Efficacy of osteoporosis pharmacotherapies in preventing fracture among oral glucocorticoid users: a network meta-analysis.

UNLABELLED: Efficacy of osteoporosis medication is not well-established among patients taking oral glucocorticoids. We assessed the efficacy of approved osteoporosis pharmacotherapies in preventing fracture by combining data from randomized controlled trials. Teriparatide, risedronate, and etidronate were associated with decreased vertebral fracture risk. INTRODUCTION: Several osteoporosis drugs are approved for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid (GC)-induced osteoporosis. However, the efficacy of these treatments among oral GC users is still limited. We aimed to examine the comparative efficacy of osteoporosis treatments among oral GC users. METHODS: We updated a systematic review through to March 2015 to identify all double-blinded randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined osteoporosis treatment among oral GC users. We used a network meta-analysis with informative priors to derive comparative risk ratios (RRs) and 95 % credible intervals (95 % CrI) for vertebral and non-vertebral fracture and mean differences in lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD). Treatment ranking was estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) statistic. A meta-regression was completed to assess a subgroup effect between patients with prior GC exposures and GC initiators. RESULTS: We identified 27 eligible RCTs examining nine active comparators. Etidronate (RR, 0.41; 95%CrI = 0.17-0.90), risedronate (RR = 0.30, 95%CrI = 0.14-0.61), and teriparatide (RR = 0.07, 95%CrI = 0.001-0.48) showed greater efficacy than placebo in preventing vertebral fractures; yet, no treatment effects were statistically significant in reducing non-vertebral fractures. Alendronate, risedronate, and etidronate increased LS BMD while alendronate and raloxifene increased FN BMD. In preventing vertebral fractures, teriparatide was ranked as the best treatment (SUCRA: 77 %), followed by risedronate (77 %) and zoledronic acid (76 %). For non-vertebral fractures, teriparatide also had the highest SUCRA (69 %), followed by risedronate (64 %). No subgroup effect was identified with regards to prior GC exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Despite weak trial evidence available for fracture prevention among GC users, we identified several drugs that are likely to prevent osteoporotic fracture. Teriparatide, risedronate, and etidronate were associated with decreased vertebral fracture risk.

Fracture risk in oral glucocorticoid users: a Bayesian meta-regression leveraging control arms of osteoporosis clinical trials.

UNLABELLED: Little data exist on the frequency of fracture among oral glucocorticoid users. We examined the effect of oral glucocorticoids on fracture incidence using data from randomized controlled trials. Patients starting glucocorticoids had a higher probability of fracture and decline in bone mineral density compared to chronic glucocorticoid users. INTRODUCTION: Oral glucocorticoids (GCs) are the leading cause of secondary osteoporosis. However, there have been few studies that quantify the rate of fracture among GC users. We sought to provide a pooled estimate of fracture risk from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of GC-treated patients. METHODS: We updated a MEDLINE search published by the American College of Rheumatology through to March 2015 and identified RCTs of osteoporosis therapies that reported fracture and bone mineral density (BMD) among oral GC users. We restricted the analysis to placebo or control arms. RCT arms were stratified by GC exposure at enrolment to GC initiators (≤6 months) and chronic GC users (>6 months). Bayesian meta-regression was used to estimate the annual probability of vertebral fracture (primary), non-vertebral fracture and percentage change in lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD. RESULTS: The annual incidence of vertebral and non-vertebral fracture was 5.1 % (95 % CrI = 2.8-8.2) and 2.5 % (95 % CrI = 1.2--4.2) among GC initiators, and 3.2 % (95 % CrI = 1.8-5.0) and 3.0 % (95 % CrI = 0.8-5.9) among chronic GC users. Our meta-regression identified a non-significant effect of group-level variables (mean age, mean BMD, mean GC daily dose, patients with previous vertebral fractures, proportion of women and adjuvant used) on vertebral fracture rate. CONCLUSION: Our study found higher vertebral fracture incidence among GC initiators, yet a relative decline in fracture incidence with longer exposure. Our findings suggest that fracture incidence among oral GC users may be more common than previously estimated. Optimizing GC-induced osteoporosis management during early exposure to GC is essential to prevent fractures.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis management among seniors, by year, sex, and indication, 1996-2012.

UNLABELLED: We identified that glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis management (bone mineral density testing or osteoporosis treatment) among seniors improved among men (2 to 23 %) and women (10 to 48 %) between 1996 and 2007, and then remained relatively stable through to 2012. Differences were also noted by indication (from a low of 21 % for respiratory conditions to a high of 41 % for rheumatic conditions). PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to describe the proportion of chronic oral glucocorticoid (GC) users that receive osteoporosis management (bone mineral density test or osteoporosis treatment) by sex and over time. METHODS: We identified community-dwelling older adults initiating chronic oral GC therapy in Ontario using pharmacy data from 1996 to 2012. Chronic GC use was defined as greater than or equal to two oral GC prescriptions dispensed and ≥450 mg prednisone equivalent over a 6-month period. Osteoporosis management within 6 months of starting chronic GC therapy was examined by sex, year, indication for therapy, and osteoporosis management history. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We identified 72,099 men and 95,975 women starting chronic oral GC therapy (mean age = 74.9 years, SD = 6.5). Approximately two thirds of patients (65 %) received ≥900 mg within the 6-month chronic use window. GC-induced osteoporosis management increased from 2 to 23 % (men) and 10 to 48 % (women) between 1996 and 2007, and then remained relatively stable through to 2012. A higher proportion of patients with prior osteoporosis management were managed within 6 months (56 % men, 67 % women) of chronic GC use, compared to patients without prior management (12 % men, 23 % women). Patients with rheumatic disease were managed most commonly (41 %), and patients with respiratory conditions were managed least commonly (21 %). CONCLUSIONS: GC-induced osteoporosis management improved significantly over time for both sexes yet remains low. Significant care gaps by sex and between clinical areas represent a missed opportunity for fracture prevention among patients requiring chronic GC therapy.

Comparative gastrointestinal safety of bisphosphonates in primary osteoporosis: a network meta-analysis.

UNLABELLED: We completed a network meta-analysis of published papers to compare bisphosphonate gastrointestinal safety. We found that zoledronic acid had the highest chance of causing gastrointestinal adverse events. Etidronate had the highest chance of discontinuation due to an adverse event. No difference was found for serious adverse events. INTRODUCTION: Bisphosphonates are first-line treatment for osteoporosis. Gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AE) are the primary reason for non-adherence. Little is known about the comparative GI safety of bisphosphonates. PURPOSE: Leverage published clinical trial data to examine the comparative GI safety of bisphosphonates. METHODS: We completed a systematic review of all English-language clinical trials that assessed bisphosphonate safety and/or efficacy in primary osteoporosis through to 2012. Randomized, blinded, and controlled studies were eligible. The primary outcome was any GI-related AE. Subanalyses were completed for upper GI symptoms, serious GI, nausea, esophageal-related events, and discontinuation due to AE. A Bayesian-based network meta-analysis was completed to allow for indirect comparisons. Results were reported as the probability that a specific drug had the highest number of events. RESULTS: We identified 50 studies: 32 alendronate, 12 risedronate, 5 etidronate, and 7 zoledronic acid. Zoledronic acid had the highest probability of having the highest number of any GI AE (91%) and nausea (70%). Etidronate (70%) and zoledronic acid (28%) had the highest probability of having the greatest attrition due to AE. Etidronate had the highest probability (56%) of having the greatest number of upper GI symptoms among oral bisphosphonates. CONCLUSION: Zoledronic acid had the highest probability of causing the greatest number of GI AE, possibly related to nausea. These results question the assumption that annual zoledronic acid will translate into better adherence. Little difference was found between alendronate and risedronate for serious AE. More research into real-world implications of the comparative safety of bisphosphonates is needed.

A population-based case-control study of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) and breast cancer: the impact of duration of use, cumulative dose and latency.

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), a popular class of antidepressants, may increase breast cancer risk by stimulating the secretion of prolactin, a potential tumour promoter. We evaluated the effects of duration of SSRI use, cumulative dose, and latency on the risk of breast cancer by conducting a population-based case-control study utilizing Saskatchewan health databases. METHODS: Cases included 1,701 women with primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed from 2003 to 2006, and controls consisted of 17,017 women, randomly selected from the population registry. Use of SSRIs was compiled using the Saskatchewan prescription database. Unconditional logistic regression was conducted to evaluate the impact of duration of combined SSRI use (total number of prescriptions dispensed), cumulative dose (total dosage received) and timing of use (two or more years, two to seven years and more than seven years prior to index date) on the risk of breast cancer. RESULTS: Overall, SSRI use was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer regardless of our definition of cumulative use (total number of prescriptions dispensed and total dosage). In addition, our results indicate that prolonged SSRI use does not have a latent effect on breast cancer risk. Also, our findings are not suggestive of an increased risk of breast cancer with the use of individual SSRIs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study improved upon most previous studies by having a longer follow-up period, a larger sample size of long-term SSRI users and consideration of risk during specific exposure time windows that take latency into account. Given the potential health benefits of using SSRIs, our results suggest that the issue of breast cancer risk may no longer be a concern for women requiring long-term SSRIs.

The coronary risk of cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with a previous myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors have been associated with cardiovascular side effects, but previous studies have generally excluded people with previous myocardial infarction, thereby limiting our knowledge of their cardiotoxicity in this population. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a history of myocardial infarction modified the risk of acute myocardial infarction associated with the use of various non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). METHODS: A population-based cohort of 122 079 elderly people with and without previous myocardial infarction newly treated with an NSAID between 1 January 1999 and 30 June 2002 were identified using the computerised health databases of Québec, Canada. A nested-case-control approach was used for the analysis, with controls matched by cohort entry and age. Current users of NSAIDs, those whose last prescription overlapped with the index date, were compared with those who were not exposed to NSAIDs in the year preceding the event. Rate ratios of acute myocardial infarction were estimated using conditional logistic regression and adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Users of rofecoxib, both with and without previous myocardial infarction, were at increased risk of myocardial infarction, with a trend for greater risk among those with a previous event (rate ratio (RR) 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 2.18 v RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.45; p = 0.14 for interaction). By contrast, celecoxib was only associated with an increased risk in people with previous myocardial infarction (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.84 v RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.20; p = 0.04 for interaction). The available power was insufficient to reliably assess risks among patients with previous myocardial infarction treated with other NSAIDs, dose-response relationships or interaction with aspirin. CONCLUSIONS: Although only rofecoxib use was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction in those without a previous event, both rofecoxib and celecoxib were associated with an excess risk of acute myocardial infarction for current users with a history of myocardial infarction. A large randomised trial is required to more completely and reliably assess the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib and traditional NSAIDs in this population of high-risk patients.

Furosemide use and hospitalization for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have shown that furosemide may have anti-inflammatory properties. We explored whether exposure to furosemide would reduce the risk of being hospitalized with prostatism, a marker of benign prostatic hyperplasia. METHODS: Using record linkage and the computerized health insurance databases of the province of Québec, Canada, we identified a cohort of men 65 years of age and older within which we conducted a case-control study. Cases were individuals hospitalized with prostatism (ICD-9 code 600) between January 1991 and June 1993, with the index date taken as the date of hospitalisation. Controls were those not having experienced the event during the study period, with an index date selected randomly during their follow-up. Cases and controls were required to have at least 2 (1/2) years of health coverage prior to index date in order to identify risk factors for benign prostatic hyperplasia and establish baseline medical history. We assessed the subjects' exposure to furosemide and various other diuretics in the period 180 to 900 days preceding the index date. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between the use of furosemide and hospitalization for prostatism, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: The cohort included 8,814 subjects, of which 231 were cases and 8,583 controls. The rate of hospitalization for prostatism was lower for users of furosemide compared to non-users (adjusted rate ratio 0.49; 95% CI: 0.25-0.95). There was no association with the use of thiazide or potassium sparing diuretics (adjusted rate ratio 0.95; 95% CI: 0.65-1.37). Results suggestive of a protective effect associated with corticosteroid use were observed (adjusted rate ratio 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the hypothesis that furosemide can reduce the risk of hospitalization for prostatism, a marker of benign prostatic hyperplasia.