Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments

A practical approach for anabolic treatment of bone fragility with romosozumab

BACKGROUND

Romosozumab, a fully humanized anti-sclerostin-antibody, is a bone-builder stimulating osteoblasts and inhibiting osteoclast by activation of the canonical Wnt-beta catenin signaling. This unique mechanism of action has the potential to address unmet needs in osteoporosis management.

METHODS

The multifaceted practical clinical issues related to romosozumab are discussed, especially focusing on the rationale of employing a sclerostin inhibitor to target bone fragility as first line or second line treatment in post-menopausal osteoporosis and in males at increased risk of fractures.

RESULTS

Four randomized clinical trials with several post-hoc analyses and more than ten observational studies have consistently demonstrated that romosozumab is effective in rapidly increasing bone mineral density (BMD) and decreasing risk of vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures in post-menopausal women at very-high risk of fractures. In male osteoporosis, only data on BMD are available. Noteworthy, romosozumab was shown to be more effective and rapid than teriparatide in improving BMD, bone structure and strength at the hip, especially in women already treated with anti-resorptive drugs. Interestingly, even if romosozumab displays best results in treatment-naïve patients, its favourable effects on BMD were observed even in women previously treated with teriparatide or denosumab, although to a lesser extent.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, romosozumab could be proposed as ideal drug in several clinical settings, such as non-fractured post-menopausal women at very-high risk of fractures, patients with recent hip fracture, patients non responder to bisphosphonates and short-term denosumab therapy.

The use of anabolic agents in the treatment of osteoporosis: a clinical update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anabolic therapies have revolutionized the management of patients with osteoporosis, especially those at very high fracture risk. The current review offers valuable insights into the latest evidence and guidelines on the use of anabolic agents, focusing on their comparative efficacy, safety profiles, and optimal implementation in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Romosozumab, abaloparatide, and teriparatide have shown superior efficacy when compared to antiresorptive therapies in increasing bone mineral density and reducing fracture risk. Notably, sequential treatment strategies, commencing with an anabolic agent followed by an antiresorptive, has emerged as an effective approach for both rapid and sustained reduction of fracture risk in patients at high risk. Additionally, anabolics have shown potential in improving outcomes for patients who have a suboptimal response to antiresorptives. Careful patient selection and vigilant monitoring are essential to optimize therapeutic benefits while mitigating the potential risks. As we gain more clinical experience with these agents, we will better understand how to use them effectively, as part of long term, sequential treatment strategies. Ongoing research into novel anabolic therapies and innovative treatment sequences holds promise for expanding our toolkit against fragility fractures.

SUMMARY

Integrating anabolic agents into personalized treatment plans has the potential to significantly improve outcomes and quality of life for patients with severe osteoporosis, highlighting the importance of this therapeutic class in the management of this chronic condition.

The sequential antifracturative treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background

Subjects with a fragility fracture have an increased risk of a new fracture and should receive effective strategies to prevent new events. The medium-term to long-term strategy should be scheduled by considering the mechanisms of action in therapy and the estimated fracture risk.

Objective

A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the sequential strategy in patients with or at risk of a fragility fracture in the context of the development of the Italian Guidelines.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources and methods

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were investigated up to February 2021 to update the search of a recent systematic review. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that analyzed the sequential therapy of antiresorptive, anabolic treatment, or placebo in patients with or at risk of a fragility fracture were eligible. Three authors independently extracted data and appraised the risk of bias in the included studies. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. Effect sizes were pooled in a meta-analysis using fixed-effects models. The primary outcome was the risk of refracture, while the secondary outcome was the bone mineral density (BMD) change.

Results

In all, 17 RCTs, ranging from low to high quality, met our inclusion criteria. A significantly reduced risk of fracture was detected at (i) 12 or 24 months after the switch from romosozumab to denosumab versus placebo to denosumab; (ii) 30 months from teriparatide to bisphosphonates versus placebo to bisphosphonates; and (iii) 12 months from romosozumab to alendronate versus the only alendronate therapy (specifically for vertebral fractures). In general, at 2 years after the switch from anabolic to antiresorptive drugs, a weighted BMD was increased at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck site.

Conclusion

The Task Force formulated recommendations on sequential therapy, which is the first treatment with anabolic drugs or 'bone builders' in patients with very high or imminent risk of fracture.

The association of FRAX with predictors of falls in the assessment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in Turkey: the fracture study of Turkey (FRACT study)

Although FRAX is used for fracture risk evaluation, this tool does not include balance and fall risk. The association between the predictors of falls and high FRAX scores we found in this study suggests that risk indicators for falls may add substantial value to FRAX by improving fracture risk prediction.

PURPOSE

This observational, descriptive, and cross-sectional study aimed to assess the fall risk predictors and explore their association with FRAX in Turkish patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

METHODS

Two hundred and nine (209) women with postmenopausal osteoporosis referred to the Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) at Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa were enrolled in the FRACT study (The Fracture Study of Turkey). Clinical risk factors were assessed using the FRAX tool. Tandem stance, Tandem walking, Timed up and go (TUG), and Chair stand tests were performed to assess balance and fall risk.

RESULTS

Among patients with a mean age of 67.6 (± 9.7) years, 66 patients (31.6%) had osteoporosis without fractures and 143 patients (68.4%) had fragility fractures. The proportion of patients with poor performance of fall prediction tests was significantly higher in patients with a fragility fracture than those with osteoporosis alone. There was an inverse relationship between dynamic balance tests and the reported number of prior falls in the past year. FRAX score was higher in patients with impaired Tandem stance, Tandem walking, and TUG tests (p = 0.008, p = 0.035, p = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Assessment of fall risk predictors should be one of the major pillars in the physical evaluation of osteoporotic patients in the FLS setting. FRAX is a useful tool to determine the fracture risk of patients with both static and dynamic balance impairments. Combining balance assessment with FRAX may be an important step to optimize osteoporosis risk assessment.

[Secondary fracture prevention/Update osteoporosis guidelines 2023 of the Umbrella Organization Osteology]

The S3 guidelines on the prophylaxis, diagnostics and treatment of osteoporosis 2023 were completely revised and updated between 2021 and 2023 in accordance with the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies of Germany (AWMF) regulations. The guideline committee consisted of delegates from the 20 specialist societies of the Umbrella Organization Osteology (Dachverband Osteologie, DVO) as well as delegates from the German Society of General Medicine and Family Medicine (DEGAM), the German Society for Nephrology (DGfN) and the Federal Self-help Association for Osteoporosis (BfO).The guidelines focus on preventive measures, diagnostic procedures and treatment approaches for osteoporosis in men aged 50 years and over and postmenopausal women. The main aim is the optimization of care processes, reduction of fracture incidences and maintenance or improvement of the quality of life and functional capacity of patients affected by fractures. A major update to the guidelines includes the introduction of a new risk calculator that can take more risk factors (n = 33) into account and that can estimate the risk of vertebral body and proximal femoral fractures for a 3-year period (previously 10 years). This results in new thresholds for diagnostics and treatment. The programmed app is currently not yet certified as a medical product and a paper version is therefore currently available for patient care with the planned integration of a web-based version of the risk calculator. From the perspective of trauma surgery, the recommendations and innovations for manifest osteoporosis are of particular clinical importance. The focus of the DVO guidelines update is therefore on the implementation of secondary fracture prevention in trauma surgery, orthopedic and geriatric traumatology in the clinical and practical daily routine.

Secondary fracture and mortality risk with very high fracture risk osteoporosis and proximal femoral fracture

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to investigate secondary fracture and mortality rates, and risk factors in patients with proximal femoral fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study on female patients with proximal femoral fractures who underwent surgical treatment between April 2020 and March 2021. Postoperative follow-ups were performed at 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month intervals to determine the secondary fracture and mortality rates, and the risk factors and its influence were examined.

RESULTS

Of the 279 registered patients, 144 patients (51.6%) were diagnosed with very high fracture risk osteoporosis. The postoperative osteoporosis rate exceeded 96%; however, osteoanabolic agents were used sparingly. The risk factor of both secondary fracture and mortality was very high fracture risk osteoporosis, and secondary fractures within 12 months were markedly occurred. Secondary fracture rates increased as the number of matched very high fracture risk osteoporosis criteria increased. Notably, secondary fractures and mortality were recorded in 21.4% and 23.5% of the patients who met all criteria, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Over half of the female patients with proximal femoral fractures had very high fracture risk osteoporosis. Although, very high fracture risk osteoporosis demonstrated a notably increased risk of secondary fractures, particularly at 12 months post-surgery, the use of osteoanabolic agents was substantially low. Collectively, our findings highlight the need to consider the risk of very high fracture risk osteoporosis, expand the use of medications to include osteoanabolic agents, and reconsider the current healthcare approach for proximal femoral fractures.

A randomized, double-blind, single-dose, phase 1 study comparing the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and immunogenicity of denosumab biosimilar CT‑P41 and reference denosumab in healthy males

BACKGROUND

This study's objective was to demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity and safety of denosumab biosimilar, CT‑P41, and United States-licensed reference denosumab (US-denosumab) in healthy male Asian adults, considering also pharmacodynamic (PD) outcomes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This double-blind, two-arm, parallel-group, Phase 1 study randomized (1:1) healthy males to a single (60-mg) subcutaneous dose of CT‑P41 or US-denosumab. Primary endpoints were area under the concentration - time curve (AUC) from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf), AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last), and maximum serum concentration (Cmax). PK equivalence was determined if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for ratios of geometric least-squares means (gLSMs) were within the predefined 80-125% equivalence margin. Secondary PK, PD, safety, and immunogenicity outcomes were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 154 participants randomized (76 CT‑P41; 78 US-denosumab), 151 received study drug (74 CT‑P41; 77 US-denosumab). Primary and secondary PK results, PD results, safety, and immunogenicity were comparable between groups. Ninety percent CIs for ratios of gLSMs were within the predefined equivalence margin for AUC0-inf (100.4-114.7), AUC0-last (99.9-114.3), and Cmax (95.2-107.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Following a single dose in healthy males, CT‑P41 demonstrated PK equivalence with US-denosumab.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06037395.

Insights and implications of sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis

Osteoporosis, a metabolic bone disease characterized by low bone mineral density and deterioration of bone microarchitecture, has led to a high risk of fatal osteoporotic fractures worldwide. Accumulating evidence has revealed that sexual dimorphism is a notable feature of osteoporosis, with sex-specific differences in epidemiology and pathogenesis. Specifically, females are more susceptible than males to osteoporosis, while males are more prone to disability or death from the disease. To date, sex chromosome abnormalities and steroid hormones have been proven to contribute greatly to sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis by regulating the functions of bone cells. Understanding the sex-specific differences in osteoporosis and its related complications is essential for improving treatment strategies tailored to women and men. This literature review focuses on the mechanisms underlying sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis, mainly in a population of aging patients, chronic glucocorticoid administration, and diabetes. Moreover, we highlight the implications of sexual dimorphism for developing therapeutics and preventive strategies and screening approaches tailored to women and men. Additionally, the challenges in translating bench research to bedside treatments and future directions to overcome these obstacles will be discussed.

Comparison of the cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with abaloparatide in US men and women at very high risk of fractures

BACKGROUND

Osteoporotic-related fractures represent an increasing burden to patients, health care systems and society.

AIMS

This study estimated cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with abaloparatide (ABL) followed by alendronate (ALN) compared to relevant alternative strategies in US men and women aged 50 to 80 years at very high fracture risk (bone mineral density T-score ≤  - 2.5 and a recent fracture).

METHODS

A lifetime Markov-based microsimulation model was used to estimate healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Comparators were sequential treatment with unbranded teriparatide (TPTD)/ALN, generic ALN monotherapy, and no treatment. Analyses were conducted based on initial fracture site (hip, vertebral, or any fracture) and treatment efficacy data (derived from clinical trials or a recent network meta-analysis).

RESULTS

From all analyses completed, sequential ABL/ALN demonstrated more QALYs for lower healthcare costs versus unbranded TPTD/ALN. No treatment was dominated (higher costs for less QALYs) versus ALN monotherapy. Sequential ABL/ALN resulted in favorable cost-effectiveness (at US threshold of $150,000/QALY) versus generic ALN monotherapy in men aged ≥ 50 years with any fracture type, women aged ≥ 65 years with any fracture type, and women aged ≥ 55 years having a hip or vertebral fracture.

DISCUSSION

Similar cost-effectiveness of sequential ABL/ALN versus unbranded TPTD/ALN, ALN monotherapy, and no treatment was observed in both US men and women at very high fracture risk, with a moderate improvement in cost-effectiveness in men versus women and in patients with a hip or vertebral fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential therapy with ABL/ALN was cost-effective in US men and women at very high risk of fractures.

Zoledronic acid sequential to teriparatide may promote greater inhibition of bone resorption than zoledronic acid alone

Background

Teriparatide (TPTD) should be followed by an antiresorptive to maximize bone mineral density gain and anti-fracture protection. Infrequent zoledronic acid (ZOL) administration has demonstrated effectiveness. The duration of ZOL effect following TPTD is unknown.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of ZOL on bone resorption marker in a post-TPTD versus ZOL-alone scenario in osteoporotic patients.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Methods

Patients treated with TPTD followed by ZOL (TPTD-ZOL) or with a single ZOL infusion were identified in the database of a tertiary referral center. Clinical and laboratory data, including C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) following ZOL treatment, were compared.

Results

Twenty-six patients (93% women) treated with TPTD-ZOL and 41 with ZOL were comparable in age (median 70.1 versus 69.6 years, p = 0.6) and sex. Timing of CTX measurement post-ZOL was the same, median 1.0 year. CTX was lower following TPTD-ZOL (median 142.1 versus 184.2 pg/mL, p = 0.005). In a multivariable regression model (controlled for baseline characteristics), pretreatment with TPTD strongly predicted CTX <150 pg/mL, 1 year following ZOL (odds ratio = 7.5, 95% CI 1.3-58.1, p = 0.03). In a subgroup with sequential CTX measurements following one ZOL, significantly lower levels persisted in the TPTD-ZOL group for a median of 4.4 years follow-up.

Conclusion

ZOL-administered sequential to TPTD yielded deeper and more prolonged bone resorption suppression than ZOL alone. Prospective data are needed to confirm whether in a sequential treatment scenario, subsequent ZOL dosing interval should be less frequent.

An enhanced version of FREM (Fracture Risk Evaluation Model) using national administrative health data: analysis protocol for development and validation of a multivariable prediction model

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis poses a growing healthcare challenge owing to its rising prevalence and a significant treatment gap, as patients are widely underdiagnosed and consequently undertreated, leaving them at high risk of osteoporotic fracture. Several tools aim to improve case-finding in osteoporosis. One such tool is the Fracture Risk Evaluation Model (FREM), which in contrast to other tools focuses on imminent fracture risk and holds potential for automation as it relies solely on data that is routinely collected via the Danish healthcare registers. The present article is an analysis protocol for a prediction model that is to be used as a modified version of FREM, with the intention of improving the identification of subjects at high imminent risk of fracture by including pharmacological exposures and using more advanced statistical methods compared to the original FREM. Its main purposes are to document and motivate various aspects and choices of data management and statistical analyses.

METHODS

The model will be developed by employing logistic regression with grouped LASSO regularization as the primary statistical approach and gradient-boosted classification trees as a secondary statistical modality. Hyperparameter choices as well as computational considerations on these two approaches are investigated by an unsupervised data review (i.e., blinded to the outcome), which also investigates and handles multicollinarity among the included exposures. Further, we present an unsupervised review of the data and testing of analysis code with respect to speed and robustness on a remote analysis environment. The data review and code tests are used to adjust the analysis plans in a blinded manner, so as not to increase the risk of overfitting in the proposed methods.

DISCUSSION

This protocol specifies the planned tool development to ensure transparency in the modeling approach, hence improving the validity of the enhanced tool to be developed. Through an unsupervised data review, it is further documented that the planned statistical approaches are feasible and compatible with the data employed.

[Osteoporosis: treatment of high-risk patients]

Nowadays, different drugs are available for specific treatment of osteoporosis. On the one hand, antiresorptives (raloxifene, bisphosphonates, denosumab) and, on the other hand, bone anabolic drugs (teriparatide and romosozumab) can be used. For both bone anabolic agents, superiority over oral bisphosphonates in high-risk patients was shown in randomized comparative studies. High-risk patients represent a subgroup of osteoporosis patients requiring treatment with a particularly high fracture risk. The very high risk can be recognized by the clinical manifestation (hip or vertebral fracture), the very low T‑score and/or the clinical risk factors (exceeding the bone anabolic threshold of the DVO risk calculator). High-risk patients should be treated with bone anabolic drugs in the first line of treatment. Patients treated with antiresorptives, who develop a very high risk in the course of the disease should be escalated to bone anabolic compounds. Every bone anabolic treatment requires an antiresorptive follow-up treatment. Drug holidays are only possible in exceptional cases for high-risk patients.

Update on the clinical use of trabecular bone score (TBS) in the management of osteoporosis: results of an expert group meeting organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO), and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) under the auspices of WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging

PURPOSE

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a grey-level textural measurement acquired from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry lumbar spine images and is a validated index of bone microarchitecture. In 2015, a Working Group of the European Society on Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) published a review of the TBS literature, concluding that TBS predicts hip and major osteoporotic fracture, at least partly independent of bone mineral density (BMD) and clinical risk factors. It was also concluded that TBS is potentially amenable to change as a result of pharmacological therapy. Further evidence on the utility of TBS has since accumulated in both primary and secondary osteoporosis, and the introduction of FRAX and BMD T-score adjustment for TBS has accelerated adoption. This position paper therefore presents a review of the updated scientific literature and provides expert consensus statements and corresponding operational guidelines for the use of TBS.

METHODS

An Expert Working Group was convened by the ESCEO and a systematic review of the evidence undertaken, with defined search strategies for four key topics with respect to the potential use of TBS: (1) fracture prediction in men and women; (2) initiating and monitoring treatment in postmenopausal osteoporosis; (3) fracture prediction in secondary osteoporosis; and (4) treatment monitoring in secondary osteoporosis. Statements to guide the clinical use of TBS were derived from the review and graded by consensus using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

A total of 96 articles were reviewed and included data on the use of TBS for fracture prediction in men and women, from over 20 countries. The updated evidence shows that TBS enhances fracture risk prediction in both primary and secondary osteoporosis, and can, when taken with BMD and clinical risk factors, inform treatment initiation and the choice of antiosteoporosis treatment. Evidence also indicates that TBS provides useful adjunctive information in monitoring treatment with long-term denosumab and anabolic agents. All expert consensus statements were voted as strongly recommended.

CONCLUSION

The addition of TBS assessment to FRAX and/or BMD enhances fracture risk prediction in primary and secondary osteoporosis, adding useful information for treatment decision-making and monitoring. The expert consensus statements provided in this paper can be used to guide the integration of TBS in clinical practice for the assessment and management of osteoporosis. An example of an operational approach is provided in the appendix. This position paper presents an up-to-date review of the evidence base, synthesised through expert consensus statements, which informs the implementation of Trabecular Bone Score in clinical practice.

A Delphi consensus on the management of Spanish patients with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture: OSARIDELPHI study

The OSARIDELPHI study evaluated the level of agreement between specialists in osteoporosis regarding the management of patients with high-risk fractures in Spain. The results provide expert-based recommendations for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment related to fracture risk. Therefore, the study facilitates clinical decision-making for managing this patient's profile.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the level of agreement between specialists in osteoporosis regarding the management of patients with high-risk fractures in Spain.

METHODS

A two-round Delphi study was performed using an online survey. In round 1, panel members rated their level of agreement with assessments on a 9-point Likert scale. Item selection was based on acceptance by ≥ 66.6% of panel experts and the agreement of the scientific committee. In round 2, the same panelists evaluated non-consensus items in round 1.

RESULTS

A total of 80 panelists participated in round 1; of these, 78 completed the round 2 survey. In round 1, 122 items from 4 dimensions (definition of fracture risk: 11 items, prevention and diagnosis: 38 items, choice of treatment: 24 items, and treatment-associated quality of life: 49 items) were evaluated. The consensus was reached for 90 items (73.8%). Panelists agreed that categorizing high risk, very high risk, or imminent risk determines secondary prevention actions (97.5%). Experts agreed that treatment with bone-forming drugs should be considered in case of a very high risk of fracture, and a sequential change to antiresorptive drugs should be made after 1-2 years (97.5%). Panelists also recommended corrective action plans for non-adherent patients to improve adherence (97.5%). A total of 131 items were finally accepted after round 2.

CONCLUSION

This Delphi study provides expert-based recommendations on clinical decision-making for managing patients with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture.

Risk factors predicting the 'time to first fracture' and its association with imminent fractures: a substudy of the FRISBEE cohort

Only previous glucocorticoid use and rheumatoid arthritis were predictors of an early fracture (< 2 years after inclusion). A shorter 'time to first fracture' was not an independent clinical risk factor for imminent fractures.

PURPOSE

Risk factors for fragility fractures independent of BMD were assessed in several prediction models. However, predictors of a shorter 'time to first fracture' and its impact on imminent fractures are unknown.

METHODS

We studied the concept of 'time to first fracture' in the FRISBEE ("Fracture RIsk Brussels Epidemiological Enquiry") cohort (3560 postmenopausal women). Validated fractures were divided into 3 groups: first fracture < 2 years, 2-5 years, and > 5 years after inclusion. Factors associated with first fracture risk were evaluated with uni- and multivariate analyses using Cox modeling. We examined 'time to first fracture' as a risk factor for imminent fractures in untreated subjects and in those receiving pharmacological treatment.

RESULTS

Classical risk factors (age, prior fracture, fall history and low BMD) were associated with first fracture in all groups. Previous glucocorticoids and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were predictors for fracture < 2 years. Imminent fractures were similar in subjects with or without osteoporosis treatment, despite a higher estimated 10-year risk of fragility fracture in those treated, suggesting that treatment is efficient. 'Time to first fracture' was not an independent risk factor for imminent fractures.

CONCLUSION

Among the risk factors considered, previous glucocorticoid use and RA were predictors for early fracture, consistent with the concept of very high risk. The 'time to first validated fracture' was not an independent risk factor for imminent fractures. Patients with a first osteoporotic fracture should thus be considered at very high risk for re-fracture, independent of the 'time to first fracture'.

First Ecuadorian statement consensus for the evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis management has become more relevant as the life expectancy increases. In Ecuador, approximately 19% of adults over 65 years of age have been diagnosed with osteoporosis. There is no national consensus for the management and prevention of the disease being this proposal the first Ecuadorian consensus.

INTRODUCTION

In Ecuador, it is estimated that around 19% of adults over 65 years of age have osteoporosis. Due to the increase in life expectancy in the world population, the evaluation and management of osteoporosis has become more relevant. Currently, there is no national consensus for the management and prevention of the disease. The Ecuadorian Society of Rheumatology presented the project for the elaboration of the first Ecuadorian consensus for the management and prevention of osteoporosis.

METHODS

A panel of experts in multiple areas and extensive experience was invited to participate. The consensus was carried out using the Delphi method. Six working dimensions were created: definition and epidemiology of osteoporosis, fracture risk prediction tools, non-pharmacological treatment, pharmacological treatment, calcium and vitamin D, and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

RESULTS

The first round was held in December 2021, followed by the second round in February 2022 and the third round in March 2022. The data was shared with the specialists at the end of each round. After three rounds of work, a consensus was reached for the management and prevention of osteoporosis.

CONCLUSION

This is the first Ecuadorian consensus for the management and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Development and validation of a machine learning model to predict imminent new vertebral fractures after vertebral augmentation

BACKGROUND

Accurately predicting the occurrence of imminent new vertebral fractures (NVFs) in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) undergoing vertebral augmentation (VA) is challenging with yet no effective approach. This study aim to examine a machine learning model based on radiomics signature and clinical factors in predicting imminent new vertebral fractures after vertebral augmentation.

METHODS

A total of 235 eligible patients with OVCFs who underwent VA procedures were recruited from two independent institutions and categorized into three groups, including training set (n = 138), internal validation set (n = 59), and external validation set (n = 38). In the training set, radiomics features were computationally retrieved from L1 or adjacent vertebral body (T12 or L2) on T1-w MRI images, and a radiomics signature was constructed using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithm (LASSO). Predictive radiomics signature and clinical factors were fitted into two final prediction models using the random survival forest (RSF) algorithm or COX proportional hazard (CPH) analysis. Independent internal and external validation sets were used to validate the prediction models.

RESULTS

The two prediction models were integrated with radiomics signature and intravertebral cleft (IVC). The RSF model with C-indices of 0.763, 0.773, and 0.731 and time-dependent AUC (2 years) of 0.855, 0.907, and 0.839 (p < 0.001 for all) was found to be better predictive than the CPH model in training, internal and external validation sets. The RSF model provided better calibration, larger net benefits (determined by decision curve analysis), and lower prediction error (time-dependent brier score of 0.156, 0.151, and 0.146, respectively) than the CPH model.

CONCLUSIONS

The integrated RSF model showed the potential to predict imminent NVFs following vertebral augmentation, which will aid in postoperative follow-up and treatment.

Diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Saudi Arabia: 2023 key updates from the Saudi Osteoporosis Society

The Saudi Osteoporosis Society (SOS) has updated its guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Saudi Arabia (SA), with emphasis on postmenopausal women. This document is relevant to all healthcare professionals in SA involved in the care of patients with osteoporosis and osteoporosis-related fractures.

INTRODUCTION

The SOS launched the first national osteoporosis guidelines in 2015 and spearheaded the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries (GCC) osteoporosis consensus report in 2020 which was under the auspices of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis (ESCEO). This paper highlights a major update of the guidelines in the SA setting.

METHODS

This guideline is an adaptation of the current guidelines derived from ESCEO, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), and the GCC osteoporosis consensus report and studies on osteoporosis done in SA. Where accessible, the timeliest systematic review, meta-analysis, and randomized controlled trials were used as evidence.

RESULTS

The present update includes new recommendations for the assessment of osteoporosis taking into consideration the Saudi model of FRAX for fracture probabilities, appropriate doses for the maintenance of vitamin D status and calcium, the use of representative blood analytes for therapy monitoring, the use of romosozumab and sequential therapy in the pharmacological management strategies, and the establishment of fracture liaison services to prevent secondary fractures.

CONCLUSION

This updated guideline is for all healthcare professionals involved in osteoporosis and post-fracture care and management in SA and harmonized the most up-to-date changes in the field based on evidence-based medicine for use in the local setting.

Cost-Effectiveness of Sequential Abaloparatide/Alendronate in Men at High Risk of Fractures in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Abaloparatide (ABL) significantly increases bone mineral density in men with osteoporosis similar to what was reported in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. The cost effectiveness of sequential treatment with ABL followed by alendronate (ALN) in men at high fracture risk was compared to relevant alternative treatments.

METHODS

A Markov-based microsimulation model based on a lifetime US healthcare decision maker perspective was developed to evaluate the cost (expressed in US$2021) per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained of sequential ABL/ALN. Comparators were sequential treatment unbranded teriparatide (TPTD)/ALN, generic ALN monotherapy, and no treatment. Discount rates of 3% were used. Consistent with practice guidelines, patients received 18 months of ABL or TPTD followed by ALN for 5 years, or 5 years of ALN monotherapy. Analyses were conducted in high-risk men aged over 50 years defined as having a bone mineral density T-score ≤-2.5 and a recent fracture. Time-specific risk of subsequent fracture after a recent fracture, incremental costs up to 5 years following fractures, real-world medication adherence, and mostly US men-specific data were included in the model. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of results.

RESULTS

Over the full age range, sequential ABL/ALN led to more QALYs for lower costs than sequential unbranded TPTD/ALN, while no treatment was dominated (more QALYs, lower costs) by ALN monotherapy. The costs per QALY gained of sequential ABL/ALN were lower than the US threshold of US$150,000 versus generic ALN monotherapy. The probabilities that sequential ABL/ALN was cost effective compared to ALN monotherapy were estimated at 51% in men aged 50 years and between 88 and 90% in those aged ≥ 60 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Sequential therapy using ABL/ALN may be cost effective compared with generic ALN monotherapy in US men aged ≥ 50 years at high fracture risk, especially in those aged ≥ 60 years. Unbranded TPTD/ALN and no treatment were dominated interventions (less QALY, more costs) compared with ABL/ALN or ALN monotherapy.

Closing the gap in osteoporosis management: the critical role of primary care in bone health

OBJECTIVE

The World Health Organization issued a call to action for primary care to lead efforts in managing noncommunicable diseases, including osteoporosis. Although common, osteoporosis remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. Primary care practitioners (PCPs) are critical in identifying individuals at risk for osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures; however, recent advances in assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis have not been incorporated into clinical practice in primary care due to numerous reasons including time constraints and insufficient knowledge. To close this gap in clinical practice, we believe PCPs need a practical strategy to facilitate osteoporosis assessment and management that is easy to implement.

METHODS

In this article, we consolidate information from various global guidelines and highlight areas of agreement to create a streamlined osteoporosis management strategy for a global audience of PCPs.

RESULTS

We present a systematic approach to facilitate osteoporosis assessment and management that includes four steps: (1) identifying patients at risk through proactive screening strategies, (2) investigating and diagnosing patients, (3) intervening with personalized treatment plans, and (4) implementing patient-centered strategies for long-term management and monitoring of patients.

CONCLUSION

Primary care has a central role in ensuring the incorporation of key elements of holistic care as outlined by the World Health Organization in managing noncommunicable diseases including osteoporosis; namely, a people-centered approach, incorporation of specialist services, and multidisciplinary care. This approach is designed to strengthen the health system's response to the growing osteoporosis epidemic.

Management of bone loss due to endocrine therapy during cancer treatment

Bone modifying agents BMAs (oral and IV bisphosphonates, denosumab) are used to treat bone loss due to endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR +) early breast cancer and non-metastatic prostate cancer (NMPC). Timely initiation of appropriate sequential therapy is imperative to reduce cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). This narrative review summarizes current literature regarding management of CTIBL in HR + early breast cancer and NMPC patients. Risk factors for fragility fractures, screening strategies, optimal timing for the treatment, dosing/duration of therapy, and post treatment monitoring have not been clearly defined in HR + early breast and NMPC patients receiving endocrine therapy. This review aims to discuss the utility of fracture risk assessment (FRAX) tool for the prevention and management of CTIBL, osteoanabolic therapy for imminent fracture risk reduction, and sequential therapy options. Using predefined terms, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies on CTIBL in HR + breast and NMPC patients. We included randomized clinical trials, meta-analysis, evidence-based reviews, observational studies, and clinical practice guidelines. Fracture risk assessment tools (FRAX) guide therapy for osteoporosis in patients with early HR + breast cancer and NMPC. BMAs to prevent bone loss should be initiated at higher T-score than recommended by FRAX in premenopausal HR + breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, oophorectomy and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy, post-menopausal women with HR + breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy, and NMPC patients with androgen deprivation therapy. Sequential therapy with osteoanabolic agents as first line treatment offers a potential therapeutic strategy in patients with high imminent fracture risk. Due to limited data in cancer patients regarding management of osteoporosis, a dosing schedule similar to osteoporosis is considered appropriate. Risk stratification to identify vulnerable patient population, choosing the appropriate sequential therapy, and close monitoring of patients at the risk of bone loss can potentially reduce the mortality, morbidity, and health care cost related to CTIBL.

Romosozumab for the treatment of postmenopausal women at high risk of fracture

INTRODUCTION

Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to sclerostin (an inhibitor of the Wingless-related integration site (Wnt) signaling pathway). It is a new osteoanabolic drug that simultaneously increases bone formation and decreases bone resorption. It has recently been approved by the US and EU authorities in postmenopausal women with at high risk of fractures.

AREAS COVERED

The literature on romosozumab in preclinical and in phase II and III clinical studies has been reviewed about the effect on bone, bone markers, and fracture reduction and its safety.

EXPERT OPINION

Compared to antiresorptive agents, its unique mechanism of action results in a quicker and greater increase in bone mineral density, it repairs and restores trabecular and cortical bone microarchitecture, and reduces fracture risk more rapidly and more effectively than alendronate, with persisting effects for at least two years after transition to antiresorptive agents. This finding has introduced the concept that, in patients at very high risk of fractures, the optimal sequence of treatment is to start with an osteoanabolic agent, followed by a potent AR drug. Recent national and international guidelines recommend the use of romosozumab as an initial treatment in patients at very high fracture risk without a history of stroke or myocardial infarction.

The need to distinguish intervention thresholds and diagnostic thresholds in the management of osteoporosis

This position paper of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) addresses the rationale for separate diagnostic and intervention thresholds in osteoporosis. We conclude that the current BMD-based diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis be retained whilst clarity is brought to bear on the distinction between diagnostic and intervention thresholds.

A systematic review of cost‑effectiveness analyses of sequential treatment for osteoporosis

Sequential treatment of osteoporosis has been increasingly mentioned in recent years. However, the corresponding systematic review has not been reported. This study aims to systematically review and assess all full-text pharmacoeconomic studies of sequential treatment for osteoporosis. A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), CNKI, and Wanfang Database to identify original articles, published before June 17, 2022. The quality of included articles was evaluated by the updated Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS 2022) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases International Osteoporosis Foundation (ESCEO-IOF). In general, ten articles were included in this review. For the comparison between sequential treatment and bisphosphonate monotherapy, more than 75% of studies demonstrated the sequential treatment was cost-effective or dominant, with the exception of sequential treatment involving teriparatide. When the comparisons occurred between the two sequential treatment groups, the sequential treatments associated with either abaloparatide or romosozumab were cost-effective or dominant compared to the sequential treatment involving teriparatide. Several major key drivers of cost-effectiveness included drug cost, medication persistence and adherence, drug effect on fracture risk, offset effect, time horizon, and baseline fracture risk. The most of studies were identified as high quality in CHEERS (2022) and ESCEO-IOF. The cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment for osteoporosis is influenced by multiple factors. Generally, the sequential treatments involving abaloparatide, romosozumab, denosumab, and bisphosphonates may be considered as the preferred option for osteoporosis with high fracture risk, while the sequential treatment with teriparatide was not a cost-effectiveness strategy. The ESCEO-IOF and CHEER (2022) increase the transparency, comparability, extrapolation, and quality of research, engage patients and the general public in research on health services and policies, and help improve the quality of health technology assessment.

Osteoporosis clinical practice guideline: romosozumab for treating severe osteoporosis – an update by the Egyptian Academy of Bone Health

Background

This is a Clinical Practice Guideline update released by the Egyptian Academy of Bone Health and Metabolic Bone Diseases. It does not replace the clinical practice guidelines published for the treatment of osteoporosis in 2021, but it entails specific recommendations and selective criteria for romosozumab as another pharmacological agent for treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. It has been issued, in part, due to the imminent approval of romosozumab in Egypt.

Main text

The guideline recommends the use of romosozumab, for up to 1 year, for the reduction of vertebral, hip, and non-vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis at very high risk of fracture/imminent fracture risk: defined as T-score less than − 2.5 and a prior hip or vertebral fracture in the past 24 months or a very high fracture risk, as identified by FRAX (FRAX major osteoporosis fracture > 30%, FRAX hip fracture > 4.5%). The recommended dosage of romosozumab is 210 mg monthly by subcutaneous injection for 12 months. For osteoporotic postmenopausal women who have completed a 12-month course of romosozumab, treatment with an anti-resorptive osteoporosis therapy is recommended to maintain bone mineral density gains and reduce fracture risk. The treatment is not recommended for women at high risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke, which includes those with prior myocardial infarction or stroke.

In conclusion, strategies to osteoporosis management have been highly diversified, with bone health specialists have become able to set up treatment plan tailored to the individual patient’s requirement. Patients with severe osteoporosis at very high fracture risk need stronger therapeutic regimens to start with. Romosozumab endorses bone formation and suppresses bone resorption, leading to a greater anabolic window and a superior positive impact on bone mineral density.

Optimizing osteoporosis management: targeting to treat — an initiative by the Egyptian Academy of Bone Health

The overarching goal of treating osteoporotic patients is to reduce the incidence of fractures, yet interventions that support early detection of osteoporosis and prevention of osteoporotic fractures are underutilized. Osteoporosis and, specifically, the associated burden of fractures call for a screening strategy offering an opportunity to intervene early. Such strategy should be clinically feasible and cost-effective, aiming to identify and treat subjects at high or very high risk of fragility fracture.

The low sensitivity of bone mineral density measurements in identifying high-risk patients is evidenced by the high number of osteoporotic fractures occurring in subjects with BMD values above threshold required for a diagnosis of osteoporosis. Consequently, DXA scanning is not considered appropriate as a public screening tool identifying patients at risk of sustaining fragility fractures and current efforts focus on identifying non-BMD-related risk factors.

In Egypt, we are fortunate in having all modalities of osteoporosis therapy and assessment tools available, yet there remains a significant treatment gap in osteoporosis management. Furthermore, screening for fracture risk is not currently advocated nationally. This manuscript describes a national initiative for a population screening intervention to identify patients at risk of developing a fragility fracture aiming to reduce fragility fractures especially in older adults.

Osteoporosis treatment in Austria-assessment of FRAX-based intervention thresholds for high and very high fracture risk

The adoption of the management pathway proposed by the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG), UK applied using the Austrian FRAX® tool in a referral population of Austrian women categorises 22-29% of women age 40 years or more eligible for treatment of whom 28-34% are classified at very high risk.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to provide a reference document for the further development of existing guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in Austria, considering FRAX-based intervention thresholds for high and very high fracture risk.

METHODS

The model development was based on two Austrian hospital referral cohorts. Baseline information was collected to compute the 10-year probability (using the Austrian FRAX model) of a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture both with and without the inclusion of femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD). Assessment thresholds for BMD testing were defined, as well as intervention thresholds. In addition, thresholds that characterise men and women at high and very high fracture risk were established. The management pathway followed that currently recommended by the UK National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG).

RESULTS

The two cohorts comprised a total of 1306 women and men with a mean age of 66.7 years. Slightly more than 50% were eligible for treatment by virtue of a prior fragility fracture. In those women without a prior fracture, 22% (n = 120) were eligible for treatment based on MOF probabilities. Of these, 28% (n = 33) were found to be at very high risk. When both MOF and hip fracture probabilities were used to characterise risk, 164 women without a prior fracture were eligible for treatment (29%). Of these, 34% (n = 56) were found to be at very high risk. Fewer men without prior fracture were eligible for treatment compared with women.

CONCLUSION

The management pathway as currently outlined is expected to reduce inequalities in patient management. The characterisation of very high risk may aid in the identification of patients suitable for treatment with osteoanabolic agents.

Evidence based Latin American Guidelines of clinical practice on prevention, diagnosis, management and treatment of glucocorticoid induced osteoporosis. A 2022 update : This manuscript has been produced under the auspices of the Committee of National Societies (CNS) and the Committee of Scientific Advisors (CSA) of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF)

Guidelines and recommendations developed and endorsed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) are intended to provide guidance for particular pattern of practice for physicians who usually prescribe glucocorticoid (GC) therapy, and not to dictate the care of a particular patient. Adherence to the recommendations within this guideline is voluntary and the ultimate determination regarding their application should be made by the physician in light of each patient's circumstances. Guidelines and recommendations are intended to promote a desirable outcome but cannot guarantee any specific outcome. This guideline and its recommendations are not intended to dictate payment, reimbursement or insurance decisions. Guidelines and recommendations are subjected to periodic revisions as a consequence of the evolution of medicine, technology and clinical practice. A panel of Latin American (LATAM) experts specialized in osteoporosis with recognized clinical experience in managing patients with glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO) met to produce evidence-based LATAM recommendations for the diagnosis and management of GIO. These guidelines are particularly intended to general practitioners and primary care physicians who prescribe GC treatments in LATAM to guide their daily clinical practice in terms of evaluation, prevention and treatment of GIO. These recommendations were based on systematic literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and COCHRANE Library database during the period from 2012 to 2021. Randomized clinical trials (RCT), systematic reviews of RCT, controlled observational studies, guidelines and consensus were considered. Based on the review and expert opinion the panel members voted recommendations during two successive rounds of voting by panel members. Agreements for each statement were considered if a concordance of at least 70% was achieved following Delphi methodology. Grading of recommendations was made according to the Oxford Centre for the Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) criteria. Among five GIO guidelines and consensus initially identified, two of them (American College of Rheumatology 2017 and the Brazilian Guidelines 2021) were selected for comparison considering the latter as the most current guides in the LATAM region. Based on this methodology fifty statements were issued. All of them but four (1.20, 1.21, 1.23 and 4.2) attained agreement.

Novel formulations of oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis

Oral bisphosphonates are a key intervention in the treatment of osteoporosis and in reducing the risk of fragility fractures. Their use is supported by over 3 decades of evidence; however, patient adherence to oral bisphosphonates remains poor in part due to complex dosing instructions and adverse events, including upper gastrointestinal symptoms. This problem has led to the development of novel oral bisphosphonate formulations. Buffered, effervescent alendronate is dissolved in water and so seeks to reduce upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, and gastro-resistant risedronate aims to reduce the complexity of dosing procedure (e.g. fasting prior to consumption) whilst still maintaining the efficacy of fracture risk reduction. Clinical trials and real-world data have been employed to demonstrate some benefits in terms of reduced upper gastro-intestinal adverse events, adherence, persistence and health economic outcomes. This report describes the result of an ESCEO (European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis) expert working group, which explores where oral bisphosphonates sit in current clinical practice guidelines, review their risk-benefit profile and the consequences of poor adherence before exploring novel oral bisphosphonate formulations and their potential clinical and health economic impact. Further research is required but there are signs that these novel, oral bisphosphonate formulations may lead to improved tolerance of oral bisphosphonates and thus, improved adherence and fracture outcomes.

How to implement guidelines and models of care

In subjects older than 50 years, the presence of clinical risk factors (CRFs) for fractures or a recent fracture is the cornerstone for case finding. In patients who are clinically at high short- and long-term risk of fractures (those with a recent clinical fracture or with multiple CRFs), further assessment with bone mineral density (BMD) measurement using dual-energy absorptiometry (DXA), imaging of the spine, fall risk evaluation and laboratory examination contributes to treatment decisions according to the height and modifiability of fracture risk. Treatment is available with anti-resorptive and anabolic drugs, and from the start of treatment a lifelong strategy is needed to decide about continuous, intermittent, and sequential therapy. Implementation of guidelines requires further initiatives for improving case finding, public awareness about osteoporosis and national policies on reimbursement of assessment and therapy.

Osteoporosis in 2022: Care gaps to screening and personalised medicine

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment, and a range of effective pharmacological agents. However, it is apparent that both in the context of primary and secondary fracture prevention, there is a considerable gap between the population at high fracture risk and those actually receiving appropriate antiosteoporosis treatment. In this narrative review article, we document recent work describing the burden of disease, approaches to management, and service provision across Europe, emerging data on gaps in care, and existing/new ways in which these gaps may be addressed at the level of healthcare systems and policy. We conclude that although the field has come a long way in recent decades, there is still a long way to go, and a concerted, integrated effort is now required from all of us involved in this field to address these urgent issues to ensure the best possible outcomes for our patients.

Treatment Consideration in Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Patients at Imminent Fracture Risk

Osteoporosis is the most common metabolic bone disease and constitutes a major public health problem all over the world. Most international clinical practice guidelines have conventionally positioned the class of antiresorptive drugs, the bisphosphonates, as the first-line medical therapy for the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis. With the clinical development of more potent antiresorptive drugs as well as bone-forming drugs, more therapeutic options with different mechanisms of action, therapeutic efficacies, and adverse effect profiles are currently available. Bone-forming drugs have demonstrated a faster and better protection to patients with osteoporosis such that clinical management decisions should position their prioritized use in patients with a very high fracture risk. This article provides a review on the preferential selection of bone-forming drugs for management of postmenopausal osteoporosis in patients with imminent fracture risk.