25 research outputs found

    Quality of Life in Sarcopenia and Frailty

    Get PDF
    The reduced muscle mass and impaired muscle performance that define sarcopenia in older individuals are associated with increased risk of physical limitation and a variety of chronic diseases. They may also contribute to clinical frailty. A gradual erosion of quality of life (QoL) has been evidenced in these individuals, although much of this research has been done using generic QoL instruments, particularly the SF-36, which may not be ideal in older populations with significant comorbidities. This review and report of an expert meeting presents the current definitions of these geriatric syndromes (sarcopenia and frailty). It then briefly summarizes QoL concepts and specificities in older populations and examines the relevant domains of QoL and what is known concerning QoL decline with these conditions. It calls for a clearer definition of the construct of disability, argues that a disease-specific QoL instrument for sarcopenia/frailty would be an asset for future research, and discusses whether there are available and validated components that could be used to this end and whether the psychometric properties of these instruments are sufficiently tested. It calls also for an approach using utility weighting to provide some cost estimates and suggests that a time trade-off study could be appropriat

    Critical issues in translational and clinical research for the study of new technologies to enhance bone repair.

    Full text link
    Osteoporosis increases fracture risk, especially in metaphyseal bone. Fractures seriously impair function and quality of life and incur large direct and indirect costs. Although the prevention of fractures is certainly the option, a fast and uneventful healing process is optimal when fractures do occur. Many new therapeutic strategies have been developed to accelerate fracture-healing or to diminish the complication rate during the course of fracture-healing. However, widely accepted guidelines are needed to demonstrate the positive or negative interactions of bioactive substances, drugs, and other agents that are being used to promote fracture-healing. For each study design, the primary study goal should be indicated. Outcome variables should include both objective and subjective parameters. The guidelines should be harmonized between European and American regulatory authorities to ensure comparability of results of studies and to foster global harmonization of regulatory requirements

    Femoral strength in osteoporotic women treated with teriparatide or alendronate

    No full text
    To gain insight into the clinical effect of teriparatide and alendronate on the hip, we performed non-linear finite element analysis of quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scans from 48 women who had participated in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing the effects of 18-month treatment of teriparatide 20 μg/d or alendronate 10 mg/d. The QCT scans, obtained at baseline, 6, and 18 months, were analyzed for volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) of trabecular bone, the peripheral bone (defined as all the cortical bone plus any endosteal trabecular bone within 3 mm of the periosteal surface), and the integral bone (both trabecular and peripheral), and for overall femoral strength in response to a simulated sideways fall. At 18 months, we found in the women treated with teriparatide that trabecular volumetric BMD increased versus baseline (+ 4.6%, p < 0.001), peripheral volumetric BMD decreased (− 1.1%, p < 0.05), integral volumetric BMD (+ 1.0%, p = 0.38) and femoral strength (+ 5.4%, p = 0.06) did not change significantly, but the ratio of strength to integral volumetric BMD ratio increased (+ 4.0%, p = 0.04). An increase in the ratio of strength to integral volumetric BMD indicates that overall femoral strength, compared to baseline, increased more than did integral density. For the women treated with alendronate, there were small ( < 1.0%) but non-significant changes compared to baseline in all these parameters. The only significant between-treatment difference was in the change in trabecular volumetric BMD (p < 0.005); related, we also found that, for a given change in peripheral volumetric BMD, femoral strength increased more for teriparatide than for alendronate (p = 0.02). We conclude that, despite different compartmental volumetric BMD responses for these two treatments, we could not detect any overall difference in change in femoral strength between the two treatments, although femoral strength increased more than integral volumetric BMD after treatment with teriparatide

    Abaloparatide followed by alendronate in women ≥80 years with osteoporosis: post hoc analysis of ACTIVExtend

    No full text
    Objective: Fracture risk increases with age, but few studies focus on persons ≥80 years. In the ACTIVE trial, treatment with abaloparatide for 18 months reduced osteoporotic fracture risk and increased bone mineral density. These effects were maintained with 24 months alendronate treatment in ACTIVExtend. We postulated that similar improvements in bone mineral density and safety would be demonstrated in women ≥80 years. Methods: Post hoc analyses of bone mineral density and fracture incidence in women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture ≥80 years from ACTIVExtend. Results: In total, 56 women aged ≥80 years at ACTIVE baseline entered the ACTIVExtend study; 46 of these completed the study. Mean age was 83.3 years; other baseline characteristics were similar. At the end of ACTIVE, bone mineral density increased at all sites for abaloparatide versus placebo. Bone mineral density increased in parallel in both groups during alendronate therapy (19 to 43 months) in ACTIVExtend. At month 43, mean percent change in bone mineral density from baseline was 17.2% abaloparatide/alendronate versus 8.6% placebo/alendronate (P < 0.0001) at the lumbar spine, 5.3% abaloparatide/alendronate versus 3.0% placebo/alendronate (P = 0.024) at the total hip, and 4.6% abaloparatide/alendronate versus 3.1% placebo/alendronate (P = 0.044) at the femoral neck. Fracture incidence was low and did not differ significantly between groups. Sequential treatment with abaloparatide followed by alendronate was well tolerated; the proportion of participants reporting adverse events was similar between groups. Conclusions: Sequential treatment with abaloparatide followed by alendronate (43 months follow-up) in this small subgroup of ACTIVExtend participants suggests abaloparatide is well tolerated and effective in women aged ≥80 years

    FRAX and the effect of teriparatide on vertebral and non-vertebral fracture

    No full text
    Background: daily administration of 20µg or 40µg teriparatide has been shown to significantly decrease the risk of vertebral and non-vertebral fracture compared with placebo. The aim of the present study was to evaluate fracture risk assessed at baseline using the FRAX® tool and to determine the efficacy of teriparatide as a function of baseline fracture risk. Methods: 1637 postmenopausal women in the pivotal phase 3 trial, randomly assigned to receive placebo (n=544), teriparatide 20 ?g per day (n=541) or teriparatide 40 ?g per day (n=552), were studied. Baseline clinical risk factors were entered into country-specific FRAX models to compute the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fractures with or without input of femoral neck BMD. Because there was no difference in effect of 20 and 40?g teriparatide daily on fracture occurrence, the two active groups were merged. The interaction between probability of a major fracture and treatment efficacy was examined by Poisson regression. Results: the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fractures (with BMD) ranged from 2.2-67.2%. Treatment with teriparatide was associated with a 37% decrease in all non-vertebral fractures (95% CI:10-56 %) and a 56% decrease in low energy non-vertebral fractures (95% CI:24-75%) compared with placebo. The risk of morphometric vertebral fractures decreased significantly by 66% (95% CI:50-77%). Hazard ratios for the effect of teriparatide on the fracture outcome did not change significantly with increasing fracture probability (p&gt;0.30). Similar findings were noted for the interaction when BMD was excluded from the FRAX model, or when probability of hip fracture was used as the marker of baseline risk. Conclusion: we conclude that teriparatide significantly decreases the risk of non-vertebral and morphometric vertebral fractures in women by a similar extent, irrespective of baseline fracture probability<br/

    Sustained vertebral fracture risk reduction after withdrawal of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

    Full text link
    BACKGROUND: Teriparatide (recombinant human parathyroid hormone [1-34]) reduces fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. We assessed the safety and incidence of new vertebral fractures after withdrawal of teriparatide. METHODS: This study is a follow-up to the Fracture Prevention Trial (FPT), a randomized, placebo-controlled study of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with teriparatide (20 or 40 microg) once daily for a mean of 18 months. More than 90% of the women remaining at the end of the FPT continued into the follow-up study (n = 1262). Patients and investigators were unblinded to original treatment group assignment. Women were treated according to standard clinical practice, including elective use of osteoporosis drugs. New vertebral fractures were determined by semiquantitative scoring of lateral thoracic lumbar spine radiographs 18 months after the end of the FPT. RESULTS: During the follow-up study, the reduction in fracture risk associated with previous treatment with teriparatide, 20 and 40 microg, was 41% (P = .004) and 45% (P = .001), respectively, vs placebo. The absolute reduction from the FPT baseline to the 18-month follow-up visit was 13% for both doses. Osteoporosis drugs were used by 47% of women during follow-up, with greater use in the former placebo group (P = .04); nevertheless, persistent fracture protection of previous teriparatide therapy was evident. Post hoc analysis also suggests that teriparatide treatment substantially reduced the increased risk of subsequent fracture in women who sustained a fracture during the FPT (P = .05). CONCLUSION: Vertebral fracture risk reduction by teriparatide administration persists for at least 18 months after discontinuation of therapy

    Early Effects of Abaloparatide on Bone Formation and Resorption Indices in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis

    No full text
    Anabolic osteoporosis drugs improve bone mineral density by increasing bone formation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the early effects of abaloparatide on indices of bone formation and to assess the effect of abaloparatide on modeling-based formation (MBF), remodeling-based formation (RBF), and overflow MBF (oMBF) in transiliac bone biopsies. In this open-label, single-arm study, 23 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were treated with 80 μg abaloparatide daily. Subjects received double fluorochrome labels before treatment and before biopsy collection at 3 months. Change in dynamic histomorphometry indices in four bone envelopes were assessed. Median mineralizing surface per unit of bone surface (MS/BS) increased to 24.7%, 48.7%, 21.4%, and 16.3% of total surface after 3 months of abaloparatide treatment, representing 5.5-, 5.2-, 2.8-, and 12.9-fold changes, on cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal surfaces (p \u3c.001 versus baseline for all). Mineral apposition rate (MAR) was significantly increased only on intracortical surfaces. Bone formation rate (BFR/BS) was significantly increased on all four bone envelopes. Significant increases versus baseline were observed in MBF on cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal surfaces, for oMBF on cancellous and endocortical surfaces, and for RBF on cancellous, endocortical, and intracortical surfaces. Overall, modeling-based formation (MBF + oMBF) accounted for 37% and 23% of the increase in bone-forming surface on the endocortical and cancellous surfaces, respectively. Changes from baseline in serum biomarkers of bone turnover at either month 1 or month 3 were generally good surrogates for changes in histomorphometric endpoints. In conclusion, treatment with abaloparatide for 3 months stimulated bone formation on cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal envelopes in transiliac bone biopsies obtained from postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. These increases reflected stimulation of both remodeling- and modeling-based bone formation, further elucidating the mechanisms by which abaloparatide improves bone mass and lowers fracture risk. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)

    Validation of the Surrogate Threshold Effect for Change in Bone Mineral Density as a Surrogate Endpoint for Fracture Outcomes: The FNIH-ASBMR SABRE Project.

    No full text
    The surrogate threshold effect (STE) is defined as the minimum treatment effect on a surrogate that is reliably predictive of a treatment effect on the clinical outcome. It provides a framework for implementing a clinical trial with a surrogate endpoint. The aim of this study was to update our previous analysis by validating the STE for change in total hip (TH) BMD as a surrogate for fracture risk reduction; the novelty of this study was this validation. To do so, we used individual patient data from 61,415 participants in 16 RCTs that evaluated bisphosphonates (nine trials), selective estrogen receptor modulators (four trials), denosumab (one trial), odanacatib (one trial), and teriparatide (one trial) to estimate trial-specific treatment effects on TH BMD and all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures. We then conducted a random effects meta-regression of the log relative fracture risk reduction against 24-month change in TH BMD, and computed the STE as the intersection of the upper 95% prediction limit of this regression with the line of no fracture reduction. We validated the STE by checking whether the number of fractures in each trial provided 80% power and determining what proportion of trials with BMD changes ≥ STE reported significant reductions in fracture risk. We applied this analysis to (i) the trials on which we estimated the STE; and (ii) trials on which we did not estimate the STE. We found that the STEs for all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures were 1.83%, 1.42%, 3.18%, and 2.13%, respectively. Among trials used to estimate STE, 27 of 28 were adequately powered, showed BMD effects exceeding the STE, and showed significant reductions in fracture risk. Among the validation set of 11 trials, 10 met these criteria. Thus STE differs by fracture type and has been validated in trials not used to develop the approach. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)
    corecore