Post hoc analysis of FRAME and ARCH revealed that on-study nonvertebral and vertebral fractures by Month 12 were less common in women initially treated with romosozumab versus placebo or alendronate. Recurrent fracture risk was also lower in romosozumab‑treated patients, and there were no fracture‑related complications. Results support continuing romosozumab treatment post‑fracture. Post hoc analysis evaluating efficacy and safety of romosozumab, administered in the immediate post‑fracture period, in the FRAME and ARCH phase 3 trials. In FRAME (NCT01575834) and ARCH (NCT01631214), postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were randomized 1:1 to romosozumab 210 mg monthly or comparator (FRAME, placebo; ARCH, alendronate 70 mg weekly) for 12 months, followed by antiresorptive therapy (FRAME, denosumab; ARCH, alendronate). In patients who experienced on-study nonvertebral or new/worsening vertebral fracture by Month 12, we report the following: fracture and treatment‑emergent adverse event (TEAE) incidence through 36 months, bone mineral density changes (BMD), and romosozumab timing. Due to the sample sizes employed, meaningful statistical comparisons between treatments were not possible. Incidence of on-study nonvertebral and vertebral fractures by Month 12 was numerically lower in romosozumab- versus comparator-treated patients (FRAME, 1.6

Purpose or Learning Objective: Identification and reporting of vertebral fractures (VFs) on routine computed tomography (CT) remains an area in need of improvement. We aimed to evaluate the performance of a deep learning algorithm for detecting VFs on CT.

This study demonstrates a substantial and persistent anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in men and women ≥50 years old who sustained major osteoporotic fracture(s) between 2005 and 2014 in Denmark. This was not substantially reduced by including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis treatments. Strengthened post-fracture organization of care and secondary fracture prevention is highly needed.The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Danish anti-osteoporosis treatment gap from 2005 to 2014 in patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), and to assess the impact of including hospital-administered anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM) on the treatment gap among these patients.In this retrospective, registry-based study, we included men and women aged 50 years or older and living in Denmark, who sustained at least one MOF between 2005 and 2014. We applied a repeated cross-sectional design to generate cohorts of patients sustaining a first MOF, hip, vertebral, humerus, or forearm fracture, respectively, within each calendar year. We evaluated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients within each cohort not receiving treatment with AOM within 1 year of the fracture. Hospital-administered AOM was identified by SKS code.The treatment gap among MOF patients decreased from 85% in 2005 to 79% in 2014. The gap was smaller among hip and vertebral fracture patients as compared to humerus and forearm fracture patients, and it was smaller in women than in men. The use of hospital-administered AOM was relatively uncommon, with a maximum of 0.9% of MOF patients initiating hospital-administered AOM (in 2012). We observed substantial variations in this proportion between fracture types and gender. Hospital-administered AOM was most commonly used among vertebral fracture patients.A significant treatment gap among patients sustaining a major osteoporotic fracture was present throughout our analysis, and including hospital-administered AOM did not significantly improve the treatment gap assessment. Improved secondary fracture prevention is urgently needed.

A novel cost-effectiveness model framework was developed to incorporate the elevated fracture risk associated with a recent fracture and to allow sequential osteoporosis therapies to be evaluated. Treating patients with severe osteoporosis after a recent fracture with a bone-forming agent followed by antiresorptive therapy can be cost-effective compared with antiresorptive therapy alone. Incorporating these novel technical attributes in economic evaluations can support appropriate policy and reimbursement decision-making. To develop a cost-effectiveness model accommodating increased fracture risk after a recent fracture and treatment sequencing. A micro-simulation cost-utility model was developed to accommodate both treatment sequencing and increased risk with recent fracture. The risk of fracture was estimated and simulated using the FRAX® algorithms combined with Swedish registry data on imminent fracture relative risk. In the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis, a sequential treatment starting with a bone-forming agent for 12 months followed by an antiresorptive agent for 48 months initiated immediately after a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) in a 70-year-old woman with a T-score of 2.5 or less was compared to an antiresorptive treatment alone for 60 months. The model was populated with data relevant for a UK population reflecting a personal social service perspective. The cost per additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in the base-case setting was estimated at £34,584. Sensitivity analyses revealed the sequential treatment to be cost-saving compared with administering a bone-forming treatment alone. Without simulating an elevated fracture risk immediately after a recent fracture, the cost per QALY changed from £34,584 to £62,184. Incorporating imminent fracture risk in economic evaluations has a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness when evaluating fracture prevention treatments in patients with osteoporosis who sustained a recent fracture. Bone-forming treatment followed by antiresorptive therapy can be cost-effective compared to antiresorptive therapy alone depending on treatment acquisition costs.

This paper demonstrates a large post-fracture anti-osteoporosis treatment gap in the period 2005 to 2015. The gap was stable in Denmark at around 88–90%, increased in Catalonia from 80 to 88%, and started to increase in the UK towards the end of our study. Improved post-fracture care is needed. Patients experiencing a fragility fracture are at high risk of subsequent fractures, particularly within the first 2 years after the fracture. Previous studies have demonstrated that only a small proportion of fracture patients initiate therapy with an anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM), despite the proven fracture risk reduction of such therapies. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the changes in this post-fracture treatment gap across three different countries from 2005 to 2015. This analysis, which is part of a multinational cohort study, included men and women, aged 50 years or older, sustaining a first incident fragility fracture. Using routinely collected patient data from three administrative health databases covering Catalonia, Denmark, and the United Kingdom, we estimated the treatment gap as the proportion of patients not treated with AOM within 1 year of their first incident fracture. A total of 648,369 fracture patients were included. Mean age 70.2–78.9 years; 22.2–31.7% were men. In Denmark, the treatment gap was stable at approximately 88–90% throughout the 2005 to 2015 time period. In Catalonia, the treatment gap increased from 80 to 88%. In the UK, an initially decreasing treatment gap—though never smaller than 63%—was replaced by an increasing gap towards the end of our study. The gap was more pronounced in men than in women. Despite repeated calls for improved secondary fracture prevention, an unacceptably large treatment gap remains, with time trends indicating that the problem may be getting worse in recent years.

This study examined the imminent risk of a future fracture within 1 and 2 years following a first fracture in women aged 50 years and older and assessed independent factors associated with risk of subsequent fractures. The study highlights the need to intervene rapidly after a fracture to prevent further fractures. This study aims to determine the imminent risk of subsequent fractures within 1 and 2 years following a first fracture and to assess independent factors associated with subsequent fractures. Retrospective, observational cohort study of women aged ≥ 50 years with a fragility fracture was identified from Swedish national registers. Clinical/demographic characteristics at the time of index fracture and cumulative fracture incidences up to 12 and 24 months following index fracture were calculated. Risk factors for subsequent fracture were identified using multivariate regression analysis. Two hundred forty-two thousand one hundred eight women (mean [SD] age 74 [12.5] years) were included. The cumulative subsequent fracture incidence at 12 months was 7.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9–7.2) and at 24 months was 12.0% (95% CI, 11.8–12.1). The rate of subsequent fractures was highest in the first month (~ 15 fractures per 1000 patient-years) and remained steady between 4 and 24 months (~ 5 fractures/1000 patient-years). Higher age was an independent risk factor for imminent subsequent fractures (at 24 months, sub-distribution hazard ratio [HR], 3.07; p < 0.001 for women 80–89 years [reference 50–59 years]). Index vertebral fracture was a strong independent risk factor for subsequent fracture (sub-distribution HR, 2.72 versus hip fracture; p < 0.001 over 12 months; HR, 2.23; p < 0.001 over 24 months). Our findings highlight the need to intervene rapidly after any fragility fracture in postmenopausal women. The occurrence of a fragility fracture provides healthcare systems with a unique opportunity to intervene to reduce the increased risk of subsequent fractures.