Interpretation of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of primary osteoporosis (2022 version) in China: essential introduction

doi:10.16150/j.1671-2870.2023.03.04

Abstract

Abstract:

China is now witnessing an accelerated aging process，and active reaction is an important issue that we are facing. Osteoporosis and the resulting fractures are particularly noteworthy. In order to further standardize the diagnosis and treatment of primary osteoporosis, the Osteoporosis and Bone Mineral Disease Branch of the Chinese Medical Association has developed and released the “Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Osteoporosis (2022 Version)” based on the epidemiological characteristics and pathogenesis of the Chinese population, which combined high-quality medical research evidence from both domestic and foreign sources. Based on evidence-based medicine evidence, and clinical practice in China, this article will focus on the interpretation of two key clinical issues in the new version of the guidelines, namely “fracture risk stratification and treatment selection” and “treatment course of anti-osteoporosis drugs”. Regarding the risk of fractures, this guideline divides it into high and extremely high fracture risks, cancels the classification of low and medium risks, and for one of the extremely high fracture risk indicators “recent brittle fractures”，defines “recent” as “24 months”.Given that the FRAX model underestimates the fracture risk of Chinese patients, it is proposed to develop a highly operational fracture risk stratification criteria in clinical practice. Regarding drug treatment, patients who use bisphosphonates should be fully evaluated before entering the medication holiday, and regular follow-up is still required. Although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States has lifted the warning of osteosarcoma and 24- month treatment limit for terlipide, the user manual of the drug in China still suggests a treatment period of 24 months. This guideline is based on high-quality evidence-based medical evidence both domestically and internationally, and may provide reference and research directions for clinical practice.

Key words: Primary osteoporosis, Risk stratification, Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

CLC Number:

R589.5

ZHANG Zhenlin, YUE Hua, LI Mei, XIA Weibo. Interpretation of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of primary osteoporosis (2022 version) in China: essential introduction[J]. Journal of Diagnostics Concepts & Practice, 2023, 22(03): 230-233.

References 15

[1]	原发性骨质疏松症诊疗指南(2022)[J]. 中华骨质疏松和骨矿盐疾病杂志, 2022, 15(6):573-611.
	Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Osteoporosis (2022)[J]. Chin J Osteoporos Bone Miner Res, 2022, 15(6):573-611.
[2]	CAMACHO P M, PETAK S M, BINKLEY N, et al. American association of clinical endocrinologists/american college of endocrinology clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis-2020 update[J]. EndocrPract, 2020, 26(Suppl 1):1-46.
[3]	SOONG Y K, TSAI K S, HUANG H Y, et al. Risk of refracture associated with compliance and persistence with bisphosphonate therapy in Taiwan[J]. Osteoporos Int, 2013, 24(2):511-521. doi: 10.1007/s00198-012-1984-z pmid: 22588182
[4]	COSMAN F, CAULEY J A, EASTELL R, et al. Reassessment of fracture risk in women after 3 years of treatment with zoledronic acid: when is it reasonable to discontinue treatment?[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2014, 99(12):4546-4554. doi: 10.1210/jc.2014-1971 pmid: 25215556
[5]	BLACK D M, REID I R, CAULEY J A, et al. The effect of 6 versus 9 years of zoledronic acid treatment in osteoporosis: a randomized second extension to the HORIZON-Pivotal Fracture Trial (PFT)[J]. J Bone Miner Res, 2015, 30(5):934-944. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.2442 pmid: 25545380
[6]	BLACK D M, REID I R, BOONEN S, et al. The effect of 3 versus 6 years of zoledronic acid treatment of osteoporosis: a randomized extension to the HORIZON-Pivotal Fracture Trial (PFT)[J]. J Bone Miner Res, 2012, 27(2):243-254. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.1494 pmid: 22161728
[7]	WATTS N B, DIAB D L. Long-term use of bisphosphonates in osteoporosis[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2010, 95(4):1555-1565. doi: 10.1210/jc.2009-1947 pmid: 20173017
[8]	林华, 夏维波. 双膦酸盐治疗骨质疏松症的依从性管理和药物假期选择[J]. 中华骨质疏松和骨矿盐疾病杂志, 2020, 13(2):103-109.
	LIN H, XIA W B. Adherence management and drug holiday option for bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis[J]. Chin J Osteoporos Bone Miner Res, 2020, 13(2):103-109.
[9]	林华, 汪青. 骨质疏松症治疗药物假期的选择与利弊[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2020, 100(21):1601-1604.
	LIN H, WANG Q. The choices, benefits and risks of drug holidays for treatment of osteoporosis[J]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2020, 100(21):1601-1604.
[10]	COSMAN F, CRITTENDEN D B, ADACHI J D, et al. Romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis[J]. N Engl J Med, 2016, 375(16):1532-1543. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1607948 URL
[11]	SIU A, ALLORE H, BROWN D, et al. National institutes of health pathways to prevention workshop: research gaps for long-term drug therapies for osteoporotic fracture prevention[J]. Ann Intern Med, 2019, 171(1):51-57. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961 pmid: 31009943
[12]	FINKELSTEIN J S, WYLAND J J, LEE H, et al. Effects of teriparatide, alendronate, or both in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 2010, 95(4):1838-1845. doi: 10.1210/jc.2009-1703 pmid: 20164296
[13]	MILLER P D, LEWIECKI E M, KROHN K, et al. Teriparatide: Label changes and identifying patients for long-term use[J]. Cleve Clin J Med, 2021, 88(9):489-493. doi: 10.3949/ccjm.88a.21011 URL
[14]	NAYAK S, GREENSPAN S L. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of bisphosphonate drug holidays on bone mineral density and osteoporotic fracture risk[J]. Osteoporos Int, 2019, 30(4):705-720. doi: 10.1007/s00198-018-4791-3 pmid: 30623214
[15]	李梅, 章振林, 夏维波. 骨质疏松症药物治疗的必由之路:长程序贯治疗[J]. 中华骨质疏松和骨矿盐疾病杂志, 2021, 14(5):441-446.
	LI M, ZHANG Z L, XIA W B. Long-term sequential treatment strategies for osteoporosis[J]. Chin J Osteoporos Bone Miner Res, 2021, 14(5):441-446.