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.

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.

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.

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.

Paget's disease of bone: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this guideline was to formulate practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Paget's disease of the bone. PARTICIPANTS: The guideline was developed by an Endocrine Society-appointed Task Force of experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer. EVIDENCE: This evidence-based guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to describe both the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. CONSENSUS PROCESS: One group meeting, several conference calls, and e-mail communications enabled consensus. Committees and members of The Endocrine Society and the European Society of Endocrinology reviewed and commented on preliminary drafts of these guidelines. Two systematic reviews were conducted to summarize supporting evidence. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that plain radiographs be obtained of the pertinent regions of the skeleton in patients with suspected Paget's disease. If the diagnosis is confirmed, we suggest that a radionucleotide bone scan be done to determine the extent of the disease. After diagnosis of Paget's disease, we recommend measurement of serum total alkaline phosphatase or, when warranted, a more specific marker of bone formation or bone resorption to assess the response to treatment or evolution of the disease in untreated patients. We suggest treatment with a bisphosphonate for most patients with active Paget's disease who are at risk for future complications. We suggest a single 5-mg dose of iv zoledronate as the treatment of choice in patients who have no contraindication. In patients with monostotic disease who have a normal serum total alkaline phosphatase, we suggest that a specific marker of bone formation and bone resorption be measured, although these may still be normal. Serial radionuclide bone scans may determine the response to treatment if the markers are normal. We suggest that bisphosphonate treatment may be effective in preventing or slowing the progress of hearing loss and osteoarthritis in joints adjacent to Paget's disease and may reverse paraplegia associated with spinal Paget's disease. We suggest treatment with a bisphosphonate before surgery on pagetic bone.(AU)

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.

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.

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.

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.

Failure to perceive increased risk of fracture in women 55 years and older: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW).

UNLABELLED: We compared self-perception of fracture risk with actual risk among 60,393 postmenopausal women aged ≥55 years, using data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW). Most postmenopausal women with risk factors failed to appreciate their actual risk for fracture. Improved education about osteoporosis risk factors is needed. INTRODUCTION: This study seeks to compare self-perception of fracture risk with actual risk among postmenopausal women using data from GLOW. METHODS: GLOW is an international, observational, cohort study involving 723 physician practices in 17 sites in ten countries in Europe, North America, and Australia. Participants included 60,393 women ≥55 years attended by their physician during the previous 24 months. The sample was enriched so that two thirds were ≥65 years. Baseline surveys were mailed October 2006 to February 2008. Main outcome measures were self-perception of fracture risk in women with elevated risk vs women of the same age and frequency of risk factors for fragility fracture. RESULTS: In the overall study population, 19% (10,951/58,434) of women rated their risk of fracture as a little/much higher than that of women of the same age; 46% (27,138/58,434) said it was similar; 35% (20,345/58,434) believed it to be a little/much lower. Among women whose actual risk was increased based on the presence of any one of seven risk factors for fracture, the proportion who recognized their increased risk ranged from 19% for smokers to 39% for current users of glucocorticoid medication. Only 33% (4,185/12,612) of those with ≥2 risk factors perceived themselves as being at higher risk. Among women reporting a diagnosis of osteopenia or osteoporosis, only 25% and 43%, respectively, thought their risk was increased. CONCLUSION: In this international, observational study, most postmenopausal women with risk factors failed to appreciate their actual risk for fracture.

Predictors of falls among postmenopausal women: results from the National Osteoporosis Risk Assessment (NORA).

UNLABELLED: Using data from 66,134 postmenopausal women enrolled in the National Osteoporosis Risk Assessment (NORA) study, more than half of whom were less than age 65, we identified 18 risk factors that independently predicted a significantly increased risk of falling and observed a graded increase in risk with an increasing number of risk factors. INTRODUCTION: This study was designed to identify predictors of falls in a large prospective study of community-dwelling, postmenopausal women, 58% of whom were less than 65 years old at baseline. METHODS: We exclusively used survey data from 66,134 NORA participants who completed the baseline survey and three follow-up surveys over 6 years. Stepwise logistic regression was used to select potential fall predictors. A simple fall risk index was created by giving one point to each significant independent risk factor. RESULTS: More than one third (38.2%) of participants reported at least one fall since baseline. The largest predictor of fall risk was history of falls (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7). In the multivariate analysis, 17 additional risk factors were significantly associated with incident falls (but with smaller OR), including age, college education, poor hearing, diabetes, personal or family history of fracture, hypothyroidism, and height loss. Of the 3,346 women with zero fall risk factors, 22.6% reported falling compared to 84.3% of the 51 women with >or=11 risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: This large cohort had sufficient power to identify 18 risk factors that independently predicted a significantly increased risk of falling with a graded increase in risk with increasing number of risk factors.

Osteoporosis care at risk in the United States.

Osteoporotic fractures are associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenses. The United States (US) Surgeon General has described osteoporosis as a major public health concern that is underdiagnosed and undertreated. US federal agencies have established funding for bone density testing and put methodologies in place to monitor physician performance in the care of patients with osteoporosis. The US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has established bone density testing as a key preventive medical service and encouraged patients to have this test when first enrolling in Medicare. However, recent CMS actions have reduced reimbursement for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to levels that are below the cost of providing this service at many facilities. As a consequence, it is likely that the number of DXA facilities in the US will decrease, thereby limiting patient access to an important diagnostic service and resulting in fewer patients being diagnosed and treated to reduce fracture risk. Unless there is a reversal of continuing reimbursement cuts for DXA, it is projected that future fracture rates will increase; the cost to Medicare for fracture-related care will be far greater than the savings in the cost of DXA services and medications to reduce fracture risk.