Alendronate reduces the risk of multiple symptomatic fractures: results from the fracture intervention trial

Proportion of osteoporotic women remaining at risk for fracture despite adherence to oral bisphosphonates

BACKGROUND

Adherence to oral bisphosphonates is often low, but even adherent patients may remain at elevated fracture risk. The goal of this study was to estimate the proportion of bisphosphonate-adherent women remaining at high risk of fracture.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of women aged 50years and older, adherent to oral bisphosphonates for at least two years was identified, and data were extracted from a multi-system health information exchange. Adherence was defined as having a dispensed medication possession ratio≥0.8. The primary outcome was clinical occurrence of: low trauma fracture (months 7-36), persistent T-score≤-2.5 (months 13-36), decrease in bone mineral density (BMD) at any skeletal site≥5%, or the composite of any one of these outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 7435 adherent women, 3110 had either pre- or post-adherent DXA data. In the full cohort, 7% had an incident osteoporotic fracture. In 601 women having both pre- and post-adherent DXA to evaluate BMD change, 6% had fractures, 22% had a post-treatment T-score≤-2.5, and 16% had BMD decrease by ≥5%. The composite outcomes occurred in 35%. Incident fracture was predicted by age, previous fracture, and a variety of co-morbidities, but not by race, glucocorticoid treatment or type of bisphosphonate.

CONCLUSION

Despite bisphosphonate adherence, 7% had incident osteoporotic fractures and 35% had either fracture, decreases in BMD, or persistent osteoporotic BMD, representing a substantial proportion of treated patients in clinical practices remaining at risk for future fractures. Further studies are required to determine the best achievable goals for osteoporosis therapy, and which patients would benefit from alternate therapies.

Incidence and Predictors of Multiple Fractures Despite High Adherence to Oral Bisphosphonates: A Binational Population-Based Cohort Study

Oral bisphosphonates (BPs) are highly effective in preventing fractures and are recommended first-line therapies for patients with osteoporosis. We identified the incidence and predictors of oral BP treatment failure, defined as the incidence of two or more fractures while on treatment (≥2 FWOT) among users with high adherence. Fractures were considered from 6 months after treatment initiation and up to 6 months after discontinuation. Data from computerized records and pharmacy invoices were obtained from Sistema d'Informació per al Desenvolupament de l'Investigació en Atenció Primària (SIDIAP; Catalonia, Spain) and Danish Health Registries (Denmark) for all incident users of oral BPs in 2006-2007 and 2000-2001, respectively. Fine and Gray survival models using backward-stepwise selection (p-entry 0.049; p- exit 0.10) and accounting for the competing risk of therapy cessation were used to identify predictors of ≥2 FWOT among patients having persisted with treatment ≥6 months with overall medication possession ratio (MPR) ≥80%. Incidence of ≥2 FWOT was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 3.2) and 1.7 (95% CI, 1.2 to 2.2) per 1000 patient-years (PYs) within Catalonia and Denmark, respectively. Older age was predictive of ≥2 FWOT in both Catalonian and Danish cohorts: subhazard ratio (SHR) = 2.28 (95% CI, 1.11 to 4.68) and SHR = 2.61 (95% CI, 0.98 to 6.95), respectively, for 65 to <80 years; and SHR = 3.19 (95% CI, 1.33 to 7.69) and SHR = 4.88 (95% CI, 1.74 to 13.7), respectively, for ≥80 years. Further significant predictors of ≥2 FWOT identified within only one cohort were dementia, SHR = 4.46 (95% CI, 1.02 to 19.4) (SIDIAP); and history of recent or older fracture, SHR = 3.40 (95% CI, 1.50 to 7.68) and SHR = 2.08 (95% CI: 1.04-4.15), respectively (Denmark). Even among highly adherent users of oral BP therapy, a minority sustain multiple fractures while on treatment. Older age was predictive of increased risk within both study populations, as was history of recent/old fracture and dementia within one but not both populations. Additional and/or alternative strategies should be investigated for these patients.

A Critical Analysis of Claims and Their Authenticity in Indian Drug Promotional Advertisements

Introduction. Drug promotional advertisements (DPAs) form a major marketing technique of pharmaceutical companies for promoting their products and disseminating ambiguous drug information which can affect prescribing pattern of physicians. Drug information includes product characteristics, various marketing claims with references in support to increase its credibility and authenticity. Material and Methods. An observational study was carried out on fifty printed drug advertisement brochures which were collected from different OPDs of Guru Nanak Dev Hospital attached to Government Medical College, Amritsar, India. These advertisements were analyzed and claims were categorized into true, false, exaggerated, vague, and controversial on criteria as reported by Rohraa et al. (2006). References of DPAs in support of the claims were critically analyzed for their retrievability from web and validity pertaining to claims. Results. Out of 209 claims from 50 advertisements, only 46% were found to be true, 21% false, 16% vague, 7% exaggerated, and 10% controversial in nature. Out of 160 references given in support of claims, 49 (30%) of references were irretrievable. Out of 111 (70%) retrievable references, 92 (83%) references were found valid. Conclusion. Drug information provided in the DPAs was biased, incomplete, unauthentic, and unreliable with references exhibiting questionable credibility.

Risk factors for treatment failure with antiosteoporosis medication: the global longitudinal study of osteoporosis in women (GLOW)

Antiosteoporosis medication (AOM) does not abolish fracture risk, and some individuals experience multiple fractures while on treatment. Therefore, criteria for treatment failure have recently been defined. Using data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW), we analyzed risk factors for treatment failure, defined as sustaining two or more fractures while on AOM. GLOW is a prospective, observational cohort study of women aged ≥55 years sampled from primary care practices in 10 countries. Self-administered questionnaires collected data on patient characteristics, fracture risk factors, previous fractures, AOM use, and health status. Data were analyzed from women who used the same class of AOM continuously over 3 survey years and had data available on fracture occurrence. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of treatment failure. Data from 26,918 women were available, of whom 5550 were on AOM. During follow-up, 73 of 5550 women in the AOM group (1.3%) and 123 of 21,368 in the non-AOM group (0.6%) reported occurrence of two or more fractures. The following variables were associated with treatment failure: lower Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) score (physical function and vitality) at baseline, higher Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) score, falls in the past 12 months, selected comorbid conditions, prior fracture, current use of glucocorticoids, need of arms to assist to standing, and unexplained weight loss ≥10 lb (≥4.5 kg). Three variables remained predictive of treatment failure after multivariable analysis: worse SF-36 vitality score (odds ratio [OR] per 10-point increase, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.95; p = 0.004); two or more falls in the past year (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.34-4.29; p = 0.011), and prior fracture (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.81-4.75; p < 0.0001). The C statistic for the model was 0.712. Specific strategies for fracture prevention should therefore be developed for this subgroup of patients.

Treatment failure in osteoporosis

Guidelines concerning the definition of failure of therapies used to reduce the risk of fracture are provided.

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to provide guidelines concerning the definition of failure of therapies used to reduce the risk of fracture.

METHODS

A working group of the Committee of Scientific Advisors of the International Osteoporosis Foundation was convened to define outcome variables that may assist clinicians in decision making.

RESULTS

In the face of limited evidence, failure of treatment may be inferred when two or more incident fractures have occurred during treatment, when serial measurements of bone remodelling markers are not suppressed by anti-resorptive therapy and where bone mineral density continues to decrease.

CONCLUSION

The provision of pragmatic criteria to define failure to respond to treatment provides an unmet clinical need and may stimulate research into an important issue.

Time to onset of efficacy in fracture reduction with current anti-osteoporosis treatments

Early prevention of future fracture is an important goal in those at risk. A similar 3-year fracture efficacy is reported for most osteoporosis agents. Onset of fracture efficacy may be useful to help tailor treatment based on risk. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature for onset of fracture efficacy data on the commonly prescribed osteoporosis treatments. All papers were reviewed independently by at least two reviewers for onset of efficacy for morphometric vertebral fracture (MVF), clinical vertebral fracture (CVF), nonvertebral fracture (NVF), hip fracture, and any clinical fracture (ACF). Alendronate is reported to reduce multiple CVF by 6 months; all CVF, NVF, and multiple ACF by 12 months; and all ACF and hip fracture by 18 months. Ibandronate is reported to reduce MVF by 12 months and NVF by 36 months. Raloxifene is reported to reduce CVF by 3-6 months and NVF by 36 months. Risedronate is reported to reduce CVF and NVF by 6 months, and hip fracture by 12 months. Strontium ranelate is reported to reduce MVF, CVF, NVF, and ACF by 12 months, and hip fracture by 36 months. Zoledronic acid is reported to reduce MVF, CVF, and ACF by 12 months, NVF by 24 months, and hip fracture by 36 months. Although direct comparisons are limited, based on the available literature, risedronate, followed by alendronate, have the earliest onset of benefit across the range of fracture types. Onset of efficacy may be an important consideration in the selection of treatment for some patients.

Clinical characteristics and incidence of first fracture in a consecutive sample of post-menopausal women attending osteoporosis centers: The PROTEO-1 study

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis is a highly prevalent disease and fractures are a major cause of disability and morbidity.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to characterize post-menopausal women attending osteoporosis centers in Italy, to evaluate physician management, and to determine the incidence of first osteoporotic fracture.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

PROTEO-1 was an observational longitudinal study with a 12-month follow-up. Data were collected from women attending osteoporosis centers. Women without prevalent fracture were eligible to enter the 1-yr follow-up phase: the clinical approach to patients according to their fracture risk profile and the incidence of fracture were recorded.

RESULTS

4269 patients were enrolled in 80 centers in the cross-sectional phase; 34.2% had an osteoporotic fracture at baseline. Patients with prevalent fractures were older and more likely to be treated compared with non-fractured patients. The incidence of vertebral or hip fracture after 1 yr was 3.84%, regardless of the calculated risk factor profile, and was significantly higher in patients with back pain at baseline (4.2%) compared with those without back pain (2.2%; p=0.023). Generally, physicians prescribed more blood exams and drugs to patients at higher risk of fracture. Among fractured patients only 24% were properly treated; the rate of non-responders to treatment was about 4%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, unselected sample of post-menopausal women attending osteoporosis centers, those without previous fracture were at substantial risk of future fracture, regardless of their theoretical low 10-yr fracture risk. The presence of back pain in women without previous fracture warrants close attention.

Secondary prevention program for osteoporotic fractures and long-term adherence to bisphosphonates

Our purpose was to assess the impact of a secondary prevention program for osteoporotic fractures in patients with fragility fracture and to determine its effect on long-term compliance with bisphosphonate treatment. Persistence with bisphosphonate use was 71%. Attending follow-up visits was the only variable significantly associated with adherence to bisphosphonates.

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to assess the impact a secondary prevention program for osteoporotic fractures in a prospective cohort of patients with at least one fragility fracture and to determine the effect of this intervention on long-term compliance with bisphosphonate treatment.

METHODS

All patients older than 50 years with a fragility fracture attended at the emergency department over a 2-year period were appointed for a clinical visit through a telephone call. Two follow-up controls at 4 and 12 months were scheduled. After a mean of 4 years, a telephone survey was conducted to assess compliance with treatment.

RESULTS

Of 683 eligible patients, 380 (55.6%) were visited at the hospital. Previous treatment with bisphosphonates was recorded in 17.9% of patients. DXA scan was considered normal in 61 patients and revealed osteopenia in 184 and osteoporosis in 135. Pharmacological treatment was indicated in 90% of patients (alendronate in 76%). Among 241 patients who participated in the survey, eight patients had new fractures (four were on treatment with bisphosphonates and four had discontinued treatment). Of 187 patients in which bisphosphonates were prescribed at the initial visit, 133 (71.1%) continued using bisphosphonates. Attendance of scheduled visits was associated with adherence to bisphosphonates (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 2.99-3.67).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of the program to recruit patients was 55%. In patients visited at the hospital, treatment with bisphosphonates increased from 17.9% to 76%. Persistence with bisphosphonate use after a mean of 4 years was 71%. Attending follow-up visits was significantly associated with adherence to bisphosphonates.

Comparison of alendronate and raloxifene in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of raloxifene (RLX) 60 mg daily and alendronate (ALN) 70 mg once weekly, either alone or in combination, on bone mineral density (BMD), bone turnover, and lipid metabolism in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

METHODS

Of the 135 women enrolled, 98 completed this 12-month, randomized, clinical study (35 in the RLX group, 31 in the ALN group, and 32 in the combination group). Measurements were taken of the BMD of the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip, urinary N-telopeptide (NTx) of type I collagen corrected for creatinine, serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP), and the lipid profile. All adverse effects were recorded.

RESULTS

At 12 months, the BMD of the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip significantly increased from baseline in all treatment groups. However, the increase in BMD in the combination group was significantly greater than those in the RLX and ALN groups (p < 0.0001). The reductions in both urinary NTx and serum BSAP in the combination and ALN groups were significantly greater than those in the RLX group (p < 0.0001). There were significant reductions in the serum total cholesterol and low density lipoprotein cholesterol and a significant increase in the serum high density lipoprotein cholesterol in the RLX and combination groups but not in the ALN group at 12 months. There were no significant differences in the incidence of adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis with RLX and ALN, alone and in combination, significantly increased the BMD of the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip and reduced markers of bone turnover. However, the effects of combined therapy were more pronounced than those of either monotherapy. On the other hand, RLX had some beneficial effects on lipid metabolism. Both medications, alone or in combination, had similar tolerability and safety profiles.

The osteoporosis needs of patients with wrist fracture

OBJECTIVES

To provide information for practitioners regarding the osteoporosis (OP)-related needs of patients who present with low-trauma wrist fractures and are at high risk of subsequent hip fracture.

DESIGN

Prospective protocol, retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Large urban teaching hospital, regional trauma center.

PATIENTS

All outpatients (women > or =40 years; men > or =50 years) who sustained fragility fractures of the wrist between December 1, 2002 and June 30, 2005.

INTERVENTION

Patients were evaluated by a coordinator and recruited to an OP program for education, diagnosis, and treatment. Patient demographic data were collected. A baseline questionnaire included fracture and OP risk history, sociodemographics, Osteoporosis Health Beliefs Scale, and Osteoporosis Self-Efficacy Scale.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Fracture history, OP risk factors, attitudes, and beliefs.

RESULTS

Of 339 patients with wrist fractures, 286 had fragility fractures (mean age 64.8 years; 82% female) and met the age criteria. Seventeen percent of men and 36% of women with fragility wrist fractures had been previously diagnosed with OP or osteopenia; nearly all of them had been prescribed supplements, and two thirds had received aminobisphosphonate treatment for OP. Half of the patients had one or more risk factors for OP. Most patients were aware of OP, but few felt their fracture could result from OP. Bone densitometry completed on 55 patients in the first year indicated OP or osteopenia in 43 of 55 patients. Patients' health beliefs underestimated the seriousness of OP. Every patient with a fragility fracture of the wrist should understand that: (1) their fracture may be related to OP; (2) by having a fragility fracture, they are at higher risk for hip fracture; and (3) preventive treatment is effective and safe. Information should be partly gender specific. Patients who believe that weak bones didn't cause their fracture require additional attention to motivate them to undergo special treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Intervention by the orthopaedic team to address potential underlying OP in patients with low-trauma wrist fractures should include directed patient education, testing, treatment with supplements and pharmacotherapy where indicated, and referral as needed.

A Markov model simulation of the impact of treatment persistence in postmenopausal osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

The Markov model followed a cohort of patients over 10 years to estimate the total number of incident osteoporotic fractures by age for the overall population of women with diagnosed postmenopausal osteoporosis in France (mean age, 71.1 years +/-9.6; range, 50-96 years). The impact of clinical efficacy, persistence, and residual treatment effects data on predicted fracture risk was also estimated in the model.

RESULTS

Predicted numbers of incident fractures appeared consistent with published data. Compared with no treatment, the relative risk of fracture over 10 years was 0.831 for weekly bisphosphonate treatment with an assumed persistence rate of 51% after 1 year (absolute risk reduction = 11.4%). This relative risk decreased to 0.731 (absolute risk reduction=18.1%) if hypothetical full-treatment persistence was achieved. In terms of public health, improving persistence with bisphosphonate treatment by only 20% could have the same impact as a 20.2% increase in clinical efficacy. The benefit associated with improved persistence declines as full persistence is approached.

CONCLUSION

Improving persistence can increase treatment effectiveness. Giving greater priority to persistence interventions might have a greater impact on the health of osteoporotic women than advances in treatment efficacy.

A comparison of the effect of alendronate and risedronate on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: 24-month results from FACTS-International

OBJECTIVES

To compare alendronate 70 mg once weekly (OW) with risedronate 35 mg OW with respect to change in bone mineral density (BMD), biochemical markers and upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tolerability over 24 months.

METHODS

This was a 12-month extension to the Fosamax Actonel Comparison Trial international study (FACTS). Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis randomly assigned to either alendronate 70 mg OW or risedronate 35 mg OW for the 12-month base study continued taking the same double-blind study medication. Efficacy measurements were BMD at the hip trochanter, lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck and levels of four bone turnover markers at 24 months. The primary hypothesis was that alendronate would produce a greater mean per cent increase from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at 24 months.

RESULTS

Trochanter BMD increased significantly from baseline to month 24 in both groups, with a significantly larger increase with alendronate: adjusted mean treatment difference of 1.50% (95% confidence interval: 0.74%, 2.26%; p < 0.001). Similar results were seen at all BMD sites. Significant geometric mean per cent decreases (p < 0.001) from baseline were seen for all four bone turnover markers in both groups, with significantly larger decreases (p < 0.001) with alendronate: adjusted mean treatment differences ranged from 8.9% to 25.3%. No significant differences were seen in incidence of UGI or other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Alendronate 70 mg OW yielded significantly greater BMD gains and larger decreases in bone turnover marker levels than risedronate 35 mg OW over 24 months, with no difference in UGI tolerability.

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Age and drug therapy are key prognostic factors for first clinical fracture in patients with primary osteoporosis

We evaluated the characteristics of 1,142 women and men who attended Canadian osteoporosis clinics and had T-score < or = -2.0 and no prior fractures to determine the predictors of first clinical fracture. Greater age and failure to start osteoporosis drug treatment increased the risk of first clinical fracture.

INTRODUCTION

Although risk factors for osteoporotic fractures are well-known, it is unclear which factors predict poor prognosis in patients with primary osteoporosis. The purpose of this study was to determine prognostic factors for first clinical fracture in patients with T-score < or = -2.0 and no previous clinical fracture.

METHODS

We examined prospectively collected data from 1,142 patients aged 40 and over in the Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia. We used prognosis methodology and performed survival analysis to determine factors that increase the risk of first clinical fracture.

RESULTS

Our inception cohort (mean age = 60.6 years, 91% females) had a cumulative fracture incidence of 5.1% (incidence rate: 2.53/100 person-years). Age and osteoporosis drug use predicted incident clinical fractures in multivariable regression analyses. The risk of first fracture increased by 3% per year. Failing to initiate osteoporosis treatment increased fracture risk by 2.4 times. In addition, low physical activity, high body mass index and low T-scores were found to predict fracture risk in certain patient subgroups using tree-structured survival analysis. These findings were robust and did not change with most sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Age and osteoporosis drug treatment are the main prognostic predictors of first clinical fracture in patients with T-score < or = -2.0.

Alendronate sodium in the management of osteoporosis

Alendronate is one of the best and most extensively studied bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis. This review considers in detail the major pivotal study, the fracture intervention trial (FIT), upon which the use of alendronate is based and which was a landmark study in terms of design, size and clinical impact. The role of alendronate has subsequently been underscored by a range of studies extending the clinical indications for its use and consolidating the effect on reducing both vertebral and non-vertebral fracture risk. Although the emphasis of these studies has predominantly been on the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis, data is also available in primary prevention, men, and glucocorticoids-induced osteoporosis. Direct comparison between the different drugs used to treat osteoporosis with fracture end points are needed for patients and doctors to make informed choices, but the size of such studies are prohibitive. Clinical trials using surrogate markers such as bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover have been performed which provide some helpful information but the limitations of this approach need to be recognized.

Fracture prevention in postmenopausal osteoporosis: a review of treatment options

Several treatment options are available to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women with or at risk for osteoporosis. A MEDLINE search was conducted to evaluate anti-fracture and adverse event data of osteoporosis therapies from trials in postmenopausal women. Among the anti-resorptive therapies, the bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate have demonstrated consistent efficacy in reducing vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risk. Once-weekly alendronate and risedronate produced similar improvements in bone mineral density compared with their once-daily counterparts with similar tolerability. Daily injections of teriparatide resulted in statistically significant reductions in the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, and trials of ibandronate, raloxifene, and calcitonin nasal spray showed reductions in vertebral fracture risk. Hormone therapy has demonstrated clinical fracture risk reduction; however, safety outcomes from the Women's Health Initiative study have raised concerns regarding long-term use of these preparations. These data can guide clinical decision-making regarding the selection of an osteoporosis therapy.

TARGET AUDIENCE

Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completion of this article, the reader should be able to summarize adverse events data of osteoporosis therapies from trials in postmenopausal women, explain that only a few therapies have shown a consistent efficacy in reducing vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, and state that data from the Women's Health Initiative study have raised concerns regarding long-term use of estrogen-progestin therapy.

Economic evaluations of interventions for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: a structured review of the literature

Economic evaluations are increasingly being used by decision-makers to estimate the cost-effectiveness of interventions. The objective of this study was to conduct a structured review of economic evaluations of interventions to prevent and treat osteoporosis. Articles were identified independently by two reviewers through searches on MEDLINE, the bibliographies of reviews and identified economic models, and expert opinion, using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on country, type and level of interventions, type of fractures, interventions, study population and the authors' stated conclusions were extracted. Forty-two relevant studies were identified. The majority of studies (71%) were conducted in Sweden, the UK and the US. The main interventions investigated were hormone replacement therapy (27%), bisphosphonates (17%) and combinations of vitamin D and calcium (16%). In 38% of studies, hip fracture was the sole fracture outcome. Eighty-eight percent (88%) of studies investigated female populations only. A relatively large number of economic evaluations were identified in the field of osteoporosis. Major changes have recently occurred in the treatment of this disease, following the publication of the results of the Women's Health Initiative trial. Methodological developments in economic evaluations, such as the use of probabilistic sensitivity analysis and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, have also taken place. Such changes are reflected in the studies that were reviewed. The development of economic models should be an iterative process that incorporates new information, whether clinical or methodological, as it becomes available.

Long-Term Safety of Bisphosphonate Therapy for Osteoporosis

This article reviews the long-term safety profile of bisphosphonates for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Bisphosphonates inhibit osteoclastic resorption and reduce the rate of bone turnover, thereby reducing fracture risk. Placebo-controlled trials of oral amino-bisphosphonates of up to 4 years' duration and continuous treatment for up to 10 years in extensions of these trials (without continuous placebo comparison groups) have reported that bone quality remains normal, and suggest that the early reductions in fracture risk may be sustained for as long as treatment continues. Studies in animals using high doses of bisphosphonates have also reported normal quality bone with increased strength. The adverse experience profile (including upper gastrointestinal tolerability) of the oral bisphosphonates alendronic acid and risedronic acid has been similar to placebo in randomised trials with thousands of participants, whereas the incidence of flu-like symptoms was increased with the high doses used in oral monthly and intravenous ibandronic acid. Thus, the existing data are reassuring for long-term continued daily (or its weekly equivalent) administration of alendronic acid and risedronic acid, with no evidence of an adverse effect on bone health. For other dosing regimens, additional data are needed to evaluate their long-term safety.

Alendronic Acid Produces Greater Effects than Risedronic Acid on Bone??Density and Turnover in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of alendronic acid once weekly relative to risedronic acid once weekly on bone mineral density (BMD), markers of bone turnover and tolerability in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

METHODS

This was a randomised, double-masked, double-dummy multicentre international study (75 centres in 27 countries in Europe, the Americas and Asia-Pacific). A total of 1303 women were screened and 936 with low bone density (T-score < or = -2.0 at the spine, hip trochanter, total hip or femoral neck) were randomised; 91% (n = 854) completed the study. Patients were randomised to treatment with either active alendronic acid 70 mg weekly (Fosamax) and placebo identical to risedronic acid weekly or active risedronic acid 35 mg weekly (Actonel) and placebo identical to alendronic acid weekly for 12 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage change from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included the percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck BMD; biochemical markers of bone turnover (including serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [BSAP] and urinary type I collagen N-telopeptides [NTx]); and safety and tolerability as assessed by reporting of adverse experiences.

RESULTS

Alendronic acid produced greater increases in BMD than did risedronic acid at 12 months at all sites measured. Mean percentage increases from baseline in hip trochanter BMD at month 12 were 3.56% and 2.71% in the alendronic acid and risedronic acid groups, respectively (treatment difference [95% CI]: 0.83% [0.22, 1.45; p = 0.008]). Mean percentage increases from baseline were greater with alendronic acid than risedronic acid at the lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck BMD at month 12 (p = 0.002, p < 0.001, p = 0.039, respectively). Increases in BMD with alendronic acid compared with risedronic acid were also significantly greater at 6 months at the trochanter and total hip. There was a greater reduction in bone turnover with alendronic acid compared with risedronic acid: NTx decreased 58% with alendronic acid compared with 47% with risedronic acid at 12 months (p < 0.001); and BSAP decreased 45% with alendronic acid compared with 34% with risedronic acid at 12 months (p < 0.001). Overall tolerability and upper gastrointestinal tolerability were similar for both agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Alendronic acid once weekly produced greater BMD increases at both hip and spine sites and greater reductions in bone turnover relative to risedronic acid once weekly. Both agents were well tolerated with no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal adverse experiences. Clinicians should consider these results when making treatment decisions for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Review of Treatment Modalities for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

This review summarizes and updates data presented at recent annual Southern Medical Association conferences on postmenopausal osteoporosis. As part of any osteoporosis treatment program, it is important to maintain adequate calcium and 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels either through diet or supplementation. Among the available pharmacologic therapies, the bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate have demonstrated the most robust fracture risk reductions-approximately 40 to 50% reduction in vertebral fracture risk, 30 to 40% in nonvertebral fracture risk, and 40 to 60% in hip fracture risk. Ibandronate, a new bisphosphonate, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing vertebral fracture risk. Salmon calcitonin nasal spray and raloxifene demonstrated significant reductions in vertebral fracture risk in pivotal studies. Teriparatide significantly reduced vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risk. Drugs on the horizon include strontium ranelate, which has been shown to reduce vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risk, and zoledronic acid, an injectable bisphosphonate that increased bone density with once-yearly administration.

Postmenopausal osteoporosis and alendronate

Osteoporosis is a systemic metabolic disorder associated with a decreased bone mass and resistance. Bisphosphonates suppress bone resorption and bone turnover by a mechanism that depends on their structure. They are characterized by low gastrointestinal absorption. In postmenopausal women, alendronate (ALN) reduces bone resorption markers and increases bone mineral density (BMD) in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total body. Individuals receiving ALN have been studied for up to 10 years with an apparent linear increase in BMD over that time period estimated at 13.7% at the lumbar spine. Treatment with ALN reduced the risk of both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures, including hip fractures, in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Direct comparisons of the results obtained with different antiresortive agents is difficult, because the designs of the respective studies, populations and other factors. However, the meta-analysis of available publications seems to indicate that ALN reduces the relative risk of vertebral fractures in a greater proportion than any other agent. Furthermore, ALN prevents the reduction in BMD after hormone replacement therapy discontinuation.

Rapid prevention of vertebral fractures associated with osteoporosis

Osteoporosis affects postmenopausal women and patients on glucocorticoid therapy. Fractures are the most devastating outcome. Patients who experience an osteoporotic vertebral fracture are at substantial risk of experiencing another within 1 year. Risk can be reduced rapidly with antiresorptives. Risedronate reduced the risk of vertebral fracture in patients with post-menopausal or glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis after 1 year by up to 71% in prospective studies. In post hoc analyses, significant reductions in clinical vertebral fractures were demonstrated after 6 months with risedronate and 1 year with alendronate and raloxifene. Rapid reduction in fracture risk is achievable with the potent therapeutic agents available.

The roles of bone mineral density, bone turnover, and other properties in reducing fracture risk during antiresorptive therapy

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone strength and increased risk of fracture. Properties related to bone strength include rate of bone turnover, bone mineral density, geometry, microarchitecture, and mean degree of mineralization. These properties (with or without bone density) are sometimes collectively referred to as bone quality. Antiresorptive agents may reduce fracture risk by several separate but interrelated effects on these individual properties. For example, antiresorptive agents have been reported to reduce bone turnover, stabilize or increase bone density, preserve or improve microarchitecture, reduce the number or size of resorption sites, and improve mineralization. Although changes in bone architecture and mineralization are not currently measurable in clinical practice, bone turnover is assessed easily in vivo and affects the other bone properties. Moreover, antiresorptive therapies that produce larger decreases in bone turnover markers together with larger increases in bone mineral density are associated with greater reductions in fracture risk, especially at sites primarily composed of cortical bone such as the hip. Reductions in fracture risk are the most convincing evidence of good bone quality. Data from well-designed randomized clinical trials with up to 10 years of continuous antiresorptive therapy have shown that certain antiresorptive agents effectively reduce fracture risk and (together with extensive preclinical data) suggest no deleterious effects on bone quality.

Comparison of the effects of alendronate and risedronate on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in postmenopausal osteoporosis

The aim of the study was to compare the effects of once-weekly alendronate sodium and daily risedronate sodium treatment on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers in postmenopausal osteoporotic subjects. For this purpose, 50 patients were included in this study and randomly classified into two groups. Group I (n=25) received risedronate (5 mg/day) and group II (n=25) received alendronate Na (70 mg/week). The study duration was limited to 12 months. The efficacy of the treatment was evaluated by BMD measurements at spine and hip at 6th and 12th months of the treatment, as well as by the measurement of bone turnover markers such as serum osteocalcin (OC), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BASP), urine deoxypyridinoline (DPD) and calcium/creatine ratio in 24-h urine at 1st, 3rd, 6th and 12th months. The evaluation of the changes in BMD in all regions revealed a significant increase in BMD in both groups compared to baseline values except for spine (L2-L4) in alendronate group at 6th and 12th month and femoral neck in risedronate group at 6th month. However, the difference in percentage increase in BMD measurements was not statistically significant between the two groups at 6th and 12th months. In both groups, serum OC, BSAP and urine DPD were found to be significantly attenuated at 1st month of the treatment period, and continued to be lowered throughout the 3rd, 6th and 12th months (P<0.05). However, there was no statistically-significant difference between both groups of patients (P>0.05). In conclusion, our results suggest that both treatment protocols provide treatment options of similar efficiency for postmenopausal osteoporosis, and have almost-similar effects in enhancing the BMD and in slowing the bone turnover. Risedronate seems to have a more potent effect in the spinal region than that of alendronate, although this potency was not statistically significant.

Once-weekly alendronate 70 mg and raloxifene 60 mg daily in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis*

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of once-weekly (OW) alendronate (ALN) 70 mg and raloxifene (RLX) 60 mg daily in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

DESIGN

This 12-month, randomized, double-blind study enrolled 456 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (223 ALN, 233 RLX) at 52 sites in the United States. Efficacy measurements included lumbar spine (LS), total hip, and trochanter bone mineral density (BMD) at 6 and 12 months, biochemical markers of bone turnover, and percent of women who maintained or gained BMD in response to treatment. The primary endpoint was percent change from baseline in LS BMD at 12 months. Adverse experiences were recorded to assess treatment safety and tolerability.

RESULTS

Over 12 months, OW ALN produced a significantly greater increase in LS BMD (4.4%, P < 0.001) than RLX (1.9%). The percentage of women with > or = 0% increase in LS BMD (ALN, 94%; RLX, 75%; P < 0.001) and > or =3% increase in LS BMD (ALN, 66%; RLX, 38%; P < 0.001) were significantly greater with ALN than RLX. Total hip and trochanter BMD increases were also significantly greater (P < or =0.001) with ALN. Greater (P < 0.001) reductions in N-telopeptide of type I collagen and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase were achieved with ALN compared with RLX at 6 and 12 months. No significant differences in the incidence of upper gastrointestinal or vasomotor adverse experiences were seen.

CONCLUSION

ALN 70 mg OW produced significantly greater increases in spine and hip BMD and greater reductions in markers of bone turnover than RLX over 12 months. A greater percentage of women maintained or gained BMD on ALN than RLX. Both medications had similar safety and tolerability profiles.

The HORIZON Recurrent Fracture Trial: design of a clinical trial in the prevention of subsequent fractures after low trauma hip fracture repair

OBJECTIVE

To present the novel design of a trial testing the safety and efficacy of a yearly bisphosponate, zoledronic acid, in preventing new clinical fractures in patients with recent low trauma hip fracture repair.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Randomized, placebo-controlled, triple-blind study. One hundred and fifteen clinical centers worldwide are recruiting approximately 1714 subjects aged 50 years and over (no upper age limit, median age of enrolled subjects to date 79 years) who have undergone surgical repair of a low trauma hip fracture in the preceding 90 days. Patients will be assigned at random to an intervention group (5 mg zoledronic acid intravenously yearly) or a control group (placebo infusion yearly). Both groups receive a loading dose of Vitamin D2 or D3 IM or orally, followed by 800-1200 IU Vitamin D and 1000-1500 mg elemental calcium orally on a daily basis. Concomitant therapy with calcitonin, hormone replacement therapy, selective estrogen receptor modulators, tibolone, and external hip protectors are allowed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint is subsequent skeletal fractures as adjudicated by a clinical endpoints committee blinded to intervention status. Secondary outcomes include delayed hip fracture healing, changes in bone mineral density, and health resource utilization. Subjects will be recruited over a 3-4 year period and will be followed until 211 primary endpoints are accrued and adjudicated.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized clinical trial is novel among osteoporosis therapies as it (1). targets hip fracture patients, a previously understudied group, and (2). uses only clinically evident fractures as the primary outcome. Ethical and practical considerations in studying this frail population are discussed.

Management of osteoporosis in women aged 50 and older with osteoporosis-related fractures in a managed care population

This study describes the pattern of evaluation and management of osteoporosis in women aged 50 and older following an osteoporosis-related fracture, conducted as a retrospective cohort study using the administrative claims database of a managed care organization. Subjects were women, aged 50 years and older, with at least one osteoporosis-related fracture in the years 1996-1998 who were continuously enrolled in the system's health plan for at least 6 months prior to and post-fracture. Bone mineral density (BMD) testing, diagnosis of osteoporosis, and treatment with any Food and Drug Administration-approved medication for osteoporosis were identified using CPT, ICD-9, and National Drug Codes for the 6-month post-fracture period. There were 658 women with an osteoporosis-related fracture: 189 (29%) hip fractures, 226 (34%) wrist fractures, 127 (19%) vertebral fractures, and 116 (18%) rib fractures. In the post-fracture period, 46 (7%) underwent BMD testing, 153 (23%) had a diagnosis of osteoporosis, and 220 (31%) were treated with a medication approved for the prevention or treatment of osteoporosis. Of the 220 women with medication claims, 124 (56%) were for estrogen, and 96 (44%) were for other antiresorptive agents. Of the 507 women who did not have medication claims during the 6 months prior to the fracture, only 17% had new fills after the fracture. Management of osteoporosis in women aged 50 and older with fractures was inadequate, despite the high risk of subsequent fractures and recommendations that osteoporosis be the presumptive diagnosis. Significant opportunity exists for improvement in assuring post-fracture followup care.

Alendronate produces greater effects than raloxifene on bone density and bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone density: results of EFFECT (Efficacy of FOSAMAX versus EVISTA Comparison Trial) International

OBJECTIVES

Alendronate and raloxifene are antiresorptive agents with different mechanisms of action, each used to treat osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of alendronate to raloxifene in postmenopausal women with low-bone density.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-masked, double-dummy multicentre international study.

SETTING

Clinical trial centres in Europe, South America and Asia-Pacific.

SUBJECTS

A total of 487 postmenopausal women with low bone density, based on bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine or hip (T-score < or =-2.0). Interventions. Patients received either alendronate 70 mg once weekly and daily placebo identical to raloxifene or raloxifene 60 mg daily and weekly placebo identical to alendronate for 12 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Evaluations included BMD of the lumbar spine and hip and markers of bone turnover at 6 and 12 months and adverse event reporting.

RESULTS

Alendronate demonstrated substantially greater increases in BMD than raloxifene at both lumbar spine and hip sites at 12 months. Lumbar spine BMD increased 4.8% with alendronate vs. 2.2% with raloxifene (P < 0.001). The increase in total hip BMD was 2.3% with alendronate vs. 0.8% with raloxifene (P < 0.001). Reductions in bone turnover were significantly larger with alendronate than raloxifene. Overall tolerability was similar, however, the proportion of patients reporting vasomotor events was significantly higher with raloxifene (9.5%) than with alendronate (3.7%, P = 0.010). The proportion of patients reporting gastrointestinal events was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

In postmenopausal women with low bone density, improvements in BMD and markers of bone turnover were substantially greater during treatment with alendronate compared to raloxifene.

The Impact of Fragility Fracture on Health-Related Quality of Life

Both general and specific health status instruments can be utilised in evaluating health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) deficits resulting from osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporotic hip, vertebral and wrist fractures significantly decrease HR-QOL in most HR-QOL domains investigated. The presence of multiple vertebral fractures leads to larger decrements in HR-QOL. More research needs to be completed with these HR-QOL tools to better assess the true burden of osteoporotic fractures, particularly in the case of hip fractures, as the burden is surely being underestimated without recognition of HR-QOL. Only when the burden of fragility fractures is understood, inclusive of HR-QOL, will the value of proven antifracture prevention and treatment therapies be appreciated. Information collected by HR-QOL instruments may provide new insight as to how to improve quality of life for patients with fractures and how to properly allocate healthcare spending.

Medical treatment of vertebral osteoporosis

Although osteoporosis is a systemic disease, vertebral fractures due to spinal bone loss are a frequent, sometimes early and often neglected complication of the disease, generally associated with considerable disability and pain. As osteoporotic vertebral fractures are an important predictor of future fracture risk, including at the hip, medical management is targeted at reducing fracture risk. A literature search for randomized, double-blind, prospective, controlled clinical studies addressing medical treatment possibilities of vertebral fractures in postmenopausal Caucasian women was performed on the leading medical databases. For each publication, the number of patients with at least one new vertebral fracture and the number of randomized patients by treatment arm was retrieved. The relative risk (RR) and the number needed to treat (NNT, i.e. the number of patients to be treated to avoid one radiological vertebral fracture over the duration of the study), together with the respective 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated for each study. Treatment of steroid-induced osteoporosis and treatment of osteoporosis in men were reviewed separately, based on the low number of publications available. Forty-five publications matched with the search criteria, allowing for analysis of 15 different substances tested regarding their anti-fracture efficacy at the vertebral level. Bisphosphonates, mainly alendronate and risedronate, were reported to have consistently reduced the risk of a vertebral fracture over up to 50 months of treatment in four (alendronate) and two (risedronate) publications. Raloxifene reduced vertebral fracture risk in one study over 36 months, which was confirmed by 48 months' follow-up data. Parathormone (PTH) showed a drastic reduction in vertebral fracture risk in early studies, while calcitonin may also be a treatment option to reduce fracture risk. For other substances published data are conflicting (calcitriol, fluoride) or insufficient to conclude about efficacy (calcium, clodronate, etidronate, hormone replacement therapy, pamidronate, strontium, tiludronate, vitamin D). The low NNTs for the leading substances (ranges: 15-64 for alendronate, 8-26 for risedronate, 23 for calcitonin and 28-31 for raloxifene) confirm that effective and efficient drug interventions for treatment and prevention of osteoporotic vertebral fractures are available. Bisphosphonates have demonstrated similar efficacy in treatment and prevention of steroid-induced and male osteoporosis as in postmenopausal osteoporosis. The selection of the appropriate drug for treatment of vertebral osteoporosis from among a bisphosphonate (alendronate or risedronate), PTH, calcitonin or raloxifene will mainly depend on the efficacy, tolerability and safety profile, together with the patient's willingness to comply with a long-term treatment. Although reduction of vertebral fracture risk is an important criterion for decision making, drugs with proven additional fracture risk reduction at all clinically relevant sites (especially at the hip) should be the preferred options.

Bisphosphonates: new indications and methods of administration

In the course of 2002, several new studies were published confirming the efficacy of bisphosphonate drugs in fracture prevention in patients with osteoporosis. Further evidence was provided of their long duration of action, making intermittent administration possible. The potent bisphosphonate zoledronate can be given at intervals of as long as 1 year and produces changes in bone density and in markers of bone turnover comparable with those seen with conventional daily oral dosing with alendronate or risedronate. If such regimens are proven to prevent fractures, their convenience is likely to result in their widespread adoption and potentially an increase in compliance with these medications. Further evidence has been presented documenting the value of bisphosphonates in preventing the skeletal complications of malignancy, and possibly in reducing mortality in patients with breast cancer. The role of bisphosphonates in osteogenesis imperfecta was further confirmed, and novel roles in ankylosing spondylitis, myelofibrosis, and hypertrophic pulmonary osteoarthropathy were suggested.

Analysis of 1-year vertebral fracture risk reduction data in treatments for osteoporosis

One-year vertebral fracture risk reduction from clinical trials in adults with postmenopausal or glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis is reviewed. Data were obtained by conducting a literature search of osteoporosis medications using the MEDLINE database, bibliographies of selected citations, and recent meeting abstracts. The methodologic quality of the trials was assessed using recently published criteria for ranking evidence. In prospective analyses, the 1-year risk of new morphometric vertebral fractures was reduced by risedronate 5 mg/d in two 3-year studies in postmenopausal women with prevalent vertebral fracture, and in two 1-year studies in patients with or at risk for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. The 1-year risk of clinical vertebral fractures was reduced by alendronate and raloxifene in post hoc analyses. Reduction of morphometrically identified vertebral fracture risk is a more stringent therapeutic goal than clinical vertebral fracture risk. Therefore, more weight should be given to data from studies that use the morphometry to assess vertebral fracture incidence.

Comparison of change in bone resorption and bone mineral density with once-weekly alendronate and daily risedronate: a randomised, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of alendronate (ALN) 70 mg once weekly (OW) and risedronate (RIS) 5 mg daily between-meal dosing on biochemical markers of bone turnover and bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a 3-month, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with a double-blind extension to 12 months. The study enrolled 549 postmenopausal women (ALN 219, RIS 222 and placebo (PBO) 108) who were > or =60 years of age at outpatient centres.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was reduction in urine N-telopeptides of type 1 collagen (NTx) corrected for creatinine level at 3 months. Secondary parameters included change in BMD at the spine and hip at 6 and 12 months, NTx at 1, 6 and 12 months, and serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP) at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Adverse experiences (AEs) were recorded throughout the study for an assessment of treatment safety profiles and tolerability.

RESULTS

Over 3 months, ALN produced a significantly greater mean reduction in urine NTx than did RIS (-52% vs -32%, p < 0.001), which was maintained at 12 months. ALN produced a significantly greater mean BMD increase than did RIS at 6 months, and it was maintained at 12 months at the lumbar spine (4.8% vs 2.8%, p < 0.001) and total hip (2.7% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001), as well as at the trochanter and femoral neck. Significant reductions in BSAP with ALN compared to RIS were maintained over the 12 months of treatment. Study size did not allow for meaningful assessment of differences in fracture rates. Tolerability was generally similar between ALN, RIS and PBO, and the incidence of upper GI AEs causing discontinuation and oesophageal AEs was similar in the ALN and RIS groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study, ALN 70 mg OW produced a 50% greater reduction in bone resorption as measured by urine NTx and significantly greater increases in lumbar spine and hip BMD than did RIS 5 mg daily. The treatments had similar safety profiles and were generally well-tolerated. Additional studies are needed comparing OW ALN with OW RIS, which became available after the commencement of the present study.

Pharmacotherapeutics for osteoporosis prevention and treatment

Osteoporosis is a silent disease that affects 10 million Americans; 80% of those affected are women. Although the disease is more common in postmenopausal Caucasian women, all ages and races are at risk. Osteoporosis can be a debilitating disease that can cause pain, fractures, depression, and social withdrawal. Signs of osteoporosis include kyphosis, loss of height, and protrusion of the abdomen. Because symptoms generally do not occur until after the disease has progressed, clinicians should include osteoporosis screening and preventative education as part of the regular gynecologic care. Diagnosis is typically made by a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan. Treatment consists of dietary and lifestyle changes, along with pharmacologic intervention. Although hormone therapy has been shown to be effective in preventing osteoporosis, the risks of long-term treatment with HRT are discussed. The following effective treatment options for women who have been diagnosed with the disease are discussed: bisphosphonates, calcitonin, and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs). Because midwives regularly care for women of all ages, they are ideal candidates to provide women with preventative education, screening, counseling, and treatment.