ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Management of Vertebral Compression Fractures: 2022 Update

Osteoporosis, a major public health problem, is becoming increasingly prevalent with the aging of the world population. Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone strength, which predisposes the individual to an increased risk of fractures of the hip, spine, and other skeletal sites. The clinical consequences and economic burden of this disease call for measures to assess individuals who are at high risk to allow for appropriate intervention. Many risk factors are associated with osteoporotic fracture, including low peak bone mass, hormonal factors, the use of certain drugs (eg, glucocorticoids), cigarette smoking, low physical activity, low intake of calcium and vitamin D, race, small body size, and a personal or a family history of fracture. All of these factors should be taken into account when assessing the risk of fracture and determining whether further treatment is required. Because osteoporotic fracture risk is higher in older women than in older men, all postmenopausal women should be evaluated for signs of osteoporosis during routine physical examinations. Radiologic laboratory assessments of bone mineral density generally should be reserved for patients at highest risk, including all women over the age of 65, younger postmenopausal women with risk factors, and all postmenopausal women with a history of fractures. The evaluation of biochemical markers of bone turnover has been useful in clinical research. However, the predictive factor of these measurements is not defined clearly, and these findings should not be used as a replacement for bone density testing. Together, clinical assessment of osteoporotic risk factors and objective measures of bone mineral density can help to identify patients who will benefit from intervention and, thus, can potentially reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with osteoporosis-associated fractures in this population.

PURPOSE The oligometastatic paradigm hypothesizes that patients with a limited number of metastases may achieve long-term disease control, or even cure, if all sites of disease can be ablated. However, long-term randomized data that test this paradigm are lacking. METHODS We enrolled patients with a controlled primary malignancy and 1-5 metastatic lesions, with all metastases amenable to stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). We stratified by the number of metastases (1-3 v 4-5) and randomized in a 1:2 ratio between palliative standard-of-care (SOC) treatments (arm 1) and SOC plus SABR (arm 2). We used a randomized phase II screening design with a primary end point of overall survival (OS), using an α of .20 (wherein P < .20 indicates a positive trial). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and quality of life (QOL). Herein, we present long-term outcomes from the trial. RESULTS Between 2012 and 2016, 99 patients were randomly assigned at 10 centers internationally. The most common primary tumor types were breast (n = 18), lung (n = 18), colorectal (n = 18), and prostate (n = 16). Median follow-up was 51 months. The 5-year OS rate was 17.7% in arm 1 (95% CI, 6% to 34%) versus 42.3% in arm 2 (95% CI, 28% to 56%; stratified log-rank P = .006). The 5-year PFS rate was not reached in arm 1 (3.2%; 95% CI, 0% to 14% at 4 years with last patient censored) and 17.3% in arm 2 (95% CI, 8% to 30%; P = .001). There were no new grade 2-5 adverse events and no differences in QOL between arms. CONCLUSION With extended follow-up, the impact of SABR on OS was larger in magnitude than in the initial analysis and durable over time. There were no new safety signals, and SABR had no detrimental impact on QOL.

Vertebroplasty has become a common treatment for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures, but there is limited evidence to support its use. We performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which participants with one or two painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures that were of less than 12 months' duration and unhealed, as confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging, were randomly assigned to undergo vertebroplasty or a sham procedure. Participants were stratified according to treatment center, sex, and duration of symptoms ( or = 6 weeks). Outcomes were assessed at 1 week and at 1, 3, and 6 months. The primary outcome was overall pain (on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being the maximum imaginable pain) at 3 months. A total of 78 participants were enrolled, and 71 (35 of 38 in the vertebroplasty group and 36 of 40 in the placebo group) completed the 6-month follow-up (91%). Vertebroplasty did not result in a significant advantage in any measured outcome at any time point. There were significant reductions in overall pain in both study groups at each follow-up assessment. At 3 months, the mean (+/-SD) reductions in the score for pain in the vertebroplasty and control groups were 2.6+/-2.9 and 1.9+/-3.3, respectively (adjusted between-group difference, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, -0.7 to 1.8). Similar improvements were seen in both groups with respect to pain at night and at rest, physical functioning, quality of life, and perceived improvement. Seven incident vertebral fractures (three in the vertebroplasty group and four in the placebo group) occurred during the 6-month follow-up period. We found no beneficial effect of vertebroplasty as compared with a sham procedure in patients with painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures, at 1 week or at 1, 3, or 6 months after treatment. (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN012605000079640.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society