Definition and management of very high fracture risk in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: a position statement from the Brazilian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism (SBEM) and the Brazilian Association of Bone Assessment and Metabolism (ABRASSO)

ABSTRACT Several drugs are available for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Over the last decades, most patients requiring pharmacological intervention were offered antiresorptive drugs as first-line therapy, while anabolic agents were considered a last resource for those with therapeutic failure. However, recent randomized trials in patients with severe osteoporosis have shown that anabolic agents reduce fractures to a greater extent than antiresorptive medications. Additionally, evidence indicates that increases in bone mineral density (BMD) are maximized when patients are treated with anabolic agents first, followed by antiresorptive therapy. This evidence is key, considering that greater increases in BMD during osteoporosis treatment are associated with a more pronounced reduction in fracture risk. Thus, international guidelines have recently proposed an individualized approach to osteoporosis treatment based on fracture risk stratification, in which the stratification risk has been refined to include a category of patients at very high risk of fracture who should be managed with anabolic agents as first-line therapy. In this document, the Brazilian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism and the Brazilian Association of Bone Assessment and Metabolism propose the definition of very high risk of osteoporotic fracture in postmenopausal women, for whom anabolic agents should be considered as first-line therapy. This document also reviews the factors associated with increased fracture risk, trials comparing anabolic versus antiresorptive agents, efficacy of anabolic agents in patients who are treatment naïve versus those previously treated with antiresorptive agents, and safety of anabolic agents.

Utilidad del Trabecular Bone Score combinado con la densitometría ósea en la valoración de una serie 194 pacientes / Usefulness of Trabecular Bone Score in combination with bone densitometry to assess a series of 194 patients / Utilidade do Trabecular Bone Score combinado com densitometria óssea na avaliação de uma série de 194 pacientes

Resumen: Introducción: la mayoría de las fracturas por fragilidad ocurren en rango densitométrico de osteopenia, la escala ósea trabecular (TBS) permite valorar aspectos de la microarquitectura que influyen en la resistencia ósea. Objetivo: describir las características clínicas y los hallazgos de la microarquitectura ósea aplicando TBS combinado con densitometría ósea (DXA) en un grupo de pacientes. Material y métodos: estudio descriptivo, de recolección retrospectiva. Se incluyen los pacientes a los que se les realizó DXA con TBS en el INRU en julio y agosto de 2020. Resultados: se analizaron 194 pacientes, 173 (89%) de sexo femenino y 21 (11%) de sexo masculino. El 36,1% (70 pacientes) en rango de osteopenia, 36,1 (70 pacientes) en rango de osteoporosis. El 32,9% (23 pacientes) con osteopenia y el 47,1% (33 pacientes) con osteoporosis tenían microarquitectura degradada. 76,9% de los pacientes con artritis reumatoidea y 45,8% de los que tenían espondiloartritis presentaban microarquitectura alterada. Conclusiones: el TBS permitió reestratificar el riesgo de fractura en un número importante de pacientes, mostrándose como una herramienta muy útil en la valoración complementaria de la salud ósea.

Summary: Introduction: most fractures that result from bone fragility occur in the osteopenia range The trabecular bone score (TBS) enables the assessment of microarchitecture aspects that impact bone resistance. Objective: to describe the clinical characteristics and findings of bone microarchitecture, by applying TBS and bone densitometry in a group of patients. Method: descriptive study of retrospective collection. Patients who were included in the study underwent a Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) with TBS at the National Rheumatology Service between July and August, 2020. Results: 94 patients were analysed, 173 (89%) were female and 21 (11%) were male. 36.1% (70 patients) lay in the osteopenia range, 36.1 (70 patients) in the osteoporotic range. 32.9% (23 patients) with osteopenia and 47.1% (33 patients) with osteoporosis evidenced a degraded bone microarchitecture. 76.9 % of patients with rheumatoid arthritis and 45.8 % of patients with spondyloarthritis respectively evidenced altered bone microarchitecture. Conclusions: TBS allowed stratification of fracture risk in a significant number of patients, which may suggest it is a useful tool for complementary assessment of bone health.

Resumo: Introdução: a maioria das fraturas por fragilidade ocorre na faixa densitométrica da osteopenia; o escore de osso trabecular (TBS) permite avaliar aspectos da microarquitetura que influenciam a resistência óssea. Objetivo: descrever as características clínicas e os achados da microarquitetura óssea aplicando TBS combinado com densitometria óssea (DMO) em um grupo de pacientes. Material e métodos: estudo descritivo, retrospectivo, incluindo pacientes que realizaram DXA (absorciometria de raios-X de dupla energia) com TBS no INRU em julho e agosto de 2020. Resultados: foram analisados 194 pacientes, 173 (89%) mulheres e 21 (11%) homens. 36,1% (70 pacientes) na faixa de osteopenia, 36,1 (70 pacientes) na faixa de osteoporose. 32,9% (23 pacientes) com osteopenia e 47,1% (33 pacientes) com osteoporose tinham microarquitetura degradada. Nos pacientes com artrite reumatoide 76,9% e nas espondiloartrite 45,8% apresentaram microarquitetura alterada, respectivamente. Conclusões: a TBS permitiu fazer uma nova estratificação do risco de fratura em um número significativo de pacientes, mostrando-se uma ferramenta muito útil na avaliação complementar da saúde óssea.

Which is the best antiresorptive treatment after finishing teriparatide? / ¿Cuál es el mejor tratamiento antirresortivo luego de terminar con teriparatide?

Abstract Anabolic drugs are the treatment of choice for osteoporotic patients with very high risk of fractures. Post anabolic treatment with an antiresorptive drug maintains the bone mineral density (BMD) gained. The recommendations regarding the ideal antiresorptive drug are not precise. The aim of this paper is to compare the usefulness of zoledronate and denosumab in a group of 28 women with very high risk of fractures. All of them completed at least one year of treatment with teripatide and latter 14 received zolendronate and 14 denosumab for another year. We retrospectively review their biochemical and densitometric changes. Both treat ment groups experienced a reduction in bone turnover markers of the same magnitude at the end of the second year. In Lumbar Spine BMD increase of 3.96 ± 8.56% Median (Me) 2.54 p = 0.21 in zolendronate group and 3.55 ± 5.36% (Me 5.14) p = 0.07 in denosumab group. Femoral Neck BMD changed -0.09 ± 6.50% (Me 0.29) p = 0.85 in zolendronate group, and - 3.41 ± 5.08% (Me 5.35) p = 0.59 in denosumab group, with no difference between both groups. In Total Hip BMD an increase of 0.55 ± 4.20% (Me 0.43) p = 0.70 in zoledronate group, and 4.53 ± 5.13% (Me 0.64) p = 0.04 with denosumab. We conclude that both antiresortive treatments have a similar effect in biochemical markers after one year of treatment. BMD increase significantly in total hip and changed with a trend toward in lumbar spine with denosumab, but without differences between both groups of treatment.

Resumen Los anabólicos son el tratamiento de elección en la osteoporosis con muy alto riesgo de fracturas. Después del tratamiento anabólico un fármaco antirresortivo mantiene la densidad mineral ósea (DMO) ganada. Las reco mendaciones sobre el fármaco antirresortivo ideal no son precisas. El objetivo de este trabajo es comparar la utilidad de zoledronato y denosumab en un grupo de 28 mujeres con muy alto riesgo de fracturas. Todas ellas completaron al menos un año de tratamiento con teripatide y luego 14 recibieron zolendronato y 14 denosumab durante un año. Revisamos retrospectivamente sus cambios bioquímicos y densitométricos. Ambos grupos de tratamiento experimentaron una reducción de los marcadores de recambio óseo de la misma magnitud al final del segundo año. En columna lumbar la DMO aumentó 3.96 ± 8.56% Mediana (Me) 2.54, p = 0.21 en el grupo zolendronato y 3.55 ± 5.36% (Me 5.14) p = 0.07 en el grupo denosumab. La DMO del cuello femoral cambió -0.09 ± 6.50% (Me 0.29) p = 0.85 en el grupo zolendronato y - 3.41 ± 5.08% (Me 5.35) p = 0.59 en el grupo de denosumab, sin diferencias entre ambos grupos. En la Cadera Total la DMO aumentó 0.55 ± 4.20% (Me 0.43) p = 0.70 con zoledronato y 4.53 ± 5.13% (Me 0.64) p = 0.04 con denosumab. Concluimos que ambos tratamien tos antiresortivos tuvieron un efecto similar en los marcadores bioquímicos después de un año de tratamiento. La DMO aumentó significativamente en la cadera total y mostró una tendencia similar en columna lumbar con denosumab, sin diferencias entre ambos tratamientos.

Comparación entre score de frax sin densidad mineral ósea y los criterios propuestos por la sociedad Argentina de osteoporosis para el uso de tratamiento antirresortivo en mujeres postmenopáusicas

Identificar pacientes con alto riesgo de fractura utilizando factores de riesgo clínicos podría reducir los gastos en salud derivados de la realización de una densitometría ósea. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar el score de FRAX sin determinación de densidad mineral ósea (DMO) con los criterios propuestos por la Sociedad Argentina de Osteoporosis (SAO), para considerar el inicio de tratamiento antirresortivo. Realizamos un estudio observacional, transversal. Se incluyeron 330 mujeres postmenopáusicas entre 40 y 90 años de edad. Se determinó la cantidad de tratamientos indicados según se utilice la herramienta FRAX sin DMO, o los criterios de la SAO. Utilizando los criterios de la SAO, 85 (25.8%) pacientes recibirían tratamiento, mientras que si se utilizara la herramienta FRAX sin DMO, lo harían 15 (4.5%) pacientes (p = 0.0019). De los 67 pacientes con diagnóstico de osteoporosis por densitometría ósea, todas recibirían tratamiento utilizando los criterios de la SAO y solo 10 (15%) lo harían si utilizáramos el score de FRAX sin DMO (p = 0.011). La utilización del score de FRAX sin DMO reduce en forma significativa la cantidad de pacientes tratables en comparación con los criterios actuales de la SAO. En pacientes con diagnóstico de osteoporosis por DMO, el score de FRAX subestima los pacientes a tratar.

To identify patients at high risk of fracture using clinical risk factors could reduce health costs arising from the realization of a bone densitometry. The aim of this study was to compare the FRAX score without bone mineral density (BMD) with the criteria proposed by the Argentine Society of Osteoporosis (SAO) to consider starting antiresorptive treatment. We conducted an observational, cross-sectional study where 330 postmenopausal women between 40 and 90 years of age were included. The number of treatments given if the FRAX tool without BMD had been followed was compared with the number of treatments indicated using the SAO criteria. Using the SAO criteria, 85 (25.8%) patients would initiate antiresorptive treatment compared with 15 (4.5%) using the FRAX without BMD (p = 0.0019). Among the 67 patients with a diagnosis of osteoporosis by BMD determination, all of them (100%) would have received treatment by using the SAO criteria compared with 10 (15%) using the FRAX score (p = 0.011). The use of FRAX without BMD significantly underestimates the number of patients who should receive antiresorptive treatment. In patients diagnosed with osteoporosis by BMD, the FRAX score underestimates the number of patients to be treated.

Posições oficiais 2008 da Sociedade Brasileira de Densitometria Clínica (SBDens) / 2008 official positions of the Brazilian Society for Clinical Densitometry - SBDens

A evolução dos métodos de avaliação da massa óssea trouxe diferentes tecnologias, modos de aquisição de imagens, bancos de dados de referência, terminologias, critérios diagnósticos fez com que a International Society for Bone Densitometry (ISCD) tomasse a iniciativa de promover reuniões periódicas de consenso, a última em 2007. A Sociedade Brasileira de Densitometria Clínica (SBDens), com apoio de várias sociedades brasileiras ligadas ao estudo da saúde óssea, reuniu diversos especialistas para discutir as propostas da ISCD e validar a aplicação destas normas à população brasileira. A reunião de Posições Oficiais da SBDens produziu um documento extremamente útil para a compreensão e interpretação da densitometria e de outros métodos de avaliação da massa óssea.

With the evolution of bone densitometry, differences in technologies, acquisition techniques, reference databases, reporting methods, diagnostic criteria and terminology have developed and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) periodically holds Position Development Conferences, the latest in 2007. The Brazilian Society for Clinical Densitometry (SBDens), with support from many Brazilian societies interested in bone health, gathered numerous specialists to discuss the ISCD proposals and to evaluate the validity of the extension of those norms to Brazilian population. The SBDens reunion of consensus made a very utile document to help the understanding and interpretation of bone densitometry and other methods of bone assessment.

The impact of methods for estimating bone health and the global burden of bone disease: [review] / Impacto de los métodos para medir la salud ósea y la carga global de enfermedades óseas: [revisión]

Osteoporosis constitutes a major public health problem through its association with age related fractures. Fracture rates are generally higher in caucasian women than in other populations. Important determinants include estrogen deficiency in women, low body mass index, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, poor dietary calcium intake, physical inactivity, certain drugs and illnesses. Thus, modification of physical activity and dietary calcium/vitamin D nutrition should complement high risk approaches. In addition, the recently developed WHO algorithm for evaluation of 10-year absolute risk of fracture provides a means whereby various therapies can be targeted cost-effectively to those at risk. Risk factors, together with bone mineral density (BMD) and biochemical indices of bone turnover, can be utilised to derive absolute risks of fracture and cost-utility thresholds at which treatment is justified. These data will provide the basis for translation into coherent public health strategies aiming to prevent osteoporosis both in individuals and in the general population.

La osteoporosis constituye un importante problema de salud pública debido a su asociación con fracturas relacionadas con la edad. Las tasas de fractura generalmente son más altas en mujeres caucásicas que en otros grupos poblacionales. Los principales determinantes incluyen deficiencia de estrógeno en mujeres, bajo índice de masa corporal, consumo de tabaco y alcohol, escaso consumo de calcio, inactividad física y algunas drogas y enfermedades. De este modo, la modificación de la actividad física y el consumo de nutrimentos con calcio y vitamina D deben complementar los tratamientos en alto riesgo. Además, el recientemente desarrollado algoritmo de la OMS para la evaluación de riesgo de fractura absoluto a 10 años constituye una herramienta que permite plantear eficientemente diversas terapias a aquellos que están en riesgo. Los factores de riesgo, junto con la densidad mineral ósea y los índices bioquímicos de regeneración ósea pueden utilizarse para obtener riesgos de fractura absolutos así como umbrales costo-utilidad que justifiquen el tratamiento. Estos datos proveerán una base para su traducción en estrategias de salud pública con la finalidad de prevenir la osteoporosis tanto en los individuos como en la población en general.