A qualitative study exploring the health-related quality of life and symptomatic experiences of adults and adolescents with ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC) often first presents during adolescence and early adulthood. Primary symptoms of UC are well known, yet similarities and differences of disease experience in adults and adolescents are not well characterized. METHODS: To understand the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptomatic experience of UC, in-depth interviews were conducted in the US with 21 adults (20-70 years) and 14 adolescents (12-17 years). Eligibility and medical history were confirmed by clinician report. A previously conducted literature review and resultant conceptual model informed the discussion guide to explore symptoms and HRQoL. Age appropriate creative tasks ("animal" task and collage) were employed to facilitate discussion. Transcripts and collages were subjected to thematic analysis using ATLAS.ti software. RESULTS: Clinician-reported UC severity included 24% mild, 38% moderate, 38% severe among adults; and 64% mild, 29% moderate, 7% severe among adolescents. Among adults, 52% were female, 67% were white. Among adolescents, 50% were female, 71% were white. During analysis it was noted that all participants reported stomach/abdominal pain. Other key symptoms identified were frequent bowel movements, diarrhea, blood in stools, sudden need for bowel movement, stomach cramping, bloating, and feeling gassy/passing gas (≥75% of participants). Key impacts identified were embarrassment, dietary limitations, having to plan around UC, worry/fear, anger, low mood/depression, and relationship with others, (≥75% of participants). In creative tasks, animals were chosen to represent their UC and content included in the collages reflected the most commonly discussed themes from the interviews. Only adults discussed feeling dehydrated, while only adolescents discussed the impact of UC on school life. CONCLUSIONS: Open-ended interviews highlighted the HRQoL and symptomatic experiences of UC from the patient's perspective, which were similar between adult and adolescent UC patients.

Phase 3 Trials of Ixekizumab in Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Two phase 3 trials (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3) showed that at 12 weeks of treatment, ixekizumab, a monoclonal antibody against interleukin-17A, was superior to placebo and etanercept in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. We report the 60-week data from the UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 trials, as well as 12-week and 60-week data from a third phase 3 trial, UNCOVER-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1296 patients in the UNCOVER-1 trial, 1224 patients in the UNCOVER-2 trial, and 1346 patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial to receive subcutaneous injections of placebo (placebo group), 80 mg of ixekizumab every 2 weeks after a starting dose of 160 mg (2-wk dosing group), or 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks after a starting dose of 160 mg (4-wk dosing group). Additional cohorts in the UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 trials were randomly assigned to receive 50 mg of etanercept twice weekly. At week 12 in the UNCOVER-3 trial, the patients entered a long-term extension period during which they received 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks through week 60; at week 12 in the UNCOVER-1 and UNCOVER-2 trials, the patients who had a response to ixekizumab (defined as a static Physicians Global Assessment [sPGA] score of 0 [clear] or 1 [minimal psoriasis]) were randomly reassigned to receive placebo, 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks, or 80 mg of ixekizumab every 12 weeks through week 60. Coprimary end points were the percentage of patients who had a score on the sPGA of 0 or 1 and a 75% or greater reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 12. RESULTS: In the UNCOVER-1 trial, at week 12, the patients had better responses to ixekizumab than to placebo; in the 2-wk dosing group, 81.8% had an sPGA score of 0 or 1 and 89.1% had a PASI 75 response; in the 4-wk dosing group, the respective rates were 76.4% and 82.6%; and in the placebo group, the rates were 3.2% and 3.9% (P<0.001 for all comparisons of ixekizumab with placebo). In the UNCOVER-1 and UNCOVER-2 trials, among the patients who were randomly reassigned at week 12 to receive 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks, 80 mg of ixekizumab every 12 weeks, or placebo, an sPGA score of 0 or 1 was maintained by 73.8%, 39.0%, and 7.0% of the patients, respectively. Patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial received continuous treatment of ixekizumab from weeks 0 through 60, and at week 60, at least 73% had an sPGA score of 0 or 1 and at least 80% had a PASI 75 response. Adverse events reported during ixekizumab use included neutropenia, candidal infections, and inflammatory bowel disease. CONCLUSIONS: In three phase 3 trials involving patients with psoriasis, ixekizumab was effective through 60 weeks of treatment. As with any treatment, the benefits need to be weighed against the risks of adverse events. The efficacy and safety of ixekizumab beyond 60 weeks of treatment are not yet known. (Funded by Eli Lilly; UNCOVER-1, UNCOVER-2, and UNCOVER-3 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT01474512, NCT01597245, and NCT01646177, respectively.).

Comparison of ixekizumab with etanercept or placebo in moderate-to-severe psoriasis (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3): results from two phase 3 randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Ixekizumab is a humanised monoclonal antibody against the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin 17A. We report two studies of ixekizumab compared with placebo or etanercept to assess the safety and efficacy of specifically targeting interleukin 17A in patients with widespread moderate-to-severe psoriasis. METHODS: In two prospective, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 studies (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3), eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a confirmed diagnosis of chronic plaque psoriasis at least 6 months before baseline (randomisation), 10% or greater body-surface area involvement at both screening and baseline visits, at least a moderate clinical severity as measured by a static physician global assessment (sPGA) score of 3 or more, and a psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) score of 12. Participants were randomly assigned (1:2:2:2) by computer-generated random sequence with an interactive voice response system to receive subcutaneous placebo, etanercept (50 mg twice weekly), or one injection of 80 mg ixekizumab every 2 weeks, or every 4 weeks after a 160 mg starting dose. Blinding was maintained with a double-dummy design. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were proportions of patients achieving sPGA score 0 or 1 and 75% or greater improvement in PASI at week 12. Analysis was by intention to treat. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01597245 and NCT01646177. FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2012, and Dec 30, 2013, 1224 patients in UNCOVER-2 were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous placebo (n=168), etanercept (n=358), or ixekizumab every 2 weeks (n=351) or every 4 weeks (n=347); between Aug 11, 2012, and Feb 27, 2014, 1346 patients in UNCOVER-3 were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n=193), etanercept (n=382), ixekizumab every 2 weeks (n=385), or ixekizumab every 4 weeks (n=386). At week 12, both primary endpoints were met in both studies. For UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 respectively, in the ixekizumab every 2 weeks group, PASI 75 was achieved by 315 (response rate 89·7%; [effect size 87·4% (97·5% CI 82·9-91·8) vs placebo; 48·1% (41·2-55·0) vs etanercept]) and 336 (87·3%; [80·0% (74·4-85·7) vs placebo; 33·9% (27·0-40·7) vs etanercept]) patients; in the ixekizumab every 4 weeks group, by 269 (77·5%; [75·1% (69·5-80·8) vs placebo; 35·9% (28·2-43·6) vs etanercept]) and 325 (84·2%; [76·9% (71·0-82·8) vs placebo; 30·8% (23·7-37·9) vs etanercept]) patients; in the placebo group, by four (2·4%) and 14 (7·3%) patients; and in the etanercept group by 149 (41·6%) and 204 (53·4%) patients (all p<0·0001 vs placebo or etanercept). In the ixekizumab every 2 weeks group, sPGA 0/1 was achieved by 292 (response rate 83·2%; [effect size 80·8% (97·5% CI 75·6-86·0) vs placebo; 47·2% (39·9-54·4) vs etanercept]) and 310 (80·5%; [73·8% (67·7-79·9) vs placebo; 38·9% (31·7-46·1) vs etanercept]) patients; in the ixekizumab every 4 weeks group by 253 (72·9%; [70·5% (64·6-76·5) vs placebo; 36·9% (29·1-44·7) vs etanercept]) and 291 (75·4%; [68·7% (62·3-75·0) vs placebo; 33·8% (26·3-41·3) vs etanercept]) patients; in the placebo group by four (2·4%) and 13 (6·7%) patients; and in the etanercept group by 129 (36·0%) and 159 (41·6%) patients (all p<0·0001 vs placebo or etanercept). In combined studies, serious adverse events were reported in 14 (1·9%) of 734 patients given ixekizumab every 2 weeks, 14 (1·9%) of 729 given ixekizumab every 4 weeks, seven (1·9%) of 360 given placebo, and 14 (1·9%) of 739 given etanercept; no deaths were noted. INTERPRETATION: Both ixekizumab dose regimens had greater efficacy than placebo and etanercept over 12 weeks in two independent studies. These studies show that selectively neutralising interleukin 17A with a high affinity antibody potentially gives patients with psoriasis a new and effective biological therapy option. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Co.

Effects of tadalafil on lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and on erectile dysfunction in sexually active men with both conditions: analyses of pooled data from four randomized, placebo-controlled tadalafil clinical studies.

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) and lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) are common in aging males and frequently occur together. Tadalafil has demonstrated efficacy in treating both conditions. AIM: The study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tadalafil 5 mg once daily vs. placebo over 12 weeks in treating both LUTS/BPH and ED in sexually active men. We also assessed relationships of baseline disease severity and prostate specific antigen (PSA) to outcomes. METHODS: Data were pooled from four multinational, randomized studies of men ≥45 years with LUTS/BPH, with analyses restricted to sexually active men with ED. Randomization (baseline) followed a 4-week placebo run-in; changes from baseline were assessed vs. placebo using analysis of covariance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS subscores, Quality-of-Life Index (IPSS-QoL), BPH Impact Index (BII), and International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) Domain score were used in this study. RESULTS: Tadalafil (N = 505) significantly improved total IPSS vs. placebo (N = 521); mean changes from baseline were -6.0 and -3.6, respectively (P < 0.001). Improvements in IIEF-EF Domain score (tadalafil, 6.4; placebo, 1.4) were also significant vs. placebo, as were the IPSS storage and voiding subscores, IPSS-QoL, and BII (all P < 0.001). No significant impact of baseline ED severity or PSA category on IPSS response was observed (interaction P values, 0.463 and 0.149, respectively). Similarly, improvement in IIEF-EF Domain score was not significantly impacted by baseline LUTS/BPH severity or PSA category (interaction P values, 0.926 and 0.230, respectively). Improvements in IPSS and IIEF-EF Domain score during treatment were weakly correlated (r = -0.229). Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil was efficacious and well tolerated in treating ED and LUTS/BPH in sexually active men with both conditions. Improvements in both conditions were significant regardless of baseline severity. Improvements in the total IPSS and the IIEF-EF Domain score were weakly correlated.

Tadalafil 2.5 or 5 mg administered once daily for 12 weeks in men with both erectile dysfunction and signs and symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study.

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction (ED) and lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH-LUTS) commonly coexist in aging men. Tadalafil, a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor approved for treating ED, is currently being evaluated for treating BPH-LUTS. AIMS: This multinational Phase 3 study assessed effects of tadalafil 2.5 or 5 mg once daily on ED and BPH-LUTS in men with both conditions during 12 weeks of double-blinded therapy. METHODS: Men were ≥ 45 years old, sexually active, and experiencing ED for ≥ 3 months and BPH-LUTS for >6 months. Randomization (baseline) followed a 4-week placebo lead-in; changes from baseline were assessed via analysis of covariance and compared to placebo. A gatekeeping procedure controlled for multiple comparisons of co-primary and key secondary measures at end point (last post-baseline observation). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The co-primary measures were the International Index of Erectile Function-erectile function (IIEF-EF) domain and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) score; key secondary measures were the Sexual Encounter Profile Question 3 (SEP Q3) and BPH Impact Index (BII). Treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, orthostatic vital signs, clinical laboratory and uroflowmetry parameters, and postvoid residual volume were assessed. RESULTS: Tadalafil 2.5 mg (N = 198) and 5 mg (N = 208) significantly improved IIEF-EF domain scores (both P < 0.001) vs. placebo (N = 200) at end point. For IPSS, improvements were significant with tadalafil 5 mg (P < 0.001), but not 2.5 mg, for observations from 2 weeks through end point (least-squares mean ± standard error change from baseline at end point, placebo -3.8 ± 0.5, tadalafil 2.5 mg -4.6 ± 0.4, and 5 mg -6.1 ± 0.4). Tadalafil 5 mg significantly improved SEP Q3 and BII (P < 0.001). Overall, tadalafil was well tolerated with no clinically adverse changes in orthostatic vital signs or uroflowmetry parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil 5 mg significantly improved both ED and BPH-related outcomes through 12 weeks and was well tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of tadalafil once daily in the treatment of men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of an international randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tadalafil is being investigated for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH-LUTS). OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy, including onset, and safety of tadalafil on BPH-LUTS and the subject's and clinician's perception of changes in urinary symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week trial enrolled men ≥45 yr of age with BPH-LUTS for >6 mo, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) ≥13, and maximum urine flow rate (Q(max)) ≥4 to ≤15 ml/s. INTERVENTION: Tadalafil 5mg (n=161) or placebo (n=164), once daily. MEASUREMENTS: Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) modeling evaluated change from baseline in continuous efficacy variables. Categoric efficacy variables were analyzed with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, and between-group differences in treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed using the Fisher exact test. RESULTS AND LIMITATION: Tadalafil significantly improved IPSS results, from baseline to endpoint, compared to placebo (-5.6 vs -3.6; p=0.004). Reduction in IPSS results was apparent after 1 wk and significant after 4 wk (tadalafil -5.3 vs placebo -3.5; p=0.003). The BPH Impact Index (BII) was not assessed at week 1; however, BII improvement was apparent at 4 wk (tadalafil -1.8 vs placebo -1.2; p=0.029) and continued at 12 wk (tadalafil -1.8 vs placebo -1.3; p=0.057). Tadalafil significantly improved the International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function score in sexually active men with erectile dysfunction (ED; 6.7 vs 2.0; p<0.001) at 12 wk (not assessed at week 1). Few subjects reported one TEAE or more (p=0.44). For tadalafil, the most common TEAEs were headache (3.7%) and back pain (3.1%). Tadalafil did not significantly improve Q(max) or reduce postvoid residual volume. CONCLUSIONS: Tadalafil 5mg once daily for 12 wk resulted in a clinically meaningful reduction in total IPSS results as early as 1 wk and achieved statistical significance at 4 wk in men with BPH-LUTS. The adverse event profile was consistent with that previously reported in men with ED. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial is registered on the clinicaltrials.gov website (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). The registration number is NCT00827242.

Tadalafil Administered Once Daily for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Korean men with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Results from a Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study Using Tamsulosin as an Active Control.

OBJECTIVES: Assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily tadalafil or tamsulosin versus placebo during 12 weeks on lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in Korean men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Following a 4-week placebo run-in period, 151 Korean men were randomly assigned to receive once-daily tadalafil 5 mg, tamsulosin 0.2 mg, or placebo for 12 weeks. RESULTS: The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) least squares mean changes from baseline to endpoint were numerically but not significantly improved in the tadalafil (-5.8) and tamsulosin (-5.4) groups compared with placebo (-4.2, P > 0.05). Decreases in IPSS obstructive and irritative subscores, IPSS Quality of Life score, and BPH Impact Index from baseline to endpoint were largest in the tadalafil group followed by tamsulosin, though none separated significantly from placebo. Increases in maximum urinary flow rate were small and not significantly different than placebo; the increase was largest in the tadalafil group (2.5 mL/sec), followed by the placebo (2.3 mL/sec) and tamsulosin (2.1 mL/sec) groups. The percentage of subjects reporting at least one treatment-emergent adverse event was 26.5, 13.7 and 3.9% in the tamsulosin, tadalafil and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study in Korean men, those with BPH and treated with tadalafil 5 mg or tamsulosin 0.2 mg once daily experienced a reduction in LUTS, which was numerically (but not statistically) significant compared with the placebo. Tadalafil was well tolerated and few subjects discontinued the study due to treatment-emergent adverse events. Larger studies in Asian men with BPH and LUTS treated with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors are needed.

Relationship between bone mass, invasive breast cancer incidence and raloxifene therapy in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between bone mass and risk of breast cancer and to determine the effect of raloxifene therapy on breast cancer incidence in women categorized by bone mass into low bone mass and osteoporosis subgroups. DESIGN: In this post hoc analysis, data were analyzed from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial, enrolling postmenopausal women with low bone mass (N = 7705), and the Continuing Outcomes Relevant to Evista (CORE) trial, a follow-up to MORE enrolling 4011 MORE participants. Total follow-up was for up to 8 years. Women with a total hip bone mineral density (BMD) T-score < -1 to > -2.5 or T-score < or = -2.5 (referent, NHANES III database) were classified as having low bone mass or osteoporosis, respectively. Women with a pre-existing vertebral fracture were considered as having osteoporosis irrespective of BMD T-score. Analyses were performed for invasive breast cancers and invasive estrogen-receptor (ER) positive breast cancers. RESULTS: Women with low bone mass (N = 3829) had a twofold higher incidence of invasive ER-positive breast cancer than those with osteoporosis (N = 3836) (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.12-4.03). The incidence of all invasive breast cancers did not differ significantly between the bone mass groups. The incidences of invasive and invasive ER-positive breast cancers were 65-78% lower in women assigned raloxifene versus placebo in both the low bone mass and osteoporosis groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of postmenopausal women participating in MORE and CORE, bone mass was a predictor of invasive ER-positive breast cancer. Raloxifene treatment reduced the risk of invasive and invasive ER-positive breast cancers in women with low bone mass and those with osteoporosis. Since participants were older postmenopausal women with low bone mass, whether these findings can be generalized to other postmenopausal women is unclear.

Continuing outcomes relevant to Evista: breast cancer incidence in postmenopausal osteoporotic women in a randomized trial of raloxifene.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial found that 4 years of raloxifene therapy decreased the incidence of invasive breast cancer among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis by 72% compared with placebo. We conducted the Continuing Outcomes Relevant to Evista (CORE) trial to examine the effect of 4 additional years of raloxifene therapy on the incidence of invasive breast cancer in women in MORE who agreed to continue in CORE. METHODS: Women who had been randomly assigned to receive raloxifene (either 60 or 120 mg/day) in MORE were assigned to receive raloxifene (60 mg/day) in CORE (n = 3510), and women who had been assigned to receive placebo in MORE continued on placebo in CORE (n = 1703). Breast cancer incidence was analyzed by a log-rank test, and a Cox proportional hazards model was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: During the CORE trial, the 4-year incidences of invasive breast cancer and estrogen receptor (ER)-positive invasive breast cancer were reduced by 59% (HR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.71) and 66% (HR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.66), respectively, in the raloxifene group compared with the placebo group. There was no difference between the two groups in incidence of ER-negative invasive breast cancer during CORE (P = .86). Over the 8 years of both trials, the incidences of invasive breast cancer and ER-positive invasive breast cancer were reduced by 66% (HR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.50) and 76% (HR = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40), respectively, in the raloxifene group compared with the placebo group. During the CORE trial, the relative risk of thromboembolism in the raloxifene group compared with that in the placebo group was 2.17 (95% CI = 0.83 to 5.70). This increased risk, also observed in the MORE trial, persisted over the 8 years of both trials. CONCLUSIONS: The reduction in invasive breast cancer incidence continues beyond 4 years of raloxifene treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. No new safety concerns related to raloxifene therapy were identified during CORE.

The role of selective estrogen receptor modulators in the prevention of breast cancer: comparison of the clinical trials.

The role of estrogen in the development of breast cancer is well recognized, and the use of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) to reduce breast cancer risk continues to be evaluated. Tamoxifen is the only SERM approved for the reduction of breast cancer incidence in women at high risk. This approval was based on results from the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. Although initial results from the Royal Marsden Hospital tamoxifen trial and Italian Tamoxifen Prevention Study did not show a similar overall effect of tamoxifen, recent updates from these two trials and initial results from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study are consistent with a risk reduction effect of tamoxifen for estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Raloxifene, approved for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, is another SERM being evaluated for breast cancer risk reduction. The recently completed Continuing Outcomes Relevant to Evista trial and the Raloxifene Use for The Heart trial, have breast cancer risk reduction as a primary end point. A third, ongoing trial, the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene trial, is evaluating the relative efficacy and adverse event profile of these two agents in a population at high risk. The study populations of these raloxifene breast cancer prevention trials and the four tamoxifen prevention trials are quite diverse in terms of breast cancer risk. Completion of these trials will provide important information about the occurrence of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women and the efficacy of raloxifene for breast cancer risk reduction.

Effect of raloxifene on the risk of new vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women with osteopenia or osteoporosis: a reanalysis of the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial.

Raloxifene reduces vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and established osteoporosis, but its efficacy in women with osteopenia has not been studied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of raloxifene hydrochloride on the risk of vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteopenia and to compare this effect with that in women with osteoporosis as defined by the bone mineral density (BMD) T-score at the hip. We studied the 3204 postmenopausal women with osteopenia or osteoporosis without vertebral fractures at baseline in the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial. Compared with placebo, 60 mg/day raloxifene reduced the risk of new vertebral fractures at 3 years independent of baseline total hip BMD. The relative risk for new vertebral fractures for the raloxifene group compared with placebo was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.32-0.88) for those with osteopenia and 0.31 (0.06-0.71) for those with osteoporosis. In raloxifene-treated women the rate of vertebral fracture was similar in women with osteoporosis (2%) to that in women with osteopenia (1.9%). For clinically apparent vertebral fractures, the relative risk of fracture in the osteopenia group for raloxifene was 0.25 (0.04-0.63) compared with placebo. There were no new clinical vertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis receiving raloxifene, whereas four occurred in the placebo group. We conclude that treatment with 60 mg/day raloxifene significantly decreases the risk of new vertebral fractures and new clinical vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women without baseline vertebral fracture who have osteopenia or osteoporosis.

Comparison of the effect of raloxifene and continuous-combined hormone therapy on mammographic breast density and breast tenderness in postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives were to evaluate mammographic changes in breast density that are associated with raloxifene or hormone therapy and to compare the safety profiles of the two therapies. STUDY DESIGN: Postmenopausal women older than 60 years who had a bone mineral density T-score of < or =-1 were assigned randomly to receive raloxifene hydrochloride 60 mg/day or continuous-combined hormone therapy that consisted of conjugated equine estrogen 0.625 mg/day plus medroxyprogesterone acetate 2.5 mg/day in a 1-year, open-label study. Radiologists who were blinded to the treatment assignment assessed the mammograms according to the American College of Radiology Breast Image Reporting and Data System breast density categories. Breast density changes were analyzed for treatment differences. RESULTS: After 12 months of treatment, 0.9% of the women who received raloxifene had increased mammographic breast density compared with 27.4% of the women who received continuous-combined hormone therapy (P <.001). In the continuous-combined hormone therapy group, 77% of the women reported breast tenderness at any time during the study, compared to 22% of the women in the raloxifene group. CONCLUSION: In postmenopausal women with low bone mass, raloxifene therapy for 12 months does not increase mammographic breast density, whereas continuous-combined hormone therapy substantially increases breast density in a significant number of women.