New considerations on the management of osteoporosis in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE): summary of the "3rd Summit on Osteoporosis-CEE", November 2009, Budapest, Hungary

Novel assessment tools for osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment

This review describes new technologies for the diagnosis and treatment, including fracture risk prediction, of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Four promising technologies and their potential for clinical translation and basic science studies are discussed. These include reference point indentation (RPI), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), Raman spectroscopy, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). While each modality exploits different physical principles, the commonality is that none of them require use of ionizing radiation. To provide context for the new developments, brief summaries are provided for the current state of biomarker assays, fracture risk assessment (FRAX), and other fracture risk prediction algorithms and quantitative ultrasound (QUS) measurements.

Techniques for diagnosing osteoporosis: a systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies

OBJECTIVES

The study question was whether dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) alone is more cost-effective for identifying postmenopausal women with osteoporosis than a two-step procedure with quantitative ultrasound sonography (QUS) plus DXA. To answer this question, a systematic review was performed.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, INAHTA, Health Evidence Network, NIHR, the Health Technology Assessment program, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Research Papers in Economics, Web of Science, Scopus, and EconLit) were searched for cost-effectiveness publications. Two independent reviewers selected eligible publications based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Quality assessment of economic evaluations was undertaken using the Drummond checklist.

RESULTS

Seven journal articles and four reports were reviewed. The cost per true positive case diagnosed by DXA was found to be higher than that for diagnosis by QUS+DXA in two articles. In one article it was found to be lower. In three studies, the results were not conclusive. These articles were characterized by the differences in the types of devices, parameters and thresholds on the QUS and DXA tests and the unit costs of the DXA and QUS tests as well as by variability in the sensitivity and specificity of the techniques and the prevalence of osteoporosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The publications reviewed did not provide clear-cut evidence for drawing conclusions about which screening test may be more cost-effective for identifying postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Incidence rates and trends of hip/femur fractures in five European countries: comparison using e-healthcare records databases

Hip fractures represent a major public health challenge worldwide. Multinational studies using a common methodology are scarce. We aimed to estimate the incidence rates (IRs) and trends of hip/femur fractures over the period 2003-2009 in five European countries. The study was performed using seven electronic health-care records databases (DBs) from Denmark, The Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom, based on the same protocol. Yearly IRs of hip/femur fractures were calculated for the general population and for those aged ≥50 years. Trends over time were evaluated using linear regression analysis for both crude and standardized IRs. Sex- and age-standardized IRs for the UK, Netherlands, and Spanish DBs varied from 9 to 11 per 10,000 person-years for the general population and from 22 to 26 for those ≥50 years old; the German DB showed slightly higher IRs (about 13 and 30, respectively), whereas the Danish DB yielded IRs twofold higher (19 and 52, respectively). IRs increased exponentially with age in both sexes. The ratio of females to males was ≥2 for patients aged ≥70-79 years in most DBs. Statistically significant trends over time were only shown for the UK DB (CPRD) (+0.7% per year, P < 0.01) and the Danish DB (-1.4% per year, P < 0.01). IRs of hip/femur fractures varied greatly across European countries. With the exception of Denmark, no decreasing trend was observed over the study period.

Congress Report: 5th Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) Summit on Osteoporosis in Bratislava, 2-3 December 2011

Major aims of the 5th Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) Summit on Osteoporosis held in Bratislava, Slovakia, on 2 and 3 December 2011, were to provide participants with state-of-the-art knowledge in the fields of osteoporosis research, diagnosis, and therapy and to evaluate, compare, and discuss the very heterogeneous health care situations and related challenges in the different countries in CEE and elsewhere. The summit was attended by 70 delegates from 15 countries. State-of-the-art lectures given by international authorities on osteoporosis covered a broad spectrum of topics ranging from osteoporosis in the male population, novel therapies in osteoporosis such as cathepsin K and sclerostin inhibitors, and the implementation and use of FRAX® in CEE, to an update on denosumab for the management of osteoporosis. Workshops organized to enable the exchange of individual experiences addressed the importance and current availability of osteology training for physicians and the impact of patient training programs on therapy compliance. Furthermore, the availability of and need for standardized quality controls and therapy guidelines in different CEE countries were discussed. Finally, based on a questionnaire, a very up-to-date analysis of all participating countries regarding incidences of osteoporosis, commonly used diagnostic and therapeutic measures, the number of specialists and specialized hospitals, and differences in the reimbursement situation in the different countries was generated and presented. On the whole, the very authentic contributions and the synergistic exchange of ideas allowed the identification of both positive developments as well as still existing issues and needs in diagnosis and therapy of osteoporosis.

Hip fracture incidence from 1981 to 2009 in the Czech Republic as a basis of the country-specific FRAX model

The aim of this study was to calculate rates of hospitalization for hip fracture and the incidence of hip fractures in the Czech Republic over a period of 29 years. A second aim was to use the most recent data to populate a FRAX(®) model for the assessment of fracture probability in individual patients. Data on hospitalizations for hip fracture (1981-2009) and number of women and men with hip fractures (2000-2009) were obtained, and incidences were computed for the entire population ≥50 years of age. Incidence of hospitalization for hip fracture in the Czech population aged ≥50 years increased progressively by calendar year. Age-standardized incidence of hip fractures increased to 2004 but leveled off thereafter and decreased after 2005. Data for hip fracture risk in 2008 and 2009 and the death hazard were used to populate a Czech-specific FRAX model for the computation of 10-year fracture probability. The customized FRAX model, using the verified epidemiological data, will be used to identify patients at increased fracture risk.

Interpretation and use of FRAX in clinical practice

The introduction of the WHO FRAX® algorithms has facilitated the assessment of fracture risk on the basis of fracture probability. Its use in fracture risk prediction has strengths, but also limitations of which the clinician should be aware and are the focus of this review

INTRODUCTION

The International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) appointed a joint Task Force to develop resource documents in order to make recommendations on how to improve FRAX and better inform clinicians who use FRAX. The Task Force met in November 2010 for 3 days to discuss these topics which form the focus of this review.

METHODS

This study reviews the resource documents and joint position statements of ISCD and IOF.

RESULTS

Details on the clinical risk factors currently used in FRAX are provided, and the reasons for the exclusion of others are provided. Recommendations are made for the development of surrogate models where country-specific FRAX models are not available.

CONCLUSIONS

The wish list of clinicians for the modulation of FRAX is large, but in many instances, these wishes cannot presently be fulfilled; however, an explanation and understanding of the reasons may be helpful in translating the information provided by FRAX into clinical practice.