Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan;33(1):217-228.
doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-06108-w. Epub 2021 Sep 6.

Fracture rates and economic outcomes in patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant versus other oral bisphosphonates: a claims data analysis

Friederike Thomasius  1 , Santiago Palacios  2 , Asif Alam  3 , Mitra Boolell  4 , Francis Vekeman  5 , Geneviève Gauthier  5
Affiliations

Fracture rates and economic outcomes in patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant versus other oral bisphosphonates: a claims data analysis

Friederike Thomasius et al. Osteoporos Int. 2022 Jan.

Abstract

Patients with osteoporosis prescribed risedronate gastro-resistant had a lower incidence of fractures versus those prescribed other oral bisphosphonates. Administration of risedronate gastric-resistant does not require fasting, and this more convenient dosing administration may explain its improved efficacy.

Purpose: Up to half of patients do not follow complex dosing instructions of immediate-release bisphosphonates used for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures, which can result in suboptimal effectiveness. Risedronate gastro-resistant (GR) offers a more convenient dosing option by eliminating the need for fasting. This study compares fracture rates and outcomes between osteoporosis women treated with risedronate GR (GR cohort) versus other oral bisphosphonates (other cohort).

Methods: Claims from women with osteoporosis in the USA were analyzed. Patients were classified into the two cohorts based on the first oral bisphosphonate observed (index date) and matched 1:1 based on patient characteristics. Patients were observed for ≥ 2 years following the index date. Fracture rates, health care resource utilization and costs, and treatment persistence were compared.

Results: In total, 2,726 patients were selected in each cohort (median age: 60.0 years). The incidence of fractures was lower in the GR versus the other cohort for any fracture sites (incidence rate ratio, 95% CI: 0.83, 0.70-0.97) and spine fractures (0.71, 0.54-0.95), although the respective rate of medication discontinuation at 2 years was 80.5% and 74.4%. Time to first fracture was delayed for the GR cohort, reaching statistical significance after 36 months. The GR cohort incurred fewer hospitalizations (incidence rate per 1,000 patient-years: GR = 106.74; other = 124.20, p < 0.05) translating into lower hospitalization costs per patient per year (GR = $3,611; other = $4,603, p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Patients prescribed risedronate GR versus other bisphosphonates had a lower incidence of fractures, which may be explained by the fact that the GR formulation is absorbed even when taken with food.

Keywords: Fracture rate; Hospitalizations; Immediate-release bisphosphonates; Osteoporosis; Risedronate gastric-resistant.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

FT has received fees for lectures and consultancy or investigator fees from Amgen, Gedeon Richter, Lilly, Hexal, Kyowa Kirin, Hologic, Novartis, Stada, Synexus, Theramex, and UCB. SP is a consultant for Pfizer, Amgen, MSD, Procare, Health, Bayer, Besins, Sérélys Shinogi, Exeltis, Gedeon Richter, Theramex, and UCB. AA and MB are employees of Theramex. FV and GG are employees of STATLOG, Inc., which has received research funding from Theramex for this study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Development of first fracture (any site)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Persistence and adherence to the index medication
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hernlund E, Svedbom A, Ivergård M, et al. Osteoporosis in the European Union: medical management, epidemiology and economic burden: a report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA) Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:136. doi: 10.1007/s11657-013-0136-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wright NC, Looker AC, Saag KG, et al. The recent prevalence of osteoporosis and low bone mass in the United States based on bone mineral density at the femoral neck or lumbar spine. J Bone Miner Res. 2014;29:2520–2526. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.2269. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brenneman S, Barrett-Connor E, Sajjan S, et al. Impact of recent fracture on health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women. J Bone Min Res. 2006;21:809–816. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.060301. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weycker D, Li X, Barron R, et al. Hospitalizations for osteoporosis-related fractures: economic costs and clinical outcomes. Bone Reports. 2016;5:186–191. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2016.07.005. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Svedbom A, Hernlund E, Ivergård M, et al. Osteoporosis in the European Union: a compendium of country-specific reports. Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:137–218. doi: 10.1007/s11657-013-0137-0. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms