Annie Petrie

The impact of incident vertebral and non-vertebral fractures on health related quality of life in postmenopausal women

BackgroundLittle empirical research has examined the multiple consequences of osteoporosis on quality of life.MethodsHealth related quality of life (HRQL) was examined in relationship to incident fractures in 2009 postmenopausal women 50 years and older who were seen in consultation at our tertiary care, university teaching hospital-affiliated office and who were registered in the Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO) patients. Patients were divided into three study groups according to incident fracture status: vertebral fractures, non-vertebral fractures and no fractures. Baseline assessments of anthropometric data, medical history, therapeutic drug use, and prevalent fracture status were obtained from all participants. The disease-targeted mini-Osteoporosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (mini-OQLQ) was used to measure HRQL.ResultsMultiple regression analyses revealed that subjects who had experienced an incident vertebral fracture had lower HRQL difference scores as compared with non-fractured participants in total score (-0.86; 95% confidence intervals (CI): -1.30, -0.43) and the symptoms (-0.76; 95% CI: -1.23, -0.30), physical functioning (-1.12; 95% CI: -1.57, -0.67), emotional functioning (-1.06; 95% CI: -1.44, -0.68), activities of daily living (-1.47; 95% CI: -1.97, -0.96), and leisure (-0.92; 95% CI: -1.37, -0.47) domains of the mini-OQLQ. Patients who experienced an incident non-vertebral fracture had lower HRQL difference scores as compared with non-fractured participants in total score (-0.47; 95% CI: -0.70, -0.25), and the symptoms (-0.25; 95% CI: -0.49, -0.01), physical functioning (-0.39; 95% CI: -0.65, -0.14), emotional functioning (-0.97; 95% CI: -1.20, -0.75) and the activities of daily living (-0.47; 95% CI: -0.73, -0.21) domains.ConclusionQuality of life decreased in patients who sustained incident vertebral and non-vertebral fractures.

Adherence to bisphosphonates and hormone replacement therapy in a tertiary care setting of patients in the CANDOO database

Therapies for osteoporosis must be taken for at least 1 year to be effective. The purpose of this study was to determine the difference in adherence to etidronate, alendronate and hormone replacement therapy in a group of patients seen at our tertiary care centres. The Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO), a prospective observational database designed to capture clinical data, was searched for patients who started therapy following entry into CANDOO. There were 1196 initiating etidronate, 477 alendronate and 294 hormone replacement therapy women and men aged (mean, SD) 65.8 (8.7) years in the study. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess differences between treatment groups in the time to discontinuation of therapy. Several potential covariates such as anthropometry, medications, illnesses, fractures and lifestyle factors were entered into the model. A forward selection technique was used to generate the final model. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Adjusted results indicated that alendronate-treated patients were more likely to discontinue therapy as compared with etidronate-treated patients (1.404; 95% CI: 1.150, 1.714). After 1 year, 90.3% of patients were still taking etidronate compared with 77.6% for alendronate. No statistically significant differences were found between hormone replacement therapy and etidronate users (0.971; 95% CI: 0.862, 1.093) and hormone replacement therapy and alendronate users (0.824; 95% CI: 0.624, 1.088) after controlling for potential covariates. After 1 year, 80.1% of patients were still taking hormone replacement therapy, which decreased to 44.5% after 6 years. Increasing age and presence of incident non-vertebral fractures were found to be independent predictors of adherence. In conclusion, alendronate users were more likely to discontinue therapy than etidronate users over the follow-up period. Potential barriers to long-term patient adherence to osteoporosis therapies need to be evaluated.

Effect of vitamin D on bone mineral density of elderly patients with osteoporosis responding poorly to bisphosphonates

BackgroundBisphosphonates are indicated in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. However, bone mineral density (BMD) continues to decline in up to 15% of bisphosphonate users. While randomized trials have evaluated the efficacy of concurrent bisphosphonates and vitamin D, the incremental benefit of vitamin D remains uncertain.MethodsUsing data from the Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO), we performed a 2-year observational cohort study. At baseline, all patients were prescribed a bisphosphonate and counseled on vitamin D supplementation. After one year, patients were divided into two groups based on their response to bisphosphonate treatment. Non-responders were prescribed vitamin D 1000 IU daily. Responders continued to receive counseling on vitamin D.ResultsOf 449 patients identified, 159 were non-responders to bisphosphonates. 94% of patients were women. The mean age of the entire cohort was 74.6 years (standard deviation = 5.6 years). In the cohort of non-responders, BMD at the lumbar spine increased 2.19% (p < 0.001) the year after vitamin D was prescribed compared to a decrease of 0.55% (p = 0.36) the year before. In the cohort of responders, lumbar spine BMD improved 1.45% (p = 0.014) the first year and 1.11% (p = 0.60) the second year. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant the first year (p < 0.001) but not the second (p = 0.60). Similar results were observed at the femoral neck but were not statistically significant.ConclusionIn elderly patients with osteoporosis not responding to bisphosphonates, vitamin D 1000 IU daily may improve BMD at the lumbar spine.

Evaluation of easily measured risk factors in the prediction of osteoporotic fractures

BackgroundFracture represents the single most important clinical event in patients with osteoporosis, yet remains under-predicted. As few premonitory symptoms for fracture exist, it is of critical importance that physicians effectively and efficiently identify individuals at increased fracture risk.MethodsOf 3426 postmenopausal women in CANDOO, 40, 158, 99, and 64 women developed a new hip, vertebral, wrist or rib fracture, respectively. Seven easily measured risk factors predictive of fracture in research trials were examined in clinical practice including: age (<65, 65–69, 70–74, 75–79, 80+ years), rising from a chair with arms (yes, no), weight (< 57, ≥ 57 kg), maternal history of hip facture (yes, no), prior fracture after age 50 (yes, no), hip T-score (>-1, -1 to >-2.5, ≤-2.5), and current smoking status (yes, no). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted.ResultsThe inability to rise from a chair without the use of arms (3.58; 95% CI: 1.17, 10.93) was the most significant risk factor for new hip fracture. Notable risk factors for predicting new vertebral fractures were: low body weight (1.57; 95% CI: 1.04, 2.37), current smoking (1.95; 95% CI: 1.20, 3.18) and age between 75–79 years (1.96; 95% CI: 1.10, 3.51). New wrist fractures were significantly identified by low body weight (1.71, 95% CI: 1.01, 2.90) and prior fracture after 50 years (1.96; 95% CI: 1.19, 3.22). Predictors of new rib fractures include a maternal history of a hip facture (2.89; 95% CI: 1.04, 8.08) and a prior fracture after 50 years (2.16; 95% CI: 1.20, 3.87).ConclusionThis study has shown that there exists a variety of predictors of future fracture, besides BMD, that can be easily assessed by a physician. The significance of each variable depends on the site of incident fracture. Of greatest interest is that an inability to rise from a chair is perhaps the most readily identifiable significant risk factor for hip fracture and can be easily incorporated into routine clinical practice.

What Predicts Early Fracture or Bone Loss on Bisphosphonate Therapy

Factors predicting early fracture or bone loss on bisphosphonate therapy are not well defined. We studied 1588 patients over the age of 50 yr who were started on cyclic etidronate (1119) or alendronate (469) in the CANDOO (Canadian Database for Osteoporosis and Osteopenia Patients) Study. Incident fracture within 2 yr of starting therapy occurred in 31 patients and was independently predicted by a previous history of nonvertebral fracture (odds ratio [OR], 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30, 6.83, p = 0.010). Two hundred and fifty-seven patients lost >/=3% bone mass at the hip or spine (early bone loss) while on bisphosphonate therapy. Protection from early bone loss was most strongly independently predicted by treatment with alendronate with no previous history of etidronate use (OR, 0.29, CI, 0.13, 0.62, p = 0.002). In conclusion, early fracture on bisphosphonate therapy is most strongly predicted by a previous history of fracture and early bone loss is most strongly predicted by the potency of the prescribed bisphosphonate.

Are Oral Bisphosphonates Effective in Improving Lumbar Bone Mineral Density in Breast Cancer Survivors With Osteopenia or Osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE Breast cancer survivors with osteoporosis or osteopenia are commonly encountered in primary care and gynaecology practices. Our objective was to determine whether treatment with oral bisphosphonates (alendronate or cyclic etidronate) was more effective than calcium with vitamin D in improving lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) within one year in breast cancer survivors. METHODS Breast cancer survivors with at least one year of clinical follow-up were identified from the prospective observational Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO). Analysis of covariance was used to examine the effects of bisphosphonate therapy on change in lumbar spine BMD at one year compared with the effects of calcium with vitamin D (analysis adjusted for baseline L2-L4 BMD, current tamoxifen use, number of prevalent vertebral fractures [VFs], and time since diagnosis of breast cancer, and age). RESULTS Eighteen patients took calcium and vitamin D, 25 took cyclic etidronate, and 27 took oral alendronate. Adjusted one-year BMD increases for alendronate and cyclic etidronate compared to calcium and vitamin D were as follows: alendronate 4.53% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26%, 7.81%, P = 0.008), and cyclic etidronate 1.85% (-1.55%, 5.25%, P = 0.280). BMD increases were significantly greater in patients with prevalent VF compared to those without VF (P = 0.025). In contrast, time since diagnosis of breast cancer was significantly associated with a decrease in BMD (P = 0.002). We were unable to detect any effect of current tamoxifen use, baseline lumbar spine BMD, or age on changes in BMD at one year. CONCLUSION Treatment with alendronate was associated with significantly greater improvements in lumbar spine BMD within one year in breast cancer survivors when compared with treatment with cyclic etidronate or calcium and vitamin D.

The association between iliocostal distance and the number of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in women and men registered in the Canadian Database For Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO)

BackgroundThe identification of new methods of evaluating patients with osteoporotic fracture should focus on their usefulness in clinical situations such that they are easily measured and applicable to all patients. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the association between iliocostal distance and vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in patients seen in a clinical setting.MethodsPatient data were obtained from the Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO). A total of 549 patients including 508 women and 41 men participated in this cross-sectional study. There were 142 women and 18 men with prevalent vertebral fractures, and 185 women and 21 men with prevalent non-vertebral fractures.ResultsIn women multivariable regression analysis showed that iliocostal distance was negatively associated with the number of vertebral fractures (-0.18, CI: -0.27, -0.09; adjusted for bone mineral density at the Wards triangle, epilepsy, cerebrovascular disease, inflammatory bowel disease, etidronate use, and calcium supplement use) and for the number of non-vertebral fractures (-0.09, CI: -0.15, -0.03; adjusted for bone mineral density at the trochanter, cerebrovascular disease, inflammatory bowel disease, and etidronate use). However, in men, multivariable regression analysis did not demonstrate a significant association between iliocostal distance and the number of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures.ConclusionsThe examination of iliocostal distance may be a useful clinical tool for assessment of the possibility of vertebral fractures. The identification of high-risk patients is important to effectively use the growing number of available osteoporosis therapies.