The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2020
Delayed Denosumab Injections and Bone Mineral Density Response: An Electronic Health Record-based Study.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lyu Houchen, Zhao Sizheng S, Yoshida Kazuki, Tedeschi Sara K, Xu Chang, Nigwekar Sagar U, Leder Benjamin Z, Solomon Daniel H
Аннотация
CONTEXT: Discontinuation of denosumab leads to a rapid reversal of its therapeutic effect. However, there are no data regarding how unintended delays or missed injections of denosumab impact bone mineral density (BMD) response.
OBJECTIVE: We examined the association of delays in injections of denosumab with BMD change.
DESIGN: We used electronic medical records from two academic hospitals from 2010 to 2017.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients older than 45 years of age and used at least 2 doses of 60 mg denosumab. Denosumab adherence was evaluated by the medication coverage ratio (MCR). Good adherence corresponds to a dosing interval ≤7 months (defined by MCR ≥93%), moderate adherence corresponds to an interval of 7 to 10 months (MCR 75%-93%), and poor adherence corresponds to an interval ≥10 months (MCR ≤75%).
OUTCOME MEASURES: Annualized percent BMD change from baseline at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck.
RESULTS: We identified 938 denosumab injections among 151 patients; the mean (SD) age was 69 (10) years, and 95% were female. Patients with good adherence had an annualized BMD increase of 3.9% at the lumbar spine, compared with patients with moderate (3.0%) or poor adherence (1.4%, P for trend .002). Patients with good adherence had an annualized BMD increase of 2.1% at the total hip, compared with patients with moderate (1.3%) or poor adherence (0.6%, P for trend .002).
CONCLUSIONS: A longer interval between denosumab injections is associated with suboptimal BMD response at both spine and total hip. Strategies to improve the timely administration of denosumab in real-world settings are needed.
OBJECTIVE: We examined the association of delays in injections of denosumab with BMD change.
DESIGN: We used electronic medical records from two academic hospitals from 2010 to 2017.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients older than 45 years of age and used at least 2 doses of 60 mg denosumab. Denosumab adherence was evaluated by the medication coverage ratio (MCR). Good adherence corresponds to a dosing interval ≤7 months (defined by MCR ≥93%), moderate adherence corresponds to an interval of 7 to 10 months (MCR 75%-93%), and poor adherence corresponds to an interval ≥10 months (MCR ≤75%).
OUTCOME MEASURES: Annualized percent BMD change from baseline at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck.
RESULTS: We identified 938 denosumab injections among 151 patients; the mean (SD) age was 69 (10) years, and 95% were female. Patients with good adherence had an annualized BMD increase of 3.9% at the lumbar spine, compared with patients with moderate (3.0%) or poor adherence (1.4%, P for trend .002). Patients with good adherence had an annualized BMD increase of 2.1% at the total hip, compared with patients with moderate (1.3%) or poor adherence (0.6%, P for trend .002).
CONCLUSIONS: A longer interval between denosumab injections is associated with suboptimal BMD response at both spine and total hip. Strategies to improve the timely administration of denosumab in real-world settings are needed.