Search

To determine denosumab's effectiveness for fracture prevention among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in East Asia, the risk of fracture was compared between patients continuing denosumab therapy versus patients discontinuing denosumab after one dose. The real-world effectiveness was observed to be consistent with the efficacy demonstrated in the phase III trial.After therapeutic efficacy is demonstrated for subjects in global clinical trials, real-world evidence may provide complementary knowledge of therapeutic effectiveness in a heterogeneous mix of patients seen in clinical practice. This retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the fracture risk in real-world clinical care received in Taiwan and Hong Kong between a treatment cohort (patients receiving denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months) versus an off-treatment cohort (patients discontinuing after 1 dose of denosumab, which has no known clinical benefit) among real-world postmenopausal women.This study included 38,906 and 2,835 postmenopausal women receiving denosumab in Taiwan and Hong Kong, respectively. The primary endpoint was hip fracture, and secondary endpoints were clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Propensity-score-matched analysis, adjusting for known covariates, was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The robustness of findings was evaluated with a series of sensitivity and quantitative bias analyses.In this study, 554 hip fractures were included in the primary Taiwan population analysis. The crude incidence rate was 0.9 per 100 person-years in the treatment cohort (n = 25,059) and 1.7 per 100 person-years in the off-treatment cohort (n = 13,847). After adjusting for prognostic differences between cohorts, denosumab reduced the risk of hip fractures by 38% (HR = 0.62, CI:0.52-0.75). Risk reductions of similar magnitude were observed for the secondary endpoints and for the analysis of the smaller Hong Kong population.The effectiveness of denosumab for fracture reduction among real-world postmenopausal women with osteoporosis was consistent with the efficacy demonstrated in a global clinical trial.EnCePP registration number: EUPAS26372; registration date: 12/11/2018.

This observational study showed that after 2 years, both risedronate and alendronate lowered the risk of hip and nonvertebral fractures compared with patients filling in a single bisphosphonate prescription.Post hoc analyses of the placebo-controlled trials suggested earlier effects for risedronate (6-12 months) than for alendronate (18-24 months). The present study extends our 1-year observational data that confirmed an earlier fracture reduction with risedronate and evaluated the absolute and relative effectiveness of alendronate and risedronate in clinical practice over 2 years.We observed three cohorts of women aged 65 years and older who initiated once-a-week dosing of bisphosphonate therapy; (1) patients adherent to alendronate (n = 21,615), (2) patients adherent to risedronate (n = 12,215), or (3) patients filling only a single bisphosphonate prescription (n = 5,390) as a referent population. Proportional hazard modeling compared the incidence of hip and nonvertebral fractures among the cohorts over 2 years after the initial prescription.In this cohort, we previously showed at 12 months a significant reduction of hip and nonvertebral fractures with risedronate but not with alendronate. At the end of 2 years, the cumulative incidence of hip fractures in the referent cohort was 1.9 %, and incidence of nonvertebral fractures was 6.3 %. Relative to the referent, 6 months after initiating therapy and continuing through 2 years, both risedronate and alendronate cohorts had approximately a 45 % lower incidence of hip fractures and a 30 % lower incidence of nonvertebral fractures.These observations suggest that both risedronate and alendronate are effective at reducing the risk of hip and nonvertebral fracture after 2 years of treatment and support the post hoc analyses of placebo-controlled trials indicating an earlier effect of risedronate.

Summary There are differences in the risk profile of patients prescribed alendronate, risedronate, or ibandronate. Observed reductions in fracture incidence over time suggest that the effectiveness of each bisphosphonate in clinical practice has been consistent with their efficacies demonstrated in randomized controlled trials. Introduction Observational studies of bisphosphonate effectiveness for fracture prevention are subject to bias from unknown characteristics of baseline fracture risk at the start of therapy. The fracture incidence during the short period after starting a bisphosphonate and before any expected clinical benefit likely reflects baseline fracture risk. Bisphosphonate effectiveness may then be estimated by measuring the change in fracture incidence over time on therapy. Methods Administrative billing data were used to follow three cohorts of women aged 65 and older (total n = 210,144) after starting therapy either on alendronate, risedronate, or ibandronate in the USA between market introduction and 2006. Within each cohort, the baseline incidence of clinical fractures at the hip, vertebral, and nonvertebral sites was defined by the initial 3-month period after starting therapy. Relative to these baselines, we then compared the fracture incidence during the subsequent 12 months on therapy. Results At the start of therapy, the ibandronate cohort was younger and had fewer prior fractures than either the risedronate or alendronate cohorts. Accordingly, the baseline incidence of hip fractures was higher in the risedronate cohort (0.90 per 100 person-years) and in the alendronate cohort (0.77) than in the ibandronate cohort (0.64). Relative to the baseline incidence, fracture incidence was significantly lower in the subsequent 12 months in both cohorts of alendronate (18% lower at hip, 28% at nonvertebral sites, and 57% at vertebral sites) and risedronate (27% lower at hip, 21% at nonvertebral sites, and 54% at vertebral sites). In the ibandronate cohort, the fracture incidence was lower (31%) only at vertebral sites. Conclusions Differences in the baseline fracture incidence among the cohorts may reflect differences in the risk profile of patients prescribed each bisphosphonate. The reductions observed in fracture incidence over time within each cohort suggest that the effectiveness of each bisphosphonate in clinical practice has been consistent with their efficacies demonstrated in randomized controlled trials.

Introduction Randomized clinical trials have shown that risedronate and alendronate reduce fractures among women with osteoporosis. The aim of this observational study was to observe, in clinical practice, the incidence of hip and nonvertebral fractures among women in the year following initiation of once-a-week dosing of either risedronate or alendronate. Methods Using records of health service utilization from July 2002 through September 2004, we created two cohorts: women (ages 65 and over) receiving risedronate (n = 12,215) or alendronate (n = 21,615). Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to compare the annual incidence of nonvertebral fractures and of hip fractures between cohorts, adjusting for potential differences in risk factors for fractures. Results There were 507 nonvertebral fractures and 109 hip fractures. Through one year of therapy, the incidence of nonvertebral fractures in the risedronate cohort (2.0%) was 18% lower (95% CI 2% – 32%) than in the alendronate cohort (2.3%). The incidence of hip fractures in the risedronate cohort (0.4%) was 43% lower (95% CI 13% – 63%) than in the alendronate cohort (0.6%). These results were consistent across a number of sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Patients receiving risedronate have lower rates of hip and nonvertebral fractures during their first year of therapy than patients receiving alendronate.

This study aims to estimate bisphosphonate effectiveness by comparing fracture incidence over time on therapy in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIO). From this observational study, alendronate and risedronate decreased clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures over time. The effectiveness of each bisphosphonate is consistent with their efficacies demonstrated on surrogate markers in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study aims to estimate bisphosphonate effectiveness by comparing fracture incidence over time on therapy with fracture incidence during a short period after starting a therapy. The study population was a subgroup of a larger cohort study comprising two cohorts of women aged ≥65 years, prescribed with alendronate or risedronate. Within the two study cohorts, 11,007 women were identified as having received glucocorticoids. Within each cohort, the baseline incidence of clinical fractures at nonvertebral and vertebral sites was defined by the initial 3-month period after starting therapy. Relative to these baseline data, we then compared the fracture incidence during the subsequent 12 months on therapy. The baseline incidence of clinical nonvertebral and vertebral fractures was similar in the alendronate cohort (5.22 and 5.79/100 person-years, respectively) and in the risedronate cohort (5.51 and 5.68/100 person-years, respectively). Relative to the baseline incidence, fracture incidence was significantly lower in the subsequent 12 months in both cohorts of alendronate (33 % lower at nonvertebral sites and 59 % at vertebral sites) and risedronate (28 % lower at nonvertebral sites and 54 % at vertebral sites). From this observational study not designed to compare drugs, both alendronate and risedronate decreased clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures over time. The reductions observed in fracture incidence, within each cohort, suggest that the effectiveness of each bisphosphonate in clinical practice is consistent with their efficacies demonstrated on surrogate markers in randomized controlled trials.

To provide insight into the factors that control growth of the penis we measured the amount and intracellular distribution of specific high affinity androgen receptor in foreskins obtained at circumcision from 49 males varying in age from newborn to 59 yr. Total (cytosolic plus nuclear extract) androgen receptor decreased from approximately 40 fmol/g tissue weight in newborn foreskins to approximately 25 fmol/g by 1 yr of age. The amount of receptor rose in childhood to approximately 180 fmol/g in the late teenage years and fell thereafter to approximately 20-40 fmol/g in men older than 40 yr. The amount of receptor in the nuclear fraction increased at the time of puberty and subsequently decreased in parallel with the decline in total receptor level. These changes in androgen-receptor amount are similar when expressed per milligram DNA or per milligram protein.