Skip to main content

Bisphosphonate and denosumab initiation in older adults in Ontario, Canada: a population-based cohort study

Archives of Osteoporosis volume 15, Article number: 133 (2020) Cite this article

Abstract

Summary

We provide an update on how commonly prescribed osteoporosis therapies are being initiated in older adults in Ontario. Patients newly prescribed denosumab are older, more often female, and have more comorbidities than those prescribed bisphosphonates. Their characteristics, monitoring, and persistence with prescribed therapy differ from clinical trial participants. Real-world studies on oral bisphosphonates and denosumab might be valuable.

Purpose

To provide a contemporary view on oral bisphosphonate and denosumab prescribing to older adults in routine care.

Methods

Using linked healthcare databases, we conducted a population-based cohort study of adults ≥ 66 years newly prescribed oral bisphosphonates or denosumab between February 2013 and March 2017 in Ontario, Canada. We captured their clinical characteristics, monitoring, and continuous use of prescribed therapies. We illustrate how “real-world” new users of bisphosphonates and denosumab differ from randomized controlled trial (RCT) participants.

Results

There were 107,847 individuals newly prescribed oral bisphosphonates (n = 59,996) or denosumab (n = 47,851) over the study period. Compared with new users of oral bisphosphonates, denosumab users were older (mean age 79.1 vs. 75.7 years), more often female (97.2 vs. 71.8%), from non-rural areas (93.9 vs. 89.9%), and resided in long-term care (10.9 vs. 3.3%). They had more comorbidities including dementia, falls, and fractures.

Following their new prescription, denosumab users had more frequent testing of serum calcium. Duration of continuous use of denosumab was longer than bisphosphonates, and more bisphosphonate users had evidence of treatment discontinuation (56.7 bisphosphonate vs. 33.8% denosumab users discontinued therapy at 365 days). Compared with RCT participants, a higher proportion of “real-world” bisphosphonate and denosumab users had comorbidities including advanced kidney disease.

Conclusion

The clinical characteristics and monitoring of new users of bisphosphonates and denosumab generally align with practice guidelines, product monographs, and drug reimbursement criteria. Given differences between real-world users and RCT participants, there may be a role for safety and effectiveness studies of bisphosphonates and denosumab in routine care.

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.

Availability of data and material

The analysis was conducted by members of the ICES Western facility (London, Ontario). Alexandra Ouédraogo and Dr. Kristin Clemens are responsible for the data analysis. The protocol can be obtained by emailing Dr. Kristin Clemens at Kristin.Clemens@sjhc.london.on.ca.

References

  1. Burden AM, Paterson JM, Solomon DH, Mamdani M, Juurlink DN, Cadarette SM (2012) Bisphosphonate prescribing, persistence and cumulative exposure in Ontario, Canada. Osteoporos Int 23:1075–1082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1645-7

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ban JK, Hao BB, McCarthy L, Guilcher SJT, Cadarette SM (2019) Denosumab utilization among older adults in Ontario: patient characteristics, persistence with therapy, and return to therapy after an extended gap. Osteoporos Int 30:1865–1872. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-05051-1

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Get coverage for prescription drugs | Ontario.ca. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-coverage-prescription-drugs. Accessed 26 Jun 2020

  4. Formulary Search. https://www.formulary.health.gov.on.ca/formulary/. Accessed 31 Mar 2020

  5. Hayes KN, Ban JK, Athanasiadis G, Burden AM, Cadarette SM (2019) Time trends in oral bisphosphonate initiation in Ontario, Canada over 20 years reflect drug policy and healthcare delivery changes. Osteoporos Int 30:2311–2319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-05061-z

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jain S, Upadhyaya P, Goyal J et al (2015) A systematic review of prescription pattern monitoring studies and their effectiveness in promoting rational use of medicines. Perspect Clin Res 6:86–90. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.154005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Langan SM, Schmidt SA, Wing K et al (2018) The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely collected health data statement for pharmacoepidemiology (RECORD-PE). BMJ 363:k3532. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3532

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Matheson FI, Dunn JR, Smith KLW et al (2012) Development of the Canadian Marginalization index: a new tool for the study of inequality. Can J Public Health 103:3–5. https://doi.org/10.17269/cjph.103.3096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Levy AR, O’Brien BJ, Sellors C et al (2003) Coding accuracy of administrative drug claims in the Ontario Drug Benefit database. Can J Clin Pharmacol 10:67–71

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cadarette SM, Jaglal SB, Raman-Wilms L, Beaton DE, Paterson JM (2011) Osteoporosis quality indicators using healthcare utilization data. Osteoporos Int 22:1335–1342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-010-1329-8

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schultz SE, Rothwell DM, Chen Z, Tu K (2013) Identifying cases of congestive heart failure from administrative data: a validation study using primary care patient records. Chronic Dis Inj Can

  12. Gershon AS, Wang C, Guan J, Vasilevska-Ristovska J, Cicutto L, To T (2009) Identifying individuals with physcian diagnosed COPD in health administrative databases. COPD 6:388–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/15412550903140865

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hux JE, Ivis F, Flintoft V, Bica A (2002) Diabetes in Ontario: determination of prevalence and incidence using a validated administrative data algorithm. Diabetes Care 25:512–516. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.25.3.512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tu K, Campbell NR, Chen Z-L, Cauch-Dudek KJ, McAlister F (2007) Accuracy of administrative databases in identifying patients with hypertension. Open Med 1:e18–e26

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Widdifield J, Bombardier C, Bernatsky S, Paterson JM, Green D, Young J, Ivers N, Butt DA, Jaakkimainen RL, Thorne JC, Tu K (2014) An administrative data validation study of the accuracy of algorithms for identifying rheumatoid arthritis: the influence of the reference standard on algorithm performance. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 15:216. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-216

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Benchimol EI, Guttmann A, Mack DR, Nguyen GC, Marshall JK, Gregor JC, Wong J, Forster AJ, Manuel DG (2014) Validation of international algorithms to identify adults with inflammatory bowel disease in health administrative data from Ontario, Canada. J Clin Epidemiol 67:887–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.02.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gershon AS, Wang C, Guan J, Vasilevska-Ristovska J, Cicutto L, To T (2009) Identifying patients with physician-diagnosed asthma in health administrative databases. Can Respir J 16:183–188. https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/963098

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Jaakkimainen RL, Bronskill SE, Tierney MC, Herrmann N, Green D, Young J, Ivers N, Butt D, Widdifield J, Tu K (2016) Identification of physician-diagnosed Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias in population-based administrative data: a validation study using family physicians’ electronic medical records. J Alzheimers Dis 54:337–349. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-160105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Iskander C, McArthur E, Nash DM, Gandhi-Banga S, Weir MA, Muanda FT, Garg AX (2019) Identifying Ontario geographic regions to assess adults who present to hospital with laboratory-defined conditions: a descriptive study. CMAJ Open 7:E624–E629. https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20190065

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. CKD Evaluation and Management – KDIGO. https://kdigo.org/guidelines/ckd-evaluation-and-management/. Accessed 24 Apr 2020

  21. Burden AM, Paterson JM, Gruneir A, Cadarette SM (2015) Adherence to osteoporosis pharmacotherapy is underestimated using days supply values in electronic pharmacy claims data. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 24:67–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Austin PC (2009) Using the standardized difference to compare the prevalence of a binary variable between two groups in observational research. Commun Stat Simul Comput 38:1228–1234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jamal SA, Ljunggren Ö, Stehman-Breen C, Cummings SR, McClung MR, Goemaere S, Ebeling PR, Franek E, Yang YC, Egbuna OI, Boonen S, Miller PD (2011) Effects of denosumab on fracture and bone mineral density by level of kidney function. J Bone Miner Res 26:1829–1835. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.403

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Shigematsu T, Muraoka R, Sugimoto T, Nishizawa Y (2017) Risedronate therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate chronic kidney disease with osteoporosis: post-hoc analysis of data from the risedronate phase III clinical trials. BMC Nephrol 18:66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-017-0478-9

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Jamal SA, Bauer DC, Ensrud KE, Cauley JA, Hochberg M, Ishani A, Cummings SR (2007) Alendronate treatment in women with normal to severely impaired renal function: an analysis of the fracture intervention trial. J Bone Miner Res 22:503–508. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.070112

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bone HG, Wagman RB, Brandi ML et al (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

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. AMGEN Denosumab. https://www.amgen.ca/products/~/media/1E79AEE7D94340DF88C3D97F5BB897C3.ashx Accessed 20 June 2020

  28. Miller PD (2011) The kidney and bisphosphonates. Bone 49:77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2010.12.024

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lin JH (1996) Bisphosphonates: a review of their pharmacokinetic properties. Bone 18:75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/8756-3282(95)00445-9

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jaglal SB, Carroll J, Hawker G et al (2003) How are family physicians managing osteoporosis? Qualitative study of their experiences and educational needs. Can Fam Physician 49

  31. Miller PD (2007) Is there a role for bisphosphonates in chronic kidney disease? Semin Dial 20:186–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-139X.2007.00271.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. CKD-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD) – KDIGO. https://kdigo.org/guidelines/ckd-mbd/. Accessed 24 Apr 2020

  33. Morley J, Moayyeri A, Ali L, Taylor A, Feudjo-Tepie M, Hamilton L, Bayly J (2020) Persistence and compliance with osteoporosis therapies among postmenopausal women in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Osteoporos Int 31:533–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-05228-8

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Fardellone P, Lello S, Cano A, de Sá Moreira E, Watanabe de Oliveira R, Julian GS, Tang B (2019) Real-world adherence and persistence with bisphosphonate therapy in postmenopausal women: a systematic review. Clin Ther 41:1576–1588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.05.001

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 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

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Freemantle N, Satram-Hoang S, Tang E-T 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

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Siris ES, Harris ST, Rosen CJ, Barr CE, Arvesen JN, Abbott TA, Silverman S (2006) Adherence to bisphosphonate therapy and fracture rates in osteoporotic women: relationship to vertebral and nonvertebral fractures from 2 US claims databases. Mayo Clin Proc 81:1013–1022. https://doi.org/10.4065/81.8.1013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Adachi JD, Josse RG, Russell RGG (2011) If you don’t take it - it can’t work: the consequences of not being treated or nonadherence to osteoporosis therapy. Ther Clin Risk Manag 7:181–198. https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S17513

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Carls GS, Tuttle E, Tan R-D, Huynh J, Yee J, Edelman SV, Polonsky WH (2017) Understanding the gap between efficacy in randomized controlled trials and effectiveness in real-world use of GLP-1 RA and DPP-4 therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 40:1469–1478. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-2725

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sørensen HT, Lash TL, Rothman KJ (2006) Beyond randomized controlled trials: a critical comparison of trials with nonrandomized studies. Hepatology 44:1075–1082. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.21404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Knudsen JS, Thomsen RW, Pottegård A, Knop FK, Sørensen HT (2018) Differences between randomized clinical trial patients and real-world initiators of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide. Diabetes Care 41:e133–e135. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc18-0999

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 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

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Yusuf AA, Cummings SR, Watts NB, Feudjo MT, Sprafka JM, Zhou J, Guo H, Balasubramanian A, Cooper C (2018) Real-world effectiveness of osteoporosis therapies for fracture reduction in post-menopausal women. Arch Osteoporos 13:33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-018-0439-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Zhang J, Yun H, Wright NC, Kilgore M, Saag KG, Delzell E (2011) Potential and pitfalls of using large administrative claims data to study the safety of osteoporosis therapies. Curr Rheumatol Rep 13:273–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11926-011-0168-8

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Burden AM, Tadrous M, Calzavara A, Cadarette SM (2015) Uptake and characteristics of zoledronic acid and denosumab patients and physicians in Ontario, Canada: impact of drug formulary access. Osteoporos Int 26:1525–1533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-014-3023-8

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank IMS Brogan Inc. for use of their Drug Information Database.

Funding

This study was supported by ICES, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care  (MOHLTC). It was conducted at ICES Western, which receives core funding from the Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario (AMOSO), the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry (SSMD), Western University, and the Lawson Health Research Institute (LHRI). Dr. K. Clemens received financial support to conduct this study from the Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario’s Opportunities Fund, and the Department of Medicine at Western University. Parts of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the MOHLTC and CIHI. The analyses, conclusions, opinions and statements expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not reflect those of the funding or data sources; no endorsement by ICES, AMOSO, SSMD, LHRI, or the MOHLTC is intended or should be inferred.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada

    Kristin K. Clemens & Tayyab Khan

  2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada

    Kristin K. Clemens

  3. ICES, Ontario, Canada

    Kristin K. Clemens, Nivethika Jeyakumar & Alexandra M. Ouédraogo

  4. Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada

    Kristin K. Clemens

  5. Center for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, St. Joseph’s Health Care London, 268 Grosvenor Street, London, Ontario, Canada

    Kristin K. Clemens & Tayyab Khan

  6. Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada

    Jenny Thain

Authors
  1. Kristin K. Clemens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nivethika Jeyakumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexandra M. Ouédraogo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jenny Thain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tayyab Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KC conceptualized the study, contributed to the design, and interpreted results, and she drafted the manuscript. AO contributed to the design of the study, conducted the analysis, and interpreted results, and she reviewed the manuscript critically. NJ contributed to the design and interpreted results, and she critically reviewed the manuscript. JT contributed to the design of the study and result interpretation, and she reviewed the manuscript critically. TK contributed to the design of the study and result interpretation, and he reviewed the manuscript critically. All authors approved the final version to be published.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristin K. Clemens.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

KC received a research award that was sponsored in part by Astra Zeneca. She has attended Merck sponsored medical conferences. She has received honoraria for delivering Certified Medical Education talks on diabetes from Sutherland Global Services Canada ULC and the Toronto Ontario Knowledge Translation Working Group Inc. TK has attended Merck sponsored conferences. He has received honoraria from Sutherland Global Services Canada ULC, Novo Nordisk Canada, Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Valeant, the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Amgen. There are no other conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethics approval

ICES is an independent, non-profit research institute whose legal status under section 45 of Ontario’s Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA) allows it to collect and analyze health care and demographic data, without REB approval or informed consent from participants, for health system evaluation and improvement.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Code availability

Please see the Online Resource.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 58 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clemens, K.K., Jeyakumar, N., Ouédraogo, A.M. et al. Bisphosphonate and denosumab initiation in older adults in Ontario, Canada: a population-based cohort study. Arch Osteoporos 15, 133 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-020-00796-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-020-00796-3

Keywords

  • Bisphosphonates
  • Denosumab
  • New use
  • Persistence
  • Characteristics