Predictive capacity of FRAX in a spanish region with a hip fracture rate close to the national mean.

BACKGROUND: It is known that standardized incidence rates of hip fracture vary among older people in Spain. So far, the results published on the validation of the FRAX® tool in Spain have suggested that the major osteoporotic fractures (MOFs) risk in our country is underestimated. These studies have practically been based on Spanish cohorts evaluated in Catalonia, a higher hip fracture rate area. The purpose of this study is to analyse the ability of the FRAX® in a Spanish mid-fracture rate population. METHODS: Study design: Retrospective cohort study. MEASURES: MOFs: hip, humerus, wrist, spine fractures. Risk of fracture assessed by calculating odds ratios (ORs). Predictive capacity of FRAX® according to the osteoporotic fractures observed between 2009 and 2018 (ObsFr) to predicted by FRAX® without densitometry in 2009 (PredFr) ratio. RESULTS: 285 participants (156 women, 54.7%) with a mean ± SD of 61.5 ± 14 years. Twenty-four people sustained 27 fractures (15 MOFs). Significant ORs were observed for an age ≥ 65 (2.92; 95% CI, 1.07-7.96), female sex (3.18; 95% CI, 1.24-8.16), rheumatoid arthritis (0.62; 95% CI, 2.03-55.55), proton pump (2.71; 95% CI, 1.20-6.09) and serotonin reuptake (2.51; 95% CI, 1.02-6.16) inhibitors. The ObsFr/PredFr ratio in women were 1.12 (95% CI, 0.95-1.29) for MOFs and 0.47 (95% CI, 0-0.94) for hip fractures. Men had a ratio of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.01-1.14) for MOF, no hip fractures were observed. The ratios for the overall group were 1.29 (95% CI, 1.12-1.48) for MOFs and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.22-1.17) for hip fractures. CONCLUSIONS: FRAX® accurately predicted MOFs in women population with a hip fracture incidence rate close to the national mean compared to previous studies conducted in higher incidence regions in Spain.

Rationale of the Spanish FRAX model in decision-making for predicting osteoporotic fractures: an update of FRIDEX cohort of Spanish women.

BACKGROUND: The FRAX® tool estimates the risk of a fragility fracture among the population and many countries have been evaluating its performance among their populations since its creation in 2007. The purpose of this study is to update the first FRIDEX cohort analysis comparing FRAX with the bone mineral density (BMD) model, and its predictive abilities. METHODS: The discriminatory ability of the FRAX was assessed using the 'area under curve' of the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC). Predictive ability was assessed by comparing estimated risk fractures with incidence fractures after a 10-year follow up period. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred eight women ≥ 40 and ≤ 90 years followed up during a 10-year period. The AUC for major osteoporotic fractures using FRAX without DXA was 0.686 (95 % CI 0.630-0.742) and using FN T-score of DXA 0.714 (95 % CI 0.661-0.767). Using only the traditional parameters of DXA (FN T-score), the AUC was 0.706 (95 % CI 0.652-0.760). The AUC for hip osteoporotic fracture was 0.883 (95 % CI 0.827-0.938), 0.857 (95 % CI 0.773-0.941), and 0.814 (95 % CI 0.712-0.916) respectively. For major osteoporotic fractures, the overall predictive value using the ratio Observed fractures/Expected fractures calculated with FRAX without T-score of DXA was 2.29 and for hip fractures 2.28 and with the inclusion of the T-score 2.01 and 1.83 respectively. However, for hip fracture in women < 65 years was 1.53 and 1.24 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FRAX tool has been found to show a good discriminatory capacity for detecting women at high risk of fragility fracture, and is better for hip fracture than major fracture. The test of sensibility shows that it is, at least, not inferior than when using BMD model alone. The predictive capacity of FRAX tool needs some adjustment. This capacity is better for hip fracture prediction and better for women < 65 years. Further studies in Catalonia and other regions of Spain are needed to fine tune the FRAX tool's predictive capability.

FRAX® tool, the WHO algorithm to predict osteoporotic fractures: the first analysis of its discriminative and predictive ability in the Spanish FRIDEX cohort.

BACKGROUND: The WHO has recently published the FRAX® tool to determine the absolute risk of osteoporotic fracture at 10 years. This tool has not yet been validated in Spain. METHODS/DESIGN: A prospective observational study was undertaken in women in the FRIDEX cohort (Barcelona) not receiving bone active drugs at baseline. Baseline measurements: known risk factors including those of FRAX® and a DXA. Follow up data on self-reported incident major fractures (hip, spine, humerus and wrist) and verified against patient records. The calculation of absolute risk of major fracture and hip fracture was by FRAX® website. This work follows the guidelines of the STROBE initiative for cohort studies. The discriminative capacity of FRAX® was analyzed by the Area Under Curve (AUC), Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The predictive capacity was determined using the ratio of observed fractures/expected fractures by FRAX® (ObsFx/ExpFx). RESULTS: The study subjects were 770 women from 40 to 90 years of age in the FRIDEX cohort. The mean age was 56.8 ± 8 years. The fractures were determined by structured telephone questionnaire and subsequent testing in medical records at 10 years. Sixty-five (8.4%) women presented major fractures (17 hip fractures). Women with fractures were older, had more previous fractures, more cases of rheumatoid arthritis and also more osteoporosis on the baseline DXA. The AUC ROC of FRAX® for major fracture without bone mineral density (BMD) was 0.693 (CI 95%; 0.622-0.763), with T-score of femoral neck (FN) 0.716 (CI 95%; 0.646-0.786), being 0.888 (CI 95%; 0.824-0.952) and 0.849 (CI 95%; 0.737-0.962), respectively for hip fracture. In the model with BMD alone was 0.661 (CI 95%; 0.583-0.739) and 0.779 (CI 95%; 0.631-0.929). In the model with age alone was 0.668 (CI 95%; 0.603-0.733) and 0.882 (CI 95%; 0.832-0.936). In both cases there are not significant differences against FRAX® model. The overall predictive value for major fracture by ObsFx/ExpFx ratio was 2.4 and 2.8 for hip fracture without BMD. With BMD was 2.2 and 2.3 respectively. Sensitivity of the four was always less than 50%. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed a good correlation only after calibration with ObsFx/ExpFx ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The current version of FRAX® for Spanish women without BMD analysed by the AUC ROC demonstrate a poor discriminative capacity to predict major fractures but a good discriminative capacity for hip fractures. Its predictive capacity does not adjust well because leading to underdiagnosis for both predictions major and hip fractures. Simple models based only on age or BMD alone similarly predicted that more complex FRAX® models.

Measuring health-related quality of life in men with osteoporosis or osteoporotic fracture.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is a serious health problem that worsens the quality of life and the survival rate of individuals with this disease on account the osteoporotic fractures. Studies have long focused on women, and its presence in men has been underestimated. While many studies conducted in different countries mainly assess health-related quality of life and identify fracture risks factors in women, few data are available on a Spanish male population. METHODS/DESIGN: Observational study. STUDY POPULATION: Men ≥ 40 years of age with/without diagnosed osteoporosis and with/without osteoporotic fracture included by their family doctor. MEASUREMENTS: The relationship between customary clinical risk factors for osteoporotic fracture and health-related quality of life in a Spanish male population. A telephone questionnaire on health-related quality of life is made. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association between qualitative variables will be assessed by the Chi-square test. The distribution of quantitative variables by Student's t-test. If the conditions for using this test are not met, the non-parametric Mann-Whitney's U test will be used.The validation of the results obtained by the FRAX™ tool will be performed by way of the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and by calculating the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). All tests will be performed with a confidence intervals set at 95%. DISCUSSION: The applicability and usefulness of Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) studies are well documented in many countries. These studies allow implementing cost-effective measures in cases of a given disease and reducing the costly consequences derived therefrom. This study attempts to provide objective data on how quality of life is affected by the clinical aspects involved in osteoporosis in a Spanish male population and can be useful as well in cost utility analyses conducted by health authorities.The sample selected is not based on a high fracture risk group. Rather, it is composed of men in the general population, and accordingly comparisons should not lead to erroneous interpretations.A possible bias correction will be ensured by checking reported fractures against healthcare reports and X-rays, or by consulting health care centers as applicable.

Prediction of absolute risk of fragility fracture at 10 years in a Spanish population: validation of the WHO FRAX ™ tool in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Age-related bone loss is asymptomatic, and the morbidity of osteoporosis is secondary to the fractures that occur. Common sites of fracture include the spine, hip, forearm and proximal humerus. Fractures at the hip incur the greatest morbidity and mortality and give rise to the highest direct costs for health services. Their incidence increases exponentially with age.Independently changes in population demography, the age - and sex- specific incidence of osteoporotic fractures appears to be increasing in developing and developed countries. This could mean more than double the expected burden of osteoporotic fractures in the next 50 years. METHODS/DESIGN: To assess the predictive power of the WHO FRAX™ tool to identify the subjects with the highest absolute risk of fragility fracture at 10 years in a Spanish population, a predictive validation study of the tool will be carried out. For this purpose, the participants recruited by 1999 will be assessed. These were referred to scan-DXA Department from primary healthcare centres, non hospital and hospital consultations. STUDY POPULATION: Patients attended in the national health services integrated into a FRIDEX cohort with at least one Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurement and one extensive questionnaire related to fracture risk factors. MEASUREMENTS: At baseline bone mineral density measurement using DXA, clinical fracture risk factors questionnaire, dietary calcium intake assessment, history of previous fractures, and related drugs. Follow up by telephone interview to know fragility fractures in the 10 years with verification in electronic medical records and also to know the number of falls in the last year. The absolute risk of fracture will be estimated using the FRAX™ tool from the official web site. DISCUSSION: Since more than 10 years ago numerous publications have recognised the importance of other risk factors for new osteoporotic fractures in addition to low BMD. The extension of a method for calculating the risk (probability) of fractures using the FRAX™ tool is foreseeable in Spain and this would justify a study such as this to allow the necessary adjustments in calibration of the parameters included in the logarithmic formula constituted by FRAX™.

[FRAX® thresholds to identify people with high or low risk of osteoporotic fracture in Spanish female population]. / Umbrales de FRAX(®) para identificar personas con alto o bajo riesgo de fractura osteoporótica en población femenina española.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To detect FRAX(®) threshold levels that identify groups of the population that are at high/low risk of osteoporotic fracture in the Spanish female population using a cost-effective assessment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a cohort study. Eight hundred and sixteen women 40-90 years old selected from the FRIDEX cohort with densitometry and risk factors for fracture at baseline who received no treatment for osteoporosis during the 10 year follow-up period and were stratified into 3 groups/levels of fracture risk (low<10%, 10-20% intermediate and high>20%) according to the real fracture incidence. RESULTS: The thresholds of FRAX(®) baseline for major osteoporotic fracture were: low risk<5; intermediate ≥ 5 to <7.5 and high ≥ 7.5. The incidence of fracture with these values was: low risk (3.6%; 95% CI 2.2-5.9), intermediate risk (13.7%; 95% CI 7.1-24.2) and high risk (21.4%; 95% CI12.9-33.2). The most cost-effective option was to refer to dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA-scan) for FRAX(®)≥ 5 (Intermediate and high risk) to reclassify by FRAX(®) with DXA-scan at high/low risk. These thresholds select 17.5% of women for DXA-scan and 10% for treatment. With these thresholds of FRAX(®), compared with the strategy of opportunistic case finding isolated risk factors, would improve the predictive parameters and reduce 82.5% the DXA-scan, 35.4% osteoporosis prescriptions and 28.7% cost to detect the same number of women who suffer fractures. CONCLUSIONS: The use of FRAX ® thresholds identified as high/low risk of osteoporotic fracture in this calibration (FRIDEX model) improve predictive parameters in Spanish women and in a more cost-effective than the traditional model based on the T-score ≤ -2.5 of DXA scan.

[Incidence of hip fracture in Spain (1997-2010)]. / Incidencia de la fractura de fémur en España (1997-2010).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To analyse differences in the incidence of hip fracture in people older than 65 years in the 17 autonomous communities (AA. CC.) (regions) of the Spanish state in the 1997-2010 period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ecological, observational and retrospective study that includes people≥65 year old who have suffered a hip fracture in Spain over 14 years. These records are taken from the minimum basic data set of patients treated in all hospitals of Spain. RESULTS: The analysis include 534,043 hip fractures in≥65 year olds (414,518 women and 119,525 men). A percentage of 85.4 of hip fractures occurred in people≥75 years (86.7% women; 80.7% men). The adjusted hip fracture rate/100,000/year was 722.6 in women and 284.8 in men. AA. CC. with women above the average of the country were 7, including Catalonia, Comunidad Valenciana and Castilla-La Mancha. Six AA. CC. had patients below the average, including Canary Islands and Galicia. In AA. CC. with highest and lowest adjusted hip fracture rate/100,000/year, the difference was 44% lower in women (Canary vs. Castilla-La Mancha) and 50% lower in men (Galicia vs. Catalonia). CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of the incidence of hip fracture in Spain in people≥65 year old shows a significant variability between AA. CC. Except in Canary Islands, this variability is difficult to explain only by factors such as population age, sun exposure or north-south gradient. Additional studies are needed to analyse the causes of these important differences between Spanish AA. CC.

Osteoporosis y el modelo FRIDEX: cómo y cuándo intervenir farmacológicamente en la prevención primaria de fracturas / Osteoporosis and the FRIDEX model: When and how to make a pharmacological intervention in the primary prevention of fractures

No disponible

Umbrales de FRAX ® para identificar personas con alto o bajo riesgo de fractura osteoporótica en población femenina española / FRAX® thresholds to identify people with high or low risk of osteoporotic fracture in Spanish female population

Fundamento y objetivo: Detectar los umbrales de la herramienta FRAX® que determinen los grupos de riesgo alto/bajo de fractura osteoporótica en la población femenina española y su valoración coste-efectiva. Pacientes y métodos: Estudio de cohortes. Ochocientas dieciséis mujeres de 40-90 años de la cohorte FRIDEX con densitometría basal, factores de riesgo de fractura y sin tratamiento para la osteoporosis en los 10 años de seguimiento. Se estratificaron en 3 grupos/niveles de riesgo de fractura principal (bajo < 10%, intermedio 10-20% y alto > 20%) según la incidencia real de fractura, y se buscaron los puntos de corte equivalentes de FRAX® basal. Resultados: Los umbrales de FRAX® basal para fractura principal fueron: riesgo bajo < 5; intermedio ≥ 5 y < 7,5 y alto ≥ 7,5. La incidencia real de fractura con estos valores fue: riesgo bajo (3,6%; IC 95% 2,2-5,9); intermedio (13,7%; IC 95%7,1-24,2), y alto (21,4%; IC 95% 12,9-33,2). La opción más coste-efectiva fue realizar una dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA, «absorciometría dual de rayos X») para FRAX® ≥ 5 (riesgo intermedio y alto) para reclasificar los casos mediante FRAX® con DXA en riesgo alto/bajo. Así se seleccionarían 17,5% de las mujeres para DXA y 10% para tratamiento. Con estos umbrales calibrados de FRAX®, comparados con la estrategia tradicional basada en la DXA, se mejoran los parámetros predictivos y se reducen las DXA (82,5%), los tratamientos (35,4%) y el coste global (28,7%) para detectar al mismo número de mujeres que tuvieron fracturas. Conclusiones: La utilización de los umbrales de FRAX® identificados como alto/bajo riesgo de fractura osteoporótica en la presente calibración (modelo FRIDEX) mejorarían los parámetros predictivos en mujeres españolas y de una forma más coste-efectiva que el modelo tradicional basado en el T-score ≤ -2,5 de la DXA (AU)

Background and objective: To detect FRAX® threshold levels that identify groups of the population that are at high/low risk of osteoporotic fracture in the Spanish female population using a cost-effective assessment. Patients and methods: This is a cohort study. Eight hundred and sixteen women 40-90 years old selected from the FRIDEX cohort with densitometry and risk factors for fracture at baseline who received no treatment for osteoporosis during the 10 year follow-up period and were stratified into 3 groups/levels of fracture risk (low < 10%, 10-20% intermediate and high > 20%) according to the real fracture incidence. Results: The thresholds of FRAX® baseline for major osteoporotic fracture were: low risk < 5; intermediate ≥ 5 to < 7.5 and high ≥ 7.5. The incidence of fracture with these values was: low risk (3.6%; 95% CI 2.2-5.9), intermediate risk (13.7%; 95% CI 7.1-24.2) and high risk (21.4%; 95% CI12.9-33.2). The most cost-effective option was to refer to dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA-scan) for FRAX® ≥ 5 (Intermediate and high risk) to reclassify by FRAX® with DXA-scan at high/low risk. These thresholds select 17.5% of women for DXA-scan and 10% for treatment. With these thresholds of FRAX®, compared with the strategy of opportunistic case finding isolated risk factors, would improve the predictive parameters and reduce 82.5% the DXA-scan, 35.4% osteoporosis prescriptions and 28.7% cost to detect the same number of women who suffer fractures. Conclusions: The use of FRAX ® thresholds identified as high/low risk of osteoporotic fracture in this calibration (FRIDEX model) improve predictive parameters in Spanish women and in a more cost-effective than the traditional model based on the T-score ≤ -2.5 of DXA scan (AU)

Incidencia de la fractura de fémur en España (1997-2010) / Incidence of hip fracture in Spain (1997-2010)

Fundamento y objetivo: Analizar las diferencias en la incidencia de fractura de fémur en mayores de 65 años en las 17 comunidades autónomas (CC. AA.) del estado español en el período de 1997-2010. Material y métodos: Estudio ecológico, observacional y retrospectivo que incluye a las personas ≥ 65 años que han presentado una fractura del tercio proximal de fémur en España durante 14 años. Estos registros provienen del conjunto mínimo básico de datos de los pacientes atendidos en el conjunto de hospitales de España. Resultados: Se analizan 534.043 fracturas de fémur en personas ≥ 65 años (414.518 en mujeres y 119.525 en varones). En ≥ 75 años ocurrieron el 85,4% (86,7% en mujeres; 80,7% en varones). La tasa ajustada/100.000/año fue de 722,6 en mujeres y 284,8 en varones. Por encima de la media en mujeres hay 7 CC. AA., y destacan: Cataluña, Comunidad Valenciana y Castilla-La Mancha. Por debajo de la media hay 6 CC. AA., y destacan: Canarias y Galicia. La diferencia entre CC. AA. con mayor y menor tasa de fractura ajustada por población es un 44% menor en mujeres (Canarias frente a Castilla-La Mancha) y un 50% menor en varones (Galicia frente a Cataluña). Conclusiones: La incidencia de fractura de fémur en España en ≥ 65 años muestra una importante variabilidad entre CC. AA. y, por tanto, entre zonas geográficas. Excepto en Canarias, esta variabilidad es difícil de explicar solo por factores como la edad de la población, la exposición solar o el gradiente norte-sur. Son necesarios estudios que analicen las causas de estas importantes diferencias entre CC. AA. Españolas (AU)

Background and objective: To analyse differences in the incidence of hip fracture in people older than 65 years in the 17 autonomous communities (AA. CC.) (regions) of the Spanish state in the 1997-2010 period. Material and methods: Ecological, observational and retrospective study that includes people ≥ 65 year old who have suffered a hip fracture in Spain over 14 years. These records are taken from the minimum basic data set of patients treated in all hospitals of Spain. Results: The analysis include 534,043 hip fractures in ≥ 65 year olds (414,518 women and 119,525 men). A percentage of 85.4 of hip fractures occurred in people ≥ 75 years (86.7% women; 80.7% men). The adjusted hip fracture rate/100,000/year was 722.6 in women and 284.8 in men. AA. CC. with women above the average of the country were 7, including Catalonia, Comunidad Valenciana and Castilla-La Mancha. Six AA. CC. had patients below the average, including Canary Islands and Galicia. In AA. CC. with highest and lowest adjusted hip fracture rate/100,000/year, the difference was 44% lower in women (Canary vs. Castilla-La Mancha) and 50% lower in men (Galicia vs. Catalonia). Conclusions: The analysis of the incidence of hip fracture in Spain in people ≥ 65 year old shows a significant variability between AA. CC. Except in Canary Islands, this variability is difficult to explain only by factors such as population age, sun exposure or north-south gradient. Additional studies are needed to analyse the causes of these important differences between Spanish AA. CC (AU)

La herramienta FRAX(R) en la prevención de fracturas asociadas al tratamiento de privación androgénica en el cáncer de próstata / The FRAX(R) tool in the prevention of fractures associated with androgenic deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

No disponible

Precauciones necesarias al utilizar los umbrales predictivos de la herramienta FRAX ® en la población española para decidir la necesidad de solicitar una densitometría ósea axial / Precautions required on using the predictive thresholds of the FRAX® tool to decide the need for an axial bone density scan in the Spanish population

No disponible

Diferencias en los valores predictivos de la herramienta FRAX™ entre población española y del Reino Unido y consideraciones sobre el umbral de intervención / Differences in the predictive values of the FRAX™ tool between the Spanish and United Kingdom population and considerations about the intervention threshold

No disponible

¿Cómo se puede prevenir y tratar la osteoporosis por glucocorticoides? / How corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis can be prevented and treated?

No disponible