OBJECTIVES: Current clinical practice guidelines identify patients at high risk for fracture who are likely to benefit from pharmacological therapy and suggest ways to monitor for effectiveness of therapy. However, there is no clear guidance on when fracture risk has been reduced to an acceptably low level. As a consequence, some patients at low risk for fracture may be treated for longer than necessary, whereas others at high risk for fracture may have treatment stopped when they might benefit from continuation of the same treatment or a change to a more potent therapeutic agent. The objective of this statement is to describe the potential clinical utility of developing a "treat-to-target" strategy for the management of patients with osteoporosis. PARTICIPANTS: We recommend that a task force of clinicians, clinical investigators, and other stakeholders in the care of osteoporosis explore the options, review the evidence, and identify additional areas for investigation to establish osteoporosis treatment targets. EVIDENCE: Data from large, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled registration trials for currently available osteoporosis therapies should be analyzed for commonalities of correlations between easily measured endpoints and fracture risk. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Osteoporosis experts, professional organizations, and patient care advocates should be involved in the process of developing consensus on easily measurable osteoporosis treatment targets that are supported by the best available evidence and likely to be accepted by clinicians and patients in the care of osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: A treat-to-target strategy for osteoporosis offers the potential of improving osteoporosis care by reducing the burden of osteoporotic fractures and limiting adverse effects of therapy.
OBJECTIVES: Current clinical practice guidelines identify patients at high risk for fracture who are likely to benefit from pharmacological therapy and suggest ways to monitor for effectiveness of therapy. However, there is no clear guidance on when fracture risk has been reduced to an acceptably low level. As a consequence, some patients at low risk for fracture may be treated for longer than necessary, whereas others at high risk for fracture may have treatment stopped when they might benefit from continuation of the same treatment or a change to a more potent therapeutic agent. The objective of this statement is to describe the potential clinical utility of developing a "treat-to-target" strategy for the management of patients with osteoporosis. PARTICIPANTS: We recommend that a task force of clinicians, clinical investigators, and other stakeholders in the care of osteoporosis explore the options, review the evidence, and identify additional areas for investigation to establish osteoporosis treatment targets. EVIDENCE: Data from large, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled registration trials for currently available osteoporosis therapies should be analyzed for commonalities of correlations between easily measured endpoints and fracture risk. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Osteoporosis experts, professional organizations, and patient care advocates should be involved in the process of developing consensus on easily measurable osteoporosis treatment targets that are supported by the best available evidence and likely to be accepted by clinicians and patients in the care of osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: A treat-to-target strategy for osteoporosis offers the potential of improving osteoporosis care by reducing the burden of osteoporotic fractures and limiting adverse effects of therapy.
Authors: J A Kanis; E McCloskey; J Branco; M-L Brandi; E Dennison; J-P Devogelaer; S Ferrari; J-M Kaufman; S Papapoulos; J-Y Reginster; R Rizzoli Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 4.507