Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
EVISTA – Studies Overview Daniel Thiebaud MD, Medical Fellow, Global Osteoporosis Strategy, Eli Lilly, Australia Concept of a SERM S elective E strogen R eceptor Modulator • Not an estrogen and not a hormone • Binds to estrogen receptors • Has estrogen-like effects in some tissues • Blocks estrogen effects in some tissues Evista Update • EVA : Evista versus Alendronate • MORE – New non vertebral fractures – Clinical vertebral fractures (3 and 6 months) • CORE – Invasive breast cancer and overall safety • RUTH – STAR timelines • CHOOSE ASIA Observational study Raloxifene versus Alendronate Comparison EVA Trial • First ever head-to-head fracture outcome trial • Compare the osteoporotic fracture risk reduction efficacy of raloxifene and alendronate • Double-blind, randomized, controlled, 5-year trial with raloxifene 60 mg/d vs alendronate 10 mg/d • Initially planned about 3000 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Enrollment terminated on Aug 2004 with 1423 patients randomized, because too slow recruitment – Calcium 500 mg + vitamin D 400 IU to all patients – Sites in US, Canada, and Puerto Rico Adapted from Recker R et al, ASBMR 2005, JBMR 2005, 20,Suppl 1,S97 Baseline Characteristics Characteristic Raloxifene (N=707) Alendronate (N=716) P-value Age (years) 65.5 65.7 0.56 Caucasian (%) 86.7 86.9 0.83 BMI (kg/m2) 24.8 24.6 0.42 LS BMD (g/cm2) 0.82 0.82 0.79 -2.32 -2.34 0.65 0.61 0.61 0.98 -2.39 -2.39 0.77 0.71 0.71 0.71 -1.99 -2.01 0.64 T-score FN BMD (g/cm2) T-score Total Hip BMD (g/cm2) T-Score Adapted from Recker R et al, ASBMR 2005, JBMR 2005, 20,Suppl 1,S97 EVA Trial: Incidence of VFx and Non-V Fx Type of Fx Women with ≥1 new Fx, n(%) ALN, 10mg/d RLX 60mg/d N=713 N=699 P value Age, yrs 65.7± 7.8 65.5± 7.7 0.56 Vert or Non Vert 22 (3.1) 20 (2.9) 0.84 Vertebrala Moderate/Severe Clinical Vertebral 8 (3.1) 4 (1.6) 3 (0.4) 5 (1.9) 0 0 0.53 0.04 0.1 NonVertebral Nonvertebral-Sixb 14 (2.0) 11 (1.5) 15 (2.2) 10 (1.4) 0.86 0.89 b Includes the clavicule, humerus, wrist, pelvis, hip and leg. Recker R et al, ASBMR 2005, Abstract in JBMR 2005, 20,Suppl 1,S97 MORE Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation • Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial • 25 countries, 180 centers, 3 years with 1 year extension • 7705 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis • Mean age 66 years • Raloxifene 60 mg =Evista, 120 mg, or placebo • All patients given daily elemental calcium (500 mg) and vitamin D (400-600 IU) • Primary endpoints: radiographic vertebral fracture, BMD, safety • Secondary endpoints: all osteoporotic fractures, cardiovascular health, breast cancer, cognitive function Ettinger B et al. JAMA 282:637-45, 1999 Cummings SR et al. JAMA 281:2189-97, 1999 Annual incidence per 1000 women Incidence Rates for Vertebral, Wrist and Hip Fractures in Women After 40 Age 50 Vertebrae 30 20 Hi p Wrist 10 50 60 Age (Years) Wasnich RD: Primer on the Metabolic Bone Diseases and Disorders of Mineral Metabolism. 70 80 Risk of New Clinical Vertebral Fractures at 1 Year New Clinical Vertebral Fracture % of Women with 2.2 Women with and without Prevalent Vertebral Fractures 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.0 RR 0.32 (95% CI, 0.13 - 0.79) 0.8 0.6 0.6 68% 0.2 0.0 0.0 Marici et al, Arch. Int med, 2002 RLX 60 66% 0.4 0.2 Placebo RR 0.34 (95% CI, 0.11 - 0.77) 1.0 0.8 0.4 Women with Prevalent Vertebral Fractures Placebo RLX 60 Women with New Clinical Vertebral Fracture (%) Effect of Raloxifene on New Clinical Vertebral Fractures at 6 Months 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 RR 0.10 (95% CI 0.02-0.41)** RR 0.10 (95% CI 0.01-0.62)** RR 0.10 (95% CI 0.01-0.63)** 0.44% 0.44% (n=10) (n=10) 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.04% (n=1) 0.04% (n=1) 0.04% (n=2) 0.0 Placebo Raloxifene 60 mg/d Qu Y, et al. CMRO, 2005, 21 (12): 1955-59. Raloxifene 120 mg/d Raloxifene Pooled Cumulative Incidence of New Clinical Vertebral Fractures in the First Year of MORE* Women with New Clinical Vertebral Fracture (%) 1.0 0.8 Placebo Raloxifene 60 mg/d Raloxifene 120 mg/d 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 2 4 6 Qu Y, et al. CMRO, 2005, 21 (12): 1955-59. 8 10 Months 12 14 16 18 *P=0.007 in the first 6 months for each raloxifene group compared with placebo Women with New Clinical Vertebral Fracture (%) 0.7 Effect of Raloxifene on New Clinical Vertebral Fractures at 3 Months 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 RR 0.20 (95% CI 0.03-0.90) * RR 0.20 (95% CI 0.02-1.31) RR 0.20 (95% CI 0.02-1.32) 0.22% 0.22% (n=5) (n=5) 0.04% (n=1) 0.1 0.04% (n=1) 0.04% (n=2) Raloxifene 120 mg/d Raloxifene Pooled 0.0 Placebo Raloxifene 60 mg/d Qu Y, et al. CMRO, 2005, 21 (12): 1955-59. Women with severe osteoporosis • Does raloxifene prevent multiple new vertebral fractures ? • Does raloxifene prevent the first severe vertebral fracture? • Does raloxifene prevent subsequent fracture (also non vertebral) when a severe fracture is present? % of Women with 2 Incident Vertebral Fractures Effect of Raloxifene on the Risk of 2 or More New Vertebral Fractures in Women MORE Trial - 3 Years 1.6 RR 0.07* (95% CI = 0.01, 0.56) 1.2 93% 0.8 0.4 0 Placebo N=1457 Raloxifene 60 mg/day N=1401 Lufkin E et al. North American Menopause Society 12th Annual Meeting Program and Abstract Book, P21, p70, October 4-6, 2001 *p = 0.001 Semiquantitative Evaluation of Vertebral Fracture Severity Fracture Grade 0- Normal Anterior Middle Posterior 1- Mild (20-25%*) 2- Moderate (26-40%*) 3- Severe (>40%*) *Percent reduction in anterior, mid and/or posterior vertebral height Adapted from: Genant HK et al. J Bone Miner Res 8:1137-1148, 1993 % of Women with At Least 1 New Moderate/Severe Vertebral Fracture Risk of At Least 1 New Moderate/Severe Vertebral Fracture MORE Trial – 3 Year 20 RR 0.63 (95% CI 0.49, 0.83) Placebo RLX 60 mg/d 37% 15 10 RR 0.39 (95% CI 0.17, 0.69) 5 61% 0 Without Preexisting Vertebral Fractures Siris E et al. Osteoporosis Int 13:907, 2002 With Prevalent Vertebral Fractures Reduction of 47% of at Least 1 New Nonvertebral* Fracture in Women With Baseline SQ Grade 3 % of Women with at Least 1 New Nonvertebral Fracture MORE Trial - 3 Years 20 RH=0.53 (95% CI 0.29, 0.99) P=0.04 15 47% 10 5 0 Raloxifene 60 mg/d Placebo * Clavicle, humerus, wrist, pelvis, hip, leg Raloxifene prevents Non Vertebral Fracture in Women with 2 Prevalent Vertebral Fractures (n= 1369, mean age 69y MORE Trial - 3 Years – pooled raloxifene % of Women With at Least 1 New non-Vertebral Fracture Nonvertebral Fracture RR=0.69 (95%* CI 0.48, 0.99) P<0.05 40 30 20 31% 10 0 Placebo Raloxifene * Farrerons et al., CTI, 2003;72(4):391(P230) Clavicle, humerus, wrist, pelvis, hip, leg Randomized Studies of Antiresorptives in Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Women* Risk of Vertebral Fractures LS BMD** Raloxifene 60 mg/d Preexisting vertebral fracture (VFx)1 No preexisting VFx1 2.2 Alendronate 5/10 mg/d Preexisting VFx2 No preexisting VFx3 6.2 6.8 Risedronate 5 mg/d Preexisting VFx4 Preexisting VFx5 4.3 5.9 Calcitonin 200 IU/d Preexisting VFx6 0.7 *Not head -to-head comparison, **vs placebo 2.9 0 1 Data 4Harris 2 Black 5 Reginster on file, Eli Lilly & Co. DM et al. Lancet 348:1535-1541, 1996 3 Cummings SR et al. JAMA 280:2077-2082, 1998 Relative Risk (95% CI) 0.5 1.0 ST et al. JAMA 282:1344-1352, 1999 JY et al. Osteoporosis Int 11:83 -91, 2000 6 Chesnut CH et al. Am J Med 109:267-276, 2000 Differences in Trial Design: Baseline fractures Ca and Vitamin D Supplementation / Ethical rules Baseline fractures and age quite different between trials Differences in calcium and vitamin D supplementation, a regimen that has been shown to reduce the risk of hip fractures, may have also contributed to the different results in hip. The estimated number of patients who received calcium and vitamin D supplementation in the FIT and WHI HRT trial was 30 -40%. • All patients in the MORE trial were supplemented in the trial. • MORE had stringent ethical rules : patients having a fracture or losing too much BMD could discontinue: ¾ more patients discontinued in placebo, strong bias against raloxifene • Also ¾ more patients took additional bone active drug in 4th year Number Needed to Treat (NNT) to Prevent 1 Vertebral Fracture Study Duration (Years) Without Preexisting Vertebral Fracture NNT Raloxifene 60 mg/d† 4.0 34 Alendronate 5/10 mg/d‡ 4.2 60 Raloxifene 60 mg/d‡ 3.0 16 Alendronate 5/10 mg/d‡ 2.9 14 Risedronate 5 mg/d‡ 3.0 20 With Preexisting Vertebral Fracture *Not head-to-head comparisons †Delmas ‡Marcus PD, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002; 87:3609-3617. R, et al. Endocrine Rev. 2002;23:16-37. Japan-China trials: Any New Clinical Fractures Asian Women with Osteoporosis - One Year 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 RR: 0.11 (0.03-0.51) RR: 0.17 (0.04-0.75) 6.0% (n=12) 1.0% (n=2) Placebo Raloxifene 60 mg/day Nakamura et a, IBMS-ECTS Geneva, June 2005, and Bone 36, Suppl 2 0.7% (n=2) Raloxifene Pooled Raloxifene Bone Efficacy Summary • Significant reduction in risk of vertebral fractures • • • • • • • 66% in risk of clinical vertebral fractures during the first year 55% in risk of women without preexisting vertebral fractures at 3 years of therapy. Efficacy sustained in the 4th year (40-50% reduction). 93% in risk of multiple vertebral fractures at 3 yr in those without preexisting vertebral fractures 47% in risk of non vertebral fractures in women with severe vertebral fractures or 31% in women with 2 pre-existing fractures Improves properties of bone quality 34% reduction of non vertebral fractures in MORE+CORE 8 y in women with pre-existing SQ3 fracture • Easy to use and good tolerability Completed and Ongoing Large-Scale Raloxifene Clinical Trials 19,365 20000 15000 10,101 10000 5000 7,705 4,011 1,764 1,400 –1y 0 Osteoporosis MORE CORE RUTH STAR EVA Prevention MORE, Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation; CORE, Continuing Outcomes Relevant to EVISTA; RUTH, Raloxifene Use for The Heart; STAR, Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene; EVA, EVISTA-Alendronate Comparison 2004 Breast Cancer Effect of Raloxifene on All Breast Cancer MORE Trial - 4 Years % of Randomized Patients 2.0 RR = 0.38 (95% CI = 0.24-0.58) NNT = 94 1.5 62% 1.0 Placebo RLX (pooled) 0.5 * 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 Total Cases = 77 Years since Randomization Arrow denotes annual mammogram (*optional) Sourced from Cauley J et al. Breast Cancer Res Treatment 65:125-34, 2001 2004 MORE plus CORE Study Design Gap MORE Conclusion CORE Screening MORE (N=7705) Three Treatment Groups Placebo CORE (n=4011) Two Treatment Groups Placebo Raloxifene HCl 60 mg/day Raloxifene HCl 60 mg/day Raloxifene HCl 120 mg/day Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 Years Total Follow-up Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 7 8 CORE Study Objectives • Determine the effect of raloxifene on incidence of invasive breast cancer over an additional 4 years of therapy (8 years total for MORE + CORE) • Determine the effect of raloxifene on incidence of invasive, ER(+) breast cancer over the same time period • Assess the tolerability of raloxifene over 8 years Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 Breast Cancer Assessment • Clinical breast exams: • MORE: every 6 months • CORE: every 12 months • Mammograms: • MORE: baseline and after 2, 3, and 4 years of treatment • CORE: baseline and after years 2 and 4 of treatment • Breast cancer cases adjudicated by an independent committee of physicians blinded to treatment assignment and not affiliated with study sponsor Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 CORE Demographics at MORE Baseline Characteristic Mean age, yr Age 60 years (%) Mean BMI, kg/m2 Caucasian, (%) Current smoker, (% yes) Mean time postmenopause, yr Family history of breast cancer, (%) Hysterectomy, (% yes) Previous hormone therapy, (%) MORE CORE Primary CORE Participants Analysis Dataset Enrollees (N = 7705) (N = 5213) (N = 4011) 66.5 81.5 25.2 95.7 16.7 18.7 66.2 81.2 25.3 95.5 16.2 18.4 65.8 80.1 25.2 96.2 12.6 22.7 29.1 12.0 21.4 26.5 11.9 Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 16.0 17.9 20.4 25.6 Incidence of Invasive Breast Cancer 4 Years of CORE Cumulative Incidence (%) 4.0 3.0 Placebo 5.2 per 1000 Women-Yrs HR 0.41 (95% CI = 0.24-0.71) N=5213 p <0.001 59% 2.0 1.0 Raloxifene 2.1 per 1000 Women-Yrs 0.0 0 Jan 1, 1999 1 2 3 Year Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 4 Incidence of Invasive Breast Cancer 8 Years of MORE plus CORE (N=7705) Cumulative Incidence (%) 4.0 Placebo 4.2 per 1000 Women-Yrs HR 0.34 (95% CI = 0.22-0.50) 3.0 p <0.001 66% 2.0 1.0 Raloxifene 1.4 per 1000 Women-Yrs 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Years in Study Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 7 8 Incidence of Invasive ER+ and ERBreast Cancer 8 Years of MORE Plus CORE Trials Incidence/1000 woman-years 4 3.5 HR 0.24 (95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40) P <.001 Placebo (N=2576) Raloxifene (N=5129) 3 2.5 2 1.5 HR 1.06 (95% CI = 0.43 to 2.59) P = .90 1 0.5 0 n=44 n=22 ER+ breast cancer n=7 n=15 ER- breast cancer Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 Summary of Adverse Outcomes over the 8 Years of MORE-CORE (N=4011) Percentage of participants who experienced event (n) P-value Placebo (N=1286) Raloxifene (N=2725) Mortality 2.3 (29) 1.7 (47) 0.27 All cancers† 8.6 (110) 5.7 (156) 0.001 All cancers† excluding breast cancer 6.3 (81) 4.6 (126) 0.027 Hospitalization 40.9 (526) 38.8 (1057) 0.21 Treatment-emergent AEs 99.0 (1273) 98.6 (2688) 0.45 Treatment-emergent serious AEs 45.5 (585) 42.3 (1154) 0.07 2.4 (31) 1.9 (53) 0.35 Study discontinuation CORE due to AE †Excluding non-melanoma skin cancers Martino S et al. Curr Med Res Opin 2005 Summary of Gynecologic AE Data over the 8 Years of MORE-CORE (N=4011) Percentage of participants who experienced event (n) P-value Placebo (N=1286) Raloxifene (N=2725) Uterine cancer†‡ 0.39 (4) 0.32 (7) 0.75 Endometrial hyperplasia‡ 0.29 (3) 0.37 (8) >0.99 Ovarian cancer 0.16 (2) 0.11 (3) 0.66 Postmenopausal bleeding‡§ 5.4 (55) 5.5 (120) 0.87 Vulvovaginal signs and symptoms 5.8 (75) 5.0 (135) 0.26 Martino S et al. Curr Med Res Opin 2005 Adverse Events Reported During MORE Plus CORE – 8 Years Number (%) Placebo (n=1286) Raloxifene (n=2725) p-value 89 (6.9) 342 (12.6) <0.001 Leg cramps 152 (11.8) 407 (14.9) 0.008 Peripheral edema 120 (9.3) 288 (10.6) 0.240 Flushing (hot flushes) Martino S, et al. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(23):1751-1761 Raloxifene and Non-Vertebral Fx at 8 yrs: Poisson analyses CORE/MORE [0.86,1.17] [0.63, 0.96] 1.0 [0.43,1.02] 0.78 0.66 SQ 1,2 N SQ 3 277 Prev Fx Incidence RR (95%CI) at 6 sites Incidence RR (95%CI) at 6 sites CORE [0.83, 1.07] 0.94 [0.44, 0.92] 0.64 SQ 1,2 1425 Adapted from Siris ES et al; J Bone Miner Res 2005; 20:1514-1522 SQ 3 615 Pathophysiology of Atherothrombosis Foam Cells Fatty Streak Intermediate Lesion Atheroma Fibrous Plaque Complicated Lesion Plaque Rupture Clinical Events Endothelial injury Lipid accumulation Inflammation Baseline to 6 Month Change (%) Compared to Placebo Effect of Raloxifene 60 mg/d on Cardiovascular Risk Factors 5 -7% -12% 0% -4% -10% 0 -5 -10 -15 * * Total Chol * LDL-C HDL-C TG Fibrinogen Adapted from Walsh BW et al., JAMA 1998;279:1445-51 *P<0.05 vs. placebo Cumulative Incidence of Cardiovascular Events MORE Trial – 4 Years All Enrolled Women N = 7705 High-Risk Women n = 1035 Total number of events = 272 Placebo RLX 60 mg/d 12 Total number of events = 97 Placeb 14 o RLX 60 mg/d 40% 12 10 10 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 RR=0.86 2 (95% CI=0.64-1.15) 14 RR=0.60 (95% CI=0.38-0.95) 0 0 0 12 24 36 48 0 12 Months Since Randomization Adapted from Barrett-Connor E et al. JAMA 287:847-57, 2002 24 36 48 RUTH Study Raloxifene Use for The Heart • 10,101 patients, DBRCT, placebo vs raloxifene (60 mg/d) • Entry: postmenopausal women at high risk for, or suffering from, heart disease • Primary endpoints – Coronary: CHD death, non-fatal MI, or hospitalized acute coronary syndrome other than MI – Invasive breast cancer • Length of trial: up to 7.5 years with anticipated completion in 2006 Wenger NK, et al. Am J Cardiol.2002;90:1204-1210. DBRCT= double-blind, randomized, controlled trial CHD=coronary heart disease MI=myocardial infarction NSABP-P2 (STAR) Study Study of Tamoxifen And Raloxifene • 19,747 patients, double-blind, randomized – Tamoxifen (20 mg/d) vs raloxifene (60 mg/d) • Entry: postmenopausal, high risk for invasive breast cancer (lobular carcinoma in situ or 5-year risk of >1.67% by the Gail model) • Primary endpoint – Invasive breast cancer • Secondary endpoints: – Uterine safety, nonvertebral fracture, cardiovascular, overall toxicity and side effects • Started 1999 with final analyses when 327 cases have occurred but women will continue to be followed; results anticipated in 2006 Vogel V, et al. Clin Breast Cancer. 2002;3:153-159. WHI Estrogen-Progestin Trial Global Index Assessment of Risk-Benefit • Defined to summarize important aspects of health benefits vs risks • Defined for each woman as the earliest occurrence of: – Coronary heart disease (CHD) – Pulmonary embolism – Invasive breast cancer – Stroke • Endometrial cancer • Colorectal cancer • Hip fracture • Death due to other causes Writing Group for the Women’s Health Initiative. JAMA. 2002;288:321-333. Global Safety Index Assessing Risk and Benefit Relative Risk 1.3 1.2 NNH = 88 Increased Harm MORE2 1.1 Raloxifene 60 mg/d 1 1 CEE/MPA Not head-to-head trials. 1. Adapted from: Writing Group for the Women’s Health Initiative. JAMA. 2002;288:321-333. 2. Barrett-Connor E. et al., J Bone Minral Res, 2004:Aug; 19,1270-1275 Relative Risk WHI1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 NNT = 69 Increased Benefit Effect of Raloxifene on WHI Global Risk-Benefit Index HR, 0.75 95% CI, 0.59-0.95 Event Rate Annualized % 2.0 HR, 0.75 95% CI, 0.60-0.96 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Placebo Raloxifene 60 mg/d Barrett-Connor E. et al., J Bone Minral Res, 2004:Aug; 19,1270-1275 Raloxifene 120 mg/d Raloxifene Administration and Tolerability • • • • Single daily dose (60 mg tablets) Liver metabolism (glucuronidation) May be given without regard to meals or time of day No adjustment needed for most commonly used concomitant medications • Can be used with Calcium and Vit D (recommended in patients with fractures) • No GI side effects Tolerability With Raloxifene Vs Alendronate In the Clinical Practice at 12 Months 30 P<0.001 Raloxifene (n=476) Alendronate (n=426) 25.8 % Patients 25 20 16.4 P<0.001 15 P<0.001 11 9.9 10 4.8 5 0 Total Discontinuation Turbí C et al. Clin Ther 26:245-256, 2004. Discontinuation due to Aes 3.4 Discontinuation due to GI disorders 2004 Comparison of Raloxifene and Bisphosphonates on Adherence, Health Outcomes and Treatment Satisfaction in Post-Menopausal Asian Women CHOOSE Asia Observational Study Objectives: • Primary: To demonstrate that raloxifene is associated with better adherence compared with daily dosing bisphosphonates in Asian postmenopausal women at increased risk of osteoporotic fractures. • Secondary: To demonstrate that raloxifene therapy is associated with improved: – treatment satisfaction – quality of life compared with bisphosphonates. Poster presented at IBMS-ECTS Geneva , June 2005, Bone 36, Suppl 2, 2005 Methods - 1 Study Design • One-year, open-label, observational study conducted in: – – – – – – Hong Kong Malaysia Pakistan Philippines Singapore Taiwan. • Postmenopausal women aged 55 years or older and at increased risk of osteoporosis. • Study treatments administered by a physician during the normal course of care: Raloxifene or Bisphosphonates (alendronate, risedronate, etidronate) VISIT 1 Baseline VISIT 2 6 months VISIT 3 12 months Patient Baseline Characteristics Characteristic Raloxifene N = 707 Age (years), Mean ± SD (range) Bisphosphonates N = 277 66.9 ± 8.5 (55-97) 67.7 ± 9.2 (55-91) Race/ethnicity, n (%): Chinese Malay Filipino Indian sub-continent Asian – other 364 (51.5) 6 (0.8) 186 (26.3) 144 (20.4) 7 (1.0) 120 (43.3) 3 (1.1) 79 (28.5) 69 (24.9) 6 (2.2) Menopause, n (%) Natural Surgical 613 (86.7) 94 (13.3) 237 (85.6) 40 (14.4) No. years since menopause, Mean ± SD 17.6 ± 9.9 19.2 ± 10.3 * Baseline fractures, n (%) 307 (43.4) 116 (41.9) * p<0.05: ANOVA Adherence Patient Discontinuations Enrolled: N = 984 Raloxifene treatment n = 707 Bisphosphonates treatment n = 277 Alendronate n = 206 Risedronate n = 71 33.1% Lost to follow up 37.5% 6.8% Chose to leave 2.9% * 5.7% Stopped treatment 10.1% * 2.8% Switched treatment 1.4% Reason missing 2.2% Completed study 50.2% * p<0.05; ** p<0.01 Fisher’s Exact Test Completed study 37.5% ** 9.7% ** Adherence Treatment Duration (days) Raloxifene Bisphosphonates p<0.05* 0 100 200 300 400 Mean Period of Exposure to Medication (days) * Wilcoxon rank sum test Poster presented at IBMS-ECTS Geneva , June 2005, Bone 36, Suppl 2, 2005 500 Treatment Satisfaction at 12 months p<0.01* 80 60 40 20 Raloxifene 100 Percent of patients Percent of patients 100 p<0.01* 80 60 40 20 Bisphosphonates * Fisher’s Exact Test Poster presented at IBMS-ECTS Geneva , June 2005, Bone 36, Suppl 2, 2005 Quality of Life – Mean Change† from Baseline to Endpoint Mean Change in Health State (VAS) Score p<0.01* 10 8 6 4 2 Raloxifene †Health Bisphosphonates State score was out of 100 * ANCOVA Poster presented at IBMS-ECTS Geneva , June 2005, Bone 36, Suppl 2, 2005 Percentage of of new, self-reported fractures Incidence of New Fractures 6 p=0.058* 5 4 Raloxifene Bisphosphonates p<0.01* * Fisher’s Exact Test 3 2 1 0 total wrist spine humerus other Fracture site There were no new fractures of the clavicle and pelvis for raloxifene or bisphosphonates