FRAX predicts cardiovascular risk in women undergoing osteoporosis screening: the Manitoba bone mineral density registry.

Osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are highly prevalent in older women, with increasing evidence for shared risk factors and pathogenesis. Although FRAX was developed for the assessment of fracture risk, we hypothesized that it might also provide information on CVD risk. To test the ability of the FRAX tool and FRAX-defined risk factors to predict incident CVD in women undergoing osteoporosis screening with DXA, we performed a retrospective prognostic cohort study which included women aged 50 yr or older with a baseline DXA scan in the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density Registry between March 31, 1999 and March 31, 2018. FRAX scores for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) were calculated on all participants. Incident MOF and major adverse CV events (MACE; hospitalized acute myocardial infarction [AMI], hospitalized non-hemorrhagic cerebrovascular disease [CVA], or all-cause death) were ascertained from linkage to population-based healthcare data. The study population comprised 59 696 women (mean age 65.7 ± 9.4 yr). Over mean 8.7 yr of observation, 6021 (10.1%) had MOF, 12 277 women (20.6%) had MACE, 2274 (3.8%) had AMI, 2061 (3.5%) had CVA, and 10 253 (17.2%) died. MACE rates per 1000 person-years by FRAX risk categories low (10-yr predicted MOF <10%), moderate (10%-19.9%) and high (≥20%) were 13.5, 34.0, and 64.6, respectively. Although weaker than the association with incident MOF, increasing FRAX quintile was associated with increasing risk for MACE (all P-trend <.001), even after excluding prior CVD and adjusting for age. HR for MACE per SD increase in FRAX was 1.99 (95%CI, 1.96-2.02). All FRAX-defined risk factors (except parental hip fracture and lower BMI) were independently associated with higher non-death CV events. Although FRAX is intended for fracture risk prediction, it has predictive value for cardiovascular risk.

A meta-analysis of previous falls and subsequent fracture risk in cohort studies.

The relationship between self-reported falls and fracture risk was estimated in an international meta-analysis of individual-level data from 46 prospective cohorts. Previous falls were associated with an increased fracture risk in women and men and should be considered as an additional risk factor in the FRAX® algorithm. INTRODUCTION: Previous falls are a well-documented risk factor for subsequent fracture but have not yet been incorporated into the FRAX algorithm. The aim of this study was to evaluate, in an international meta-analysis, the association between previous falls and subsequent fracture risk and its relation to sex, age, duration of follow-up, and bone mineral density (BMD). METHODS: The resource comprised 906,359 women and men (66.9% female) from 46 prospective cohorts. Previous falls were uniformly defined as any fall occurring during the previous year in 43 cohorts; the remaining three cohorts had a different question construct. The association between previous falls and fracture risk (any clinical fracture, osteoporotic fracture, major osteoporotic fracture, and hip fracture) was examined using an extension of the Poisson regression model in each cohort and each sex, followed by random-effects meta-analyses of the weighted beta coefficients. RESULTS: Falls in the past year were reported in 21.4% of individuals. During a follow-up of 9,102,207 person-years, 87,352 fractures occurred of which 19,509 were hip fractures. A previous fall was associated with a significantly increased risk of any clinical fracture both in women (hazard ratio (HR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33-1.51) and men (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.41-1.67). The HRs were of similar magnitude for osteoporotic, major osteoporotic fracture, and hip fracture. Sex significantly modified the association between previous fall and fracture risk, with predictive values being higher in men than in women (e.g., for major osteoporotic fracture, HR 1.53 (95% CI 1.27-1.84) in men vs. HR 1.32 (95% CI 1.20-1.45) in women, P for interaction = 0.013). The HRs associated with previous falls decreased with age in women and with duration of follow-up in men and women for most fracture outcomes. There was no evidence of an interaction between falls and BMD for fracture risk. Subsequent risk for a major osteoporotic fracture increased with each additional previous fall in women and men. CONCLUSIONS: A previous self-reported fall confers an increased risk of fracture that is largely independent of BMD. Previous falls should be considered as an additional risk factor in future iterations of FRAX to improve fracture risk prediction.

Fracture prediction in rheumatoid arthritis: validation of FRAX with bone mineral density for incident major osteoporotic fractures.

OBJECTIVES: FRAX® uses clinical risk factors, with or without bone mineral density (BMD), to calculate 10-year fracture risk. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a risk factor for osteoporotic fracture and a FRAX input variable. FRAX predates the current era of RA treatment. We examined how well FRAX predicts fracture in contemporary RA patients. METHODS: Administrative data from patients receiving BMD testing were linked to the Manitoba Population Health Research Data Repository. Observed cumulative 10-year Major Osteoporotic Fracture (MOF) probability was compared with FRAX-predicted 10-year MOF probability with BMD for assessing calibration. MOF risk stratification was assessed using Cox regression. RESULTS: RA patients (N = 2,099, 208 with incident MOF) and non-RA patients (N = 2,099, with 165 incident MOF) were identified. For RA patients, FRAX predicted 10-year risk was 13.2% and observed 10-year MOF risk was 13.2% (95% CI 11.6% to 15.1%). The slope of the calibration plot was 0.67 (95% CI 0.53-0. 81) in those with RA vs 0.98 (95% CI 0.61-1.34) in non-RA patients. Risk was overestimated in RA patients with high FRAX scores (>20%), but FRAX was well-calibrated in other groups. FRAX stratified risk in those with and without RA (hazard ratios 1.52, 95% 1.25-1.72 vs 2.00, 95% 1.73-2.31), with slightly better performance in the latter (p-interaction = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: FRAX predicts fracture risk in contemporary RA patients but may slightly overestimate risk in those already at high predicted risk. Thus, the current FRAX tool continues to be appropriate for fracture risk assessment in RA patients.

Adjusting Trabecular Bone Score (TBS) for Level-Specific Differences Reduces FRAX®-Based Treatment Reclassification in Patients with Vertebral Exclusions: The Manitoba BMD Registry.

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a FRAX®-independent risk factor for fracture prediction. TBS values increase from cranial to caudal, with the following mean differences between TBSL1-L4 and individual lumbar vertebrae: L1 -0.093, L2 -0.008, L3 +0.055 and L4 +0.046. Excluding vertebral levels can affect FRAX-based treatment recommendations close to the intervention threshold. We examined the effect of adjusting for level-specific TBS differences in individuals with vertebral exclusions due to structural artifact on TBS-adjusted FRAX-based treatment recommendations. We identified 71,209 individuals aged ≥40 years with TBS and FRAX calculations through the Manitoba Bone Density Program. In the 24,428 individuals with vertebral exclusions, adjusting TBS using these level-specific factors agreed with TBSL1-L4 (mean difference -0.001). We compared FRAX-based treatment recommendations for TBSL1-L4 and for non-excluded vertebral levels before and after adjusting for level-specific TBS differences. Among those with baseline major osteoporotic fracture risk ≥15 %, TBS with vertebral exclusions reclassified FRAX-based treatment in 10.6 % of individuals compared with TBSL1-L4, and was reduced to 7.2 % after adjusting for level-specific differences. In 11,131 patients where L1-L2 was used for BMD reporting (the most common exclusion pattern with the largest TBS effect), treatment reclassification was reduced from 13.9 % to 2.4 %, respectively. Among individuals with baseline hip fracture risk ≥2 %, TBS vertebral exclusions reclassified 7.1 % compared with TBSL1-L4, but only 4.5 % after adjusting for level-specific differences. When L1-L2 was used for BMD reporting, treatment reclassification from hip fracture risk was reduced from 9.2 % to 5.2 %. In conclusion, TBS and TBS-adjusted FRAX-based treatment recommendations are affected by vertebral level exclusions for structural artifact. Adjusting for level-specific differences in TBS reduces reclassification in FRAX-based treatment recommendations.

Effect of BMI-Discordant Abdominal Tissue Thickness on Fracture Probability: A Registry-Based Study.

FRAX, which is used to assess fracture probability, considers body mass index (BMI), but BMI may not reflect individual variation in body composition and distribution. We examined the effect of BMI-discordant abdominal thickness on FRAX-derived fracture probability for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture. We studied 73,105 individuals, mean age 64.2 years. During mean 8.7 years, 7048 (9.6%) individuals sustained incident MOF, including 2155 (3.0%) hip fractures. We defined abdominal thickness index (ATI) as the difference between abdominal thickness measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and thickness predicted by BMI using sex-stratified regression. ATI was categorized from lower (<-2 cm, -2 to -1 cm) to higher (1-2 cm, >+2 cm) with referent around zero (-1 to +1 cm). Adjusted for FRAX probability, increasing ATI was associated with incident MOF and hip fracture (p < 0.001). For the highest ATI category, MOF risk was increased (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.35) independent of FRAX probability. Similar findings were noted for hip fracture probability (HR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.09-1.51). There was significant age-interaction with much larger effects before age 65 years (HR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.23-1.69 for MOF; 2.29, 95% CI 1.65-3.18 for hip fracture). In contrast, for the subset of individuals with diabetes, there was also increased risk for those in the lowest ATI category (HR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.12-2.65 for MOF; 2.81, 95% CI 1.59-4.97 for hip fracture). Calibration plots across ATI categories demonstrated deviation from the line of identity in women (calibration slope 2.26 for MOF, 2.83 for hip fracture). An effect of ATI was not found in men, but this was inconclusive as the sex-interaction terms did not show significant effect modification. In conclusion, these data support the need to investigate increased abdominal thickness beyond that predicted by BMI and sex as a FRAX-independent risk factor for fracture. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

FRAX® Adjustment Using Renormalized Trabecular Bone Score (TBS) from L1 Alone may be Optimal for Fracture Prediction: The Manitoba BMD Registry.

Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS) used in conjunction with FRAX® improves 10-year fracture prediction. The derived FRAX risk adjustment is based upon TBS measured from L1-L4, designated TBSL1-L4-FRAX. In prior studies, TBS measurements that include L1 and exclude L4 give better fracture stratification than L1-L4. We compared risk stratification from TBS-adjusted FRAX using TBS derived from different combinations of upper lumbar vertebral levels renormalized for level-specific differences in individuals from the Manitoba Bone Density Program aged >40 years with baseline assessment of TBS and FRAX. TBS measurements for L1-L3, L1-L2 and L1 alone were calculated after renormalization for level-specific differences. Corresponding TBS-adjusted FRAX scores designated TBSL1-L3-FRAX, TBSL1-L2-FRAX and TBSL1-FRAX were compared with TBSL1-L4-FRAX for fracture risk stratification. Incident major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) and hip fractures were assessed. The primary outcome was incremental change in area under the curve (ΔAUC). The study population included 71,209 individuals (mean age 64 years, 89.8% female). Before renormalization, mean TBS for L1-3, L1-L2 and L1 was significantly lower and TBS-adjusted FRAX significantly higher than from using TBSL1-L4. These differences were largely eliminated when TBS was renormalized for level-specific differences. During mean follow-up of 8.7 years 6745 individuals sustained incident MOF and 2039 sustained incident hip fractures. Compared with TBSL1-L4-FRAX, use of FRAX without TBS was associated with lower stratification (ΔAUC = -0.009, p < 0.001). There was progressive improvement in MOF stratification using TBSL1-L3-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.001, p < 0.001), TBSL1-L2-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.004, p < 0.001) and TBSL1-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.005, p < 0.001). TBSL1-FRAX was significantly better than all other combinations for MOF prediction (p < 0.001). Incremental improvement in AUC for hip fracture prediction showed a similar but smaller trend. In conclusion, this single large cohort study found that TBS-adjusted FRAX performance for fracture prediction was improved when limited to the upper lumbar vertebral levels and was best using L1 alone.

Adjusting FRAX Estimates of Fracture Probability Based on a Positive Vertebral Fracture Assessment.

Importance: FRAX is the most widely used and validated fracture risk prediction tool worldwide. Vertebral fractures, which are an indicator of subsequent osteoporotic fractures, can be identified using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) vertebral fracture assessment (VFA). Objective: To assess the calibration of FRAX and develop a simple method for improving FRAX-predicted fracture probability in the presence of VFA-identified fracture. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study analyzed the DXA and VFA results of all individuals who underwent a VFA between March 31, 2010, and March 31, 2018, who were included in the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density Registry. These individuals were randomly assigned to either the development cohort or validation cohort. A modified algorithm-based qualitative approach was used by expert readers to code VFAs as positive (≥1 vertebral fractures detected) or negative (0 vertebral fracture detected). Statistical analysis was conducted from August 7, 2022, to May 22, 2023. Exposures: FRAX scores for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture were calculated with or without VFA results. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incident fractures and death were ascertained using linked population-based health care provincial data. Cumulative incidence curves for MOF and hip fracture were constructed, including competing mortality, to predict the 10-year observed risk of fracture. The observed probability was compared with FRAX-predicted fracture probability with and without VFA results and recalibrated FRAX from derived multipliers. Results: The full cohort of 11 766 individuals was randomly allocated to the development cohort (n = 7854; 7349 females [93.6%]; mean [SD] age, 75.7 [6.8] years) or the validation cohort (n = 3912; 3713 females [94.9%]; mean [SD] age, 75.5 [6.9] years). Over a mean (SD) observation time of 3.8 (2.3) years, with the longest observation at 7.5 years, FRAX was well calibrated in subgroups with negative VFA results. For individuals without a prior clinical fracture but with a positive VFA result, the 10-year FRAX-predicted MOF probability was 16.3% (95% CI, 15.7%-16.8%) without VFA information and 23.4% (95% CI, 22.7%-24.1%) with VFA information. The observed 10-year probabilities were 26.9% (95% CI, 26.0%-27.8%) and 11.2% (95% CI, 10.3%-12.1%), respectively, resulting in recalibration multipliers of 1.15 (95% CI, 0.87-1.43) for MOF and 1.31 (95% CI, 0.75-1.87) for hip fracture. For individuals with a prior clinical fracture and a positive VFA result, the 10-year FRAX-predicted probabilities were 25.0% (95% CI, 24.2%-25.7%) for MOF and 9.3% (95% CI, 8.7%-10.0%) for hip fracture. The observed 10-year probabilities were 38.1% (95% CI, 37.0%-39.1%) for MOF and 16.4% (95% CI, 15.4%-17.4%) for hip fracture, resulting in a recalibration multiplier of 1.53 (95% CI, 1.10-1.96) for MOF and 1.76 (95% CI, 1.17-2.35) for hip fracture. Good calibration (>0.90) was confirmed using the derived multipliers in the validation cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this prognostic study suggest that FRAX underestimated fracture risk in patients with VFA-identified fractures. Simple multipliers could recover FRAX calibration in individuals with VFA-identified fractures.

Update on the clinical use of trabecular bone score (TBS) in the management of osteoporosis: results of an expert group meeting organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO), and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) under the auspices of WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging.

PURPOSE: Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a grey-level textural measurement acquired from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry lumbar spine images and is a validated index of bone microarchitecture. In 2015, a Working Group of the European Society on Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) published a review of the TBS literature, concluding that TBS predicts hip and major osteoporotic fracture, at least partly independent of bone mineral density (BMD) and clinical risk factors. It was also concluded that TBS is potentially amenable to change as a result of pharmacological therapy. Further evidence on the utility of TBS has since accumulated in both primary and secondary osteoporosis, and the introduction of FRAX and BMD T-score adjustment for TBS has accelerated adoption. This position paper therefore presents a review of the updated scientific literature and provides expert consensus statements and corresponding operational guidelines for the use of TBS. METHODS: An Expert Working Group was convened by the ESCEO and a systematic review of the evidence undertaken, with defined search strategies for four key topics with respect to the potential use of TBS: (1) fracture prediction in men and women; (2) initiating and monitoring treatment in postmenopausal osteoporosis; (3) fracture prediction in secondary osteoporosis; and (4) treatment monitoring in secondary osteoporosis. Statements to guide the clinical use of TBS were derived from the review and graded by consensus using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: A total of 96 articles were reviewed and included data on the use of TBS for fracture prediction in men and women, from over 20 countries. The updated evidence shows that TBS enhances fracture risk prediction in both primary and secondary osteoporosis, and can, when taken with BMD and clinical risk factors, inform treatment initiation and the choice of antiosteoporosis treatment. Evidence also indicates that TBS provides useful adjunctive information in monitoring treatment with long-term denosumab and anabolic agents. All expert consensus statements were voted as strongly recommended. CONCLUSION: The addition of TBS assessment to FRAX and/or BMD enhances fracture risk prediction in primary and secondary osteoporosis, adding useful information for treatment decision-making and monitoring. The expert consensus statements provided in this paper can be used to guide the integration of TBS in clinical practice for the assessment and management of osteoporosis. An example of an operational approach is provided in the appendix. This position paper presents an up-to-date review of the evidence base, synthesised through expert consensus statements, which informs the implementation of Trabecular Bone Score in clinical practice.

Real-world evidence: new opportunities for osteoporosis research. Recommendations from a Working Group from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).

This narrative review summarises the recommendations of a Working Group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) for the conduct and reporting of real-world evidence studies with a focus on osteoporosis research. PURPOSE: Vast amounts of data are routinely generated at every healthcare contact and activity, and there is increasing recognition that these real-world data can be analysed to generate scientific evidence. Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly used to delineate the natural history of disease, assess real-life drug effectiveness, understand adverse events and in health economic analysis. The aim of this work was to understand the benefits and limitations of this type of data and outline approaches to ensure that transparent and high-quality evidence is generated. METHODS: A ESCEO Working Group was convened in December 2022 to discuss the applicability of RWE to osteoporosis research and approaches to best practice. RESULTS: This narrative review summarises the agreed recommendations for the conduct and reporting of RWE studies with a focus on osteoporosis research. CONCLUSIONS: It is imperative that research using real-world data is conducted to the highest standards with close attention to limitations and biases of these data, and with transparency at all stages of study design, data acquisition and curation, analysis and reporting to increase the trustworthiness of RWE study findings.

Trabecular Bone Score Vertebral Exclusions Affect Risk Classification and Treatment Recommendations: The Manitoba Bmd Registry.

Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS), a texture measure derived from spine dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images, is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent risk factor for fracture. Lumbar vertebral levels that show structural artifact are excluded from BMD measurement. TBS is relatively unaffected by degenerative artifact, and it is uncertain whether the same exclusions should be applied to TBS reporting. To gain insight into the clinical impact of vertebral exclusion on TBS, we examined the effect of lumbar vertebral exclusions in routine clinical practice on tertile-based TBS categorization and TBS adjusted FRAX-based treatment recommendations. The study population consisted of 71,209 individuals aged 40 years and older with narrow fan-beam spine DXA examinations and retrospectively-derived TBS. During BMD reporting, 34.3% of the scans had one or more vertebral exclusions for structural artifact. When TBS was derived from the same vertebral levels used for BMD reporting, using fixed L1-L4 tertile cutoffs (1.23 and 1.31 from the McCloskey meta-analysis) reclassified 17.9% to a lower and 6.5% to a higher TBS category, with 75.6% unchanged. Reclassification was reduced from 24.4% overall to 17.2% when level-specific tertile cutoffs from the software manufacturer were used. Treatment reclassification based upon FRAX major osteoporotic fracture probability occurred in 2.9% overall, but in 9.6% of those with baseline risk ≥15%. For treatment based upon FRAX hip fracture probability, reclassification occurred in 3.4% overall, but in 10.4% in those with baseline risk ≥2%. In summary, lumbar spine TBS measurements based upon vertebral levels other than L1-L4 can alter the tertile category and treatment recommendations based upon TBS-adjusted FRAX calculation, especially for those close to or exceeding the treatment cut-off. Manufacturer level-specific tertile cut-offs should be used if vertebral exclusions are applied.

FRAX Adjustment by Trabecular Bone Score with or Without Bone Mineral Density: The Manitoba BMD Registry.

Trabecular bone score (TBS), a texture measure derived from spine dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images, is a FRAX®-independent risk factor for fracture. The TBS adjustment to FRAX assumes the presence of femoral neck BMD in the calculation. However, there are many individuals in whom hip DXA cannot be acquired. Whether the TBS-adjustment would apply to FRAX probabilities calculated without BMD has not been studied. The current analysis was performed to evaluate major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture risk adjusted for FRAX with and without femoral neck BMD. The study cohort consisted of 71,209 individuals (89.8% female, mean age 64.0 years). During mean follow-up 8.7 years, 6743 (9.5%) individuals sustained one or more incident MOF, of which 2037 (2.9%) sustained a hip fracture. Lower TBS was significantly associated with increased fracture risk when adjusted for FRAX probabilities, with a slightly larger effect when BMD was not included. Inclusion of TBS in the risk calculation gave a small but significant increase in stratification for fracture probabilities estimated with and without BMD. Calibration plots showed very minor deviations from the line of identity, indicating overall good calibration. In conclusion, the existing equations for incorporating TBS in FRAX estimates of fracture probability work similarly when femoral neck BMD is not used in the calculation. This potentially extends the range of situations where TBS can be used clinically to those individuals in whom lumbar spine TBS is available but femoral neck BMD is not available.

Vertebral Level Variations in Trabecular Bone Score and Effect on Fracture Prediction: The Manitoba BMD Registry.

Trabecular bone score (TBS), a texture measure derived from spine dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images, is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent risk factor for fracture. TBS is reportedly insensitive to degenerative changes, and it is uncertain whether the same rules for excluding lumbar vertebral levels from BMD measurement should be applied to TBS. The current analysis was performed to explore inter-vertebral variation in TBS measurements from L1 to L4, how this relates to clinically identified structural artifact resulting in vertebral level exclusion from BMD reporting, and area under the curve (AUC) for incident fracture. The study population comprised 70,762 individuals aged 40 years and older at the time of baseline spine DXA assessment (mean age 64.1 years, 89.7% female), among whom 24,289 (34.3%) had one or more vertebral exclusions. Both TBS and BMD showed a similar cranial/caudal inter-vertebral gradient. Compared with L1-4, TBS from L1 alone was lower (mean difference -0.096; -7.6%) while TBS from L4 alone was 0.046 (3.6%) greater, similar in those without and with visual structural artifact. During mean follow-up of 8.7 years, 6744 (9.5%) individuals sustained incident major osteoporotic fractures. TBS from L1 alone gave significantly higher AUC for incident fracture than L1-4, which was in turn significantly higher than L2, L3 and L4 alone, seen in those without and with visual structural artifact. In contrast, AUCs for BMD showed minimal variation from L1 to L4, and was higher for L1-4 than for any individual lumbar vertebral level. In summary, we found inter-vertebral TBS variations within the lumbar spine are overall similar to BMD but are relatively unaffected by visual structural artifact. Fracture outcomes showed the strongest association with TBS measured from L1 alone. Further investigation is need to understand the cause and clinical application of these differences.

Performance of FRAX in Men With Prostate Cancer: A Registry-Based Cohort Study.

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®) was created to predict major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) and hip fractures in the general population. Whether FRAX accurately predicts fractures in men with prostate cancer is unknown. Our objective was to assess the performance of FRAX for predicting incident fractures in men with prostate cancer. Men from the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Registry (1996-2018) with prostate cancer diagnoses in the 3 years prior to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) were identified. FRAX scores with and without BMD were calculated. From population-based healthcare data we identified incident MOF, hip fracture, any osteoporotic fracture and death from the date of BMD testing to March 31, 2018. Cox regression was performed to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) per standard deviation increase in FRAX score. Observed 10-year probability (estimated with competing risk of mortality) was compared with 10-year FRAX-predicted fracture probability to assess calibration. The study population included 684 men with prostate cancer (mean age 74.6 years) and 8608 men without prostate cancer (mean age 65.5 years). FRAX stratified risk for MOF (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.48-2.45 with BMD; HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.43-2.69 without BMD) and hip fracture (HR 3.37, 95% CI 1.90-6.01 with BMD; HR 4.58, 95% CI 2.17-9.67 without BMD) in men with prostate cancer. There was no effect modification observed with prostate cancer status or current androgen deprivation therapy. Observed 10-year fracture probability in men with prostate cancer showed good agreement with FRAX with and without BMD included in the calculation (observed/predicted calibration ratios MOF 0.97, hip 1.00 with BMD; MOF 0.92, hip 0.93 with BMD). In conclusion, FRAX reliably predicts incident fractures in men with prostate cancer. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Contributions of Clinical and Technical Factors to Longitudinal Change in Trabecular Bone Score and Bone Density: A Registry-Based Individual-Level Analysis.

Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS), a gray-level texture measure derived from spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images, is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent risk factor for fracture. An unresolved question is whether TBS is sufficiently responsive to change over time or in response to widely used osteoporosis therapy at the individual level to serve as a useful biomarker. Using the Manitoba DXA Registry, we identified 11,643 individuals age 40 years and older with two fan-beam DXA scans performed on the same instrument within 5 years (mean interval 3.2 years), of whom 6985 (60.0%) received antiresorptive osteoporosis medication (majority oral bisphosphonate) between the scans. We examined factors that were associated with a change in lumbar spine TBS, lumbar spine BMD, and total hip BMD exceeding the 95% least significant change (LSC). Change exceeding the LSC was identified in 23.0% (9.3% increase, 13.8% decrease) of lumbar spine TBS, 38.2% (22.1% increase, 16.1% decrease) lumbar spine BMD, and 42.5% (17.6% increase, 24.9% decrease) total hip BMD measurement pairs. From regression models, the variables most strongly associated with significant change in TBS (decreasing order) were tissue thickness change, acquisition mode change, weight change, and spine percent fat change. Consistent with the insensitivity of TBS to oral antiresorptive therapies, use of these agents showed very little effect on TBS change. In contrast, for both spine BMD change and total hip BMD change, osteoporosis medication use was the most significant variable, whereas tissue thickness change, acquisition mode change, and weight change had relatively weak effects. In summary, change in spine TBS using the present algorithm appears to be strongly affected by technical factors. This suggests a limited role, if any, for using TBS change in untreated individuals or for monitoring response to antiresorptive treatment in routine clinical practice with the current version of the TBS algorithm. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Adjusting conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the number of prior falls in the preceding year.

A greater propensity to falling is associated with higher fracture risk. This study provides adjustments to FRAX-based fracture probabilities accounting for the number of prior falls. INTRODUCTION: Prior falls increase subsequent fracture risk but are not currently directly included in the FRAX tool. The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of the number of prior falls on the 10-year probability of fracture determined with FRAX®. METHODS: We studied 21,116 women and men age 40 years or older (mean age 65.7 ± 10.1 years) with fracture probability assessment (FRAX®), self-reported falls for the previous year, and subsequent fracture outcomes in a registry-based cohort. The risks of death, hip fracture, and non-hip major osteoporotic fracture (MOF-NH) were determined by Cox proportional hazards regression for fall number category versus the whole population (i.e., an average number of falls). Ten-year probabilities of hip fracture and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) were determined according to the number of falls from the hazards of death and fracture incorporated into the FRAX model for the UK. The probability ratios (number of falls vs. average number of falls) provided adjustments to conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the number of falls. RESULTS: Compared with the average number of falls, the hazard ratios for hip fracture, MOF-NH and death were lower than unity in the absence of a fall history. Hazard ratios increased progressively with an increasing number of reported falls. The probability ratio rose progressively as the number of reported falls increased. Probability ratios decreased with age, an effect that was more marked the greater the number of prior falls. CONCLUSION: The probability ratios provide adjustments to conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the number of prior falls.

Primary hyperparathyroidism and fracture probability.

The incidence of hip and major osteoporotic fracture was increased in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism even in patients not referred for parathyroidectomy. The risk of death was also increased which attenuated an effect on fracture probabilities. The findings argue for widening the indications for parathyroidectomy in mild primary hyperparathyroidism. INTRODUCTION: Primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) is associated with an increase in the risk of fracture. In FRAX, the increase in risk is assumed to be mediated by low bone mineral density (BMD). However, the risk of death is also increased and its effect on fracture probability is not known. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether PHPT affects hip fracture and major osteoporotic fracture risk independently of bone mineral density (BMD) and whether this and any increase in mortality affects the assessment of fracture probability. METHODS: A register-based survey of patients with PHPT and matched controls in Denmark were identified from hospital registers. The incidence of death, hip fracture, and major osteoporotic fracture were determined for computing fracture probabilities excluding time after parathyroidectomy. The gradient of risk for fracture for differences in BMD was determined in a subset of patients and in BMD controls. The severity of disease was based on serum calcium and parathyroid hormone levels. RESULTS: We identified 6884 patients with biochemically confirmed PHPT and 68,665 matched population controls. On follow-up, excluding time after parathyroidectomy in those undergoing surgery, patients with PHPT had a higher risk of death (+52%), hip fracture (+48%), and major osteoporotic fracture (+36%) than population controls. At any given age, average 10-year probabilities of fracture were higher in patients with PHPT than population controls. The gradient of fracture risk with differences in BMD was similar in cases and controls. Results were similar when confined to patients not undergoing parathyroidectomy. Fracture probability decreased with the severity of disease due to an increase in mortality rather than fracture risk. CONCLUSION: The risk of hip and other major osteoporotic fracture is increased in PHPT irrespective of the disease severity. Fracture probability was attenuated due to the competing effect of mortality. The increased fracture risk in patients treated conservatively argues for widening the indications for parathyroidectomy in mild PHPT.

The need to distinguish intervention thresholds and diagnostic thresholds in the management of osteoporosis.

This position paper of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) addresses the rationale for separate diagnostic and intervention thresholds in osteoporosis. We conclude that the current BMD-based diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis be retained whilst clarity is brought to bear on the distinction between diagnostic and intervention thresholds.

General Comorbidity Indicators Contribute to Fracture Risk Independent of FRAX: Registry-Based Cohort Study.

CONTEXT: FRAX® estimates 10-year fracture probability from osteoporosis-specific risk factors. Medical comorbidity indicators are associated with fracture risk but whether these are independent from those in FRAX is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized Johns Hopkins Aggregated Diagnosis Groups (ADG®) score or recent hospitalization number may be independently associated with increased risk for fractures. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included women and men age ≥ 40 in the Manitoba BMD Registry (1996-2016) with at least 3 years prior health care data and used linked administrative databases to construct ADG scores along with number of hospitalizations for each individual. Incident Major Osteoporotic Fracture and Hip Fracture was ascertained during average follow-up of 9 years; Cox regression analysis determined the association between increasing ADG score or number of hospitalizations and fractures. RESULTS: Separately, hospitalizations and ADG score independently increased the hazard ratio for fracture at all levels of comorbidity (hazard range 1.2-1.8, all P < 0.05), irrespective of adjustment for FRAX, BMD, and competing mortality. Taken together, there was still a higher than predicted rate of fracture at all levels of increased comorbidity, independent of FRAX and BMD but attenuated by competing mortality. Using an intervention threshold of major fracture risk >20%, application of the comorbidity hazard ratio multiplier to the patient population FRAX scores would increase the number of treatment candidates from 8.6% to 14.4%. CONCLUSION: Both complex and simple measures of medical comorbidity may be used to modify FRAX-based risk estimates to capture the increased fracture risk associated with multiple comorbid conditions in older patients.

An assessment of intervention thresholds for high fracture risk in Chile.

Assessment and treatment pathways using FRAX-based intervention thresholds in Chile can be used to identify patients at high risk of fracture and avoid unnecessary treatment in those at low fracture risk. PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to explore treatment paths and characteristics of women eligible for treatment in Chile based on major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) probabilities derived from FRAX®. METHODS: Intervention and assessment thresholds were derived using methods adopted by the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group for FRAX-based guidelines in the UK but based on the epidemiology of fracture and death in Chile. Age-dependent and hybrid assessment and intervention thresholds were applied to 1998 women and 1122 men age 50 years or more drawn from participants in the National Health Survey 2016-2017. RESULTS: Approximately 12% of men and women had a prior fragility fracture and would be eligible for treatment for this reason. Using age-dependent thresholds, an additional 2.6% of women (0.3% of men) were eligible for treatment in that MOF probabilities lay above the upper assessment threshold. A BMD test would be recommended in 5% of men and 38% of women. With hybrid thresholds, an additional 13% of women (3.6% of men) were eligible for treatment and BMD recommended in 11% of men and 42% of women. CONCLUSION: The application of hybrid intervention thresholds ameliorates the disparity in fracture probabilities seen with age-dependent thresholds. Probability-based assessment of fracture risk, including the use of the hybrid intervention thresholds for Chile, is expected to help guide decisions about treatment.