COVID pandemic and denosumab adherence

On-time denosumab dosing recovered rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet remains suboptimal

Timely administration of denosumab every 6 mo is critical in osteoporosis treatment to avoid multiple vertebral fracture risk upon denosumab discontinuation or delay. This study aimed to estimate the immediate and prolonged impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the timing of denosumab doses. We identified older adults (≥66 yr) residing in the community who were due to receive denosumab between January 2016 and December 2020 using Ontario Drug Benefit data. We completed an interrupted time-series analysis to estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) on the monthly proportion of on-time denosumab doses (183 +/-30 d). Analyses were stratified by user type: patients due for their second dose (novice users), third or fourth dose (intermediate users), or ≥5th dose (established users). In additional analyses, we considered patients living in nursing homes, switching to other osteoporosis drugs, and reported trends until February 2022. We studied 148 554 patients (90.9% female, mean [SD] age 79.6 [8.0] yr) receiving 648 221 denosumab doses. The average pre-pandemic proportion of on-time therapy was steady in the community, yet differed by user type: 64.9% novice users, 72.3% intermediate users, and 78.0% established users. We identified an immediate overall decline in the proportion of on-time doses across all user types at the start of the pandemic: -17.8% (95% CI, -19.6, -16.0). In nursing homes, the pre-pandemic proportion of on-time therapy was similar across user types (average 83.5%), with a small decline at the start of the pandemic: -3.2% (95% CI, -5.0, -1.2). On-time therapy returned to pre-pandemic levels by October 2020 and was not impacted by therapy switching. Although on-time dosing remains stable as of February 2022, approximately one-fourth of patients in the community do not receive denosumab on-time. In conclusion, although pandemic disruptions to denosumab dosing were temporary, levels of on-time therapy remain suboptimal.

Improvement of proportion of days covered for denosumab under implementation of clinical pharmacist adherence management system: normal and COVID-19 period

We established a clinical pharmacist adherence management system (CPAMS) led by clinical pharmacists to examine whether denosumab adherence could be improved. The results showed that CPAMS could effectively improve adherence to denosumab and the treatment of osteoporosis. However, this effect weakened during the spread of infectious diseases such as COVID-19.

PURPOSE

Denosumab is currently one of the drugs that can effectively reduce the risk of clinical fracture. However, as a drug requiring long-term subcutaneous injection, patient adherence to denosumab is the most important factor affecting its therapeutic efficacy. Therefore, we established a clinical pharmacist adherence management system (CPAMS) led by clinical pharmacists and examined whether denosumab adherence could be improved.

METHODS

Data were collected from patients receiving denosumab in our hospital between March 2021 and May 2022. The patients who participated in the CPAMS were in the intervention group, and the rest were in the control group. We analysed the proportion of days covered (PDC) value of denosumab, distribution of subsequent visits, and proportion of patients who continued participating during the normal and coronavirus (COVID-19) periods.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were enrolled in this retrospective study: 32 in the intervention group and 53 in the control group. The PDC values were significantly higher in the intervention group (0.9875, 0.9025-1) than in the control group (0.5, 0.5-0.5) after 1 year. The subsequent visit rate in the intervention group was 93.80%. However, none of the patients in the control group returned. In the intervention group, the ratio of timely to delayed subsequent visits was 11:19. After the COVID-19 pandemic, the PDC value of the intervention group (0.957, 0.5-1) was lower than that before COVID-19, and the ratio of timely to delayed subsequent visits was 9:13.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical pharmacist-led CPAMS could effectively improve adherence to denosumab and the treatment of osteoporosis.

Knowledge gap in a cross section of Irish general practitioners prescribing denosumab for osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Denosumab is commonly used by general practitioners (GPs) in Ireland to treat osteoporosis though drug holidays are not recommended with rebound bone loss and risk of vertebral fractures if stopped. We aimed to investigate GP practice and knowledge regarding denosumab including use and reasons for use, therapy duration, blood monitoring and recommended vitamin D status/calcium intake on treatment, staff administering, methods of recall, delays in receiving injections, management of and awarenes of guidelines if stopped, reasons for stopping and concerns about same.

METHODS

GPs were contacted (n = 846) by email and invited to complete an online anonymous survey comprising 25 questions in January 2022. We collated responses and explored for differences between GP principals/trainers and GP trainees.

RESULTS

There were 146 responses. Sixty-seven percent were female and 50% were GP principal/trainers. Forty-three percent used denosumab as a first line therapy citing convenience in 32% of cases. Half (50%) envisaged therapy for 3-5 years and 15% lifelong use. A fifth (21%) had no concerns about it being stopped (11% trainors vs 31% trainees, P = 0.002). If stopped, 41% cited opting for a drug holiday with monitoring. Forty percent of GPs gave patients a reminder card for the next injection and 27% had an alert system.

CONCLUSION

We identified a knowledge gap in denosumab prescribing among a sample of Irish GPs. Findings suggest a need for education to increase awareness around denosumab use and to consider recall systems in GP practices as suggested elsewhere to ensure persistence with therapy.

Denosumab treatment lapses, discontinuation, and off-treatment fracture risk: A retrospective study of patients with osteoporosis in a real-world clinical setting

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively examine predictors of fracture risk when adult patients experienced a denosumab treatment lapse or discontinuation in a real-world clinic setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were adults who had received ≥2 doses of denosumab at an academic health center in the United States. Demographics, treatment doses, reasons for missed doses, and fractures, were collected retrospectively from electronic health records, from an 8-year period (2010-2018). The number of times each patient incurred a treatment lapse, defined as ≥240 days between two doses (excluding lapse due to discontinuation, death, or transfer of care) was computed. The occurrence of denosumab discontinuation (excluding discontinuation due to death or transfer of care), whether the patient initiated alternative therapy, and the reason for each lapse and discontinuation were collected. Cox proportional hazards models assessed characteristics associated with risk of fracture and treatment discontinuation. A logistic regression model was used to determine if cumulative amount of time off medication (i.e., cumulative lapse time) was associated with a higher likelihood of incurring a fracture.

RESULTS

We included 534 patients: 95 % White, 86 % women, 33 % tobacco users, 13 % diagnosed with diabetes, median age 69 years (Interquartile Range (IQR): 62-77), and median Body Mass Index (BMI) 25 kg/m2 (IQR: 22-28). Thirty-six percent of patients incurred 250 lapses; 10 % discontinued therapy. Dental problems/procedures and logistical barriers were the most common reasons for lapses and discontinuations. Nineteen percent (n = 103) incurred a total of 190 fractures; of these, 121 were osteoporotic, 50 were vertebral. Risk of any, osteoporotic, and vertebral fractures were associated with off-treatment status (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.7, p = 0.043; HR = 2.0, p = 0.026; and HR = 4.2, p = 0.001, respectively) and older age (HR = 1.3, p = 0.015; HR = 1.5, p = 0.001; and HR = 1.8, p = 0.005, respectively). Older age was associated with higher risk of discontinuation (HR = 1.4, p = 0.022). There was a non-significant trend of a nonlinear association between incurring a fracture and cumulative lapse time (p = 0.087).

CONCLUSION

Denosumab treatment lapses are common, and off-treatment status may be associated with a higher risk of fractures. Clinical teams should proactively identify and address adverse effects and potential logistical barriers to reduce the risk of treatment lapses.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Adherence to Denosumab Therapy: A Single Center Study

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective comparative study of denosumab therapy adherence before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on denosumab therapy adherence in Japan.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody for osteoporosis treatment. Delayed denosumab injections are associated with reduced treatment responses, which was a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Participants included 376 patients who received denosumab (60 mg every 6 months) from January 2013 to June 2021. The time from therapy initiation to discontinuation was used to measure persistence, and that between initial and subsequent injections was used to determine adherence. The pandemic period was from March 2020 to December 2021.

RESULTS

Patients were divided into those treated after March 2020 (pandemic group, n=244) and those who discontinued treatment before March 2020 (non-pandemic group, n=132). Non-persistent cases accounted for 154, including 24 (20%), 64 (19%), and 66 (53%) aged ≤59 years, 60-79 years, and ≥80 years, respectively. The overall persistence rate at 78 months was 59.2%. Postponed cases were significantly lower in the non-pandemic group than in the pandemic group (8% vs. 15%, p =0.042). Postponement with a delay of 1-2 months did not significantly differ between the two groups, but with a significant difference for a delay of ≥3 months (0% vs. 36%, p =0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

Denosumab adherence remained constant but postponed cases significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Better communication by health providers on denosumab adherence and alternative administration may reduce dosing interruptions in similar pandemic situations.

Bone loss after denosumab discontinuation is prevented by alendronate and zoledronic acid but not risedronate: a retrospective study

A retrospective study of 121 patients who stopped denosumab (Dmab) then received no treatment (NT), risedronate (RIS), alendronate (ALN), or zoledronic acid (ZOL). Bone density (spine and hip) during and after Dmab discontinuation was measured. Treatment with ALN or ZOL, not NT and RIS, mitigated BMD loss after Dmab discontinuation.

INTRODUCTION

Denosumab (Dmab) discontinuation is associated with bone loss and multiple vertebral fractures. The purpose was to compare bone mineral density (BMD) change in patients following Dmab discontinuation with no subsequent treatment (NT) and three bisphosphonate (BP) treatments: risedronate (RIS), alendronate (ALN), and zoledronic acid (ZOL).

METHODS

In a review of 121 patients aged 71.2 ± 8.1 years, discontinuing Dmab (mean 5.4 doses), 33 received NT and 88 received BP (22 RIS; 34 ALN; 32 ZOL). BMD change after 1 year was compared between groups at the lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN), and total hip (TH). Risk factors for bone loss after Dmab discontinuation were compared between groups and incidence of vertebral fractures was determined.

RESULTS

Following Dmab discontinuation, LS mean change (g/cm2; 95% CI) was for NT: - 0.041 (- 0.062 to - 0.021); RIS: - 0.035 (- 0.052 to - 0.017); ALN: - 0.005 (- 0.020 to 0.009); and ZOL: - 0.009 (- 0.025 to 0.008). Differences in LS were found between NT and ALN (p =  0.015), and NT and ZOL (p=0.037), but not between NT and RIS. The only significant difference in TH was found between NT and ZOL (p 0.034) with no group differences in FN. BMD gains during Dmab treatment were associated with BMD loss after Dmab discontinuation. In a subset, discontinuation after Dmab treatment (> 5 doses) followed by ALN (n = 22) and ZOL (n = 11) showed no difference in BMD. Five of 7 vertebral fractures occurred after Dmab discontinuation in NT.

CONCLUSION

Subsequent treatment with ALN or ZOL but not NT and RIS mitigates BMD loss after Dmab discontinuation.

COVID-19 lockdown negatively impacted on adherence to denosumab therapy: incidence of non-traumatic fractures and role of telemedicine

PURPOSE

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdowns have impacted on management of osteoporosis and the use of telemedicine is increasingly widespread albeit supported by little evidence so far. The aim of the study is to assess adherence to denosumab and incidence of non-traumatic fractures during the lockdown compared to the pre-COVID-19 year and to explore the effectiveness of telemedicine in the management of osteoporotic patients.

METHODS

Retrospective, longitudinal, single-center study on patients receiving subcutaneous denosumab therapy every 6 months. Each patient was scheduled to undergo 2 visits: one during the pre-COVID-19 period (March 2019-March 2020) and another visit during the lockdown period (March 2020-March 2021). Data on new fractures, adherence, risk factors for osteoporosis and the modality of visit (telemedicine or face-to-face) were collected.

RESULTS

The prevalence of non-adherent patients was higher during the lockdown (35 of 269 patients, 13.0%) than the pre-COVID-19 period (9 of 276 patients, 3.3%) (p < 0.0001). During the lockdown, the number of new non-traumatic fractures was higher than the pre-COVID-19 year (p < 0.0001): 10 patients out of 269 (3.7%) experienced a fragility fracture and 2 patients (0.7%) a probable rebound fracture during the lockdown period, whereas no patient had fragility/rebound fractures during the pre-COVID-19 period. No difference was found in the prevalence of non-adherence and new non-traumatic fractures comparing patients evaluated with tele-medicine to those evaluated with face-to-face visit.

CONCLUSION

Non-adherent patients and new non-traumatic fractures (including rebound fractures) were more prevalent during the lockdown in comparison to the pre-COVID-19 period, regardless of the modality of medical evaluation.