Advertisement

Osteoporosis International

, Volume 29, Issue 7, pp 1511–1513 | Cite as

Cost-effective but clinically inappropriate: new NICE intervention thresholds in osteoporosis (Technology Appraisal 464)

  • N. C. Harvey
  • E. McCloskey
  • J. A. Kanis
  • J. Compston
  • C. Cooper
Position Paper

Abstract

Purpose

To comment on the latest technology appraisal of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in osteoporosis.

Methods

Review of NICE Technology Appraisal (TA464) on bisphosphonate use in osteoporosis.

Results

The NICE appraisal on bisphosphonate use in osteoporosis indicates that treatment with oral bisphosphonates may be instituted at a FRAX 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture above 1%. Implementation would mean that all women aged 50 years or older are deemed eligible for treatment, a position that would increase the burden of rare long-term side effects across the population.

Conclusion

Cost-effectiveness thresholds for low-cost interventions should not be used to set intervention thresholds but rather to validate the implementation of clinically driven intervention thresholds.

Keywords

Cost-effectiveness FRAX Intervention thresholds National Institute for Clinical Excellence National Osteoporosis Guideline Group Osteoporosis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Committee of Scientific Advisors and the Committee of National Societies of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the Scientific Advisory Board of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) for their reviews and endorsement of this manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

NCH has received consultancy/lecture fees/honoraria/grant funding from Alliance for Better Bone Health, AMGEN, MSD, Eli Lilly, Servier, Shire, UCB, Consilient Healthcare and Internis Pharma. EVM has received consultancy/lecture fees/grant funding/honoraria from ActiveSignal, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Consilient Healthcare, Gilead, GSK, Hologic, Internis, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Radius Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Synexus, Tethys, UCB, Viiv, Warner Chilcott, I3 Innovus, Unilever. JAK reports grants from Amgen, Lilly and Radius Health, and consulting fees from Meda; he is the architect of FRAX but has no financial interest. JEC has received advisory and speaking fees from Gilead, speaking fees from Amgen, and is Chairman of NOGG. CC has received consultancy/lecture fees/honoraria/grant funding from AMGEN, GSK, Alliance for Better Bone Health, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Servier, Medtronic and Roche.

References

  1. 1.
    NICE (2017) TA464: bisphosphonates for treating osteoporosis. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sims I (2017) Many more eligible for bisphosphonates after NICE lowers threshold to 1%. PULSE. http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/clinical/more-clinical-areas/musculoskeletal/many-more-eligible-for-bisphosphonates-after-nice-lowers-threshold-to-1/20034787.article. Accessed 26/07/2017 2017
  3. 3.
    NICE (2008) TA160: alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, raloxifene and strontium ranelate for the primary prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures in postmenopausal women (amended). National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    NICE (2008) TA161: alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, raloxifene, strontium ranelate and teriparatide for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures in postmenopausal women. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kanis JA, McCloskey E, Jonsson B, Cooper A, Strom O, Borgstrom F (2010) An evaluation of the NICE guidance for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures in postmenopausal women. Arch Osteoporos 5:19–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    NICE (2012) CG146: osteoporosis: fragility fracture risk. Short clinical guideline- evidence and recommendation, National Clinical Guideline Centre, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McCloskey E, Kanis JA, Johansson H, Harvey N, Oden A, Cooper A, Cooper C, Francis RM, Reid DM, Marsh D, Selby P, Thompson F, Hewitt S, Compston J (2015) FRAX-based assessment and intervention thresholds—an exploration of thresholds in women aged 50 years and older in the UK. Osteoporos Int 26(8):2091–2099.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3176-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Compston J, Cooper A, Cooper C, Gittoes N, Gregson C, Harvey N, Hope S, Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Poole KES, Reid DM, Selby P, Thompson F, Thurston A, Vine N (2017) UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Arch Osteoporos 12(1):43.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0324-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rizzoli R, Akesson K, Bouxsein M, Kanis JA, Napoli N, Papapoulos S, Reginster JY, Cooper C (2011) Subtrochanteric fractures after long-term treatment with bisphosphonates: a European society on clinical and economic aspects of osteoporosis and osteoarthritis, and international osteoporosis foundation working group report. Osteoporos Int 22(2):373–390.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1453-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Adler RA, El-Hajj Fuleihan G, Bauer DC, Camacho PM, Clarke BL, Clines GA, Compston JE, Drake MT, Edwards BJ, Favus MJ, Greenspan SL, McKinney R Jr, Pignolo RJ, Sellmeyer DE (2016) Managing osteoporosis in patients on long-term bisphosphonate treatment: report of a task force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. J Bone Miner Res 31(1):16–35.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.2708 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kanis JA, Adams J, Borgstrom F, Cooper C, Jonsson B, Preedy D, Selby P, Compston J (2008) The cost-effectiveness of alendronate in the management of osteoporosis. Bone 42(1):4–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, Strom O, Borgstrom F, Oden A (2008) Case finding for the management of osteoporosis with FRAX—assessment and intervention thresholds for the UK. Osteoporos Int 19(10):1395–1408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanis JA, Harvey NC, Cooper C, Johansson H, Oden A, McCloskey EV (2016) A systematic review of intervention thresholds based on FRAX : a report prepared for the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group and the International Osteoporosis Foundation. Arch Osteoporos 11(1):25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-016-0278-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farmer C, Fenu E, O'Flynn N, Guthrie B (2016) Clinical assessment and management of multimorbidity: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ 354:i4843.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4843 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology UnitUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research CentreUniversity of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation TrustSouthamptonUK
  3. 3.NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research UnitUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  4. 4.Centre for Metabolic Bone DiseasesUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK
  5. 5.Centre for Integrated Research in Musculoskeletal Ageing (CIMA), Mellanby Centre for Bone ResearchUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK
  6. 6.Institute for Health and AgingCatholic University of AustraliaMelbourneAustralia
  7. 7.Cambridge Biomedical CampusCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations