Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors affecting continuation of weekly teriparatide administration in rural areas

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Although teriparatide plays an important role in the treatment of patients with severe osteoporosis, it is meaningless if patients cannot continue. There have been few reports of studies evaluating factors affecting the continuation rate of weekly teriparatide; moreover, no study has investigated the relationship between the distance to travel to the hospital and continuation rate. Therefore, we examined the continuation rate of weekly teriparatide and factors that affect this rate.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study included 73 patients who were administered weekly teriparatide in a rural hospital. Patient information, including the age, sex, distance between the hospital and home, family structure, place of introduction, reason for the start of teriparatide administration, past osteoporosis treatment and fracture, side effects, and period of teriparatide continuation, was collected. We examined factors influencing weekly teriparatide continuation.

Results

The continuation rate of weekly teriparatide was 22.7%. The Kaplan–Meier curves for the two groups regarding the place of introduction and side effects showed significant differences (P = 0.0158 and P = 0.0309, respectively). In the multivariate analyses to investigate factors associated with teriparatide continuation, an older age, starting administration while hospitalized, and side effects were identified as risk factors negatively influencing continuation (P = 0.0280, P = 0.0222, and P = 0.0095, respectively). On the other hand, the number of family members and distance between our hospital and home did not affect teriparatide continuation.

Conclusion

An older age, starting administration while hospitalized, and side effects were identified as risk factors negatively influencing teriparatide continuation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Melton LJ III, Chrischilles EA, Cooper C, Lane AW, Riggs BL (1992) Perspective: how many women have osteoporosis? J Bone Miner Res 7:1005–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A report of committee for developing guidelines for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: Japan osteoporosis society, Japanese society for bone and mineral research, and Japan osteoporosis foundation (2015) Japanese 2015 guideline for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Lifescience, Tokyo

  3. Andreassen TT, Ejersted C, Oxlund H (1999) Intermittent parathyroid hormone (1-34) treatment increases callus formation and mechanical strength of healing rat fractures. J Bone Miner Res 14:960–968

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Peichl P, Holzer LA, Maier R, Holzer G (2011) Parathyroid hormone 1-84 accelerates fracture-healing in pubic bones of elderly osteoporotic women. J Bone Jt Surg Am 93:1583–1587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Durden E, Pinto L, Lopez-Gonzalez L, Juneau P, Barron R (2017) Two-year persistence and compliance with osteoporosis therapies among postmenopausal women in a commercially insured population in the United States. Arch Osteoporos 12:22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Solomon DH, Avorn J, Katz JN, Finkelstein JS, Arnold M, Polinski JM, Brookhart MA (2005) Compliance with osteoporosis medications. Arch Intern Med 165:2414–2419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rajzbaum G, Grados F, Evans D, Liu-Leage S, Petto H, Augendre-Ferrante B (2014) Treatment persistence and changes in fracture risk, back pain, and quality of life amongst patients treated with teriparatide in routine clinical care in France: results from the European Forsteo Observational Study. Jt Bone Spine 81:69–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kyvernitakis I, Kostev K, Kurth A, Albert US, Hadji P (2014) Differences in persistency with teriparatide in patients with osteoporosis according to gender and health care provider. Osteoporos Int 25:2721–2728

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Foster SA, Foley KA, Meadows ES, Johnston JA, Wang SS, Pohl GM, Long SR (2011) Adherence and persistence with teriparatide among patients with commercial, medicare, and medicaid insurance. Osteoporos Int 22:551–557

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ziller V, Zimmermann SP, Kalder M, Ziller M, Seker-Pektas B, Hellmeyer L, Hadji P (2010) Adherence and persistence in patients with severe osteoporosis treated with teriparatide. Curr Med Res Opin 26:675–681

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Adachi JD, Hanley DA, Lorraine JK, Yu M (2007) Assessing compliance, acceptance, and tolerability of teriparatide in patients with osteoporosis who fractured while on antiresorptive treatment or were intolerant to previous antiresorptive treatment: an 18-month, multicenter, open-label, prospective study. Clin Ther 29:2055–2067

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Arden NK, Earl S, Fisher DJ, Cooper C, Carruthers S, Goater M (2006) Persistence with teriparatide in patients with osteoporosis: the UK experience. Osteoporos Int 17:1626–1629

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Usui T, Funagoshi M, Seto K, Ide K, Tanaka S, Kawakami K (2018) Persistence of and switches from teriparatide treatment among women and men with osteoporosis in the real world: a claims database analysis. Arch Osteoporos 13:54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Oishi T, Fujita T, Nishida T, Hagiwara K, Kurokawa K, Yamamoto M, Suzuki D, Sugiura K (2018) Comparison of continuation rates of osteoporosis treatment injection preparations and examination on factors involved in dropout. Annu Enshu Hosp 24:27–32 (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cotté FE, Fardellone P, Mercier F, Gaudin AF, Roux C (2010) Adherence to monthly and weekly oral bisphosphonates in women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 21:145–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hadji P, Felsenberg D, Amling M, Hofbauer LC, Kandenwein JA, Kurth A (2014) The non-interventional bonviva intravenous versus alendronate (VIVA) study: real-world adherence and persistence to medication, efficacy, and safety, in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 25:339–347

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fahrleitner-Pammer A, Papaioannou N, Gielen E, Feudjo Tepie M, Toffis C, Frieling I, Geusens P, Makras P, Boschitsch E, Callens J, Anastasilakis AD, Niedhart C, Resch H, Kalouche-Khalil L, Hadji P (2017) Factors associated with high 24-month persistence with denosumab: results of a real-world, non-interventional study of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis in Germany, Austria, Greece, and Belgium. Arch Osteoporos 12:58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McHorney CA, Schousboe JT, Cline RR, Weiss TW (2007) The impact of osteoporosis medication beliefs and side-effect experiences on non-adherence to oral bisphosphonates. Curr Med Res Opin 23:3137–3152

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kishimoto H, Maehara M (2015) Compliance and persistence with daily, weekly, and monthly bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in Japan: analysis of data from the CISA. Arch Osteoporos 10:231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Moriwaki K, Noto S (2017) Economic evaluation of osteoporosis liaison service for secondary fracture prevention in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients with previous hip fracture in Japan. Osteoporos Int 28:621–632

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Akita University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1-1 Hondo, Akita, 010-8543, Japan

    Hiroyuki Tsuchie, Naohisa Miyakoshi, Yuji Kasukawa & Yoichi Shimada

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Ugo Municipal Hospital, 44-5 Otomichi, Nishomonai, Ugo, 012-1131, Japan

    Hidekazu Abe & Norimitsu Masutani

Authors
  1. Hiroyuki Tsuchie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naohisa Miyakoshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuji Kasukawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hidekazu Abe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Norimitsu Masutani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yoichi Shimada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors were involved in the planning of this study and revising the manuscript. TH, AH, and MN collected the patient data. TH analyzed the raw data. TH wrote the manuscript. MN, KY, and SY reviewed this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroyuki Tsuchie.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tsuchie, H., Miyakoshi, N., Kasukawa, Y. et al. Factors affecting continuation of weekly teriparatide administration in rural areas. J Bone Miner Metab 38, 248–253 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00774-019-01051-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00774-019-01051-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation