Denosumab for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women

Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Fragility fractures are fractures that result from mechanical forces that would not ordinarily result in fracture.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of non-bisphosphonates {denosumab [Prolia®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA], raloxifene [Evista®; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan], romosozumab [Evenity®; Union Chimique Belge (UCB) S.A. (Brussels, Belgium) and Amgen Inc.] and teriparatide [Forsteo®; Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA]}, compared with each other, bisphosphonates or no treatment, for the prevention of fragility fracture.

DATA SOURCES

For the clinical effectiveness review, nine electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were searched up to July 2018.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of fracture and femoral neck bone mineral density were conducted. A review of published economic analyses was undertaken and a model previously used to evaluate bisphosphonates was adapted. Discrete event simulation was used to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years for a simulated cohort of patients with heterogeneous characteristics. This was done for each non-bisphosphonate treatment, a strategy of no treatment, and the five bisphosphonate treatments previously evaluated. The model was populated with effectiveness evidence from the systematic review and network meta-analysis. All other parameters were estimated from published sources. An NHS and Personal Social Services perspective was taken, and costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Fracture risk was estimated from patient characteristics using the QFracture® (QFracture-2012 open source revision 38, Clinrisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and FRAX® (web version 3.9, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK) tools. The relationship between fracture risk and incremental net monetary benefit was estimated using non-parametric regression. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses were used to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

Fifty-two randomised controlled trials of non-bisphosphonates were included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review and an additional 51 randomised controlled trials of bisphosphonates were included in the network meta-analysis. All treatments had beneficial effects compared with placebo for vertebral, non-vertebral and hip fractures, with hazard ratios varying from 0.23 to 0.94, depending on treatment and fracture type. The effects on vertebral fractures and the percentage change in bone mineral density were statistically significant for all treatments. The rate of serious adverse events varied across trials (0-33%), with most between-group differences not being statistically significant for comparisons with placebo/no active treatment, non-bisphosphonates or bisphosphonates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were > £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for all non-bisphosphonate interventions compared with no treatment across the range of QFracture and FRAX scores expected in the population eligible for fracture risk assessment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for denosumab may fall below £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year at very high levels of risk or for high-risk patients with specific characteristics. Raloxifene was dominated by no treatment (resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years) in most risk categories.

LIMITATIONS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are uncertain for very high-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-bisphosphonates are effective in preventing fragility fractures, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are generally greater than the commonly applied threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107651.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Nonpharmacological interventions for osteoporosis treatment: Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines

Objectives

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines to identify nonpharmacologic recommendations for osteoporosis treatment.

Methods

A systematic review of literature following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)-statement methodology for clinical practice guidelines was conducted; PROSPERO CRD42019138548. Assessment of selected clinical practice guidelines with the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation)-II methodological quality instrument was performed, and those graded over 60 points were selected for recommendations extraction and evidence analysis.

Results

Only 6 clinical practice guidelines fulfilled criteria, 69 nonpharmacological recommendations were extracted: 13 from American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology guideline, 16 from Malaysian Osteoporosis Society guideline, 15 from the Ministry of Health in Mexico guideline, 14 from Royal Australian College of General Practitioners guideline, 7 from Sociedad Española de Investigación Ósea y del Metabolismo Mineral guideline, and 7 from National Osteoporosis Guideline Group guideline. Percentage by theme showed that the highest number of recommendations were 12 (17.1%) for vitamin D, 11 (15.7%) for a combination of calcium and vitamin D, and 11 (15.7%) for exercise.

Conclusions

These recommendations address integrating interventions to modify lifestyle, mainly calcium and vitamin D intake, and exercise. Other recommendations include maintaining adequate protein intake, identification and treatment of risk factors for falls, and limiting the consumption of coffee, alcohol and tobacco. Considerations on prescription must be taken.

Cost-effectiveness of denosumab in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women

Denosumab is a novel biological agent for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women with increased risk of fractures. With limited healthcare resources, economic evaluations are increasingly being used by decision-makers to optimize healthcare resource allocation. The cost-effectiveness of denosumab has been evaluated in various studies, and a systematic literature study was conducted up to April 2012 to identify all published research articles and research abstracts presented at various congresses. This article provides a systematic review of four articles and eight abstracts reporting on the cost-effectiveness of denosumab in the treatment of osteoporosis. In most economic evaluations, denosumab has been considered as a cost-effective treatment compared with first-line and second-line options (including generic alendronate) in the treatment of women with high risk of fractures.

Phage displayed peptides/antibodies recognizing growth factors and their tyrosine kinase receptors as tools for anti-cancer therapeutics

The basic idea of displaying peptides on a phage, introduced by George P. Smith in 1985, was greatly developed and improved by McCafferty and colleagues at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology and, later, by Barbas and colleagues at the Scripps Research Institute. Their approach was dedicated to building a system for the production of antibodies, similar to a naïve B cell repertoire, in order to by-pass the standard hybridoma technology that requires animal immunization. Both groups merged the phage display technology with an antibody library to obtain a huge number of phage variants, each of them carrying a specific antibody ready to bind its target molecule, allowing, later on, rare phage (one in a million) to be isolated by affinity chromatography. Here, we will briefly review the basis of the technology and the therapeutic application of phage-derived bioactive molecules when addressed against key players in tumor development and progression: growth factors and their tyrosine kinase receptors.