Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39730734›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2025

Cost-effectiveness of FRAX®-based intervention thresholds for management of osteoporosis in Indian women: a Markov microsimulation model analysis.

Lakshmi Nagendra, Manju Chandran, Jean-Yves Reginster, Sanjay Kumar Bhadada, Saptarshi Bhattacharya, Deep Dutta, Mickael Hiligsmann

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lakshmi NagendraDepartment of Endocrinology, JSS Medical College, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Mysore, Karnataka, India. drlakshminagendra@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6865-5554
Manju ChandranOsteoporosis and Bone Metabolism Unit, Department of Endocrinology, Singapore General Hospital, 20, College Road, Academia, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169856, Singapore. mchandran7@gmail.com.
Jean-Yves ReginsterProtein Research Chair, Biochemistry Dept, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Sanjay Kumar BhadadaDepartment of Endocrinology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Saptarshi BhattacharyaDepartment of Endocrinology, Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, Sarita Vihar, Delhi, India.
Deep DuttaDepartment of Endocrinology, Centre for Endocrinology, Arthritis, and Rheumatism (CEDAR), Superspeciality Healthcare, Dwarka, New Delhi, India.
Mickael HiligsmannDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A cost-effectiveness analysis of FRAX® intervention thresholds (ITs) in Indian women over 50 years indicated that generic alendronate was cost-effective for age-dependent major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) ITs and hip fracture (HF) ITs starting at ages 60 and 65 years for full and real-world adherence, respectively. Alendronate was cost-effective at fixed MOF IT of 14% and HF IT of 3.5%, regardless of age. PURPOSE: Osteoporosis represents a significant public health challenge in India, with an increasing economic burden due to the aging population. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of using fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX®)-based intervention thresholds (ITs) for managing osteoporosis with generic alendronate in Indian women.

methodsA Markov microsimulation model, adapted to the Indian healthcare context, was used to simulate the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with different treatment strategies. The one-time gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (estimated at INR 1,97,468/QALY gained) was used as the cost-effectiveness threshold.

resultsThe model revealed that generic alendronate is cost-effective for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) ITs beginning at age 60 years with full adherence-incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of INR 102,151 per QALY gained, and age 65 with real-world adherence-ICER of INR 28,203 per QALY gained (conversion rate used is 1 US dollar (USD) = INR 83.97 and 1 EURO = INR 92.70). Hip fracture (HF) ITs showed similar cost-effectiveness at ages 60 (ICER of INR 67,144) and was the dominant strategy (i.e., more QALYs for lower costs) at ≥ 65 years. Fixed ITs of 14% for MOF and 3.5% for HF proved cost-effective across all age groups (dominant strategy for ages ≥ 65 years). Limitations of our study include the reliance on fracture incidence data from Singaporean Indians and variability in fracture prevalence across India.

conclusionThe results support the integration of FRAX®-based fixed ITs from the age of 50 years and age-based ones from the age of 65 years in India to optimize resource allocation and improve osteoporosis management.

Indexed as

AlendronateBone Density Conservation AgentsOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalOsteoporotic FracturesAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug CostsDrugs, GenericFemaleHip FracturesHumansIndiaMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsRisk AssessmentAlendronateBone Density Conservation AgentsDrugs, GenericCost effectivenessFRAXIndianIntervention thresholdsOsteoporosis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.