Bisphosphonate alternative regimens for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures: BLAST-OFF, a mixed-methods study.

Background: Bisphosphonates are a class of medication commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is recommended as the first-line treatment; however, long-term adherence (both treatment compliance and persistence) is poor. Alternative bisphosphonates are available, which can be given intravenously and have been shown to improve long-term adherence. However, the most clinically effective and cost-effective alternative bisphosphonate regimen remains unclear. What is the most cost-effective bisphosphonate in clinical trials may not be the most cost-effective or acceptable to patients in everyday clinical practice. Objectives: 1. Explore patient, clinician and stakeholder views, experiences and preferences of alendronate compared to alternative bisphosphonates. 2. Update and refine the 2016 systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of bisphosphonates, and estimate the value of further research into their benefits. 3. Undertake stakeholder/consensus engagement to identify important research questions and further rank research priorities. Methods: The study was conducted in two stages, stages 1A and 1B in parallel, followed by stage 2: • Stage 1A - we elicited patient and healthcare experiences to understand their preferences of bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. This was undertaken by performing a systematic review and framework synthesis of qualitative studies, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews with participants. • Stage 1B - we updated and expanded the existing Health Technology Assessment systematic review and clinical and cost-effectiveness model, incorporating a more comprehensive review of treatment efficacy, safety, side effects, compliance and long-term persistence. • Stage 2 - we identified and ranked further research questions that need to be answered about the effectiveness and acceptability of bisphosphonates. Results: Patients and healthcare professionals identified a number of challenges in adhering to bisphosphonate medication, balancing the potential for long-term risk reduction against the work involved in adhering to oral alendronate. Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable, with such regimens perceived to be more straightforward to engage in, although a portion of patients taking alendronate were satisfied with their current treatment. Intravenous zoledronate was found to be the most effective, with higher adherence rates compared to the other bisphosphonates, for reducing the risk of fragility fracture. However, oral bisphosphonates are more cost-effective than intravenous zoledronate due to the high cost of zoledronate administration in hospital. The importance of including patients and healthcare professionals when setting research priorities is recognised. Important areas for research were related to patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, how to optimise long-term care and the cost-effectiveness of delivering zoledronate in an alternative, non-hospital setting. Conclusions: Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable to patients and found to be the most effective bisphosphonate and with greater adherence; however, the cost-effectiveness relative to oral alendronate is limited by its higher zoledronate hospital administration costs. Future work: Further research is needed to support people to make decisions influencing treatment selection, effectiveness and optimal long-term care, together with the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intravenous zoledronate administered in a non-hospital (community) setting. Limitations: Lack of clarity and limitations in the many studies included in the systematic review may have under-interpreted some of the findings relating to effects of bisphosphonates. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN10491361. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127550) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Bisphosphonates are drug treatments commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is the most used and is taken by mouth, weekly at a specific time of the week, which can be challenging. Less than one in four people continue this treatment beyond 2 years. Alternative bisphosphonates are available, which vary in frequency and how they are administered. The most acceptable and best value-for-money regimen is unclear. Our aim was to determine how effective alternative bisphosphonates are compared to alendronate at preventing fractures and whether reduction in fracture risk was achieved at a reasonable financial cost, but acceptable to patients. The study was conducted in two stages, stages 1A and 1B in parallel, followed by stage 2: Stage 1A: a review of the published evidence on patients' and doctors' views, experiences and preferences regarding different bisphosphonate treatment regimens, followed by interviews with patients and healthcare professionals. Stage 1B: an update of an existing study on how effective bisphosphonates are in preventing fragility fractures caused by osteoporosis and whether they are good value for money. Stage 2: identification of questions that need to be answered about the effectiveness and acceptability of bisphosphonate treatments. Taking bisphosphonate medication often involves quite a lot of effort by patients, particularly when taking alendronate tablets. A yearly infusion of zoledronate treatment was more acceptable, easier to engage with and the most effective treatment compared to alendronate. However, the cost of administering zoledronate in hospital made alendronate better value for money. Bisphosphonates are effective in reducing the risk of fracture, but 'continuing with treatment', particularly alendronate tablets, remains a challenge. A yearly infusion of zoledronate offers an acceptable and effective treatment, but further research is needed to support patients and healthcare professionals in making decisions about the various treatments, benefits and cost savings of administering zoledronate outside of hospital and in the community.

Discontinuation of long-term growth hormone treatment in adults with growth hormone deficiency: a survey of UK practice.

Objective: We conducted a survey of UK endocrine clinicians between June 2022 and August 2022 to understand current practices regarding GH treatment discontinuation in adults with growth hormone deficiency. Design and methods: Using Survey Monkey®, a web-based multiple-choice questionnaire was disseminated to the UK Society for Endocrinology membership. It consisted of 15 questions on demographics, number of patients receiving GH and current practice on GH treatment discontinuation. Results: In total, 102 endocrine clinicians completed the survey. Of these, 65 respondents (33 endocrinologists and 32 specialist nurses) indicated active involvement in managing patients with growth hormone deficiency. In total, 27.7% of clinicians were routinely offering a trial of GH discontinuation to adults receiving long-term GH therapy. Only 6% had a clinical guideline to direct such practice. In total, 29.2% stated that GH discontinuation should be routinely offered as an option to patients on long-term treatment, whilst 60% were not clearly in favour or against this approach but stated that it should probably be considered, and 9.2% were against. During the GH withdrawal period, most clinicians monitor signs and symptoms (75.4%), measure IGF-1 (84.6%), and complete a quality-of-life assessment (89.2%). Conclusion: The practice of offering a trial of GH discontinuation in growth hormone deficiency adults on long-term GH therapy is highly variable, reflecting the lack of high-quality evidence. Around a quarter of clinicians offer GH withdrawal for a number of reasons, but only a few have a local clinical guidance. A further 60% of clinicians stated they would probably consider such an approach. Methodologically sound studies underpinning the development of safe and cost-effective guidance are needed. Significance statement: In this UK survey of endocrine clinicians managing adults with growth hormone deficiency on long-term GH therapy, we explored for the first-time current practice and views on offering GH treatment discontinuation. In total, 27.7% of clinicians were routinely offering this option for a variety of reasons. Only 6% have local clinical guideline available to direct their practice on this. The majority of clinicians (60%), were not clearly in favour or against this approach but indicated it should probably be considered. In the absence of robust evidence on consequences of GH withdrawal, clinicians proposed monitoring of various clinical, biochemical and quality-of-life parameters during the period of discontinuation. Methodologically sound studies that will underpin the development of a safe, cost-effective guidance are needed.

Clinicians' views of prescribing oral and intravenous bisphosphonates for osteoporosis: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Bisphosphonate medications, including alendronate, ibandronate and risedronate administered orally and zoledronate, administered intravenously, are commonly prescribed for the treatment of osteoporosis based on evidence that, correctly taken, bisphosphonates can improve bone strength and lead to a reduction in the risk of fragility fractures. However, it is currently unclear how decisions to select between bisphosphonate regimens, including intravenous regimen, are made in practice and how clinicians support patients with different treatments. METHODS: This was an interpretivist qualitative study. 23 semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a sample of general practitioners (GPs), secondary care clinicians, specialist experts as well as those providing and leading novel treatments including participants from a community intravenous (IV) zoledronate service. Data analysis was undertaken through a process of iterative categorisation. RESULTS: The results report clinicians varying experiences of making treatment choices, as well as wider aspects of osteoporosis care. Secondary care and specialist clinicians conveyed some confidence in making treatment choices including on selecting IV treatment. This was aided by access to diagnostic testing and medication expertise. In contrast GPs reported a number of challenges in prescribing bisphosphonate medications for osteoporosis and uncertainty about treatment choice. Results also highlight how administering IV zoledronate was seen as an opportunity to engage in broader care practices. CONCLUSION: Approaches to making treatment decisions and supporting patients when prescribing bisphosphonates for osteoporosis vary in practice. This study points to the need to co-ordinate osteoporosis treatment and care across different care providers.

Research priorities regarding the use of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis: a UK priority setting exercise.

PURPOSE: Worldwide, many people who would benefit from osteoporosis drugs are not offered or receiving them, resulting in an osteoporosis care gap. Adherence with bisphosphonates is particularly low. This study aimed to identify stakeholder research priorities relating to bisphosphonate treatment regimens for prevention of osteoporotic fractures. METHODS: A three-step approach based on the James Lind Alliance methodology for identification and prioritisation of research questions was used. Research uncertainties were gathered from a large programme of related research studies about bisphosphonate regimens and from recent published international clinical guidelines. Clinical and public stakeholders refined the list of uncertainties into research questions. The third step prioritised the questions using a modified nominal group technique. RESULTS: In total, 34 draft uncertainties were finalised into 33 research questions by stakeholders. The top 10 includes questions relating to which people should be offered intravenous bisphosphonates first line (1); optimal duration of treatment (2); the role of bone turnover markers in treatment breaks (3); support patient need for medicine optimisation (4); support primary care practitioner need regarding bisphosphonates (5); comparing zoledronate given in community vs hospital settings (6); ensuring quality standards are met (7); the long-term model of care (8); best bisphosphonate for people aged under 50 (9); and supporting patient decision-making about bisphosphonates (10). CONCLUSION: This study reports, for the first time, topics of importance to stakeholders in the research of bisphosphonate osteoporosis treatment regimens. These findings have implications for research into implementation to address the care gap and education of healthcare professionals. Using James Lind Alliance methodology, this study reports prioritised topics of importance to stakeholders in the research of bisphosphonate treatment in osteoporosis. The priorities address how to better implement guidelines to address the care gap, understanding patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, and how to optimise long-term care.

Acceptability and engagement amongst patients on oral and intravenous bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is common in older adults leading to fragility fractures at enormous individual and economic cost. Improving long-term adherence with bisphosphonate treatments reduces fracture risk, but adherence rates for first-line oral bisphosphonate alendronate remains low. Although alternative treatment regimens, including annual intravenous infusions are available, patient acceptability remains unclear. Therefore, understanding patients' acceptability and engagement in different bisphosphonate regimens is important to ensure optimal treatment benefits. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 78 patients with a mean age of 69.9 years, who had taken or received bisphosphonates for osteoporosis within the last 24 months. Data analysis included iterative categorisation and used the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA) to compare the acceptability of treatments regimens. RESULTS: Treatment acceptability and engagement were influenced by the extent to which patients understood the prescribed treatment, and evidence of the treatment working. Acceptability and engagement were compromised when treatment was perceived as burdensome, personal costs were incurred, and patients' values were incompatible with the regimen. The balancing of these factors contributed to patients' ability to cope with the treatment and their emotional responses. Intravenous treatment was generally perceived as easier to understand, more effective, less burdensome with fewer opportunity costs, and a preferable regimen compared with oral bisphosphonates. CONCLUSIONS: Annual intravenous zoledronate bisphosphonate treatment was generally more acceptable to patients, perceived as more straightforward to engage in, although a small portion of patients on oral bisphosphonates were satisfied with treatment. Further research is needed to identify how acceptability and engagement can be optimised.

Epidemiology and Financial Burden of Adult Chronic Hypoparathyroidism.

Chronic hypoparathyroidism is characterized by low serum calcium, increased serum phosphorus, and inappropriately low or decreased serum parathyroid hormone. This rare disorder is associated with a variety of complications. The prevalence, incidence, mortality, financial burden, and epidemiology of complications of this disorder are not well understood. This narrative review summarizes current information on the epidemiology and complications of chronic hypoparathyroidism. The reported prevalence of chronic hypoparathyroidism ranges from 6.4-37/100,000, and the incidence is reported to be 0.8-2.3/100,000/year. Mortality is not increased in studies from Denmark or South Korea but was increased in studies from Scotland and Sweden. The financial burden of this disorder is substantial because of increased health care resource utilization in two studies but not well quantitated. Recognized complications include hypercalciuria, nephrocalcinosis, kidney stones, and chronic kidney disease; low bone turnover and possibly upper extremity fractures; cardiac and vascular calcifications; basal ganglia calcifications, cataracts, infections, neuropsychiatric complications, and difficulties with pregnancy. This review concludes that chronic hypoparathyroidism is a rare disorder associated with significant morbidity that may not increase overall mortality but is associated with a substantial financial burden. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Evaluation and Management of Hypoparathyroidism Summary Statement and Guidelines from the Second International Workshop.

This clinical practice guideline addresses the prevention, diagnosis, and management of hypoparathyroidism (HypoPT) and provides evidence-based recommendations. The HypoPT task forces included four teams with a total of 50 international experts including representatives from the sponsoring societies. A methodologist (GG) and his team supported the taskforces and conducted the systematic reviews. A formal process following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology and the systematic reviews provided the structure for seven of the guideline recommendations. The task force used a less structured approach based on narrative reviews for 20 non-GRADEd recommendations. Clinicians may consider postsurgical HypoPT permanent if it persists for >12 months after surgery. To predict which patients will not develop permanent postsurgical HypoPT, we recommend evaluating serum PTH within 12 to 24 hours post total thyroidectomy (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). PTH > 10 pg/mL (1.05 pmol/L) virtually excludes long-term HypoPT. In individuals with nonsurgical HypoPT, genetic testing may be helpful in the presence of a positive family history of nonsurgical HypoPT, in the presence of syndromic features, or in individuals younger than 40 years. HypoPT can be associated with complications, including nephrocalcinosis, nephrolithiasis, renal insufficiency, cataracts, seizures, cardiac arrhythmias, ischemic heart disease, depression, and an increased risk of infection. Minimizing complications of HypoPT requires careful evaluation and close monitoring of laboratory indices. In patients with chronic HypoPT, the panel suggests conventional therapy with calcium and active vitamin D metabolites as first-line therapy (weak recommendation, low-quality evidence). When conventional therapy is deemed unsatisfactory, the panel considers the use of PTH. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Management of Primary Hyperparathyroidism.

Since the last international guidelines were published in 2014 on the evaluation and management of primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT), new information has become available with regard to evaluation, diagnosis, epidemiology, genetics, classical and nonclassical manifestations, surgical and nonsurgical approaches, and natural history. To provide the most current summary of these developments, an international group, consisting of over 50 experts in these various aspects of PHPT, was convened. This paper provides the results of the task force that was assigned to review the information on the management of PHPT. For this task force on the management of PHPT, two questions were the subject of systematic reviews using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology. The full report addressing surgical and nonsurgical management of PHPT, utilizing the GRADE methodology, is published separately in this series. In this report, we summarize the results of that methodological review and expand them to encompass a much larger body of new knowledge that did not specifically fit the criteria of the GRADE methodology. Together, both the systematic and narrative reviews of the literature, summarized in this paper, give the most complete information available to date. A panel of experts then considered the last set of international guidelines in light of the newer data and assessed the need for their revision. This report provides the evidentiary background to the guidelines report. In that report, evidence from all task forces is synthesized into a summary statement and revised guidelines for the evaluation and management of PHPT. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Assessing the Effectiveness of Bisphosphonates for the Prevention of Fragility Fractures: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analyses.

Bisphosphonates have been found to be effective in preventing fragility fractures. However, their comparative effectiveness in populations at risk has yet to be defined. In light of recent clinical trials, we aimed to compare four bisphosphonates (alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronate) and to identify which are the most effective for the prevention of fragility fractures. This is an update of a systematic review previously published as part of a NICE HTA report. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis, updating the estimates regarding the comparative effectiveness of the aforementioned bisphosphonates. Studies identified from published and unpublished sources between 2014 and 2021 were added to the studies identified in the previous review. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently undertaken by two reviewers. Outcomes were fractures, femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), mortality, and adverse events. We identified 25 additional trials, resulting in a total population of 47,007 participants. All treatments had beneficial effects on fractures versus placebo with zoledronate being the most effective treatment in preventing vertebral fractures (hazard ratio [HR] 0.38; 95% credibility interval [CrI], 0.28-0.49). Zoledronate (HR 0.71; 95% CrI, 0.61-0.81) and risedronate (HR 0.70; 95% CrI, 0.53-0.84) were found to be the most effective treatments in preventing nonvertebral fractures. All treatments were associated with increases in femoral neck BMD versus placebo with zoledronate being the most effective treatment mean difference (MD 4.02; 95% CrI, 3.2-4.84). There was a paucity of data regarding hip and wrist fractures. Depending on its cost-effectiveness, zoledronate could be considered a first-line option for people at increased risk of fragility fractures. © 2022 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

The National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) has revised the UK guideline for the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50 years and older. Accredited by NICE, this guideline is relevant for all healthcare professionals involved in osteoporosis management. INTRODUCTION: The UK National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) first produced a guideline on the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in 2008, with updates in 2013 and 2017. This paper presents a major update of the guideline, the scope of which is to review the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50 years and older. METHODS: Where available, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials were used to provide the evidence base. Conclusions and recommendations were systematically graded according to the strength of the available evidence. RESULTS: Review of the evidence and recommendations are provided for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, fracture-risk assessment and intervention thresholds, management of vertebral fractures, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, including duration and monitoring of anti-resorptive therapy, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, and models of care for fracture prevention. Recommendations are made for training; service leads and commissioners of healthcare; and for review criteria for audit and quality improvement. CONCLUSION: The guideline, which has received accreditation from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), provides a comprehensive overview of the assessment and management of osteoporosis for all healthcare professionals involved in its management. This position paper has been endorsed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation and by the European Society for the Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases.

European Expert Consensus on Practical Management of Specific Aspects of Parathyroid Disorders in Adults and in Pregnancy: Recommendations of the ESE Educational Program of Parathyroid Disorders.

This European expert consensus statement provides recommendations for the diagnosis and management of primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT), chronic hypoparathyroidism in adults (HypoPT), and parathyroid disorders in relation to pregnancy and lactation. Specified areas of interest and unmet needs identified by experts at the second ESE Educational Program of Parathyroid Disorders (PARAT) in 2019, were discussed during two virtual workshops in 2021, and subsequently developed by working groups with interest in the specified areas. PHPT is a common endocrine disease. However, its differential diagnosing to familial hypocalciuric hypercalcemia (FHH), the definition and clinical course of normocalcemic PHPT, and the optimal management of its recurrence after surgery represent areas of uncertainty requiring clarifications. HypoPT is an orphan disease characterized by low calcium concentrations due to insufficient PTH secretion, most often secondary to neck surgery. Prevention and prediction of surgical injury to the parathyroid glands are essential to limit the disease-related burden. Long-term treatment modalities including the place for PTH replacement therapy and the optimal biochemical monitoring and imaging surveillance for complications to treatment in chronic HypoPT, need to be refined. The physiological changes in calcium metabolism occurring during pregnancy and lactation modify the clinical presentation and management of parathyroid disorders in these periods of life. Modern interdisciplinary approaches to PHPT and HypoPT in pregnant and lactating women and their newborns children are proposed. The recommendations on clinical management presented here will serve as background for further educational material aimed for a broader clinical audience, and were developed with focus on endocrinologists in training.

The PARADIGHM (physicians advancing disease knowledge in hypoparathyroidism) registry for patients with chronic hypoparathyroidism: study protocol and interim baseline patient characteristics.

BACKGROUND: The PARADIGHM registry of adult and pediatric patients with chronic hypoparathyroidism evaluates the long-term safety and effectiveness of treatment with recombinant human parathyroid hormone, rhPTH(1-84), and describes the clinical disease course under conditions of routine clinical practice. In this first report, we detail the registry protocol and describe the baseline characteristics of two adult patient cohorts from an interim database analysis. One cohort after study entry were prescribed rhPTH(1-84), and the other cohort received conventional therapy of calcium and active vitamin D. METHODS: An observational study of patients with chronic hypoparathyroidism in North America and Europe, collecting data for ≥10 years per patient. Main outcome measures were baseline patient demographics, clinical characteristics, medications, and disease outcome variables of symptoms, biochemical parameters, and health assessments. Baseline is the enrollment assessment for all variables except biochemical measurements in patients treated with rhPTH(1-84); those measurements were the most recent value before the first rhPTH(1-84) dose. Exclusion criteria applied to the analysis of specified outcomes included pediatric patients, patients who initiated rhPTH(1-84) prior to enrollment, and those who received rhPTH(1-34). Clinically implausible biochemical outlier data were excluded. RESULTS: As of 30 June 2019, data of 737 patients were analyzed from 64 centers; 587 (80%) were women, mean ± SD age 49.1±16.45 years. At enrollment, symptoms reported for patients later prescribed rhPTH(1-84) (n=60) and those who received conventional therapy (n=571), respectively, included fatigue (51.7%, 40.1%), paresthesia (51.7%, 29.6%), muscle twitching (48.3%, 21.9%), and muscle cramping (41.7%, 33.8%). Mean serum total calcium, serum phosphate, creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were similar between cohorts. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) 36-item Short Form Health Survey questionnaire scores for those later prescribed rhPTH(1-84) were generally lower than those for patients in the conventional therapy cohort. CONCLUSIONS: At enrollment, based on symptoms and HRQoL, a greater percentage of patients subsequently prescribed rhPTH(1-84) appeared to have an increased burden of disease than those who received conventional therapy despite having normal biochemistry measurements. PARADIGHM will provide valuable real-world insights on the clinical course of hypoparathyroidism in patients treated with rhPTH(1-84) or conventional therapy in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUPAS16927, NCT01922440.

Normocalcaemic primary hyperparathyroidism: what is the role of parathyroid surgery?

Primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) is classically associated with both an elevated or 'inappropriately normal' parathyroid hormone (PTH) level and raised serum calcium. However, in clinical practice, increasing numbers of patients present with raised PTH but normal serum calcium, renal function and vitamin D; this is known as normocalcaemic PHPT (nPHPT). Studies investigating the clinical presentation of this condition have shown that patients may present with hypertension, nephrolithiasis, impaired glucose tolerance, osteoporosis and fragility fractures. The prevalence of such complications in nPHPT is similar to that in classical hypercalcaemic PHPT (hPHPT). Although the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) have developed guidelines for the management of PHPT generally, a consensus is yet to be reached on the optimal management of nPHPT specifically. A review of the literature on parathyroidectomy in the treatment of nPHPT revealed that nPHPT patients were more likely to present with multi-glandular disease and significantly less nPHPT patients had an intra-operative PTH fall of >50% compared with those with hPHPT. These findings demonstrate that patients with nPHPT are more likely to receive bilateral neck explorations and require remedial surgery compared with hPHPT patients. Following surgery, improvements in bone mineral density (BMD) and renal stones are generally observed in those with nPHPT. Where surgery is not possible, medical management with alendronate has been shown to be effective in nPHPT patients. Given the higher incidence of multi-gland disease and greater possibility of remedial surgery in nPHPT, careful consideration of risks and benefits should be made on an individualised basis and surgery should be performed by surgeons experienced in four gland exploration.

Management of Parathyroid Disease during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease, COVID-19, has caused widespread and sustained disruption to healthcare, not only in the delivery of emergency care, but knock-on consequences have resulted in major delays to the delivery of elective care, including surgery. COVID-19 has accelerated novel pathways for delivering clinical services, many of which have an increased reliance on technology. COVID-19 has impacted care for patients with both hypoparathyroidism and hyperparathyroidism. The role of vitamin D in the prevention of severe COVID-19 infection has also been widely debated. Severe hypocalcemia can be precipitated by infection in patients with hypoparathyroidism. With this in mind, compliance with medical management, including calcium and vitamin D supplementation, is crucial. Technology in the form of text message reminders and smartphone apps may have a key role in ensuring this. Furthermore, clinicians should ensure that patients are educated on the symptoms of hypocalcemia and the steps needing to be taken should these symptoms be experienced. Patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) should be educated on the symptoms of hypercalcemia, as well as the importance of remaining adequately hydrated. In addition, patients should be reassured that the postponement of parathyroidectomy is likely to have negligible impact on their condition; for those with symptomatic hypercalcemia, cinacalcet can be considered as an interim measure.

Very high bone mineral density in a monogenic form of obesity-associated insulin resistance.

INTRODUCTION: Alström syndrome (ALMS) is an ultra-rare metabolic disorder caused by biallelic loss-of-function in the Alms1 gene which encodes a ubiquitously expressed centrosomal protein of the primary cilium. Although ALMS is characterised by several metabolic and hormonal dysfunctions that can lead to an increased risk of developing osteoporosis and bone fracture, an increased BMD have been observed. The aim of this study was to characterise the anthropometric, clinical, genetic and densitometric features of bone health in a large adult UK cohort of subjects with ALMS. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with ALMS and 23 age-matched male control subjects were recruited. Lumbar spine (LS) and total hip (TH) bone mineral density (BMD) were evaluated by DXA in all subjects. A CT scan to assess the spinal bone architecture was performed in ALMS patients with raised lumbar density. Blood analysis for biochemical parameters and thyroid and sex hormones was performed in all ALMS patients. RESULTS: LS Z-score levels were higher than +2 SD in 35% of all ALMS study participants, of whom 75% were men and 25% were women. TH Z-scores were higher than +1 SD 13% of patients and all of them have higher than expected lumbar Z-score. An extremely high BMD was found in two of the oldest patients (LS Z-score +10.8 and +15.3 SD). CONCLUSION: ALMS patients tend to have high levels of BMD that increase with age, in particular of the trabecular bones. Although obesity and lifelong IR can be responsible for the increase in BMD, at least in part, of a possible signalling role of Alms1 protein as a bone-forming factor is plausible.

Acceptability of bisphosphonates among patients, clinicians and managers: a systematic review and framework synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the acceptability of different bisphosphonate regimens for the treatment of osteoporosis among patients, clinicians and managers, payers and academics. DESIGN: A systematic review of primary qualitative studies. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 2019. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment of full-articles selected for inclusion were performed independently by two authors. A framework synthesis was applied to extracted data based on the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). The TFA includes seven domains relating to sense-making, emotions, opportunity costs, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality and self-efficacy. Confidence in synthesis findings was assessed. SETTING: Any developed country healthcare setting. PARTICIPANTS: Patients, healthcare professionals, managers, payers and academics. INTERVENTION: Experiences and views of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included, mostly describing perceptions of oral bisphosphonates. We identified, with high confidence, how patients and healthcare professionals make sense (coherence) of bisphosphonates by balancing perceptions of need against concerns, how uncertainty prevails about bisphosphonate perceived effectiveness and a number of individual and service factors that have potential to increase self-efficacy in recommending and adhering to bisphosphonates. We identified, with moderate confidence, that bisphosphonate taking induces concern, but has the potential to engender reassurance, and that both side effects and special instructions for taking oral bisphosphonates can result in treatment burden. Finally, we identified with low confidence that multimorbidity plays a role in people's perception of bisphosphonate acceptability. CONCLUSION: By using the lens of acceptability, our findings demonstrate with high confidence that a theoretically informed, whole-system approach is necessary to both understand and improve adherence. Clinicians and patients need supporting to understand the need for bisphosphonates, and clinicians need to clarify to patients what constitutes bisphosphonate treatment success. Further research is needed to explore perspectives of male patients and those with multimorbidity receiving bisphosphonates, and patients receiving intravenous treatment. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019143526.

Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture. DATA SOURCES: For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty. RESULTS: Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0-33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories. LIMITATIONS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BACKGROUND: Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture, known as low-level (or 'low-energy') trauma. Some people are at particularly high risk of fragility fractures. The first treatment used is often a bisphosphonate, but non-bisphosphonate treatments are alternatives. AIMS: We aimed to determine how effective non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]} are at preventing fractures, whether or not treatment has any risks for patients and whether or not the clinical benefits are achieved at a reasonable cost. METHODS: We have systematically identified and examined trials that assessed the clinical effects of non-bisphosphonates. For each clinical outcome, we have combined data from multiple trials to estimate the clinical effectiveness of each non-bisphosphonate treatment. We combined data from published sources in an economic model to estimate lifetime costs and clinical benefits for each non-bisphosphonate and compared these with the estimated costs and clinical outcomes for untreated patients and patients treated with bisphosphonates. RESULTS: All non-bisphosphonates reduced the risk of vertebral fractures compared with no treatment. For fractures at the hip or at any non-vertebral site, all of the non-bisphosphonates reduced the average number of fractures, but, for some non-bisphosphonates, we could not exclude the possibility that this was a chance finding. The chance of patients experiencing serious side effects was generally similar regardless of whether patients took non-bisphosphonates, bisphosphonates or placebo (a dummy pill). Blood clots were more common in patients taking raloxifene than in those taking placebo, but these were still a rare outcome (fewer than 1 in 100). The benefits of denosumab, teriparatide and romosozumab are few compared with their costs. For raloxifene, the risks generally outweigh the benefits. Treatment with bisphosphonates is likely to represent better value for money than treatment with non-bisphosphonates.

Management of endocrine conditions at the end of life.

An important facet to end-of-life care is deprescribing. This can be challenging when reviewing life-sustaining endocrine medications but, unlike for diabetes, there is no national guidance to support patients and clinicians faced with care planning. This article reviews the limited current evidence to highlight areas for further discussion and research with the aim of moving towards consensus opinion. Discontinuation of certain endocrine medications, including corticosteroids, desmopressin and levothyroxine, is likely to precipitate an 'endocrine-driven mechanism of death', while it may be reasonable to discontinue other endocrine medications without the risk of hastening death or causing unnecessary symptoms. However, the over-arching theme should be that early discussion with patients regarding conversion or discontinuation of endocrine medications or monitoring is central to care planning.