Spine-hip T-score difference predicts major osteoporotic fracture risk independent of FRAX(®): a population-based report from CAMOS

The neglected association between schizophrenia and bone fragility: a systematic review and meta-analyses

Schizophrenia is associated with increased risk of medical comorbidity, possibly including osteoporosis, which is a public health concern due to its significant social and health consequences. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to determine whether schizophrenia is associated with bone fragility. The protocol for this review has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020171959). The research question and inclusion/exclusion criteria were developed and presented according to the PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparison, Outcome) framework. Schizophrenia was identified from medical records, DSM-IV/5 or the ICD. The outcomes for this review were bone fragility [i.e., bone mineral density (BMD), fracture, bone turnover markers, bone quality]. A search strategy was developed and implemented for the electronic databases. A narrative synthesis was undertaken for all included studies; the results from eligible studies reporting on BMD and fracture were pooled using a random effects model to complete a meta-analysis. The conduct of the review and reporting of results adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Our search yielded 3103 studies, of which 29 met the predetermined eligibility criteria. Thirty-seven reports from 29 studies constituted 17 studies investigating BMD, eight investigating fracture, three investigating bone quality and nine investigating bone turnover markers. The meta-analyses revealed that people with schizophrenia had lower BMD at the lumbar spine [standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% CI -1.27, -0.20; Z = -2.71, p = 0.01] and at the femoral neck (SMD -0.78, 95% CI -1.03, -0.53; Z = -6.18, p ≤ 0.001). Also observed was a higher risk of fracture (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.27, 1.61; Z = 5.88, p ≤ 0.001). Following adjustment for publication bias, the association between schizophrenia and femoral neck BMD (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -0.97, -0.29) and fracture (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.28, 1.35) remained. Significantly increased risk of bone fragility was observed in people with schizophrenia. This association was independent of sex, participant number, methodological quality and year of publication.

Discordance in Bone Mineral Density between the Lumbar Spine and Femoral Neck Is Associated with Renal Dysfunction

PURPOSE

Bone mineral density (BMD) determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is considered a gold standard for diagnosing osteoporosis. Some people show discordance in BMD values measured at the femur and that at the lumbar spine (LS). The aim of the present study was to investigate whether differences in BMD T-scores between the LS and femur neck (FN) are associated with renal dysfunction in the general population of Korea.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed national data for 17306 adults from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey conducted between 2008 and 2011. BMD T-score differences between LS and FN (termed BMD offset) were calculated by subtracting FN T-scores from LS T-scores. Diminished renal function was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m².

RESULTS

Among those aged ≥50 years, BMD offset was negatively associated with eGFR levels. Additionally, eGFR levels decreased linearly across increasing BMD offset quartiles. Men and women with an offset of >1.5 showed a 4.79-times and 2.51-times higher risk of renal dysfunction, respectively, compared to individuals with an offset of ≤0, after adjusting for age, body mass index, educational level, current smoking, and physical activity. In contrast, there was little evidence of an association between renal dysfunction and BMD offset in subjects aged <50 years.

CONCLUSION

Discordance between LS and FN BMDs was significantly associated with renal dysfunction in subjects aged ≥50 years. When assessing bone health in older chronic kidney disease patients, physicians should consider the possibility of BMD discordance between LS and FN.

A cross-sectional analysis of the association between sleep duration and osteoporosis risk in adults using 2005-2010 NHANES

Controversy remains regarding the relationship between bone health and sleep. In the literature, the effect of sleep on bone density in the clinical setting varies depending on the definition of normal sleep duration, sleep quality, selected population, and diagnostic tools for bone density. The aim of this study was to examine the association between bone mineral density (BMD)assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and sleep duration/quality in the defined adult population from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (a national household survey) within a 6-year period (2005–2010) and explore age differences. The basic variables, metabolic diseases, and bone density in the femoral neck as determined through dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, were segregated, and analyzed according to different sleep durations (1–4, 5–6,7–8, and > 9 h/day) and sleep quality using multinomial regression models. A total of 12,793 subjects were analyzed. Our results reveal that women aged > 50 years with sleep duration < 5 h/day had a 7.35 (CI 3.438–15.715) odds of osteoporosis than those in other groups. This analysis is based on a nationally representative sample using survey and inspection data and clarifies the relationship between bone density and the effect of the combination of sleep quality and duration.

Impact of spine-hip discordance on fracture risk assessment and treatment qualification in Canada: the Manitoba BMD registry

In 50,330 women undergoing bone mineral density (BMD) testing, adjusting FRAX® major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) probability for T-score differences between lumbar spine and femoral neck had a small impact on treatment qualification, with only 1.1% reclassified from below to above the 20% MOF intervention threshold.

PURPOSE

Discordance between lumbar spine and femoral neck T-score measurements are frequently encountered in clinical practice. The FRAX tool accepts femoral neck BMD as an optional input but does not consider lumbar spine BMD, though adjustments based upon T-score difference have been proposed. This analysis was undertaken to examine change in treatment qualification using the lumbar spine T-score adjustment to FRAX assuming an intervention threshold of 20% MOF.

METHODS

Women aged > 50 years with baseline FRAX MOF probability computed with femoral neck BMD of ≥ 20% but without previous high-risk fracture or high-risk medication use were identified in the province of Manitoba BMD registry. If lumbar spine T-score was lower than the femoral neck T-score, MOF probability was recalculated, and treatment qualification, reassessed.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 50,300 women (mean age 64.2 ± 8.6 years). During mean follow-up of 9.5 years, 4550 sustained incident MOF. The baseline mean T-score difference (femoral neck minus lumbar spine) was - 0.2 ± 1.1. Recalculated MOF probability using the T-score difference significantly improved overall net reclassification index for incident MOF prediction (+ 0.017, p < 0.001). A total of 561 (1.1%) of these women were reclassified from below to above 20% MOF probability based upon the T-score difference. No individuals with MOF probability less than 15% were reclassified to the higher risk category. Risk reclassification increased with lower lumbar spine T-score (15.6% reclassification for lumbar spine T-score of - 3.5 or lower, 4.0% of the study population) and larger T-score differences (9.7% reclassification for T-score difference of 2.5 or more, < 1% of the study population).

CONCLUSIONS

Very few women showed risk reclassification based upon adjusting FRAX MOF probability for lumbar spine T-score. Reclassification occurred only in those with baseline MOF probability > 15%.

Metabolic characteristics of subjects with spine-femur bone mineral density discordances: the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES 2008-2011)

The diagnosis of osteoporosis is determined based on the lowest bone mineral density (BMD) T-score at the lumbar spine (LS) and hip. However, there are occasional marked discordances between the T-score of LS and femur neck (FN). We aimed to examine the prevalence and characteristics of individuals with spine-femur BMD discordance using a nationwide survey. A total of 3233 men aged ≥ 50 years and 2915 postmenopausal women were included from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (2008-2011). The spine-femur discordance was defined as a difference of ≥ 1.5 SD between LS and FN BMD. Subjects were divided into three groups: low LS (LS < FN), low FN (LS > FN), and no discordance. Four-hundred and seventeen men (12.9%) and two hundred and ninety women (10%) exhibited spine-femur BMD discordance. The prevalence of hypertension and diabetes was higher in men and women with low FN BMD than in any other group. Fasting plasma glucose and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance was the highest in subjects with low FN BMD among the three groups. Low FN BMD revealed higher serum parathyroid hormone and lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 levels compared to any other group in women, but this was not observed in men. Osteoporosis was prevalent in subjects with discordance in both genders, particularly, in those with low LS BMD (31.6% in men and 63.5% in women). Given the high prevalence of spine-femur BMD discordance, low FN BMD may be associated with vitamin D deficiency and insulin resistance, but low LS BMD may present severe osteoporosis.

Screening to prevent fragility fractures among adults 40 years and older in primary care: protocol for a systematic review

PURPOSE

To inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care by systematically reviewing direct evidence on the effectiveness and acceptability of screening adults 40 years and older in primary care to reduce fragility fractures and related mortality and morbidity, and indirect evidence on the accuracy of fracture risk prediction tools. Evidence on the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatment will be reviewed, if needed to meaningfully influence the Task Force's decision-making.

METHODS

A modified update of an existing systematic review will evaluate screening effectiveness, the accuracy of screening tools, and treatment benefits. For treatment harms, we will integrate studies from existing systematic reviews. A de novo review on acceptability will be conducted. Peer-reviewed searches (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO [acceptability only]), grey literature, and hand searches of reviews and included studies will update the literature. Based on pre-specified criteria, we will screen studies for inclusion following a liberal-accelerated approach. Final inclusion will be based on consensus. Data extraction for study results will be performed independently by two reviewers while other data will be verified by a second reviewer; there may be some reliance on extracted data from the existing reviews. The risk of bias assessments reported in the existing reviews will be verified and for new studies will be performed independently. When appropriate, results will be pooled using either pairwise random effects meta-analysis (screening and treatment) or restricted maximum likelihood estimation with Hartun-Knapp-Sidnick-Jonkman correction (risk prediction model calibration). Subgroups of interest to explain heterogeneity are age, sex, and menopausal status. Two independent reviewers will rate the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach, with consensus reached for each outcome rated as critical or important by the Task Force.

DISCUSSION

Since the publication of other guidance in Canada, new trials have been published that are likely to improve understanding of screening in primary care settings to prevent fragility fractures. A systematic review is required to inform updated recommendations that align with the current evidence base.

Automation of a DXA-based finite element tool for clinical assessment of hip fracture risk

Finite element analysis of medical images is a promising tool for assessing hip fracture risk. Although a number of finite element models have been developed for this purpose, none of them have been routinely used in clinic. The main reason is that the computer programs that implement the finite element models have not been completely automated, and heavy training is required before clinicians can effectively use them. By using information embedded in clinical dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), we completely automated a DXA-based finite element (FE) model that we previously developed for predicting hip fracture risk. The automated FE tool can be run as a standalone computer program with the subject's raw hip DXA image as input. The automated FE tool had greatly improved short-term precision compared with the semi-automated version. To validate the automated FE tool, a clinical cohort consisting of 100 prior hip fracture cases and 300 matched controls was obtained from a local community clinical center. Both the automated FE tool and femoral bone mineral density (BMD) were applied to discriminate the fracture cases from the controls. Femoral BMD is the gold standard reference recommended by the World Health Organization for screening osteoporosis and for assessing hip fracture risk. The accuracy was measured by the area under ROC curve (AUC) and odds ratio (OR). Compared with femoral BMD (AUC = 0.71, OR = 2.07), the automated FE tool had a considerably improved accuracy (AUC = 0.78, OR = 2.61 at the trochanter). This work made a large step toward applying our DXA-based FE model as a routine clinical tool for the assessment of hip fracture risk. Furthermore, the automated computer program can be embedded into a web-site as an internet application.

Use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for diagnosis and fracture risk assessment; WHO-criteria, T- and Z-score, and reference databases

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a two-dimensional imaging technology developed to assess bone mineral density (BMD) of the entire human skeleton and also specifically of skeletal sites known to be most vulnerable to fracture. In order to simplify interpretation of BMD measurement results and allow comparability among different DXA-devices, the T-score concept was introduced. This concept involves an individual's BMD which is then compared with the mean value of a young healthy reference population, with the difference expressed as a standard deviation (SD). Since the early nineties of the past century, the diagnostic categories "normal, osteopenia, and osteoporosis", as recommended by a WHO working Group, are based on this concept. Thus, DXA is still the globally accepted "gold-standard" method for the noninvasive diagnosis of osteoporosis. Another score obtained from DXA measurement, termed Z-score, describes the number of SDs by which the BMD in an individual differs from the mean value expected for age and sex. Although not intended for diagnosis of osteoporosis in adults, it nevertheless provides information about an individual's fracture risk compared to peers. DXA measurement can either be used as a "stand-alone" means in the assessment of an individual's fracture risk, or incorporated into one of the available fracture risk assessment tools such as FRAX® or Garvan, thus improving the predictive power of such tools. The issue which reference databases should be used by DXA-device manufacturers for T-score reference standards has been recently addressed by an expert group, who recommended use National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III) databases for the hip reference standard but own databases for the lumbar spine. Furthermore, in men it is recommended use female reference databases for calculation of the T-score and use male reference databases for calculation of Z-score.

Clinical guidelines for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: summary statements and recommendations from the Italian Society for Orthopaedics and Traumatology

BACKGROUND

The Italian Society for Orthopaedics and Traumatology conceived this guidance-which is primarily addressed to Italian orthopedic surgeons, but should also prove useful to other bone specialists and to general practitioners-in order to improve the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of osteoporosis and its consequences.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature reviews by a multidisciplinary team.

RESULTS

The following topics are covered: the role of instrumental, metabolic, and genetic evaluations in the diagnosis of osteoporosis; appraisal of the risk of fracture and thresholds for intervention; general strategies for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis (primary and secondary prevention); the pharmacologic treatment of osteoporosis; the setting and implementation of fracture liaison services for tertiary prevention. Grade A, B, and C recommendations are provided based on the main levels of evidence (1-3). Toolboxes for everyday clinical practice are provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The first up-to-date Italian guidelines for the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures are presented.

Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry

Bone mineral density (BMD) measurement by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most commonly used method to assess fracture risk. DXA utilizes two different energy X-rays to calculate BMD and, by comparison to a young normative database, the T-score. In 1994, the World Health Organization defined osteoporosis based on T-score, changing the paradigm of the field and forever placing DXA measurements in the center of osteoporosis diagnosis. Since then, many large studies have demonstrated the predictive value of BMD by DXA-for every standard deviation decline in BMD, there is a relative risk of 1.5-2.5 for fracture. This predictive ability is similar to how blood pressure can predict myocardial infarction. Limitations of DXA are also important to consider. While BMD by DXA can identify those at risk, there is a significant overlap in the BMD of patients who will and will not fracture. Special considerations are also needed in men and ethnic minority groups. These groups may have different bone size, thus affecting the normative range of BMD, and/or distinct bone structure that affect the association between BMD and fractures. Finally, BMD can be affected by positioning errors or artifacts, including osteoarthritis, fracture, and jewelry. Of course, DXA has tremendous strengths as well-namely its wide availability, its low radiation exposure, and a large body of evidence that relate DXA measurements to fracture risk. For these reasons, DXA remains the cornerstone of fracture assessment now and for the foreseeable future.

Fracture Burden: What Two and a Half Decades of Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study Data Reveal About Clinical Outcomes of Osteoporosis

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

This review aims to highlight important clinical findings from the over 25 year-long Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study particularly focusing on outcomes post fracture.

RECENT FINDINGS

Every low trauma fracture in the elderly is associated with an increased risk of a subsequent fracture, with a higher risk in men than women. All major or proximal fractures and even minor fractures in the very elderly or minor fractures that are then followed by re-fracture are associated with premature mortality, greatest in the first 5 years post fracture. Having a subsequent fracture further increases this high mortality risk, but if an individual survives the high risk period, their risk returns to that of the background population. Non-hip non-vertebral fractures account for a significant proportion of the premature mortality. Despite an improvement in overall health and population mortality over the years, excess mortality post fracture has not changed in the last 2 decades. All low trauma, fractures in the elderly herald a high risk of poor outcomes, particularly in the first few years post fracture. Early intervention should be initiated.

Clinical fracture risk evaluated by hierarchical agglomerative clustering

Clustering analysis can identify subgroups of patients based on similarities of traits. From data on 10,775 subjects, we document nine patient clusters of different fracture risks. Differences emerged after age 60 and treatment compliance differed by hip and lumbar spine bone mineral density profiles.

INTRODUCTION

The purposes of this study were to establish and quantify patient clusters of high, average and low fracture risk using an unsupervised machine learning algorithm.

METHODS

Regional and national Danish patient data on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, medication reimbursement, primary healthcare sector use and comorbidity of female subjects were combined. Standardized variable means, Euclidean distances and Ward's D2 method of hierarchical agglomerative clustering (HAC), were used to form the clustering object. K number of clusters was selected with the lowest cluster containing less than 250 subjects. Clusters were identified as high, average or low fracture risk based on bone mineral density (BMD) characteristics. Cluster-based descriptive statistics and relative Z-scores for variable means were computed.

RESULTS

Ten thousand seven hundred seventy-five women were included in this study. Nine (k = 9) clusters were identified. Four clusters (n = 2886) were identified based on low to very low BMD with differences in comorbidity, anthropometrics and future bisphosphonate compliance. Two clusters of younger subjects (n = 1058, mean ages 30 and 51 years) were identified as low fracture risk with high to very high BMD. A mean age of 60 years was the earliest that allowed for separation of high-risk clusters. DXA scan results could identify high-risk subjects with different antiresorptive treatment compliance levels based on similarities and differences in lumbar spine and hip region BMD.

CONCLUSIONS

Unsupervised HAC presents a novel technology to improve patient characteristics in bone disease beyond traditional T-score-based diagnosis. Technological and validation limitations need to be overcome to improve its use in internal medicine. Current DXA scan indication guidelines could be further improved by clustering algorithms.

Diagnostic devices for osteoporosis in the general population: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

A diagnostic gap exists in the current dual photon X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) based diagnostic approach to osteoporosis. Other diagnostic devices have been developed, but no comprehensive review concerning the applicability of these diagnostic devices for population-based screening have been performed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials was performed for population-based studies that focused on technical methods that could either indicate bone mineral density (BMD) by DXA, substitute for DXA in prediction of fracture risk, or that could have an incremental value in fracture prediction in addition to DXA. Quality of included studies was rated by QUADAS 2.

RESULTS

Many other technical devices have been tested in a population-based setting. Five studies aiming to indicate BMD and 17 studies aiming to predict fractures were found. Overall, the latter studies had higher methodological quality. The highest number of studies was found for quantitative ultrasound (QUS). The ability to indicate BMD or predict fractures was moderate to minor for all examined devices, using reported area under the curve (AUC) of Receiver Operating Characteristic curves values as standard.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the methods assessed, only QUS appears capable of perhaps replacing DXA as standalone examination in the future whilst radiographic absorptiometry could provide important information in areas with scarcity of DXA. QUS may be of added value even after DXA has been performed. Evaluation of proposed cutoff-values from population-based studies in separate population-based cohorts is still lacking for most examination devices.

Is It Possible to Increase the Clinical Effectiveness of the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool in Osteopenia Patients by Taking Into Account Bone Mineral Density Values?

The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the clinical use of the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX(®)) developed by the World Health Organization identifying patients at risk of osteoporotic fracture and to evaluate changes in osteoporotic fracture risk prediction according to bone mineral density (BMD) values. We identified the occurrence of osteoporotic fracture among patients whose BMD was measured in our hospital between April 2003 and March 2013. We then analyzed FRAX(®) scores obtained with or without BMD on the day before the occurrence of an osteoporotic fracture in actual osteoporotic fracture patients. According to the National Osteoporosis Foundation high-risk criteria, we identified the percentage of high-risk patients before the actual fracture. Among 445 osteoporotic fracture patients, when FRAX(®)-BMD was used, 281 patients (63%) were identified as high-risk before an actual osteoporotic fracture, and when FRAX(®) without BMD was used, 258 patients (58%) were identified (p = 0.115). In the 84 osteopenia patients, 39 patients (46.4%) were identified as high-risk when FRAX(®) without BMD was used, and 19 patients (22.6%) were identified when FRAX(®)-BMD was used (p = 0.001). The use of BMD in FRAX(®) does not seem to increase the clinical effectiveness of predicting osteoporotic fracture in osteopenia patients.

A Meta-Analysis of Trabecular Bone Score in Fracture Risk Prediction and Its Relationship to FRAX

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a gray-level textural index of bone microarchitecture derived from lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images. TBS is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent predictor of fracture risk. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine whether TBS predicted fracture risk independently of FRAX probability and to examine their combined performance by adjusting the FRAX probability for TBS. We utilized individual-level data from 17,809 men and women in 14 prospective population-based cohorts. Baseline evaluation included TBS and the FRAX risk variables, and outcomes during follow-up (mean 6.7 years) comprised major osteoporotic fractures. The association between TBS, FRAX probabilities, and the risk of fracture was examined using an extension of the Poisson regression model in each cohort and for each sex and expressed as the gradient of risk (GR; hazard ratio per 1 SD change in risk variable in direction of increased risk). FRAX probabilities were adjusted for TBS using an adjustment factor derived from an independent cohort (the Manitoba Bone Density Cohort). Overall, the GR of TBS for major osteoporotic fracture was 1.44 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-1.53) when adjusted for age and time since baseline and was similar in men and women (p > 0.10). When additionally adjusted for FRAX 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture, TBS remained a significant, independent predictor for fracture (GR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.24-1.41). The adjustment of FRAX probability for TBS resulted in a small increase in the GR (1.76, 95% CI 1.65-1.87 versus 1.70, 95% CI 1.60-1.81). A smaller change in GR for hip fracture was observed (FRAX hip fracture probability GR 2.25 vs. 2.22). TBS is a significant predictor of fracture risk independently of FRAX. The findings support the use of TBS as a potential adjustment for FRAX probability, though the impact of the adjustment remains to be determined in the context of clinical assessment guidelines. © 2015 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Number of osteoporotic sites as a modifying factor for bone mineral density

Discordance has been proposed as a new predictor of fracture risk that may affect fracture risk via bone mineral density (BMD). With an emphasis on better understanding the relationship between discordance and BMD, the aim of this study was to determine the effect of the number of osteoporotic sites, as an indicator of discordance, on BMD and to explore the clinical significance of BMD modification by this factor. This study was based on data obtained from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2008-2011, which is a nationwide cross-sectional study. Among postmenopausal women aged 50 years or older, 3,849 women whose BMD was measured at three sites (lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip) were included in the study. The diagnosis was consistent across sites in only 39.2-59.0 % of cases. Lumbar spine T-score was reduced by 0.163 for two osteoporotic sites and by 0.462 for three osteoporotic sites, compared with having one osteoporotic site at the lumbar spine only. Femoral neck T-score was reduced by 0.609 for three osteoporotic sites compared with one or two osteoporotic sites. Using BMD adjusted for discordance, we found fracture risk probability changed significantly. Our results confirmed that BMD discordance was considerably high among Korean women in their 50s and older owing to site-dependent differences in the pattern of BMD reduction with age. Mean BMD decreased with increasing number of osteoporotic sites. Using a modified BMD adjusted for the number of osteoporotic sites may offer more accurate fracture risk assessment.

Risk Assessment Tools for Osteoporosis Screening in Postmenopausal Women: A Systematic Review

Osteoporotic fractures are common in postmenopausal women. Tools are available to estimate the risk of low bone mineral density (BMD) or fracture. This systematic review retrieved articles that evaluated osteoporosis risk assessment tools among postmenopausal women in North America. For identifying BMD T-score ≤-2.5, most studies of the Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation tool (SCORE) and Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI) reported sensitivity ≥90 %. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was usually <0.75 for SCORE and ≥0.75 for ORAI. Among women 50-64 years old, a Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) threshold ≥9.3 % had a sensitivity of 33 % for identifying BMD T-score ≤-2.5 and 26 % for predicting major osteoporotic fracture (MOF). For predicting MOF, sensitivity was higher for SCORE and Osteoporosis Self-assessment Tool equation (OST), and higher in women ≥65 years old. For predicting BMD T-score ≤-2.5 in women ≥65 years old, the sensitivities of SCORE; ORAI; and Age, Body Size, No Estrogen (ABONE) were very high. No optimal osteoporosis risk assessment tool is available for identifying low BMD and MOF risk.

What Do We Know about Individuals Who Are Assessed as Being at Moderate Risk for Future Fracture in Canada?

OBJECTIVE

We examined what was known about individuals in Canada who were assessed as being at moderate risk for future fracture.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted. Eligible articles were Canadian studies published from 2010 onwards reporting on primary data that included patients at moderate risk for future fracture. We limited the search to Canada as fracture risk categorization is unique to each country. Studies were identified by searching relevant databases. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts to determine each study's eligibility. General information about each study, demographic information about the moderate risk groups (including tool used to determine moderate risk (Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada (CAROC)), and outcomes (number of patients: recommended treatment, prescribed treatment, initiating treatment, persisting with treatment after six months, who re-fractured, who died) were documented.

RESULTS

We identified 1193 papers which were further screened for eligibility. Of the 1193 identified, 7 were eligible for the review but only 4 articles contained demographic or outcome data on moderate risk patients. In one study, 1.8% of moderate risk patients died over a mean 5.3 years of observation and in three studies, the risk of fracture was 5.9% over a median of 3 years of follow-up, 8.3% over a mean of 5.4 years, and 14.7% over 10 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

There is a wide knowledge gap in the literature concerning individuals who are assessed as moderate risk for future fracture in Canada.

High prevalence of spine–femur bone mineral density discordance and comparison of vertebral fracture risk assessment using femoral neck and lumbar spine bone density in Korean patients

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of spine–femur discordance, and to compare the effectiveness of femoral neck (FN) and lumbar spine (LS) bone mineral density (BMD) for estimation of the risk of vertebral fractures. Women who were evaluated with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry between January 2001 and December 2005 were enrolled in this study. Vertebral fracture risk was calculated using initial FN and LS BMD. The follow-up vertebral X-rays from all subjects were reviewed, and the calculated estimated risk using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX(®)) was compared with the actual prevalence of vertebral fractures during the follow-up period. Among a total of 443 women with a mean age of 58.5 years, 130 women (29.3 %) demonstrated femur–spine discordance (i.e., a difference between FN and LS BMD of [1 SD). Most subjects having discordance showed lower LS BMD (73.1 %) compared to FN BMD. During the mean 7-year follow-up period, 12 (2.7 %) vertebral fractures occurred. In cases with high estimated fracture risk ([20 % for estimated fracture risk), using LSBMD significantly reflected the actual vertebral fracture in total subjects [odds ratio (OR) 19.29, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 4.21–88.46], in subjects with spine–femur discordance (OR 16.00, 95 % CI 1.91–134.16), and in subjects with spine–femur discordance having lower LSBMD (OR 20.67, 95 % CI 1.63–262.71). In comparison, the estimated risk using FN BMD did not reflect the actual occurrence of vertebral fractures. In conclusion, a significant number of Korean subjects exhibited spine–femur discordance, and LS BMD might be more appropriate for estimation of vertebral fracture risk.

Utility of spine bone mineral density in fracture prediction within FRAX

Predicting individuals at risk for fracturing and modifying that risk are important in preventative health. Our aim was to quantify the impact of spine bone mineral density (BMD) on fracture risk prediction and determine the positive predictive value of fracture prediction using the lowest BMD value at the femoral neck, total hip, or lumbar spine. A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 15,033 women was performed, assessing the contribution of age, body mass index, number of clinical risk factors, T-score, and osteoporosis category to the presence of fracture. In patients whose lumbar spine T-scores are 1 or 2 osteoporosis categories lower than femoral neck, there is an approximately 30% increased risk of fracture compared with the femoral neck alone. For patients younger than 60 years, the odds ratio of having a fracture based on the presence of lumbar spine osteoporosis was greater than that based on femoral neck osteoporosis. Osteoporosis at the total hip correlated best with the presence of fracture. When using FRAX, we recommend that the 10-yr fracture prediction be adjusted when lumbar spine T-score is 1-2 osteoporosis categories lower than the femoral neck T-score or when lumbar spine T-score is ≥1 standard deviation less than femoral neck T-score.

European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

Guidance is provided in a European setting on the assessment and treatment of postmenopausal women at risk of fractures due to osteoporosis.

INTRODUCTION

The International Osteoporosis Foundation and European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis published guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in 2008. This manuscript updates these in a European setting.

METHODS

Systematic literature reviews.

RESULTS

The following areas are reviewed: the role of bone mineral density measurement for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk, general and pharmacological management of osteoporosis, monitoring of treatment, assessment of fracture risk, case finding strategies, investigation of patients and health economics of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A platform is provided on which specific guidelines can be developed for national use.

Assessment of fracture risk

Osteoporosis-related fractures (low-trauma, fragility fractures) are associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditure worldwide. In the absence of a defining fracture, the diagnosis of osteoporosis is based on the World Health Organization's T-score criteria using central dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Paradoxically, the majority of those patients who will sustain a low-trauma fracture do not meet the T-score definition of osteoporosis. Conversely, younger individuals with bone density in the osteoporotic range but no other risk factors have relatively low fracture rates and yet are frequently considered candidates for osteoporosis therapies. The limited accuracy of bone density testing alone to predict fractures has led to the development of a variety of fracture assessment tools that utilize the combination of bone density and clinical risk factors to improve the prediction of low-trauma fractures. These fracture assessment tools quantitatively predict the 10-year fracture probability of hip and major osteoporosis-related fractures, and can be used to define cost-effective intervention strategies for primary and secondary fracture prevention.

Predicting fracture using 2D finite element modelling

A decrease in bone density at the hip or spine has been shown to increase the risk of fracture. A limitation of the bone mineral density (BMD) measurement is that it provides only a measure of a bone sample's average density when projected onto a 2D surface. Effectively, what determines bone fracture is whether an applied load exceeds ultimate strength, with both bone tissue material properties (can be approximated through bone density), and geometry playing a role. The goal of this project was to use bone geometry and BMD obtained from radiographs and DXA measurements respectively to estimate fracture risk, using a two-dimensional finite element model (FEM) of the sagittal plane of lumbar vertebrae. The Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos) data was used for this study. There were 4194 men and women over the age of 50 years, with 786 having fractures. Each subject had BMD testing and radiographs of their lumbar vertebrae. A single two dimensional FEM of the first to fourth lumbar vertebra was automatically generated for each subject. Bone tissue stiffness was assigned based on the BMD of the individual vertebrae, and adjusted for patient age. Axial compression boundary conditions were applied with a force proportional to body mass. The resulting overall strain from the applied force was found. Men and women were analyzed separately. At baseline, the sensitivity of BMD to predict fragility fractures in women and men was 3.77% and 0.86%, while the sensitivity of FEM to predict fragility fractures for women and men was 10.8% and 11.3%. The FEM ROC curve demonstrated better performance compared to BMD. The relative risk of being considered at high fracture risk using FEM at baseline, was a better predictor of 5 year incident fragility fracture risk compared to BMD.

Official Positions for FRAX® Bone Mineral Density and FRAX® simplification from Joint Official Positions Development Conference of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and International Osteoporosis Foundation on FRAX®

Tools to predict fracture risk are useful for selecting patients for pharmacological therapy in order to reduce fracture risk and redirect limited healthcare resources to those who are most likely to benefit. FRAX® is a World Health Organization fracture risk assessment algorithm for estimating the 10-year probability of hip fracture and major osteoporotic fracture. Effective application of FRAX® in clinical practice requires a thorough understanding of its limitations as well as its utility. For some patients, FRAX® may underestimate or overestimate fracture risk. In order to address some of the common issues encountered with the use of FRAX® for individual patients, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) and International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) assigned task forces to review the medical evidence and make recommendations for optimal use of FRAX® in clinical practice. Among the issues addressed were the use of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements at skeletal sites other than the femoral neck, the use of technologies other than dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, the use of FRAX® without BMD input, the use of FRAX® to monitor treatment, and the addition of the rate of bone loss as a clinical risk factor for FRAX®. The evidence and recommendations were presented to a panel of experts at the Joint ISCD-IOF FRAX® Position Development Conference, resulting in the development of Joint ISCD-IOF Official Positions addressing FRAX®-related issues.