Should postmenopausal women with rheumatoid arthritis who are starting corticosteroid treatment be screened for osteoporosis? A cost-effectiveness analysis

Anti-citrullinated protein antibodies are associated with decreased bone mineral density: baseline data from a register of early arthritis patients

Since the previous studies showed that anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) can induce osteoclasts differentiation and activation, even before arthritis onset, the aim of our study was to determine whether ACPA-positivity is associated with lower bone mineral density (BMD) at baseline visit of a register of early arthritis (EA) patients. The study population comprised 578 patients (80% females) from our EA clinic with a median disease duration, 5.1 months (p25-p75: 6-8); median age, 53.6 years (41.9-66.1), 38% ACPA-positive, and 55% fulfilling 2010 criteria for rheumatoid arthritis. BMD was measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry at lumbar spine, hip, and metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of the non-dominant hand to evaluate both systemic and juxta-articular bone mass. ACPA titers were determined through enzyme immunoassay. The effect of ACPA on BMD was analyzed using multivariable analysis based on generalized linear models adjusted for various confounders. ACPA-positive patients showed lower bone mass at lumbar spine and hip, but no differences were observed at MCP joints compared to ACPA-negative patients. However, ACPA-positive patients displayed higher disease activity and disability than ACPA-negative patients. After adjustment for gender, age, body mass index, and other bone-related variables, the presence of ACPA remained significantly associated with lower BMD at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and hip but not at MCP joints. Disease activity was not associated with baseline bone mass. Our data reinforce the previous preclinical findings suggesting that the systemic bone loss detected at the initial phases of early ACPA-positive arthritis is independent of inflammatory status and, therefore, could be mediated by ACPA.

Economics of stratified medicine in rheumatoid arthritis

Clinically relevant examples of stratified medicine are available for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of this study was to understand the current economic evidence for stratified medicine in RA. Two systematic reviews were conducted to identify: (1) all economic evaluations of stratified treatments for rheumatoid arthritis, or those which have used a subgroup analysis, and (2) all stated preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis. Ten economic evaluations of stratified treatments for RA, 38 economic evaluations including with a subgroup analysis and eight stated preference studies were identified. There was some evidence to support that stratified approaches to treating a patient with RA may be cost-effective. However, there remain key gaps in the economic evidence base needed to support the introduction of stratified medicine in RA into healthcare systems and considerable uncertainty about how proposed stratified approaches will impact future patient preferences, outcomes and costs when used in routine practice.

Bone safety of low-dose glucocorticoids in rheumatic diseases

Glucocorticoids are widely used internationally for the treatment of inflammatory disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although the benefit of glucocorticoids in RA on both disease activity and severity are well known, there remain unanswered questions about the overall bone safety of chronic low-dose glucocorticoids in RA. Debate exists about the merits of glucocorticoids for bone health on the basis of their benefits in promoting activity and reducing proinflammatory cytokines. Overall current evidence supports the view that bone loss is a disease related both to RA and to glucocorticoid use independently. Calcium and vitamin D, along with prescription antiosteoporosis therapies, particularly bisphosphonates and teriparatide, play an important role in stabilizing bone mineral density and potentially lowering spinal fracture risk at the spine. International guidelines provide pathways for appropriate prevention of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). Despite the evidence and these guidelines, many patients do not receive adequate management to prevent GIOP.

A framework for the development of guidelines for the management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

This paper provides a framework for the development of national guidelines for the management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in men and women aged 18 years and over in whom oral glucocorticoid therapy is considered for 3 months or longer.

INTRODUCTION

The need for updated guidelines for Europe and other parts of the world was recognised by the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the European Calcified Tissue Society, which set up a joint Guideline Working Group at the end of 2010.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The epidemiology of GIO is reviewed. Assessment of risk used a fracture probability-based approach, and intervention thresholds were based on 10-year probabilities using FRAX. The efficacy of intervention was assessed by a systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidance for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is updated in the light of new treatments and methods of assessment. National guidelines derived from this resource need to be tailored within the national healthcare framework of each country.

Cost-effectiveness of multifaceted evidence implementation programs for the prevention of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

SUMMARY

Using a computer simulation model, we determined that an intervention aimed at improving the management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is likely to be cost-effective to third-party health insurers only if it focuses on individuals with very high fracture risk and the proportion of prescriptions for generic bisphosphonates increases substantially.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to determine whether an evidence implementation program (intervention) focused on increasing appropriate management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) might be cost-effective compared with current practice (no intervention) from the perspective of a third-party health insurer.

METHODS

We developed a Markov microsimulation model to determine the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. The hypothetical patient cohort was of current chronic glucocorticoid users 50-65 years old and 70% female. Model parameters were derived from published literature, and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The intervention resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $298,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) and $206,000 per hip fracture averted. If the cohort's baseline risk of fracture was increased by 50% (10-year cumulative incidence of hip fracture of 14%), the ICERs improved significantly: $105,000 per QALY and $137,000 per hip fracture averted. The ICERs improved significantly if the proportion of prescriptions for generic bisphosphonates was increased to 75%, with $113,000 per QALY and $77,900 per hip fracture averted.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence implementation programs for the management of GIOP are likely to be cost-effective to third-party health insurers only if they are targeted at individuals with a very high risk of fracture and the proportion of prescriptions for less expensive generic bisphosphonates increases substantially.

Does the funding source influence the results in economic evaluations? A case study in bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis

Research sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry is often assumed to be more likely to report favourable cost-effectiveness results. To determine whether there was a relationship between the source of funding and the reporting of positive results. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify economic evaluations of bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. We extracted the source of funding, region of study, the journal name and impact factor, and all reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We identified which ICERs were under the thresholds of $US20 000, $US50 000 and $US100 000 per QALY. A quality score between 0 and 7 was also given to each of the studies. We used generalized estimating equations for the analysis. The systematic review yielded 532 potential abstracts; 17 of these met our final eligibility criteria. Ten studies (59%) were funded by non-industry sources. A total of 571 ICERs were analysed. There was no significant difference between the number of industry- and non-industry-funded studies reporting ICERs below the thresholds of $US20 000 and $US50 000. However, industry-sponsored studies were more likely to report ICERs below $US100 000 (odds ratio = 4.69, 95% CI 1.77, 12.43). Studies of higher methodological quality (scoring >4.5 of 7) were less likely to report ICERs below $US20 000 and $US50 000 than studies of lower methodological quality (scores <4). Methodological quality was not significantly different between studies reporting ICERs under $US100 000. In this relatively small sample of studies of bisphosphonates, the funding source (industry vs non-industry) did not seem to significantly affect the reporting of ICERs below the $US20 000 and $US50 000 thresholds. We hypothesize that methodological quality might be a more significant factor than the source of funding in differentiating which studies are likely to report favourable ICERs, with the higher-quality studies significantly less likely to report ICERs below $US20 000 and $US50 000 per QALY. Further research should explore this finding.

Economic consequences of established rheumatoid arthritis and its treatment

Recent years have witnessed tremendous progress in the therapeutic approach to rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The introduction of novel biologic agents, in particular TNF inhibitors, has allowed clinicians to achieve improved outcomes for their patients. An important factor that has affected the utilization of novel therapies is their acquisition costs, which far exceed those for older antirheumatic drugs. Nevertheless, RA is a serious chronic condition which can cause substantial morbidity and even accelerated mortality for affected individuals. The notable sequelae of uncontrolled rheumatoid synovitis include joint damage and functional disability, which in turn, cause severe economic consequences not only to patients and their families, but also to society. Therefore, it is appropriate for pharmacoceconomic analyses to take into account all relevant costs, not only of the treatments, but of the disease itself. In this way, the value of therapies can be correctly estimated.

The utility of clinical decision tools for diagnosing osteoporosis in postmenopausal women with rheumatoid arthritis

Background

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis have a higher risk of low bone mineral density than normal age matched populations. There is limited evidence to support cost effectiveness of population screening in rheumatoid arthritis and case finding strategies have been proposed as a means to increase cost effectiveness of diagnostic screening for osteoporosis. This study aimed to assess the performance attributes of generic and rheumatoid arthritis specific clinical decision tools for diagnosing osteoporosis in a postmenopausal population with rheumatoid arthritis who attend ambulatory specialist rheumatology clinics.

Methods

A cross-sectional study of 127 ambulatory post-menopausal women with rheumatoid arthritis was performed. Patients currently receiving or who had previously received bone active therapy were excluded. Eligible women underwent clinical assessment and dual-energy-xray absorptiometry (DXA) bone mineral density assessment.

Clinical decision tools, including those specific for rheumatoid arthritis, were compared to seven generic post-menopausal tools to predict osteoporosis (defined as T score < -2.5). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values and area under the curve were assessed. The diagnostic attributes of the clinical decision tools were compared by examination of the area under the receiver-operator-curve.

Results

One hundred and twenty seven women participated. The median age was 62 (IQR 56–71) years. Median disease duration was 108 (60–168) months. Seventy two (57%) women had no record of a previous DXA examination. Eighty (63%) women had T scores at femoral neck or lumbar spine less than -1. The area under the ROC curve for clinical decision tool prediction of T score <-2.5 varied between 0.63 and 0.76. The rheumatoid arthritis specific decision tools did not perform better than generic tools, however, the National Osteoporosis Foundation score could potentially reduce the number of unnecessary DXA tests by approximately 45% in this population.

Conclusion

There was limited utility of clinical decision tools for predicting osteoporosis in this patient population. Fracture prediction tools that include risk factors independent of BMD are needed.

Cost effectiveness of screen-and-treat strategies for low bone mineral density: how do we screen, who do we screen and who do we treat?

Bone densitometry is currently widely recommended for, and considered central to, identifying post-menopausal women and older men at high risk of fracture and establishing an indication for pharmacological fracture-prevention therapy. The purpose of this article is to comprehensively review cost-effectiveness modelling studies published to date of bone mass measurement technologies (primarily dual energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) designed to identify those individuals at sufficiently high risk of fracture to warrant pharmacological fracture-prevention therapy.Based on older paradigms of the pharmacological treatment of those with a bone density value below a specific threshold, bone densitometry appears to be cost effective for post-menopausal women aged > or =65 years, regardless of the presence or absence of other clinical risk factors. For younger post-menopausal women, bone densitometry is likely to be cost effective only for those with specific clinical risk factors, such as prior fracture or low bodyweight. For older men, bone densitometry may be cost effective for those who have had a prior fracture and/or are aged > or =80 years, but the subset of men for whom bone densitometry is likely to be cost effective may vary from country to country depending on societal willingness to pay for health benefits, fracture rates in the population and the costs of bone densitometry and drug treatment. The cost effectiveness of other technologies such as heel ultrasound, peripheral DXA and quantitative CT remains uncertain.However, in the context of the new WHO paradigm of directing treatment based on absolute fracture risk rather than bone density, a new generation of cost-effectiveness modelling studies will be required to define the most cost-effective way bone densitometry can be used to identify those who are likely to benefit sufficiently from pharmacological fracture-prevention therapies.

Simulation-based cost-utility analysis of population screening-based alendronate use in Switzerland

A simulation model adopting a health system perspective showed population-based screening with DXA, followed by alendronate treatment of persons with osteoporosis, or with anamnestic fracture and osteopenia, to be cost-effective in Swiss postmenopausal women from age 70, but not in men.

INTRODUCTION

We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a population-based screen-and-treat strategy for osteoporosis (DXA followed by alendronate treatment if osteoporotic, or osteopenic in the presence of fracture), compared to no intervention, from the perspective of the Swiss health care system.

METHODS

A published Markov model assessed by first-order Monte Carlo simulation was refined to reflect the diagnostic process and treatment effects. Women and men entered the model at age 50. Main screening ages were 65, 75, and 85 years. Age at bone densitometry was flexible for persons fracturing before the main screening age. Realistic assumptions were made with respect to persistence with intended 5 years of alendronate treatment. The main outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

In women, costs per QALY were Swiss francs (CHF) 71,000, CHF 35,000, and CHF 28,000 for the main screening ages of 65, 75, and 85 years. The threshold of CHF 50,000 per QALY was reached between main screening ages 65 and 75 years. Population-based screening was not cost-effective in men.

CONCLUSION

Population-based DXA screening, followed by alendronate treatment in the presence of osteoporosis, or of fracture and osteopenia, is a cost-effective option in Swiss postmenopausal women after age 70.

The cost effectiveness of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: a structured review of the literature

Osteoporotic fragility fractures constitute a significant public health concern. The lifetime risk of any osteoporotic fracture is very high (40-50% in women and 13-22% in men). Fractures are associated with significant mortality and morbidity and represent a substantial economic burden to society. Bisphosphonates (alendronate, etidronate, risedronate and ibandronate) are indicated for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis but are costly compared with other treatments, such as vitamin D and calcium. Our search identified 23 studies evaluating the cost effectiveness of bisphosphonate therapy for the treatment and prevention of fragility fractures; these studies were from five geographical areas and employed a variety of comparators and assumptions. We identified 11 studies investigating bisphosphonates in women with low bone mineral density (BMD) [T-score >2.5 standard deviations {SDs} below normal {mean} peak values for young adults] and previous fractures, five studies investigating bisphosphonates in women with low BMD and no previous fracture, one study of bisphosphonates in women with osteopenia, five studies involving screening and two studies of bisphosphonates in special populations (women initiating corticosteroid treatment and men). In women with low BMD and previous fractures, bisphosphonate therapy was most cost effective in populations aged > or =70 years and was unlikely to be cost effective in populations aged < or =50 years. There was uncertainty concerning the cost effectiveness of bisphosphonates in such populations aged 60-69 years. In women with low BMD without previous fractures, treatment with alendronate or risedronate appeared to be cost effective across countries (UK, US, Denmark), but there was some uncertainty about the cost effectiveness of etidronate in patients in the highest age groups. Identifying risk factors for fractures through means such as spine radiographs to detect vertebral deformities improves the cost effectiveness of treatment. In women with osteopenia, alendronate therapy may be cost effective in women with a T-score of -2.4SD in the US. Screening for low BMD and treatment with alendronate or etidronate appears to be cost effective in postmenopausal women in general and in women with rheumatoid arthritis initiating corticosteroid therapy. Alendronate therapy without screening was also shown to be potentially cost effective in certain at-risk male populations, as well as in women initiating corticosteroid therapy after the age of 40 years. Decision makers in the US, UK and Sweden should consider funding the use of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in women aged >70 years, particularly if they have other risk factors for fracture. Further studies are required to make more definitive conclusions in other countries and patient populations. Screening strategies for low BMD followed by bisphosphonate treatment should also be considered in the general female population aged >65 years in the UK and US and in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating corticosteroid therapy.

The pharmacoeconomics of newer therapeutics for rheumatic diseases

Rheumatic diseases are common, serious conditions characterized by alterations in normal immune homeostasis with resultant end-organ injury. Although diverse in clinical expression and pathophysiologic basis, therapeutic approaches for these conditions frequently overlap. Over the past decade, several important new therapies have been introduced into the clinic for the treatment of many rheumatic conditions. Although these agents have proven highly effective, their higher costs have raised questions concerning their most appropriate use in the clinic. This issue has been analyzed in greatest detail in rheumatoid arthritis. Increasing data suggest that newer therapeutics may be cost-effective for rheumatoid arthritis and other rheumatic diseases.

Cost-effectiveness of inhaled steroids in asthma: impact of effect on bone mineral density

BACKGROUND

The effects of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) preparations on bone health have been debated. Multiple analyses have been published examining the question, with mixed results.

OBJECTIVES

We examined how assumptions about the effect of ICS on bone mineral density (BMD) influence the cost-effectiveness of ICS in asthma.

METHODS

We developed a mathematical simulation model to estimate clinical outcomes and costs for a cohort with mild/moderate asthma. The analysis conformed to reference case recommendations of the US Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Sensitivity analysis evaluated the stability of our results to uncertainty in treatment duration, age at treatment, and ICS dose.

RESULTS

Assuming a dose of 200 microg twice per day of ICS, a literature-based average effect of ICS on BMD and a 10-year time horizon, we observed a minimal increase in the costs attributed to hip fracture and incremental cost effectiveness ratio of $26,000 per quality-adjusted life-year and $14.00 per symptom-free day gained. Over an extended the time horizon (lifetime), the incremental cost effectiveness ratio increased to $42,000/quality-adjusted life-year. Only under a scenario of high-dose ICS, a lifetime horizon, and a large effect of ICS on BMD did the potential impact of ICS on BMD dramatically affect the economic attractiveness of therapy.

CONCLUSION

To minimize any potential impact, use of the lowest effective dose of ICS and measures to target and intervene in high-risk individuals are warranted. However, ICS therapy in mild/moderate asthma compares favorably with commonly accepted interventions over a wide range of assumptions regarding this treatment and its effects on BMD.

In whom and how to prevent glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

Glucocorticoid use is widespread in medicine. While it is often life-saving, side-effects are well known. The most common side-effect is osteoporosis. Today we have therapies with proven efficacy for the prevention of vertebral fractures and bone loss. Consequently recognition of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is extremely important given the availability of effective therapy.

Universal Bone Densitometry Screening Combined with Alendronate Therapy for Those Diagnosed with Osteoporosis Is Highly Cost-Effective for Elderly Women

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of universal bone densitometry in women aged 65 and older combined with alendronate treatment for those diagnosed with osteoporosis (femoral neck T-score < or = -2.5).

DESIGN

A Markov model with a lifetime time horizon and eight health states (no fracture, distal forearm fracture, radiographic (but clinically inapparent) vertebral fracture, clinical vertebral fracture, hip fracture, hip and vertebral fracture, and other fractures), using the societal perspective.

SETTING

Women living independently and those in nursing homes.

PARTICIPANTS

Caucasian women aged 65, 75, 85, or 95.

INTERVENTION

Bone densitometry of the hip, with 5 years of alendronate therapy for those found to have osteoporosis versus no intervention (densitometry or drug therapy).

MEASUREMENTS

Lifetime accumulated quality adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

The cost per QALY gained for the screen-and-treat strategy was 43,000 dollars per QALY gained for 65-year-old women and 5,600 dollars per QALY gained for 75-year-old women. For 85- and 95-year-old women, the screen-and-treat strategy was cost saving. Sensitivity analyses showed that the screen-and-treat strategy was cost-effective even under assumptions of reduced adherence to drug therapy, reduced fracture reduction benefit from alendronate therapy, or reduced QALYs saved by preventing fracture.

CONCLUSION

Universal bone densitometry combined with alendronate therapy for those found to have osteoporosis is highly cost-effective for women aged 65 and older and may be cost saving for ambulatory women aged 85 and older (whether independently living or residing in nursing homes).

The cost of glucocorticoid-associated adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the costs of glucocorticoid associated adverse events (GAEs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

We conducted a literature review of studies reporting GAEs in RA patients, and developed a Markov model with the following GAEs: fractures (vertebral, hip, pelvic), hypertension, diabetes, gastrointestinal complications, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, cataract and, in an extended model, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Two-year total costs were calculated using direct medical costs (2001 US dollars [USD]) and by running 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations with probability values randomly selected from the GAE literature.

RESULTS

On average, glucocorticoid users spent USD 445 more than non-users, or USD 0.46 for each dollar spent on purchasing the drug. When adding MI and stroke, users spent on average USD 430 more than non-users, or USD 0.44 for each dollar spent on purchasing the drug; this incremental cost ranged from USD 193 to USD 682 if MI and stroke were excluded, respectively. In 70% of the simulations there were more deaths among users than among non-users, in both the model with and without MI and stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Although results varied depending on attributed GAEs, in general glucocorticoid users spent more than non-users on GAE treatment, and had higher mortality. Patients, providers and policy makers should consider these potential costs of GAEs when making treatment decisions.

The treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

Glucocorticoid use results in an increase risk for fractures. Over the past 10 years, we have a greater understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid induced osteoporosis. This article reviews these recent findings and selective practice guidelines.

An economic approach to health care

Economic analyses have the potential to put all of the positive and negative outcomes of an intervention into perspective to aid decision making. The quality of the data upon which the analysis is based has an impact on the resulting quality of the analysis itself. Analysis of cost-effectiveness requires the input of many types of data, and where data are not available, assumptions must be made. There are many instances where the analysis may go wrong, and it is important to remain cognizant of these. The critical parts of the analysis, which have also been identified in quality assessment tools, include the following: design of the study question, sources of probability estimates and cost data, sensitivity analysis, and the interpretation of results. If the readers are able to identify the assumptions of the analysis they are better equipped to judge the validity. We have reviewed economic analyses relating to two hot economic topics in rheumatology. These are the cost-effectiveness of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors for 'arthritis' and cost-effectiveness of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNF) agents for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The results of the COX-2 analyses vary by review. Some show cost savings, while others calculate a significant cost in order to achieve any change in quality of life. Given the unanswered questions that still exist, it seems reasonable to conclude that COX-2 inhibitors may be cost effective when used in patients at a high risk of GI complications. Unanswered questions remain regarding the concomitant use of low-dose ASA and proton pump inhibitors and how they may affect the results of these economic analyses. The cost-effectiveness of anti-TNF agents has not been explored in as much detail as that of the COX-2 agents. Two studies have presented cost-effectiveness models that include a hypothetical biologic agent. Two economic analyses report on the cost-effectiveness of etanercept compared with traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in methotrexate-resistant and methotrexate-naïve patients with RA. Both the analyses show that etanercept has a cost-effectiveness ratio of around 40,000 US dollars for every patient who achieves an American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement score (ACR 20) within a 6-month period. A cost-utility analysis was published regarding the use of infliximab in methotrexate resistant RA. It showed a cost-utility ratio of 3400:34,000 Euro per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, depending on the country evaluated (Sweden and the UK, respectively). An important finding in all three studies was that indirect costs dominate costs in RA; therefore, they should be included in all future analyses of this disease.

The effect of low-dose prednisone on bone mineral density in Peruvian rheumatoid arthritis patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the difference between bone mineral density (BMD) of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients on low-dose prednisone and matched RA patients without prior systemic corticosteroid therapy.

METHODS

Ninety patients attending our clinics and receiving 10 mg/day of prednisone or less for at least the previous 3 consecutive months were studied. The control group comprised 90 selected RA patients without corticosteroid therapy matched for age, race, gender, disease duration, use of methotrexate, postmenopause, and Health Assessment Questionnaire score. The BMD was measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry.

RESULTS

Patients on prednisone had lower BMD than controls (0.94 +/- 0.17 vs 0.96 +/- 0.17 for L2-4 and 0.73 +/- 0.14 vs 0.76 +/- 0.16 for femoral neck), but these differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). In post hoc analysis, postmenopausal women on prednisone had more bone loss in femoral neck than controls (0.68 +/- 0.13 vs 0.74 +/- 0.15).

CONCLUSION

Bone mineral density was not significantly reduced by low-dose prednisone in this diverse group of RA patients. A reduction in hip BMD was seen in postmenopausal women on prednisone.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

Therapeutic use of glucocorticoids can lead to many well-known adverse events. Of all potential serious side effects, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is one of the most devastating complications of protracted glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. GIOP is the most common form of drug-induced osteoporosis. Although much has been written about the association of glucocorticoids with bone disease among patients with chronic inflammatory conditions, many issues remain unsettled. This article focuses on areas of continued controversies, including the epidemiology and pathogenesis of GIOP, specification of a "safe" dose, methods for diagnosis of GIOP, and an evidence-based approach for GIOP prevention.

Glucocorticoid use in rheumatoid arthritis

More than 50 years after their discovery, glucocorticoids continue to be a mainstay of treatment for many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although the short- and moderate-term efficacy of glucocorticoids in RA is seldom debated, increasing evidence favors a disease-modifying role of glucocorticoids. Despite renewed enthusiasm based on this newer long-term data, glucocorticoid use is marred substantially by the potential for many serious adverse events. Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is one of the most predictable and serious complications for many chronic and some acute users. The correct identification of patients at high risk for bone complications and the institution of appropriate preventive measures may partially attenuate this adverse outcome.

Cost of illness studies in rheumatic diseases

Knowledge about the economic burden of rheumatic diseases has progressed during recent years. In addition to the increasing number of studies published, the Economics Working Group of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trial (OMERACT) Conference has produced substantial work to improve methodological standards for the economic evaluation of rheumatic diseases. Some of their preliminary results are presented in this review. Recent data have confirmed two main conclusions of previous studies: the total economic burden of rheumatic diseases is often more substantial than other chronic conditions, including cardiovascular diseases and cancer; and the impact of the disability caused by musculoskeletal diseases is significant on both direct (long-term care in osteoporosis for example) and indirect costs (productivity loss in chronic patients). Besides that, cost-effectiveness studies have provided valid information to improve disease management, especially for patients with rheumatoid arthritis or chronic low back pain.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis

Glucocorticoids remain a key component in the management of many inflammatory disorders but the adverse consequences, especially on bone, can be devastating. The incidence of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) may be as high as 50% after 6 months' treatment with steroids. This manifests itself as a 30 to 400% increase in the incidence of low trauma fractures. The incidence rates can be even greater in specific clinical settings such as following organ transplantation. The pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis remains complex and perplexing.The concomitant prescription of bone-active drugs for the prevention and treatment of GIO in the United Kingdom population remains low, despite the availability of effective therapies. In addition, there remain many unanswered questions about the pathogenesis of GIO and clinical management. These include identification of the optimum bone mineral density threshold at which to intervene with bone-active drugs, the dose or duration of exposure to steroid therapy that warrants intervention, and the demonstration of the efficacy of fracture prevention for different bone-active drugs or for a combination of these drugs.