nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.05.2010 | Original Article

Preference and satisfaction with a 6-month subcutaneous injection versus a weekly tablet for treatment of low bone mass

verfasst von: D. L. Kendler, L. Bessette, C. D. Hill, D. T. Gold, R. Horne, S. F. Varon, J. Borenstein, H. Wang, H.-S. Man, R. B. Wagman, S. Siddhanti, D. Macarios, H. G. Bone

Erschienen in: Osteoporosis International | Ausgabe 5/2010

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Summary

The Preference and Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ) compares patient preference and satisfaction between a 6-month subcutaneous injection and weekly oral tablet for treatment of bone loss. Patients preferred and were more satisfied with a treatment that was administered less frequently, suggesting the acceptability of the 6-month injection for treatment of bone loss.

Introduction

The PSQ compares patient preference and satisfaction between a 6-month subcutaneous injection and a weekly oral tablet for treatment of bone loss.

Methods

Postmenopausal women with low bone mass who enrolled in two separate randomized phase 3 double-blind, double-dummy studies received a 6-month subcutaneous denosumab injection (60 mg) plus a weekly oral placebo or a weekly alendronate tablet (70 mg) plus a 6-month subcutaneous placebo injection. After 12 months, patients completed the PSQ to rate their preference, satisfaction, and degree of bother with each regimen.

Results

Most enrolled patients (1,583 out of 1,693; 93.5%) answered ≥1 item of the PSQ. Significantly more patients preferred and were more satisfied with the 6-month injection versus the weekly tablet (P < 0.001). More patients reported no bother with the 6-month injection (90%) than the weekly tablet (62%).

Conclusion

Patients preferred, were more satisfied, and less bothered with a 6-month injection regimen for osteoporosis.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Osterberg L, Blaschke T (2005) Adherence to medication. N Engl J Med 353:487–497CrossRefPubMed

Wahl C, Gregoire JP, Teo K et al (2005) Concordance, compliance and adherence in healthcare: closing gaps and improving outcomes. Healthc Qual 8:65–70

Kothawala P, Badamgarav E, Ryu S et al (2007) Systematic review and meta-analysis of real-world adherence to drug therapy for osteoporosis. Mayo Clin Proc 82:1493–1501CrossRefPubMed

Reginster JY, Rabenda V, Neuprez A (2006) Adherence, patient preference and dosing frequency: understanding the relationship. Bone 38:S2–S6CrossRefPubMed

Siris ES, Harris ST, Rosen CJ et al (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 81:1013–1022CrossRefPubMed

Gold DT, Martin BC, Frytak JR et al (2007) A claims database analysis of persistence with alendronate therapy and fracture risk in post-menopausal women with osteoporosis. Curr Med Res Opin 23:585–594CrossRefPubMed

van den Boogaard CH, Breekveldt-Postma NS, Borggreve SE et al (2006) Persistent bisphosphonate use and the risk of osteoporotic fractures in clinical practice: a database analysis study. Curr Med Res Opin 22:1757–1764CrossRefPubMed

Caro JJ, Ishak KJ, Huybrechts KF et al (2004) The impact of compliance with osteoporosis therapy on fracture rates in actual practice. Osteoporos Int 15:1003–1008CrossRefPubMed

Huybrechts KF, Ishak KJ, Caro JJ (2006) Assessment of compliance with osteoporosis treatment and its consequences in a managed care population. Bone 38:922–928CrossRefPubMed

10.

McCombs JS, Thiebaud P, McLaughlin-Miley C et al (2004) Compliance with drug therapies for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis. Maturitas 48:271–287CrossRefPubMed

11.

Papaioannou A, Ioannidis G, Adachi JD et al (2003) Adherence to bisphosphonates and hormone replacement therapy in a tertiary care setting of patients in the CANDOO database. Osteoporos Int 14:808–813CrossRefPubMed

12.

Stafford RS, Drieling RL, Hersh AL (2004) National trends in osteoporosis visits and osteoporosis treatment, 1988–2003. Arch Intern Med 164:1525–1530CrossRefPubMed

13.

Watson J, Wise L, Green J (2007) Prescribing of hormone therapy for menopause, tibolone, and bisphosphonates in women in the UK between 1991 and 2005. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 63:843–849CrossRefPubMed

14.

Black DM, Thompson DE, Bauer DC et al (2000) Fracture risk reduction with alendronate in women with osteoporosis: the Fracture Intervention Trial. FIT Research Group. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85:4118–4124CrossRefPubMed

15.

Cummings SR, Black DM, Thompson DE et al (1998) Effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with low bone density but without vertebral fractures: results from the Fracture Intervention Trial. JAMA 280:2077–2082CrossRefPubMed

16.

Kendler D, Kung AW, Fuleihan Gel H et al (2004) Patients with osteoporosis prefer once weekly to once daily dosing with alendronate. Maturitas 48:243–251CrossRefPubMed

17.

Simon JA, Lewiecki EM, Smith ME et al (2002) Patient preference for once-weekly alendronate 70 mg versus once-daily alendronate 10 mg: a multicenter, randomized, open-label, crossover study. Clin Ther 24:1871–1886CrossRefPubMed

18.

Burgess TL, Qian Y, Kaufman S et al (1999) The ligand for osteoprotegerin (OPGL) directly activates mature osteoclasts. J Cell Biol 145:527–538CrossRefPubMed

19.

Kostenuik P, Nguyen H, McCabe J et al (2009) Denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody to RANKL, inhibits bone resorption and increases bone density in knock-in mice that express chimeric (murine/human) RANKL. J Bone Miner Res 24:182–195CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lacey DL, Timms E, Tan HL et al (1998) Osteoprotegerin ligand is a cytokine that regulates osteoclast differentiation and activation. Cell 93:165–176CrossRefPubMed

21.

Bone HG, Bolognese MA, Yuen CK et al (2008) Effects of denosumab on bone mineral density and bone turnover in postmenopausal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 93:2149–2157CrossRefPubMed

22.

Cummings SR, McClung MR, Christiansen C et al (2008) The effects of denosumab on fracture risk in women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 20:167

23.

Lewiecki EM, Miller PD, McClung MR et al (2007) Two-year treatment with denosumab (AMG 162) in a randomized phase 2 study of postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 22:1832–1841CrossRefPubMed

24.

McClung MR, Lewiecki EM, Cohen SB et al (2006) Denosumab in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density. N Engl J Med 354:821–831CrossRefPubMed

25.

Miller PD, Bolognese MA, Lewiecki EM et al (2008) Effect of denosumab on bone density and turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone mass after long-term continued, discontinued, and restarting of therapy: a randomized blinded phase 2 clinical trial. Bone 43:222–229CrossRefPubMed

26.

Emkey R, Koltun W, Beusterien K et al (2005) Patient preference for once-monthly ibandronate versus once-weekly alendronate in a randomized, open-label, cross-over trial: the Boniva Alendronate Trial in Osteoporosis (BALTO). Curr Med Res Opin 21:1895–1903CrossRefPubMed

27.

Hadji P, Minne H, Pfeifer M et al (2008) Treatment preference for monthly oral ibandronate and weekly oral alendronate in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: A randomized, crossover study (BALTO II). Joint Bone Spine 75:303–310CrossRefPubMed

28.

McClung M, Recker R, Miller P et al (2007) Intravenous zoledronic acid 5 mg in the treatment of postmenopausal women with low bone density previously treated with alendronate. Bone 41:122–128CrossRefPubMed

29.

Gold DT, Horne R, Hill C et al (2008) Development, reliability, and validity of a new preference satisfaction questionnaire. J Bone Miner Res 23:S210–S211

30.

Kendler DL, Benhamou CL, Brown JP et al (2008) Effects of denosumab in postmenopausal women transitioning from alendronate therapy in comparison with continued alendronate. Osteoporos Int 9(Suppl 2):S385–S386

31.

Brown JP, Prince RL, Deal C et al (2008) Comparison of the effect of denosumab and alendronate on bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: a randomized, blinded, phase 3 trial. J Bone Miner Res . doi:10.1359/jbmr.080910 PubMed

32.

Cramer JA, Gold DT, Silverman SL et al (2007) A systematic review of persistence and compliance with bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 18:1023–1031CrossRefPubMed

33.

Reginster JY, Burlet N (2006) Osteoporosis: a still increasing prevalence. Bone 38:S4–S9CrossRefPubMed

34.

Solomon DH, Avorn J, Katz JN et al (2005) Compliance with osteoporosis medications. Arch Intern Med 165:2414–2419CrossRefPubMed

35.

Saltman DC, Sayer GP, O'Dea NA (2006) Dosing frequencies in general practice—whose decision and why? Aust Fam Physician 35:915–919PubMed

36.

Claxton AJ, Cramer J, Pierce C (2001) A systematic review of the associations between dose regimens and medication compliance. Clin Ther 23:1296–1310CrossRefPubMed

37.

Brankin E, Walker M, Lynch N et al (2006) The impact of dosing frequency on compliance and persistence with bisphosphonates among postmenopausal women in the UK: evidence from three databases. Curr Med Res Opin 22:1249–1256CrossRefPubMed

38.

Cramer JA, Amonkar MM, Hebborn A et al (2005) Compliance and persistence with bisphosphonate dosing regimens among women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Curr Med Res Opin 21:1453–1460CrossRefPubMed

39.

Cramer JA, Lynch NO, Gaudin AF et al (2006) The effect of dosing frequency on compliance and persistence with bisphosphonate therapy in postmenopausal women: a comparison of studies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. Clin Ther 28:1686–1694CrossRefPubMed

40.

Ettinger MP, Gallagher R, MacCosbe PE (2006) Medication persistence with weekly versus daily doses of orally administered bisphosphonates. Endocr Pract 12:522–528PubMed

41.

Payer J, Killinger Z, Sulkova I et al (2008) Preferences of patients receiving bisphosphonates—how to influence the therapeutic adherence. Biomed Pharmacother 62:122–124CrossRefPubMed

42.

Cooper A, Drake J, Brankin E (2006) Treatment persistence with once-monthly ibandronate and patient support vs. once-weekly alendronate: results from the PERSIST study. Int J Clin Pract 60:896–905CrossRefPubMed

43.

Saag K, Lindsay R, Kriegman A et al (2007) A single zoledronic acid infusion reduces bone resorption markers more rapidly than weekly oral alendronate in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density. Bone 40:1238–1243CrossRefPubMed

44.

Horne R, Kovacs C, Katlama C et al (2009) Prescribing and using self-injectable antiretrovirals: how concordant are physician and patient perspectives? AIDS Res Ther 6:2CrossRefPubMed

45.

Gruffydd-Jones K, Hood CA, Price DB (1997) A within-patient comparison of subcutaneous and oral sumatriptan in the acute treatment of migraine in general practice. Cephalalgia 17:31–36CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Preference and satisfaction with a 6-month subcutaneous injection versus a weekly tablet for treatment of low bone mass
verfasst von: D. L. Kendler
L. Bessette
C. D. Hill
D. T. Gold
R. Horne
S. F. Varon
J. Borenstein
H. Wang
H.-S. Man
R. B. Wagman
S. Siddhanti
D. Macarios
H. G. Bone
Publikationsdatum: 01.05.2010
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: Osteoporosis International / Ausgabe 5/2010
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-009-1023-x

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen.
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

25.04.2024 | Hypertonie | Nachrichten

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Preference and satisfaction with a 6-month subcutaneous injection versus a weekly tablet for treatment of low bone mass

Abstract

Summary

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Vorsicht mit hohen NSAR-Dosen bei ankylosierender Spondylitis!

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Summary

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2010

Neovascular AMD: an overlooked risk factor for injurious falls

Fracture incidence in nursing homes in Japan

Shorter unipedal standing time and lower bone mineral density in women with distal radius fractures

Women with hip fracture experience greater loss of geometric strength in the contralateral hip during the year following fracture than age-matched controls

Treatment of osteoporosis: recognizing and managing cutaneous adverse reactions and drug-induced hypersensitivity

The need for a transparent, ethical, and successful relationship between academic scientists and the pharmaceutical industry: a view of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES)

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Vorsicht mit hohen NSAR-Dosen bei ankylosierender Spondylitis!

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie