1
|
Beaudart C, Sharma M, Clark P, Fujiwara S, Adachi JD, Messina OD, Morin SN, Kohlmeier LA, Sangan CB, Nogues X, Cruz-Priego GA, Cavallo A, Cooper F, Grier J, Leckie C, Montiel-Ojeda D, Papaioannou A, Raskin N, Yurquina L, Wall M, Bruyère O, Boonen A, Dennison E, Harvey NC, Kanis JA, Kaux JF, Lewiecki EM, Lopez-Borbon O, Paskins Z, Reginster JY, Silverman S, Hiligsmann M. Patients' preferences for fracture risk communication: the Risk Communication in Osteoporosis (RICO) study. Osteoporos Int 2024; 35:451-468. [PMID: 37955683 PMCID: PMC10866759 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-023-06955-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/18/2023] [Indexed: 11/14/2023]
Abstract
The RICO study indicated that most patients would like to receive information regarding their fracture risk but that only a small majority have actually received it. Patients globally preferred a visual presentation of fracture risk and were interested in an online tool showing the risk. PURPOSE The aim of the Risk Communication in Osteoporosis (RICO) study was to assess patients' preferences regarding fracture risk communication. METHODS To assess patients' preferences for fracture risk communication, structured interviews with women with osteoporosis or who were at risk for fracture were conducted in 11 sites around the world, namely in Argentina, Belgium, Canada at Hamilton and with participants from the Osteoporosis Canada Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network (COPN), Japan, Mexico, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA in California and Washington state. The interviews used to collect data were designed on the basis of a systematic review and a qualitative pilot study involving 26 participants at risk of fracture. RESULTS A total of 332 women (mean age 67.5 ± 8.0 years, 48% with a history of fracture) were included in the study. Although the participants considered it important to receive information about their fracture risk (mean importance of 6.2 ± 1.4 on a 7-point Likert scale), only 56% (i.e. 185/332) had already received such information. Globally, participants preferred a visual presentation with a traffic-light type of coloured graph of their FRAX® fracture risk probability, compared to a verbal or written presentation. Almost all participants considered it important to discuss their fracture risk and the consequences of fractures with their healthcare professionals in addition to receiving information in a printed format or access to an online website showing their fracture risk. CONCLUSIONS There is a significant communication gap between healthcare professionals and patients when discussing osteoporosis fracture risk. The RICO study provides insight into preferred approaches to rectify this communication gap.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte Beaudart
- Department of Health Services Research, Care & Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging, Division of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
- Research Institute for Life Sciences (NARILIS), Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium.
| | | | - Patricia Clark
- Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Children's Hospital of Mexico, Federico Gomez - Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Saeko Fujiwara
- Department of Pharmacy, Yasuda Women's University, Hiroshima, Japan
| | | | - Osvaldo D Messina
- Investigaciones Reumatológicas y Osteológicas (IRO), Collaborating Centre WHO, Buenos Aires, Argentina
- IRO Medical Center, Investigaciones Reumatologicas y Osteologicas SRL, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | | | - Xavier Nogues
- Internal Medicine Department, CIBERFES (ISCIII), Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute, Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Griselda Adriana Cruz-Priego
- Clinical Epidemiology Research Unit, Children's Hospital of Mexico, Federico Gomez - Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Andrea Cavallo
- Investigaciones Reumatológicas y Osteológicas (IRO), Collaborating Centre WHO, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | | | - Diana Montiel-Ojeda
- Clinical Epidemiology Research Unit, Children's Hospital of Mexico, Federico Gomez - Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | - Nele Raskin
- Department of Health Services Research, Care & Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Michelle Wall
- Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Olivier Bruyère
- WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging, Division of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - Annelies Boonen
- Department of Health Services Research, Care & Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Elaine Dennison
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Nicholas C Harvey
- MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
- NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - John A Kanis
- Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia
- Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jean-François Kaux
- Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine and Sport Traumatology Department, University Hospital of Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - E Michael Lewiecki
- New Mexico Clinical Research & Osteoporosis Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | - Oscar Lopez-Borbon
- Research Institute for Life Sciences (NARILIS), Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium
| | - Zoé Paskins
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Stoke-On-Trent, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Stoke-On-Trent, UK
| | - Jean-Yves Reginster
- WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging, Division of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - Stuart Silverman
- Research Institute for Life Sciences (NARILIS), Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Namur, Namur, Belgium
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Mickaël Hiligsmann
- Department of Health Services Research, Care & Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lee KH, Lee G, Lee T, Byun DW, Ha YC. Patient Perception on Osteoporosis in Korean Female Patients with Osteoporosis. J Bone Metab 2024; 31:63-74. [PMID: 38485243 PMCID: PMC10940108 DOI: 10.11005/jbm.2024.31.1.63] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2024] [Revised: 02/03/2024] [Accepted: 02/08/2024] [Indexed: 03/17/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient perception is a key element in improving compliance with medications for osteoporosis. This study evaluated the awareness, perception, sources of information, and knowledge of osteoporosis among Korean women with osteoporosis. METHODS A questionnaire survey was conducted from July 22, 2021 to 13 August 2021. Patients who were followed up in endocrinology (Endo), orthopedic surgery (OS), and gynecology (GY) were recruited (N=40, 40, and 20 in each group). Patients were allocated according to their age, as follows: 15, 15, and 10 patients in their 60s, 70s, and 80s for Endo and OS, and 10 and 10 patients in their 60s and 70s for GY. The questionnaire was composed of the following topics: patient journey to the hospital, drug-related issues, communication with medical doctors, patient knowledge, and sources of information about osteoporosis. RESULTS The results of medical check-ups were the most common reason for patient visits to the hospital for an initial diagnosis of osteoporosis (61%). A knowledge gap regarding mortality, refracture, and drug-induced osteoporosis was observed. Doctors were the most preferred and trustful source of information, while health-related TV shows were the second most common source of information. Patients with OS reported lower perceived severity and higher drug discontinuation, along with a higher proportion of fractures, as the initial reasons for hospital visits for osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS Variations in perceptions according to the issue and group were identified. These should be considered during patient consultations to improve compliance with osteoporosis treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyung-Hag Lee
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Medical Center, Seoul,
Korea
| | - Guhyun Lee
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Medical Center, Seoul,
Korea
| | - Taehyun Lee
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Medical Center, Seoul,
Korea
| | - Dong-Won Byun
- Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul,
Korea
| | - Yong-Chan Ha
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul Bumin Hospital, Seoul,
Korea
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
LeBoff MS, Greenspan SL, Insogna KL, Lewiecki EM, Saag KG, Singer AJ, Siris ES. The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2022; 33:2049-2102. [PMID: 35478046 PMCID: PMC9546973 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-05900-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 524] [Impact Index Per Article: 174.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. S. LeBoff
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 221 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115 USA
| | - S. L. Greenspan
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, 1110 Kaufmann Building, 3471 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
| | - K. L. Insogna
- Yale School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
| | - E. M. Lewiecki
- University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, 300 Oak St NE, Albuquerque, NM 87106 USA
| | - K. G. Saag
- University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 2nd Avenue South, FOT 820, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA
| | - A. J. Singer
- MedStar Georgetown University Hospital and Georgetown University Medical Center, 3800 Reservoir Road NW, 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20007 USA
| | - E. S. Siris
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 180 Fort Washington Ave, Suite 9-903, New York, NY 10032 USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Beaudart C, Hiligsmann M, Li N, Lewiecki EM, Silverman S. Effective communication regarding risk of fracture for individuals at risk of fragility fracture: a scoping review. Osteoporos Int 2022; 33:13-26. [PMID: 34559256 PMCID: PMC8758611 DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-06151-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2020] [Accepted: 09/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Two scoping reviews were conducted to review recommendations and guidelines for communication regarding general health risk, and to investigate communication strategies regarding risk of fracture. Healthcare professionals are invited to apply these recommendations to optimize a patient-centered approach to reducing risk of fracture. INTRODUCTION To conduct a scoping review of the medical literature regarding recommendations and tools for effective communication between healthcare professionals and patients regarding general health risk and risk of fracture. METHODS The scoping review was divided into two parts to search for (1) studies presenting recommendations and guidelines for communication regarding general health risk; (2) studies investigating communication regarding risk of fracture for individuals at risk for fractures. Medline was searched in April 2020 to identify relevant studies. RESULTS The scoping review included 43 studies on communication with regard to general health risk and 25 studies about communication regarding risk of fracture. Recommendations for effective communication with regard to risk are presented. Communication of numeric data on risk should be adapted to the literacy and numeracy levels of the individual patient. Patient understanding of numerical data can be enhanced with appropriate use of visual aids (e.g., pie charts, icon arrays, bar charts, pictograms). The FRAX® tool is the most recommended and most used tool for assessing risk of fracture. Communication sent as individualized letters to patients following DXA scans has been studied, although patient understanding of their risk of fracture is often reported as low using this technique. Use of visual aids may improve patient understanding. CONCLUSION Healthcare professionals are encouraged to apply recommendations presented in this scoping review in their clinical practice. Patient understanding of risk of fracture should be confirmed by making sure that patients feel free to ask questions and express their concerns. This will contribute to an optimal patient-centered approach. Developing online tools to convert the probability of fracture into patient-friendly visual presentations could facilitate communication between healthcare professionals and patients about risk of fracture.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte Beaudart
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Mickael Hiligsmann
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Nannan Li
- Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Stuart Silverman
- New Mexico Clinical Research & Osteoporosis Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Drudge-Coates L, Van den Wyngaert T, Schiødt M, van Muilekom HAM, Demonty G, Otto S. Preventing, identifying, and managing medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: a practical guide for nurses and other allied healthcare professionals. Support Care Cancer 2020; 28:4019-4029. [PMID: 32307659 PMCID: PMC7378104 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-020-05440-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2019] [Accepted: 03/27/2020] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is an infrequent, but potentially serious, adverse event that can occur after exposure to bone-modifying agents (BMAs; e.g., bisphosphonates, denosumab, and antiangiogenic therapies). BMAs are typically used at higher doses to prevent skeletal-related events in cancer patients and at lower doses for osteoporosis/bone loss. MRONJ can cause significant pain, reduce quality of life, and can be difficult to treat, requiring a multiprofessional approach to care. METHODS We reviewed the literature and guidelines to summarize a practical guide on MRONJ for nurses and other allied healthcare professionals. RESULTS While there is a risk of MRONJ with BMAs, this should be considered in relation to the benefits of treatment. Nurses and other allied healthcare professionals can play a key role alongside physicians and dentists in assessing MRONJ risk, identifying MRONJ, counseling the patient on the benefit-risk of BMA treatment, preventing MRONJ, and managing the care pathway of these patients. Assessing patients for MRONJ risk factors before starting BMA treatment can guide preventative measures to reduce the risk of MRONJ. Nurses can play a pivotal role in facilitating multiprofessional management of MRONJ by communicating with patients to ensure compliance with preventative measures, and with patients' physicians and dentists to ensure early detection and referral for prompt treatment of MRONJ. CONCLUSIONS This review summarizes current evidence on MRONJ and provides practical guidance for nurses, from before BMA treatment is started through to approaches that can be taken to prevent and manage MRONJ in patients receiving BMAs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lawrence Drudge-Coates
- Department of Urology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9RS, UK.
| | - Tim Van den Wyngaert
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Morten Schiødt
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - H A M van Muilekom
- Department of Urology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital-Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Gaston Demonty
- Medical Development, Amgen (Europe) GmbH, Rotkreuz, Switzerland
| | - Sven Otto
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lewiecki EM. Romosozumab, clinical trials, and real-world care of patients with osteoporosis. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2020; 8:974. [PMID: 32953774 PMCID: PMC7475409 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.196] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- E Michael Lewiecki
- New Mexico Clinical Research & Osteoporosis Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Camacho PM, Petak SM, Binkley N, Clarke BL, Harris ST, Hurley DL, Kleerekoper M, Lewiecki EM, Miller PD, Narula HS, Pessah-Pollack R, Tangpricha V, Wimalawansa SJ, Watts NB. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF POSTMENOPAUSAL OSTEOPOROSIS - 2016. Endocr Pract 2019; 22:1-42. [PMID: 27662240 DOI: 10.4158/ep161435.gl] [Citation(s) in RCA: 321] [Impact Index Per Article: 53.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
ABBREVIATIONS AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists AFF = atypical femur fracture ASBMR = American Society for Bone and Mineral Research BEL = best evidence level BMD = bone mineral density BTM = bone turnover marker CBC = complete blood count CI = confidence interval DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry EL = evidence level FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration FLEX = Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT) Long-term Extension FRAX® = Fracture Risk Assessment Tool GFR = glomerular filtration rate GI = gastrointestinal HORIZON = Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly IOF = International Osteoporosis Foundation ISCD = International Society for Clinical Densitometry IU = international units IV = intravenous LSC = least significant change NBHA = National Bone Health Alliance NOF = National Osteoporosis Foundation 25(OH)D = 25-hydroxy vitamin D ONJ = osteonecrosis of the jaw PINP = serum carboxy-terminal propeptide of type I collagen PTH = parathyroid hormone R = recommendation RANK = receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B RANKL = receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand RCT = randomized controlled trial RR = relative risk S-CTX = serum C-terminal telopeptide SQ = subcutaneous VFA = vertebral fracture assessment WHO = World Health Organization.
Collapse
|
8
|
Lovato C, Lewiecki EM. Emerging anabolic agents in the treatment of osteoporosis. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs 2017; 22:247-257. [DOI: 10.1080/14728214.2017.1362389] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Lovato
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lewiecki EM, Miller PD, Harris ST, Bauer DC, Davison KS, Dian L, Hanley DA, McClung MR, Yuen CK, Kendler DL. Understanding and communicating the benefits and risks of denosumab, raloxifene, and teriparatide for the treatment of osteoporosis. J Clin Densitom 2014; 17:490-5. [PMID: 24206867 DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2013.09.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2013] [Revised: 09/13/2013] [Accepted: 09/18/2013] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
The number needed to treat is a valuable metric to determine the benefit of therapy, but it must be viewed against the respective number needed to harm. Denosumab and teriparatide (TPTD) have proven antifracture efficacy at vertebral and nonvertebral sites, whereas raloxifene has proven antifracture efficacy at the spine only. Denosumab use has been associated with a small, yet statistically significant, increased incidence of eczema and serious cellulitis. Raloxifene use has been associated with statistically significant increases in the risk of venous thromboembolism and possibly deadly stroke, although not an increase in total strokes. No significant, nontransient adverse events have been reported with TPTD use. When used for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, denosumab, raloxifene, and TPTD all generally have favorable risk-to-benefit profiles, but therapy-specific contraindications necessitate thoughtful consideration of all available clinical information and individualization of treatment decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Michael Lewiecki
- New Mexico Clinical Research and Osteoporosis Center, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
| | - Paul D Miller
- Colorado Center for Bone Research, Lakewood, CO, USA
| | - Steve T Harris
- Department of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Douglas C Bauer
- Department of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - K Shawn Davison
- Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Larry Dian
- Prohealth Clinical Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver Canada
| | - David A Hanley
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | | | - Chui K Yuen
- Prohealth Clinical Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver Canada
| | - David L Kendler
- Prohealth Clinical Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver Canada
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Nadler M, Alibhai S, Catton P, Catton C, Jones J. The impact of bone mineral density testing, fracture assessment, and osteoporosis education in men treated by androgen deprivation for prostate cancer: a pilot study. Support Care Cancer 2014; 22:2409-15. [PMID: 24696083 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-014-2183-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2013] [Accepted: 03/02/2014] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer have low knowledge of osteoporosis (OP) and engage in few healthy bone behaviors (HBBs). A multicomponent intervention was piloted in this population. Changes in OP knowledge, self-efficacy, health beliefs, and engagement in HBBs were evaluated. METHODS A pre-post pilot study was performed in a convenience sample of men recruited from the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Men were sent personalized letters explaining their dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results and fracture risk assessment with an OP-related education booklet. Participants completed questionnaires assessing OP knowledge, self-efficacy, health beliefs, and current engagement in HBBs at baseline (T1) and 3 months post-intervention (T2). Paired t tests and McNemar's test were used to assess changes in outcomes. RESULTS A total of 148 men completed the study. There was an increase in OP knowledge (9.7 ± 4.3 to 11.4 ± 3.3, p < 0.0001) and feelings of susceptibility (16.5 ± 4.3 to 17.4 ± 4.7, p = 0.015), but a decrease in total self-efficacy (86.3 ± 22.9 to 81.0 ± 27.6, p = 0.007) from baseline to post-intervention. Men made appropriate changes in their overall daily calcium intake (p ≤ 0.001), and there was uptake of vitamin D supplementation from 44 % (n = 65) to 68 % (n = 99) (p < 0.0001). Men with bone loss (osteopenia or OP) had a greater change in susceptibility (1.9 ± 4.3 vs. -0.22 ± 4.2, p = 0.005) compared to men with normal bone density. CONCLUSIONS Our results provide preliminary evidence that a multicomponent intervention such as the one described can lead to increased knowledge and feelings of susceptibility regarding OP and can enhance uptake of some HBBs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle Nadler
- Undergraduate Medicine Program, University of Toronto CREMS Scholar Program, Toronto, ON, Canada,
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lewiecki EM. Safety and tolerability of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. DRUG HEALTHCARE AND PATIENT SAFETY 2011; 3:79-91. [PMID: 22279412 PMCID: PMC3264422 DOI: 10.2147/dhps.s7727] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody to receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL), a cytokine member of the tumor necrosis factor family that is the principal regulator of osteoclastic bone resorption. Postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) is a systemic skeletal disease associated with high levels of RANKL, resulting in a high rate of bone remodeling and an imbalance of bone resorption over bone formation. By inhibiting RANKL in women with PMO, denosumab reduces the rate of bone remodeling, thereby increasing bone mineral density, improving bone strength, and reducing the risk of fractures. In clinical trials of women with osteoporosis and low bone mineral density, denosumab has been well tolerated, with overall rates of adverse events and serious adverse events in women treated with denosumab similar to those receiving placebo. In the largest clinical trial of denosumab for the treatment of women with PMO, there was a significantly greater incidence of cellulitis reported as a serious adverse event, with no difference in the overall incidence of cellulitis, and a significantly lower incidence of the serious adverse event of concussions with denosumab compared with placebo. The evidence supports a favorable balance of benefits versus risks of denosumab for the treatment of PMO. Assessments of the long-term safety of denosumab are ongoing. Denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months is an approved treatment for women with PMO who are at high risk for fracture.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Michael Lewiecki
- New Mexico Clinical Research & Osteoporosis Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| |
Collapse
|