ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2025
Treatment failure in osteoporosis: who will experience a new Fracture? TAILOR a retrospective study.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Etiology, diagnosis, and management of chronic pancreatitis associated primary complications: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporosis treatments reduce fracture risk but cannot fully eliminate it, and the concept of treatment failure (TF) or inadequate clinical response (ICR) remains debated.
aimsThe TAILOR study aims to assess the prevalence of ICR and TF in osteoporotic women undergoing active drug treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis.
methodsTAILOR is a retrospective study conducted in an Italian outpatient service. We included 415 patients with at least 12 months of treatment and up to 10 years, examining clinical characteristics predicting TF and ICR. TF was defined as the occurrence of two fragility fractures while on treatment or one fracture plus lack of variation BMD and ICR as the occurrence of a new osteoporotic fracture in treated patients according to previous literature.
resultsSeventy-two patients experienced fractures during the follow-up, of those, 26 (36%) were classified as TF. The clinical characteristics of patients with fractures were similar to those without, except for a longer postmenopausal period and lower lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD). Postmenopausal period was significantly longer in TF compared to ICR patients. However, no significant differences were found in baseline fractures, prescribed treatments, or fracture-free survival curves with age, postmenopausal period, BMD, and previous treatments. The clinical follow-up was longer in ICR and TF patients. DISCUSSION: TAILOR shows a higher prevalence of ICR and TF (17.3%) compared to randomized controlled trials and real-world data, with 36% of fractures during follow-up classified as TF. Clinician decisions often led to changes in antiosteoporosis treatment, particularly in TF cases, though TF diagnosis was rarely cited explicitly in medical records.
conclusionTAILOR emphasizes that common clinical factors do not reliably predict ICR and TF. The findings highlight the complexity of determining an algorithm for the best treatment approach to prevent TF and ICR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.