English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) decreases bone mineral density and increases osteoporotic fracture (OsteoFx) risk. Hypothesis: To assess OsteoFx clinical risk factors (CRF) most predictive of future OsteoFx among men with prostate cancer on ADT. Methods: 4370 electronic medical records were reviewed of adult men with prostate cancer on cancer therapy +/- anti-osteoporosis therapy (Anti-OsteoRx) from 2011–2019. Cancer therapy included ADT (anti-androgens, GnRH agonists &amp; antagonists, orchiectomy) and supplemental cancer therapy (SupplRx) (prostatectomy, brachytherapy, radiation, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy). Anti-OsteoRx included bisphosphonates, denosumab, and parathyroid hormone analogs. Patients with other cancers within 5 years of initial visit, metastasis, and traumatic fractures were excluded. Retrospective analysis was done to determine baseline characteristics, type and duration of ADT, Anti-OsteoRx, SupplRx, and osteoporosis CRF. Results: 615 men on ADT +/- SupplRx +/- Anti-OsteoRx were included in the study. 10.08% had OsteoFx irrespective of SupplRx or Anti-OsteoRx. Comparing the OsteoFx group to the non-fracture group, the following CRF were found to be statistically significant (p &amp;lt;0.05): age at prostate cancer diagnosis (75.10 +/- 11.80 vs 71.59 +/- 9.80 y), diabetes mellitus (DM) (33.9 vs 19%), pre-existing comorbidities affecting bone (PreCo) (41.9 vs 24.8%), steroid use (11.3 vs 4.0%), and anti-convulsant and proton-pump inhibitor (med) use (45.2 vs 26.8%). 9.89% of 374 men on ADT only without (wo) Anti-OsteoRx fractured. Statistically significant CRF for OsteoFx were age (76.86 +/- 10.55 vs 73.02 +/- 10.06 y), DM (40.5 vs 19.6%), PreCo (45.9 vs. 26.4%), and med use (48.6 vs. 25.5%). In the following subgroups there were no statistically significant difference in CRF:•7.64% of 170 men on ADT + SupplRx wo Anti-OsteoRx •19.23% of 52 men on ADT only + Anti-OsteoRx •10.52% of 19 men on ADT + SupplRx + Anti-OsteoRx To increase statistical power, patients on ADT +/- SupplRx were assessed:•Among 71 men on ADT +/- SupplRx + Anti-OsteoRx, there were no statistically significant differences in CRF•Among the 544 men on ADT +/- SupplRx wo Anti-OsteoRx, significant CRF for OsteoFx were age (75.16 + 11.70 vs 71.37 + 9.85 y), DM (38 vs 19.4%), PreCo (38 vs 24.1%), steroid use (12 vs 3.8%), and med use (48 vs 24.3%) Discussion: Men with prostate cancer requiring ADT have a higher incidence of osteoporosis defined by DXA prior to initiating ADT compared to age-matched cohorts (Hussain et al). Our study revealed ADT with CRF is associated with OsteoFx irrespective of SupplRx or Anti-OsteoRx. Limitations include inability to evaluate efficacy of Anti-OsteoRx due to insufficient power. Conclusion: OsteoFx risk assessment utilizing CRF, FRAX, DXA with timely intervention may prevent OsteoFx in these high-risk patients.

journal of the endocrine society

Clinical Risk Factors for Osteoporotic Fractures in Men With Non-Metastatic Prostate Cancer on Androgen Deprivation Therapy With or Without Anti-Osteoporosis Treatment