Skip to main content

Long-term persistence in patients with osteoporosis receiving denosumab in routine practice: 36-month non-interventional, observational study

Osteoporosis International volume 30, pages 1455–1464 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

Summary

Persistence rates over 36 months with denosumab in patients diagnosed with osteoporosis in a real-world setting were examined, along with baseline patient characteristics predictive of persistence. This study represents the longest observational period with denosumab persistence and shows higher persistence rates when compared to bisphosphonates.

Introduction

The study objective was to describe long-term persistence with denosumab among patients treated for osteoporosis in a real-world setting. We also sought to examine patient characteristics predictive of persistence. Lastly, this study attempted to place the results in context by conducting a literature review of published persistence data for denosumab.

Methods

This retrospective, non-interventional study analyzed 1158 patients from a specialty community private practice to assess patient persistence with denosumab in routine care. Persistence was defined as receiving seven denosumab injections, using an 8-week permissible gap, over 36 months. Non-persistent patients were further investigated retrospectively to identify reasons for discontinuation, when available.

Results

Demographic analysis showed a population of 1158 patients with mean age 68.4 years old and baseline T-score − 2.7; nearly half of which experienced a prior osteoporosis-related fracture. In a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, 36-month persistence overall was 50.7%. Net persistence, as defined by receiving seven injections in the allowable time frame, was 64.2% of the cohort. In a multivariate analysis, prior vertebral fractures and recent osteoporosis therapy were associated with higher persistence; age greater than 75 years was associated with non-persistence. Reasons for discontinuation were available in 91.6% of non-persistent patients and categorized to include the ten most common explanations.

Conclusion

This study to our knowledge represents the longest continuous observational period providing data on denosumab persistence in a real-world setting. The total persistence noted is quite robust when compared to bisphosphonates and is within the upper range of prior published studies of denosumab with shorter observation periods.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy (2001) Osteoporosis: prevention, diagnosis, and management. J Am Med Assoc 285:785–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Holroyd C, Cooper C, Dennison E (2008) Epidemiology of osteoporosis. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 22(5):671–685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Siris ES, Harris S, Rosen C et al (2006) Adherence to bisphosphonate therapy and fracture rates in osteoporosis. Mayo Clin Proc 81:1013–1022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Imaz I, Zegarra P, González-Enríquez J, Rubio B, Alcazar R, Amate JM (2010) Poor bisphosphonate adherence for treatment of osteoporosis increases fracture risk: systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 21:1943–1951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-009-1134-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kothawala P, Badamgarav E, Ryu S, Miller RM, Halbert RJ (2007) Systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world adherence to drug therapy for osteoporosis. Mayo Clin Proc 82:1493–1501. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-6196(11)61093-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Caro JJ, Ishak KJ, Huybrechts KF, Raggio G, Naujoks C (2004) The impact of compliance with osteoporosis therapy on fracture rates in actual practice. Osteoporos Int 15:1003–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-004-1652-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gold DT, Martin BC, Frytak JR, Amonkar MM, Cosman F (2007) A claims database analysis of persistence with alendronate therapy and fracture risk in post-menopausal women with osteoporosis. Curr Med Res Opin 23:585–594. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079906X167615

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Burge R, Dawson-Hughes B, Solomon DH, Wong JB, King A, Tosteson A (2007) Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025. J Bone Miner Res 22:465–475. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.061113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cho H, Byun JH, Song I, Kim HY, Ha YC, Kim TY, Lee YK, Jang S (2018) Effect of improved medication adherence on health care costs in osteoporosis patients. Medicine (Baltimore) 97:e11470. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Halpern R, Iqbal SU, Kazis LE et al (2011) The association of adherence to osteoporosis therapies with fracture, all-cause medical costs, and all-cause hospitalizations: a retrospective claims analysis of female health plan enrollees with osteoporosis. J Manag Care Pharm 17:25–39. https://doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2011.17.1.25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hiligsmann M, Rabenda V, Gathon HJ, Ethgen O, Reginster JY (2010) Potential clinical and economic impact of nonadherence with osteoporosis medications. Calcif Tissue Int 86:202–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-009-9329-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McClung MR, Lewiecki EM, Geller ML et al (2013) Effect of denosumab on bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover: 8-year results of a phase 2 clinical trial. Osteoporos Int 24:227–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42291-6_68

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kendler DL, Roux C, Benhamou CL, Brown JP, Lillestol M, Siddhanti S, Man HS, Martin JS, Bone HG (2010) Effects of denosumab on bone mineral density and bone turnover in postmenopausal women transitioning from alendronate therapy. J Bone Miner Res 25:72–81. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.090716

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cummings SR, San Martin J, McClung MR, Siris ES, Eastell R, Reid IR, Delmas P, Zoog HB, Austin M, Wang A, Kutilek S, Adami S, Zanchetta J, Libanati C, Siddhanti S, Christiansen C, FREEDOM Trial (2009) Denosumab for prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 361:756–765. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0809493

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Brown JP, Prince RL, Deal C, Recker RR, Kiel DP, de Gregorio LH, Hadji P, Hofbauer LC, Álvaro-Gracia JM, Wang H, Austin M, Wagman RB, Newmark R, Libanati C, San Martin J, Bone HG (2009) Comparison of the effect of denosumab and alendronate on BMD and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: a randomized, blinded, phase 3 trial. J Bone Miner Res 24:153–161. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.0809010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bone HG, Wagman RB, Brandi ML, Brown JP, Chapurlat R, Cummings SR, Czerwiński E, Fahrleitner-Pammer A, Kendler DL, Lippuner K, Reginster JY, Roux C, Malouf J, Bradley MN, Daizadeh NS, Wang A, Dakin P, Pannacciulli N, Dempster DW, Papapoulos S (2017) 10 years of denosumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the phase 3 randomised FREEDOM trial and open-label extension. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 5:513–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30138-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen L-I, Durden E, Limone B et al (2015) Persistance and compliance with osteoporosis therapies among women in a commercially insured population in the United States lung-I. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 21:22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0316-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 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 12:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0316-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fuksa L, Vytrisalova M (2015) Adherence to denosumab in the treatment of osteoporosis and its utilization in the Czech Republic. Curr Med Res Opin 31:1645–1653. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2015.1065241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Migliaccio S, Francomano D, Romagnoli E, Marocco C, Fornari R, Resmini G, Buffa A, di Pietro G, Corvaglia S, Gimigliano F, Moretti A, de Sire A, Malavolta N, Lenzi A, Greco EA, Iolascon G (2017) Persistence with denosumab therapy in women affected by osteoporosis with fragility fractures: a multicenter observational real practice study in Italy. J Endocrinol Investig 40:1321–1326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-017-0701-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-017-0351-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Karlsson L, Lundkvist J, Psachoulia E, Intorcia M, Ström O (2015) Persistence with denosumab and persistence with oral bisphosphonates for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a retrospective, observational study, and a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 26:2401–2411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3253-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Lakatos P, Takács I, Marton I, Tóth E, Zoltan C, Lang Z, Psachoulia E, Intorcia M (2016) A retrospective longitudinal database study of persistence and compliance with treatment of osteoporosis in Hungary. Calcif Tissue Int 98:215–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-015-0082-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Modi A, Sajjan S, Insinga R, Weaver J, Lewiecki EM, Harris ST (2017) Frequency of discontinuation of injectable osteoporosis therapies in US patients over 2 years. Osteoporos Int 28:1355–1363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3886-y

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Papaioannou A, Khan A, Belanger A, Bensen W, Kendler D, Theoret F, Amin M, Brekke L, Erdmann M, Walker V, Adachi JD (2015) Persistence with denosumab therapy among osteoporotic women in the Canadian patient-support program. Curr Med Res Opin 31:1391–1401. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2015.1053049

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Petranova T, Boyanov M, Shinkov A, Petkova R, Psachoulia E (2015) Medication-taking behaviour in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (Op) treated with denosumab or monthly oral bisphosphonates (Obps). Value Health 18:A650–A651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2015.09.2340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Silverman SL, Siris E, Belazi D, Recknor C, Papaioannou A, Brown JP, Gold DT, Lewiecki EM, Quinn G, Balasubramanian A, Yue S, Stolshek B, Kendler DL (2018) Persistence at 24 months with denosumab among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results of a prospective cohort study. Arch Osteoporos 13:85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-018-0491-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Tremblay É, Perreault S, Dorais M (2016) Persistence with denosumab and zoledronic acid among older women: a population-based cohort study. Arch Osteoporos 11:30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-016-0282-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sampalis JS, Adachi JD, Rampakakis E, Vaillancourt J, Karellis A, Kindundu C (2012) Long-term impact of adherence to oral bisphosphonates on osteoporotic fracture incidence. J Bone Miner Res 27:202–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.533

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wade SW, Curtis JR, Yu J, White J, Stolshek BS, Merinar C, Balasubramanian A, Kallich JD, Adams JL, Viswanathan HN (2012) Medication adherence and fracture risk among patients on bisphosphonate therapy in a large United States health plan. Bone 50:870–875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2011.12.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schousboe JT (2013) Adherence with medications used to treat osteoporosis: behavioral insights. Curr Osteoporos Rep 11:21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-013-0133-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Patrick AR, Brookhart MA, Losina E, Schousboe JT, Cadarette SM, Mogun H, Solomon DH (2010) The complex relation between bisphosphonate adherence and fracture reduction. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 95:3251–3259. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2009-2778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Freemantle N, Satram-Hoang S, Tang ET et al (2012) Final results of the DAPS (denosumab adherence preference satisfaction) study: a 24-month, randomized, crossover comparison with alendronate in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 23:317–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1780-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chapurlat R (2018) Effects and management of denosumab discontinuation. Jt Bone Spine 85:515–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2017.12.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Austin M, Yang Y-C, Vittinghoff E, Adami S, Boonen S, Bauer DC, Bianchi G, Bolognese MA, Christiansen C, Eastell R, Grauer A, Hawkins F, Kendler DL, Oliveri B, McClung MR, Reid IR, Siris ES, Zanchetta J, Zerbini CAF, Libanati C, Cummings SR, for the FREEDOM Trial (2012) Relationship between bone mineral density changes with denosumab treatment and risk reduction for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 27:687–693. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.1472

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. McClung MR (2016) Cancel the denosumab holiday. Osteoporos Int 27:1677–1682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3553-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Tsourdi E, Langdahl B, Cohen-Solal M, Aubry-Rozier B, Eriksen EF, Guañabens N, Obermayer-Pietsch B, Ralston SH, Eastell R, Zillikens MC (2017) Discontinuation of denosumab therapy for osteoporosis: a systematic review and position statement by ECTS. Bone 105:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2017.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lekkerkerker F, Kanis JA, Alsayed N, Bouvenot G, Burlet N, Cahall D, Chines A, Delmas P, Dreiser RL, Ethgen D, Hughes N, Kaufman JM, Korte S, Kreutz G, Laslop A, Mitlak B, Rabenda V, Rizzoli R, Santora A, Schimmer R, Tsouderos Y, Viethel P, Reginster JY, Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES) (2007) Adherence to treatment of osteoporosis: a need for study. Osteoporos Int 18:1311–1317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-007-0410-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Brask-Lindemann D, Cadarette SM, Eskildsen P, Abrahamsen B (2011) Osteoporosis pharmacotherapy following bone densitometry: importance of patient beliefs and understanding of DXA results. Osteoporos Int 22:1493–1501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1365-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ringe JD, Farahmand P (2014) Improved real-life adherence of 6-monthly denosumab injections due to positive feedback based on rapid 6-month BMD increase and good safety profile. Rheumatol Int 34:727–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-012-2663-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Lindsay BR, Olufade T, Bauer J, Babrowicz J, Hahn R (2016) Patient-reported barriers to osteoporosis therapy. Arch Osteoporos 11:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-016-0272-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Dowd R, Recker RR, Heaney RP (2000) Study subjects and ordinary patients. Osteoporos Int 11:533–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001980070097

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Jönsson B, Ström O, Eisman JA, Papaioannou A, Siris ES, Tosteson A, Kanis JA (2011) Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 22:967–982. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1424-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the invaluable administrative assistance of Lisa Bazoge for extraction of data from the electronic medical records and Shari Goldapper for the useful editorial comments on this manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. City College of New York, New York, NY, USA

    D.M. Borek

  2. State University of New York at Binghamton, Binghamton, NY, USA

    R.C. Smith

  3. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    C.N. Gruber & B.L. Gruber

  4. Long Island Regional Arthritis and Osteoporosis Care, PC, Babylon, NY, USA

    B.L. Gruber

Authors
  1. D.M. Borek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R.C. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C.N. Gruber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B.L. Gruber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B.L. Gruber.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

Daniel M Borek, Ryan C. Smith, and Conor N. Gruber declare that they have no conflict of interest. Barry L. Gruber has received honoraria from serving on the speaker bureau and advisory panels for Amgen, Inc., and Radius Pharmaceuticals.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Borek, D., Smith, R., Gruber, C. et al. Long-term persistence in patients with osteoporosis receiving denosumab in routine practice: 36-month non-interventional, observational study. Osteoporos Int 30, 1455–1464 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-04963-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-04963-2

Keywords

  • Denosumab
  • Osteoporosis
  • Persistence
  • Real-world data
  • Treatment