Search

We comprehensively described elderly Medicare women with an outpatient visit in 2011 and fracture within 2 years before. These women were at very high risk for subsequent fracture and high healthcare utilization and cost, especially those with vertebral or multiple fractures. However, rates of fracture prevention treatments were low.Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis are stratified to high and very-high fracture risk categories, and this categorization drives algorithms for osteoporosis management in osteoporosis treatment guidelines. This study comprehensively describes a very-high-risk cohort.This retrospective cohort study used the Medicare 20% database; elderly women with an outpatient visit in 2011 and fracture within 2 years before the visit were included. Outcomes included fracture risk, all-cause and fracture-related healthcare resource utilization and cost, and osteoporosis medication use in the 5 years after the visit.Overall, 43,193 patients were included. The 5-year probability was 0.36 for major fracture and 0.11 and 0.17 for hip fracture and vertebral fracture, respectively, much higher than the guidelines' 10-year probability thresholds for very-high-risk (0.3 for major fracture, 0.045 for hip fracture). Rates of hospitalizations, emergency department visits or observation stays, and skilled nursing facility stays in year 1 were 53.7, 57.0, and 18.8 per 100 patient-years, respectively, decreasing slightly in subsequent years. Mean healthcare cost was $23,700 in year 1, decreasing to $18,500 in year 5. About 29.1% of patients received osteoporosis medications in year 1, decreasing to 16.9% by year 5. Rates for all outcomes, especially fractures, were much higher among vertebral and multiple fracture cohorts.Elderly women with a fracture within last 2 years were at very-high-risk for subsequent fracture and high healthcare utilization and cost, especially those with vertebral or multiple fractures. However, rates of fracture prevention treatments were low. More effort is needed to identify and treat patients at very-high-risk for fracture.

This study assessed the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japan, using bone mineral density (BMD) efficacy data. Results show that romosozumab/alendronate produces greater health benefits at a lower cost than teriparatide/alendronate.This study aims to assess the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japanese women previously treated with bisphosphonates.A Markov model was used to assess the relative cost effectiveness of 1 year of romosozumab versus 2 years of teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate for a total treatment duration of 5 years. Outcomes for a cohort of women with a mean age of 78 years, a T-score ≤-2.5 and a previous fragility fracture were simulated over a lifetime horizon. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Japanese healthcare system and used a discount rate of 2% per annum. To inform relative fracture incidence, the bone mineral density (BMD) advantage of romosozumab over teriparatide was translated into relative risks of fracture, using relationships provided by a meta-regression of osteoporosis therapy trials. Outcomes were assessed in terms of lifetime costs (2020 US dollars) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).Base case results showed that, compared with teriparatide/alendronate, romosozumab/alendronate reduced costs by $5134 per patient and yielded 0.045 additional QALYs. Scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed that results are robust to uncertainty in model assumptions and inputs.Results show that romosozumab/alendronate produces greater health benefits at a lower total cost than teriparatide/alendronate.