelated medical condition.

Factors associated with the contemplative stage of readiness to initiate osteoporosis treatment.

We investigated the factors associated with readiness for initiating osteoporosis treatment in women at high risk of fracture. We found that women in the contemplative stage were more likely to report previously being told having osteoporosis or osteopenia, acknowledge concern about osteoporosis, and disclose prior osteoporosis treatment. INTRODUCTION: Understanding factors associated with reaching the contemplative stage of readiness to initiate osteoporosis treatment may inform the design of behavioral interventions to improve osteoporosis treatment uptake in women at high risk for fracture. METHODS: We measured readiness to initiate osteoporosis treatment using a modified form of the Weinstein Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) among 2684 women at high risk of fracture from the Activating Patients at Risk for OsteoPOroSis (APROPOS) clinical trial. Pre-contemplative participants were those who self-classified in the unaware and unengaged stages of PAPM (stages 1 and 2). Contemplative participants were those in the undecided, decided not to act, or decided to act stages of PAPM (stages 3, 4, and 5). Using multivariable logistic regression, we evaluated participant characteristics associated with levels of readiness to initiate osteoporosis treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 24% (N = 412) self-classified in the contemplative stage of readiness to initiate osteoporosis treatment. After adjusting for age, race, education, health literacy, and major osteoporotic fracture in the past 12 months, contemplative women were more likely to report previously being told they had osteoporosis or osteopenia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] (95% CI) 11.8 (7.8-17.9) and 3.8 (2.5-5.6), respectively), acknowledge concern about osteoporosis (aOR 3.5 (2.5-4.9)), and disclose prior osteoporosis treatment (aOR 4.5 (3.3-6.3)) than women who self-classified as pre-contemplative. CONCLUSIONS: For women at high risk for future fractures, ensuring women's recognition of their diagnosis of osteoporosis/osteopenia and addressing their concerns about osteoporosis are critical components to consider when attempting to influence stage of behavior transitions in osteoporosis treatment.

Hip fracture trends in the United States, 2002 to 2015.

An analysis of United States (US) Medicare claims data from 2002 to 2015 for women aged ≥ 65 years found that age-adjusted hip fracture rates for 2013, 2014, and 2015 were higher than projected, resulting in an estimated increase of more than 11,000 hip fractures. INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures are a major public health concern due to high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenses. Previous studies have reported a decrease in the annual incidence of hip fractures in the US beginning in 1995, coincident with the introduction of modern diagnostic tools and therapeutic agents for osteoporosis. In recent years, there has been less bone density testing and fewer prescriptions for osteoporosis treatments. The large osteoporosis treatment gap raises concern of possible adverse effects on hip fracture rates. METHODS: We assessed hip fracture incidence in the US to determine if the previous decline in hip fracture incidence continued. Using 2002 to 2015 Medicare Part A and Part B claims for women ≥ 65 years old, we calculated age-adjusted hip fracture rates, weighting to the 2014 population. RESULTS: We found that hip fracture rates declined each year from 2002 to 2012 and then plateaued at levels higher than projected for years 2013, 2014, and 2015. CONCLUSIONS: The plateau in age-adjusted hip fracture incidence rate resulted in more than 11,000 additional estimated hip fractures over the time periods 2013, 2014, and 2015. We recommend further study to assess all factors contributing to this remarkable change in hip fracture rate and to develop strategies to reduce the osteoporosis treatment gap.

Correction to: Hip fracture trends in the United States, 2002 to 2015.

The name of the first author, E.M. Lewiecki, was rendered incorrectly in the original publication. The publisher regrets any inconvenience and is pleased to correct the error here.

The impact of the new National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA) diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of osteoporosis in the United States: supplementary presentation.

We evaluated the prevalence of osteoporosis using the osteoporosis diagnostic criteria developed by the National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA), which includes qualified fractures, FRAX score in addition to BMD. The expanded definition increases the prevalence compared to BMD alone definitions; however, it may better identify those at elevated fracture risk. Recently an NBHA working Group published a paper in OI with recommendations for expanding the criteria that would constitute an osteoporosis diagnosis in postmenopausal women and in men over age 50 for use in the US - Siris et al., Osteoporosis International 25(%): 1439-1443, 2014. The recommendations have now been endorsed by NOF, ASBMR and a number of professional medical groups and appear in the NOF Clinician's Guide. The new diagnostic criteria continue to include a T-score by DXA of spine or hip that is less than or equal to -2.5, but alternatively also include a hip fracture with or without BMD testing or a vertebral, pelvis, proximal humerus and in some cases a distal forearm fracture in a person with low bone mass, or a FRAX score that meets or exceeds the NOF Guide osteoporosis treatment cut point.

The impact of the new National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA) diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of osteoporosis in the USA.

We evaluated the prevalence of osteoporosis using the osteoporosis diagnostic criteria developed by the National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA), which includes qualified fractures, FRAX score in addition to bone mineral density (BMD). The expanded definition increases the prevalence compared to BMD alone definitions; however, it may better identify those at elevated fracture risk. PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to estimate the prevalence of osteoporosis in US adults ≥50 years using the NBHA osteoporosis diagnostic criteria. METHODS: Utilizing 2005-2008 data of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), we identified participants with osteoporosis with any one of the following: (1) femoral neck or lumbar spine T-score ≤ -2.5; (2) low trauma hip fracture irrespective of BMD or clinical vertebral, proximal humerus, pelvis, or distal forearm fracture with a T-score >-2.5 <-1.0; or (3) FRAX score at the National Osteoporosis Foundation intervention thresholds (≥3% for hip fracture or ≥20% for major osteoporotic fracture). We estimated the prevalence overall and by gender and age. RESULTS: Our sample included 1948 (54.3%) men and 1639 (45.7%) women. Approximately 12% were 80+ years and 21% were from racial/ethnic minority groups. We estimated that 16.0% (0.8) of men and 29.9% (1.0) of women 50+ years have osteoporosis. The prevalence increases with age to 46.3% in men and 77.1% in women 80+ years. The combination of FRAX score and fractures was the largest contributing factor defining osteoporosis in men (70-79, 88.1%; 80+, 80.1%), whereas T-score was the largest contributing factor in women (70-79, 49.2%; 80+, 43.5%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that 16% of men and 29.9% of women 50+ have osteoporosis based on the NBHA diagnostic criteria. Although the expanded definition increases the prevalence compared to BMD alone-based definitions, it may better identify those at elevated fracture risk in order to reduce the burden of fractures in older adults.

Is the association between hip fractures and seasonality modified by influenza vaccination? An ecological study.

Osteoporotic hip fractures in 4344 patients were more common during winter. Lower temperatures were associated with higher rates of fracture only in those not vaccinated for influenza. Influenza outbreaks increased the risk of hip fractures. Further studies are needed to assess whether influenza vaccination can prevent hip fractures. INTRODUCTION: Winter seasonality of osteoporotic hip fracture incidence has been demonstrated, yet the explanation for the association is lacking. We hypothesize that the seasonality of osteoporotic hip fracture can be explained by an association between hip fractures and seasonal influenza outbreaks. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients admitted to Soroka University Medical Center with a diagnosis of osteoporotic hip fracture (ICD-9 code 820) between the years 2001 and 2013. Patients with malignancies, trauma, and age under 50 were excluded. In a time series analysis, we examined the association between hip fracture incidence and seasonality adjusted for meteorological factors, and population rates of influenza infection and vaccination using Poisson models. RESULTS: Four thousand three hundred forty-four patients with a hip fracture were included (69% females, mean age 78). Daily fracture rates were significantly higher in winter (1.1 fractures/day) compared to summer, fall, and spring (0.79, 0.90, and 0.91; p < 0.001). In analysis adjusted for seasons and spline function of time, temperatures were associated with hip fractures risk only in those not vaccinated for influenza (n = 2939, for every decrease of 5 °C, RR 1.08, CI 1.02-1.16; p < 0.05). In subgroup analysis during the years with weekly data on national influenza rates (2010-2013), the risk for hip fracture, adjusted for seasons and temperature, was 1.26 2 weeks following a week with high infection burden (CI 1.05;1.51 p = 0.01), while the temperature was not significantly associated with the fracture risk. CONCLUSIONS: Under dry and warm desert climate, winter hip fracture incidence increase might be associated with influenza infection, and this effect can be negated by influenza vaccination.

Self-perception of fracture risk: what can it tell us?

In this study, we report that self-perception of fracture risk captures some aspect of fracture risk not currently measured using conventional fracture prediction tools and is associated with improved medication uptake. It suggests that adequate appreciation of fracture risk may be beneficial and lead to greater healthcare engagement and treatment. INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess how well self-perception of fracture risk, and fracture risk as estimated by the fracture prediction tool FRAX, related to fracture incidence and uptake and persistence of anti-osteoporosis medication among women participating in the Global Longitudinal study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW). METHODS: GLOW is an international cohort study involving 723 physician practices across 10 countries in Europe, North America and Australia. Aged ≥ 55 years, 60,393 women completed baseline questionnaires detailing medical history, including co-morbidities, fractures and self-perceived fracture risk (SPR). Annual follow-up included self-reported incident fractures and anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) use. We calculated FRAX risk without bone mineral density measurement. RESULTS: Of the 39,241 women with at least 1 year of follow-up data, 2132 (5.4%) sustained an incident major osteoporotic fracture over 5 years of follow-up. Within each SPR category, risk of fracture increased as the FRAX categorisation of risk increased. In GLOW, only 11% of women with a lower baseline SPR were taking AOM at baseline, compared with 46% of women with a higher SPR. AOM use tended to increase in the years after a reported fracture. However, women with a lower SPR who were fractured still reported lower AOM rates than women with or without a fracture but had a higher SPR. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that SPR captures some aspect of fracture risk not currently measured using conventional fracture prediction tools and is also associated with improved medication uptake.

Persistence at 12 months with denosumab in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: interim results from a prospective observational study.

UNLABELLED: To determine persistence with subcutaneous denosumab every 6 months in women being treated for osteoporosis, we conducted a single-arm prospective, observational study in the United States and Canada. Among 935 patients enrolled, 12-month persistence was 82%, with 66 patients (7%) reporting serious adverse events and 19 patients (2%) reporting fractures. INTRODUCTION: Increased persistence with osteoporosis therapy is associated with reduced fracture risk. Denosumab reduced fracture risk in clinical trials; persistence in community settings is undetermined. This study evaluates persistence with denosumab in community practice in the United States (US) and Canada. METHODS: In a 24-month multicenter, prospective, single-arm, observational study, women being treated for osteoporosis were enrolled ≤4 weeks after the first subcutaneous injection of denosumab. For this 12-month prespecified interim analysis, endpoints include persistence (one injection at study entry and another within 6 months + 8 weeks), attributes associated with persistence (univariate analysis), and serious adverse events (SAEs). RESULTS: Among 935 patients (mean age 71 years), mean baseline T-scores were -2.18 (femoral neck) and -2.00 (lumbar spine); 50% of patients had experienced osteoporotic fracture(s). At 12 months, 82 % of patients were persistent with denosumab. Baseline factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with higher persistence included use of osteoporosis medications >5 years previously, lumbar spine T-score > -2.5, and treatment by female physicians (US). Lower persistence was associated (p < 0.05) with psychiatric diagnoses including depression, southern US residence, being divorced, separated, or widowed (US), and prior hip fracture (Canada). SAEs were reported in 66 patients (7%); no SAEs of osteonecrosis of the jaw, atypical femoral fracture, fracture healing complications, hypocalcemia, eczema, or hypersensitivity were reported. Nineteen patients (2%) reported osteoporotic fractures. CONCLUSIONS: The 12-month persistence observed in this single-arm open-label study of US and Canadian community practice extends the evidence regarding denosumab's potential role in reducing fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

The clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis: a position statement from the National Bone Health Alliance Working Group.

UNLABELLED: Osteoporosis causes an elevated fracture risk. We propose the continued use of T-scores as one means for diagnosis but recommend that, alternatively, hip fracture; osteopenia-associated vertebral, proximal humerus, pelvis, or some wrist fractures; or FRAX scores with ≥3% (hip) or 20% (major) 10-year fracture risk also confer an osteoporosis diagnosis. INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is a common disorder of reduced bone strength that predisposes to an increased risk for fractures in older individuals. In the USA, the standard criterion for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and older men is a T-score of ≤ -2.5 at the lumbar spine, femur neck, or total hip by bone mineral density testing. METHODS: Under the direction of the National Bone Health Alliance, 17 clinicians and clinical scientists were appointed to a working group charged to determine the appropriate expansion of the criteria by which osteoporosis can be diagnosed. RESULTS: The group recommends that postmenopausal women and men aged 50 years should be diagnosed with osteoporosis if they have a demonstrable elevated risk for future fractures. This includes having a T-score of less than or equal to -2.5 at the spine or hip as one method for diagnosis but also permits a diagnosis for individuals in this population who have experienced a hip fracture with or without bone mineral density (BMD) testing and for those who have osteopenia by BMD who sustain a vertebral, proximal humeral, pelvic, or, in some cases, distal forearm fracture. Finally, the term osteoporosis should be used to diagnose individuals with an elevated fracture risk based on the World Health Organization Fracture Risk Algorithm, FRAX. CONCLUSIONS: As new ICD-10 codes become available, it is our hope that this new understanding of what osteoporosis represents will allow for an appropriate diagnosis when older individuals are recognized as being at an elevated risk for fracture.

Disease-specific perception of fracture risk and incident fracture rates: GLOW cohort study.

UNLABELLED: Accurate patient risk perception of adverse health events promotes greater autonomy over, and motivation towards, health-related lifestyles. INTRODUCTION: We compared self-perceived fracture risk and 3-year incident fracture rates in postmenopausal women with a range of morbidities in the Global Longitudinal study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW). METHODS: GLOW is an international cohort study involving 723 physician practices across ten countries (Europe, North America, Australasia); 60,393 women aged ≥55 years completed baseline questionnaires detailing medical history and self-perceived fracture risk. Annual follow-up determined self-reported incident fractures. RESULTS: In total 2,945/43,832 (6.8%) sustained an incident fracture over 3 years. All morbidities were associated with increased fracture rates, particularly Parkinson's disease (hazard ratio [HR]; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.89; 2.78-5.44), multiple sclerosis (2.70; 1.90-3.83), cerebrovascular events (2.02; 1.67-2.46), and rheumatoid arthritis (2.15; 1.53-3.04) (all p < 0.001). Most individuals perceived their fracture risk as similar to (46%) or lower than (36%) women of the same age. While increased self-perceived fracture risk was strongly associated with incident fracture rates, only 29% experiencing a fracture perceived their risk as increased. Under-appreciation of fracture risk occurred for all morbidities, including neurological disease, where women with low self-perceived fracture risk had a fracture HR 2.39 (CI 1.74-3.29) compared with women without morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Postmenopausal women with morbidities tend to under-appreciate their risk, including in the context of neurological diseases, where fracture rates were highest in this cohort. This has important implications for health education, particularly among women with Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, or cerebrovascular disease.

Non-hip, non-spine fractures drive healthcare utilization following a fracture: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW).

UNLABELLED: We evaluated healthcare utilization associated with treating fracture types in >51,000 women aged ≥55 years. Over the course of 1 year, there were five times more non-hip, non-spine fractures than hip or spine fractures, resulting in twice as many days of hospitalization and rehabilitation/nursing home care for non-hip, non-spine fractures. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to evaluate medical healthcare utilization associated with treating several types of fractures in women ≥55 years from various geographic regions. METHODS: Information from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) was collected via self-administered patient questionnaires at baseline and year 1 (n = 51,491). Self-reported clinically recognized low-trauma fractures at year 1 were classified as incident spine, hip, wrist/hand, arm/shoulder, pelvis, rib, leg, and other fractures. Healthcare utilization data were self-reported and included whether the fracture was treated at a doctor's office/clinic or at a hospital. Patients were asked if they had undergone surgery or been treated at a rehabilitation center or nursing home. RESULTS: During 1-year follow-up, there were 195 spine, 134 hip, and 1,654 non-hip, non-spine fractures. Clinical vertebral fractures resulted in 617 days of hospitalization and 512 days of rehabilitation/nursing home care; hip fractures accounted for 1,306 days of hospitalization and 1,650 days of rehabilitation/nursing home care. Non-hip, non-spine fractures resulted in 3,805 days in hospital and 5,186 days of rehabilitation/nursing home care. CONCLUSIONS: While hip and vertebral fractures are well recognized for their associated increase in health resource utilization, non-hip, non-spine fractures, by virtue of their 5-fold greater number, require significantly more healthcare resources.

What's in a name? What constitutes the clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis?

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder in which reductions in bone strength predispose to an increased risk for fractures. Currently, the diagnosis is officially made based exclusively on bone mineral density T-scores that are ≤-2.5 at the spine or hip. Limiting the clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis solely to a T-score-based criterion, which is the official convention in the USA, creates uncertainty about the use of the term osteoporosis to diagnose older women and men who have T-scores >-2.5, but either have already sustained low-trauma fractures or are recognized as having high fracture risk based on absolute fracture risk calculations from FRAX or other algorithms. A failure to diagnose such patients as having osteoporosis may be one component of the well-documented underdiagnosis and undertreatment of this disease which limits our ability to reduce the burden of fractures worldwide. There is a need to expand the criteria for making a clinical diagnosis and to codify these changes in order to help patients, physicians, policy makers, and payers better understand who has this disease and the elevated risk for fracture that it represents.

Rib fracture as a predictor of future fractures in young and older postmenopausal women: National Osteoporosis Risk Assessment (NORA).

UNLABELLED: A rib fracture history after age 45 was associated with a 5.4-fold increase in new rib fracture risk and a 2.4-fold increase in risk of any new clinical fracture in 155,031 postmenopausal women. A rib fracture history suggests osteoporosis and should be considered when evaluating patients for interventions to prevent fractures. INTRODUCTION: Until recently, little attention was paid to rib fracture as an osteoporosis marker. Emerging evidence suggests rib fracture may be an osteoporotic fracture in men and women. We report the 5-year independent association between baseline rib fracture histories and self-reported future fractures by age (decade) in the NORA cohort (155,031 postmenopausal women, 50-99 years). METHODS: Participants reported fracture history and responded to follow-up surveys at years 1, 3, or 6. Women with a baseline rib fracture history without other fractures were compared with women with no fracture. RESULTS: At baseline, 4,758 (3.07%) women reported a rib fracture history without other fractures; 6,300 women reported 6,830 new clinical fractures, including wrist (2,271), rib (1,891), spine (1,136), hip (941), and forearm (591). Adjusted relative risk (ARR) values (95% confidence interval [CI]) for future fractures in women with rib fracture history versus women with no fracture history were 5.4 (4.8-6.1) at the rib, 2.1 (1.7-2.6) at the spine, and 1.4 (1.1-1.7) at the wrist, and not significant for forearm or hip fractures. Future fracture risk was at least doubled in women with a rib fracture history in all ages: ARR (95% CI) 3.4 (2.8-4.0) for ages 50-59, 2.5 (2.1-3.0) for ages 60-69, 2.0 (1.7-2.3) for ages 70-79, and 2.0 (1.6-2.6) for ages >80. CONCLUSIONS: Rib fracture, the second most common clinical fracture in women (after wrist fracture), predicted future fractures of the rib, wrist, and spine at all ages. Women presenting with rib fractures should be evaluated for appropriate management to prevent future fractures.

Regional and age-related variations in the proportions of hip fractures and major fractures among postmenopausal women: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women.

UNLABELLED: We examined variations in proportions of hip fractures and major fractures among postmenopausal women using the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW). The proportion of major fractures that were hip fractures varied with age and region, whereas variations in the proportion of fractures that were major fractures appeared modest. INTRODUCTION: In many countries, the World Health Organization fracture risk assessment tool calculates the probability of major fractures by assuming a uniform age-associated proportion of major fractures that are hip fractures in different countries. We further explored this assumption, using data from the GLOW. METHODS: GLOW is an observational population-based study of 60,393 non-institutionalized women aged ≥55 years who had visited practices within the previous 2 years. Main outcome measures were self-reported prevalent fractures after the age of 45 years and incident fractures during the 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: The adjusted proportion of prevalent and incident major fractures after the age of 45 years that were hip fractures was higher in North America (16%, 17%) than in northern (13%, 12%) and southern Europe (10%, 10%), respectively. The proportion of incident major fractures that were hip fractures increased more than five-fold with age, from 6.6% among 55-59-year-olds to 34% among those aged ≥85 years. Regional and age-associated variations in the proportion of all incident fractures that were major fractures were less marked, not exceeding 16% and 28%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that there may be regional differences in the proportion of major fractures that are hip fractures in postmenopausal women. In contrast, the regional and age-related variations in the proportion of fractures that are major fractures appear to be modest. However, because of the limited number of fractures in our sample, further studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Impact of clinical fractures on health-related quality of life is dependent on time of assessment since fracture: results from the FREEDOM trial.

UNLABELLED: In the Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis Every 6 Months (FREEDOM) study, women with incident clinical fractures reported significant declines in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The largest declines were observed when the assessment was <3 months post fracture. The largest impact of incident clinical fractures was on physical function, and that of incident clinical vertebral fractures was on back pain. INTRODUCTION: In the FREEDOM trial, denosumab significantly reduced the risk of new vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures. We evaluated the effect of denosumab on HRQoL and the association between incident clinical fractures and HRQoL. METHODS: The FREEDOM trial enrolled 7,868 women aged 60-90 years with a total hip and/or lumbar spine BMD T-score <-2.5 and not <-4.0 at either site. Women were randomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo every 6 months, in addition to daily calcium and vitamin D. HRQoL was assessed with the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire-Short Version (OPAQ-SV) at baseline and every 6 months for 36 months. The OPAQ-SV assesses physical function, emotional status, and back pain. Higher scores indicate better health status. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in mean change in HRQoL from baseline to end of study were found when comparing treatment groups. Compared with women without any incident fractures during the study, women with incident clinical fractures reported significant declines in physical function (-4.0 vs. -0.5) and emotional status (-5.0 vs. -0.8) at month 36 (P < 0.001 for both). Importantly, time-dependent covariate analyses demonstrated that the largest declines were observed when the assessment was <3 months post fracture. The largest impact of incident clinical fractures was on physical function, and that of incident clinical vertebral fractures was on back pain. CONCLUSIONS: These findings not only demonstrate that incident clinical fractures impact HRQoL but also contribute new information regarding the impact of these fracture events on HRQoL over time.

Burden of non-hip, non-vertebral fractures on quality of life in postmenopausal women: the Global Longitudinal study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW).

UNLABELLED: Among 50,461 postmenopausal women, 1,822 fractures occurred (57% minor non-hip, non-vertebral [NHNV], 26% major NHNV, 10% spine, 7% hip) over 1 year. Spine fractures had the greatest detrimental effect on EQ-5D, followed by major NHNV and hip fractures. Decreases in physical function and health status were greatest for spine or hip fractures. INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence that NHNV fractures result in substantial morbidity and healthcare costs. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the effect of these NHNV fractures on quality of life. METHODS: We analyzed the 1-year incidences of hip, spine, major NHNV (pelvis/leg, shoulder/arm) and minor NHNV (wrist/hand, ankle/foot, rib/clavicle) fractures among women from the Global Longitudinal study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW). Health-related quality of life (HRQL) was analyzed using the EuroQol EQ-5D tool and the SF-36 health survey. RESULTS: Among 50,461 women analyzed, there were 1,822 fractures (57% minor NHNV, 26% major NHNV, 10% spine, 7% hip) over 1 year. Spine fractures had the greatest detrimental effect on EQ-5D summary scores, followed by major NHNV and hip fractures. The number of women with mobility problems increased most for those with major NHNV and spine fractures (both +8%); spine fractures were associated with the largest increases in problems with self care (+11%), activities (+14%), and pain/discomfort (+12%). Decreases in physical function and health status were greatest for those with spine or hip fractures. Multivariable modeling found that EQ-5D reduction was greatest for spine fractures, followed by hip and major/minor NHNV. Statistically significant reductions in SF-36 physical function were found for spine fractures, and were borderline significant for major NHNV fractures. CONCLUSION: This prospective study shows that NHNV fractures have a detrimental effect on HRQL. Efforts to optimize the care of osteoporosis patients should include the prevention of NHNV fractures.

Cost-effectiveness of Denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

UNLABELLED: Denosumab is an injectable drug that reduces the risk of fractures. The objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab in a Swedish setting, also accounting for poor adherence to treatment. Denosumab is cost-effective, particularly for patients at high risk of fracture and low adherence to oral treatments. INTRODUCTION: Denosumab is a novel biologic agent developed for the treatment of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures that has been shown to reduce the risk of fractures in a phase III trial. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab from a societal perspective compared with generic alendronate, branded risedronate, strontium ranelate, and no treatment in a Swedish setting. METHODS: A Markov cohort model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab given for up to 5 years to a typical Swedish patient population (women aged 71 years, T-score ≤ -2.5 SD and a prevalence of morphometric vertebral fractures of 34%). The model included treatment persistence and residual effect after discontinuation assumed to be equal to the time on treatment. Persistence with the comparator treatments and with denosumab was derived from prescription data and a persistence study, respectively. RESULTS: The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated at €27,000, €12,000, €5,000, and €14,000, for denosumab compared with generic alendronate, risedronate, strontium ranelate, and no treatment, respectively. Sub-optimal persistence had the greatest impact in the comparison with generic alendronate, where the difference in drug cost was large. CONCLUSION: Improving persistence with osteoporosis treatment impacts positively on cost-effectiveness with a larger number of fractures avoided in the population targeted for treatment. Denosumab is a cost-effective alternative to oral osteoporosis treatments, particularly for patients at high risk of fracture and low expected adherence to oral treatments.