Adjusting conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the recency of sentinel fractures

Vertebral fractures in patients with CKD and the general population: a call for diagnosis and action

Vertebral fractures (VFs) are the most common osteoporotic fractures in the general population, and they have been associated with high mortality, decreased quality of life, and high risk of subsequent fractures, especially when recent, multiple, or severe. Currently, VF diagnosis and classification determine fracture risk and the most appropriate anti-osteoporotic treatment. However, VFs are clearly underdiagnosed, especially in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and CKD-associated osteoporosis has been disregarded until recently. VFs are associated with higher morbidity and mortality, and their prevalence and incidence differ depending on the grade of renal dysfunction (CKD G1-G5) and/or the type of renal replacement therapy (dialysis or transplantation). In addition to classical risk factors [such as higher age, female sex, reduced bone mineral density, diabetes and steroid use], various other factors have been associated with an increased risk of VFs in CKD, including CKD grade, haemodialysis vintage, time since renal transplantation, low or high intact parathyroid hormone and phosphate levels, and/or vitamin D and K1 deficiencies. Importantly, several clinical societies have recently modified their algorithms according to the fracture risk classification (including the presence of VFs) and determined the most appropriate anti-osteoporotic treatment for the general population. However, there are no specific guidelines addressing this topic in patients with CKD despite an important paradigm shift regarding the prognostic value of bone mineral density in 2017 after the publication of the CKD-Mineral and Bone Disorder Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines. A proactive attitude towards diagnosis, treatment, and research is proposed to avoid therapeutic nihilism.

Update on fracture risk assessment in osteoporosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The assessment of fracture risk is playing an ever-increasing role in osteoporosis clinical management and informing international guidelines for osteoporosis. FRAX, a fracture risk calculator that provides individualized 10-year probabilities of hip and major osteoporotic fracture, has been widely used since 2008. In this review, we recap the development and limitations of intervention thresholds and the role of absolute fracture risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is an increasing awareness of disparities and inequities in the setting of intervention thresholds in osteoporosis. The limitations of the simple use of prior fracture or the DXA-derived BMD T -score threshold are increasingly being discussed; one solution is to use fracture risk or probabilities in the setting of such thresholds. This approach also permits more objective assessment of high and very high fracture risk to enable physicians to make choices not just about the need to treat but what agents to use in individual patients.

SUMMARY

Like all clinical tools, FRAX has limitations that need to be considered, but the use of fracture risk in deciding who to treat, when to treat and what agent to use is a mechanism to target treatment equitably to those at an increased risk of fracture.

Non-osteoporotic fractures are associated with increased risk of subsequent major osteoporotic fractures

We studied the association between non-osteoporotic fractures and future major osteoporotic fractures, using UK health records. Non-osteoporotic fractures were found to increase the risk of major osteoporotic fractures, although to a lesser extent than osteoporotic fractures. This highlights the importance of considering all previous fractures in assessing future fracture risk.

PURPOSE

Previous studies demonstrated that osteoporotic fractures-minor and major-increase the risk for future major osteoporotic fractures; we test whether non-osteoporotic fractures are also associated with such increased risk.

METHODS

The study is a retrospective cohort study using UK primary care electronic health records. Exposure groups were defined according to fracture location prior to the year 2011 (index date): major, minor, and non-osteoporotic. The outcome of incident major osteoporotic fractures following the index date was compared between the exposure groups and the general population.

RESULTS

The general study population included 1,951,388 patients. The exposure groups included 39,931 patients with a prior major osteoporotic fracture, 19,397 with a prior minor osteoporotic fracture, and 50,115 patients with a prior non-osteoporotic fracture. The standardized Incidence Rate Ratio for future major osteoporotic fractures was 2.73 (95% confidence interval: 2.64-2.82), 2.43 (2.32-2.54), and 1.83 (1.74-1.92), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Non-osteoporotic fractures are significantly associated with increased risk for future major osteoporotic fractures relative to the general population, yet to a lesser extent compared to major and minor osteoporotic fractures.

Osteoporotic Fractures: Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Significance From the International Working Group on DXA Best Practices

Osteoporotic fractures, also known as fragility fractures, are reflective of compromised bone strength and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Such fractures may be clinically silent, and others may present clinically with pain and deformity at the time of the injury. Unfortunately, and even at the time of detection, most individuals sustaining fragility fractures are not identified as having underlying metabolic bone disease and are not evaluated or treated to reduce the incidence of future fractures. A multidisciplinary international working group with representation from international societies dedicated to advancing the care of patients with metabolic bone disease has developed best practice recommendations for the diagnosis and evaluation of individuals with fragility fractures. A comprehensive narrative review was conducted to identify key articles on fragility fractures and their impact on the incidence of further fractures, morbidity, and mortality. This document represents consensus among the supporting societies and harmonizes best practice recommendations consistent with advances in research. A fragility fracture in an adult is an important predictor of future fractures and requires further evaluation and treatment of the underlying osteoporosis. It is important to recognize that most fragility fractures occur in patients with bone mineral density T scores higher than -2.5, and these fractures confirm the presence of skeletal fragility even in the presence of a well-maintained bone mineral density. Fragility fractures require further evaluation with exclusion of contributing factors for osteoporosis and assessment of clinical risk factors for fracture followed by appropriate pharmacological intervention designed to reduce the risk of future fracture. Because most low-trauma vertebral fractures do not present with pain, dedicated vertebral imaging and review of past imaging is useful in identifying fractures in patients at high risk for vertebral fractures. Given the importance of fractures in confirming skeletal fragility and predicting future events, it is recommended that an established classification system be used for fracture identification and reporting.

The significance of recent fracture location for imminent risk of hip and vertebral fractures-a nationwide cohort study on older adults in Sweden

The role of recent fracture site in predicting the most detrimental subsequent fractures, hip and vertebral, is unclear. This study found that most recent fracture sites were associated with an increased risk of both hip and vertebral fracture, a finding that may impact the design of secondary prevention programs.

BACKGROUND

Hip and vertebral fractures are the most serious in terms of associated morbidity, mortality, and societal costs. There is limited evidence as to which fracture types are associated with the highest risk for subsequent hip and vertebral fractures. This study aims to explore the dependency of imminent hip and vertebral fracture risk on the site of the recent index fracture.

METHODS

Conducted as a nationwide retrospective cohort study, we utilized Swedish national registers to assess the risk of hip and vertebral fractures based on the site of the recent (≤ 2 years) index fracture and an old (> 2 years) prevalent fracture. This risk was compared to that observed in individuals without any prevalent fractures. This study encompassed all Swedes aged 50 years and older between 2007 and 2010. Patients with a recent fracture were categorized into specific groups based on the type of their previous fracture and were followed until December 2017, with censoring for death and migration. The study assessed the risk of hip and vertebral fractures during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 3,423,320 individuals, comprising 145,780 with a recent fracture, 293,051 with an old fracture, and 2,984,489 without a previous fracture. The median follow-up times for the three groups were 7.6 years (IQR 4.0-9.1), 7.9 years (5.8-9.2), and 8.5 years (7.4-9.7), respectively. Patients with a recent fracture at almost all sites exhibited a significantly increased risk of hip fracture and an elevated risk of vertebral fracture compared to controls. Patients with recent fractures had an increased risk of subsequent hip and vertebral fractures, regardless of the index fracture site. These results strengthen the notion that all patients with a recent fracture, regardless of fracture site, should be included in secondary prevention programs, to improve the prevention of the clinically most serious fractures.

Guidelines for fracture risk assessment and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men above the age of 50 in Qatar

We present comprehensive guidelines for osteoporosis management in Qatar. Formulated by the Qatar Osteoporosis Association, the guidelines recommend the age-dependent Qatar fracture risk assessment tool for screening, emphasizing risk-based treatment strategies and discouraging routine dual-energy X-ray scans. They offer a vital resource for physicians managing osteoporosis and fragility fractures nationwide.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis and related fragility fractures are a growing public health issue with an impact on individuals and the healthcare system. We aimed to present guidelines providing unified guidance to all healthcare professionals in Qatar regarding the management of osteoporosis.

METHODS

The Qatar Osteoporosis Association formulated guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men above the age of 50. A panel of six local rheumatologists who are experts in the field of osteoporosis met together and conducted an extensive review of published articles and local and international guidelines to formulate guidance for the screening and management of postmenopausal women and men older than 50 years in Qatar.

RESULTS

The guidelines emphasize the use of the age-dependent hybrid model of the Qatar fracture risk assessment tool for screening osteoporosis and risk categorization. The guidelines include screening, risk stratification, investigations, treatment, and monitoring of patients with osteoporosis. The use of a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan without any risk factors is discouraged. Treatment options are recommended based on risk stratification.

CONCLUSION

Guidance is provided to all physicians across the country who are involved in the care of patients with osteoporosis and fragility fractures.

Risk prediction of second hip fracture by bone and muscle density of the hip varies with time after first hip fracture: A prospective cohort study

Purpose

Predictors of 'imminent' risk of second hip fracture are unknown. The aims of the study were to explore strength of hip areal bone mineral density (aBMD), and muscle area and density for predicting second hip fracture at different time intervals.

Methods

Data of the Chinese Second Hip Fracture Evaluation were analyzed, a longitudinal study to evaluate the risk of second hip fracture (of the contralateral hip) by using CT images obtained immediately after first hip fracture. Muscle cross-sectional area and density were measured of the gluteus maximus (G.MaxM) and gluteus medius and minimus (G.Med/MinM) and aBMD of the proximal femur at the contralateral unfractured side. Patients were followed up for a median time of 4.5 years. Separate Cox models were used to predict second hip fracture risk at different time intervals after first event adjusted for age, sex, BMI and diabetes.

Results

The mean age of subjects with imminent (within 1st or 2nd year) second hip fracture was 79.80 ± 5.16 and 81.56 ± 3.64 years. In the 1st year after the first hip fracture, femoral neck (FN) aBMD predicted second hip fracture (HR 5.88; 95 % CI, 1.32-26.09). In the remaining years of follow-up after 2nd year, muscle density predicted second hip fracture (G.MaxM HR 2.13; 95 % CI, 1.25-3.65,G.Med/MinM HR 2.10; 95 % CI, 1.32-3.34).

Conclusions

Our results show that femoral neck aBMD is an important predictor for second hip fracture within the first year and therefore suggest supports the importance concept of early and rapid-acting bone-active drugs to increase hip BMD. In addition, the importance of muscle density predicting second hip fracture after the second year suggest post hip fracture rehabilitation and exercise programs could also be important to reduce muscle fatty infiltration.

An overview of the use of the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in osteoporosis

FRAX®, a simple-to-use fracture risk calculator, was first released in 2008 and since then has been used increasingly worldwide. By calculating the 10-year probabilities of a major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture, it assists clinicians when deciding whether further investigation, for example a bone mineral density measurement (BMD), and/or treatment is needed to prevent future fractures. In this review, we explore the literature around osteoporosis and how FRAX has changed its management. We present the characteristics of this tool and describe the use of thresholds (diagnostic and therapeutic). We also present arguments as to why screening with FRAX should be considered. FRAX has several limitations which are described in this review. This review coincides with the release of a version, FRAXplus, which addresses some of these limitations.

Insights and implications of sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis

Osteoporosis, a metabolic bone disease characterized by low bone mineral density and deterioration of bone microarchitecture, has led to a high risk of fatal osteoporotic fractures worldwide. Accumulating evidence has revealed that sexual dimorphism is a notable feature of osteoporosis, with sex-specific differences in epidemiology and pathogenesis. Specifically, females are more susceptible than males to osteoporosis, while males are more prone to disability or death from the disease. To date, sex chromosome abnormalities and steroid hormones have been proven to contribute greatly to sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis by regulating the functions of bone cells. Understanding the sex-specific differences in osteoporosis and its related complications is essential for improving treatment strategies tailored to women and men. This literature review focuses on the mechanisms underlying sexual dimorphism in osteoporosis, mainly in a population of aging patients, chronic glucocorticoid administration, and diabetes. Moreover, we highlight the implications of sexual dimorphism for developing therapeutics and preventive strategies and screening approaches tailored to women and men. Additionally, the challenges in translating bench research to bedside treatments and future directions to overcome these obstacles will be discussed.

Hemoglobin Levels Improve Fracture Risk Prediction in Addition to FRAX Clinical Risk Factors and Bone Mineral Density

CONTEXT

Anemia and decreasing levels of hemoglobin (Hb) have previously been linked to increased fracture risk, but the added value to FRAX, the most utilized fracture prediction tool worldwide, is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between anemia, Hb levels, bone microstructure, and risk of incident fracture and to evaluate whether Hb levels improve fracture risk prediction in addition to FRAX clinical risk factors (CRFs).

METHODS

A total of 2778 community-dwelling women, aged 75-80 years, and part of a prospective population-based cohort study in Sweden were included. At baseline, information on anthropometrics, CRFs, and falls was gathered, blood samples were collected, and skeletal characteristics were investigated using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography. At the end of follow-up, incident fractures were retrieved from a regional x-ray archive.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 6.4 years. Low Hb was associated with worse total hip and femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), and lower tibia cortical and total volumetric BMD, and anemia was associated with increased risk of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF; hazard ratio 2.04; 95% CI 1.58-2.64). Similar results were obtained for hip fracture and any fracture, also when adjusting for CRFs. The ratio between 10-year fracture probabilities of MOF assessed in models with Hb levels included and not included ranged from 1.2 to 0.7 at the 10th and 90th percentile of Hb, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Anemia and decreasing levels of Hb are associated with lower cortical BMD and incident fracture in older women. Considering Hb levels may improve the clinical evaluation of patients with osteoporosis and the assessment of fracture risk.

Active identification of vertebral fracture in the FLS model of care

The identification of vertebral fracture is a key point in an FLS. We have analyzed the characteristics of 570 patients according to the route of identification (referral by other doctors, emergency registry or through VFA), concluding that promoting referral by other doctors with a training campaign is effective.

PURPOSE

Vertebral fractures (VF) are associated with increased risk of further VFs. Our objective was to analyze the characteristics of patients with VF seen in a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS).

METHODS

An observational study was carried out on patients with VF referred to the outpatient metabolic clinic (OMC) after a training campaign, identified in the emergency registry, and captured by VF assessment with bone densitometry (DXA-VFA) in patients with non-VFs. Patients with traumatic VF or VF > 1 year, infiltrative or neoplastic disease were excluded. The number and severity of VFs (Genant) were analyzed. Treatment initiation in the first 6 months after baseline visit was reviewed.

RESULTS

Overall, 570 patients were included, mean age 73. The most common route for identifying VF was through referral to OMC (303 cases), followed by the emergency registry (198) and DXA-VFA (69). Osteoporosis by DXA was found in 312 (58%) patients and 259 (45%) had ≥ 2 VFs. The rate of grade 3 VFs was highest among patients on the emergency registry. Those identified through OMC had a higher number of VFs, a higher rate of osteoporosis, more risk factors and greater treatment initiation. Patients with VFs detected by DXA-VFA were mostly women with a single VF and had a lower rate of osteoporosis by DXA.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the distribution of VFs by the route of identification in an FLS. Promoting referral by other doctors with a training campaign may help in the quality improvement of the FLS-based model of care.

Risk factors predicting the 'time to first fracture' and its association with imminent fractures: a substudy of the FRISBEE cohort

Only previous glucocorticoid use and rheumatoid arthritis were predictors of an early fracture (< 2 years after inclusion). A shorter 'time to first fracture' was not an independent clinical risk factor for imminent fractures.

PURPOSE

Risk factors for fragility fractures independent of BMD were assessed in several prediction models. However, predictors of a shorter 'time to first fracture' and its impact on imminent fractures are unknown.

METHODS

We studied the concept of 'time to first fracture' in the FRISBEE ("Fracture RIsk Brussels Epidemiological Enquiry") cohort (3560 postmenopausal women). Validated fractures were divided into 3 groups: first fracture < 2 years, 2-5 years, and > 5 years after inclusion. Factors associated with first fracture risk were evaluated with uni- and multivariate analyses using Cox modeling. We examined 'time to first fracture' as a risk factor for imminent fractures in untreated subjects and in those receiving pharmacological treatment.

RESULTS

Classical risk factors (age, prior fracture, fall history and low BMD) were associated with first fracture in all groups. Previous glucocorticoids and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were predictors for fracture < 2 years. Imminent fractures were similar in subjects with or without osteoporosis treatment, despite a higher estimated 10-year risk of fragility fracture in those treated, suggesting that treatment is efficient. 'Time to first fracture' was not an independent risk factor for imminent fractures.

CONCLUSION

Among the risk factors considered, previous glucocorticoid use and RA were predictors for early fracture, consistent with the concept of very high risk. The 'time to first validated fracture' was not an independent risk factor for imminent fractures. Patients with a first osteoporotic fracture should thus be considered at very high risk for re-fracture, independent of the 'time to first fracture'.

Selection for treatment of patients at high risk of fracture by the short versus long term prediction models - data from the Belgian FRISBEE cohort

Our imminent model was less sensitive but more selective than FRAX® in the choice of treatment to prevent imminent fractures. This new model decreased NNT by 30%, which could reduce the treatment costs. In the Belgian FRISBEE cohort, the effect of recency further decreased the selectivity of FRAX®.

PURPOSE

We analyzed the selection for treatment of patients at high risk of fracture by the Belgian FRISBEE imminent model and the FRAX® tool.

METHODS

We identified in the FRISBEE cohort subjects who sustained an incident MOF (mean age 76.5 ± 6.8 years). We calculated their estimated 10-year risk of fracture using FRAX® before and after adjustment for recency and the 2-year probability of fracture using the FRISBEE model.

RESULTS

After 6.8 years of follow-up, we validated 480 incident and 54 imminent MOFs. Of the subjects who had an imminent fracture, 94.0% had a fracture risk estimated above 20% by the FRAX® before correction for recency and 98.1% after adjustment, with a specificity of 20.2% and 5.9%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the FRISBEE model at 2 years were 72.2% and 55.4%, respectively, for a threshold of 10%. For these thresholds, 47.3% of the patients were identified at high risk in both models before the correction, and 17.2% of them had an imminent MOF. The adjustment for recency did not change this selection. Before the correction, 34.2% of patients were selected for treatment by FRAX® only, and 18.8% would have had an imminent MOF. This percentage increased to 47% after the adjustment for recency, but only 6% of those would suffer a MOF within 2 years.

CONCLUSION

In our Belgian FRISBEE cohort, the imminent model was less sensitive but more selective in the selection of subjects in whom an imminent fracture should be prevented, resulting in a lower NNT. The correction for recency in this elderly population further decreased the selectivity of FRAX®. These data should be validated in additional cohorts before using them in everyday practice.

The Importance of Recent Prevalent Fracture Site for Imminent Risk of Fracture - A Retrospective, Nationwide Cohort Study of Older Swedish Men and Women

There is limited evidence regarding which fracture types carry the highest risk for subsequent fracture. The aim of this study was to investigate how the risk of imminent fracture depends on index fracture site. This nationwide retrospective cohort study utilized national registers in Sweden to determine the risk of fracture according to recent (≤2 years) index fracture site and according to an old (>2 years) prevalent fracture compared with the risk observed in controls without a fracture. All Swedes 50 years or older between 2007 and 2010 were included in the study. Patients with a recent fracture were designated a specific fracture group depending on the type of previous fracture. Recent fractures were classified as major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), including fractured hip, vertebra, proximal humerus, and wrist, or non-MOF. Patients were followed until December 31, 2017, censored for death and emigration, and the risk of any fracture and hip fracture was assessed. A total of 3,423,320 persons were included in the study, 70,254 with a recent MOF, 75,526 with a recent non-MOF, 293,051 with an old fracture, and 2,984,489 persons with no previous fracture. The median time of follow-up for the four groups was 6.1 (interquartile range [IQR] 3.0-8.8), 7.2 (5.6-9.4), 7.1 (5.8-9.2), and 8.1 years (7.4-9.7), respectively. Patients with a recent MOF, recent non-MOF, and old fracture had a substantially increased risk of any fracture (hazard ratio [HR] adjusted for age and sex 2.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08-2.14; HR 2.24, 95% CI 2.21-2.27; and HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.76-1.78, respectively) compared with controls. All recent fractures, MOFs, and non-MOFs, as well as older fractures, increase the risk of subsequent fracture, suggesting that all recent fractures should be included in fracture liaison services and that case-finding strategies for those with older fractures may be warranted to prevent subsequent fractures. © 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).

New Horizons: Artificial Intelligence Tools for Managing Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration leading to increased bone fragility and fracture risk. Typically, osteoporotic fractures occur at the spine, hip, distal forearm, and proximal humerus, but other skeletal sites may be affected as well. One of the major challenges in the management of osteoporosis lies in the fact that although the operational diagnosis is based on bone mineral density (BMD) as measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry, the majority of fractures occur at nonosteoporotic BMD values. Furthermore, osteoporosis often remains undiagnosed regardless of the low severity of the underlying trauma. Also, there is only weak consensus among the major guidelines worldwide, when to treat, whom to treat, and which drug to use. Against this background, increasing efforts have been undertaken in the past few years by artificial intelligence (AI) developers to support and improve the management of this disease. The performance of many of these newly developed AI algorithms have been shown to be at least comparable to that of physician experts, or even superior. However, even if study results appear promising at a first glance, they should always be interpreted with caution. Use of inadequate reference standards or selection of variables that are of little or no value in clinical practice are limitations not infrequently found. Consequently, there is a clear need for high-quality clinical research in this field of AI. This could, eg, be achieved by establishing an internationally consented "best practice framework" that considers all relevant stakeholders.

Asia-pacific consensus on osteoporotic fracture prevention in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis but no fragility fractures

Postmenopausal women are at significant risk for osteoporotic fractures due to their rapid bone loss. Half of all postmenopausal women will get an osteoporosis-related fracture over their lifetime, with 25% developing a spine deformity and 15% developing a hip fracture. By 2050, more than half of all osteoporotic fractures will occur in Asia, with postmenopausal women being the most susceptible. Early management can halt or even reverse the progression of osteoporosis. Consequently, on October 31, 2020, the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association hosted the Asia-Pacific (AP) Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention (POFP) consensus meeting, which was supported by the Asian Federation of Osteoporosis Societies (AFOS) and the Asia Pacific Osteoporosis Foundation (APOF). International and domestic experts developed ten applicable statements for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis but no fragility fractures in the AP region. The experts advocated, for example, that postmenopausal women with a high fracture risk be reimbursed for pharmaceutical therapy to prevent osteoporotic fractures. More clinical experience and data are required to modify intervention tactics.

The effect of fracture recency on observed 5-year fracture probability: A study based on the FRISBEE cohort

Introduction

Prediction models, especially the FRAX®, are largely used to estimate the fracture risk at ten years, but the current algorithm does not take into account the time elapsed after a fracture. Kanis et al. recently proposed correction factors allowing to adjust the FRAX® score for fracture recency. The objective of this work was to analyze the effect of fracture recency in the FRISBEE cohort.

Methods

We identified in the FRISBEE cohort subjects who sustained a validated fracture during the first 5 years following an incident MOF. We calculated their estimated 5-year risk of fracture using FRAX® uncorrected, adjusted for recency and further adjusted for the MOF/hip ratios calibration factors previously derived for the Belgian FRAX®. We compared the fracture risk estimated by FRAX® before and after these corrections to the observed incidence of validated fractures in our cohort.

Results

In our ongoing cohort, 376 subjects had a first non-traumatic incident validated MOF after inclusion; 81 had a secondary fracture during the 5 years follow-up period after this index fracture. The FRAX® score significantly under-evaluated the observed incidence of fractures in our cohort by 54.7 % (fracture rate of 9.7 %; 95 % CI, 6.8-12.9 %) if uncorrected (p < 0.001) and by 32.6 % after correction for recency (14.5 %; 95 % CI, 11.1-18.2 %) (p = 0.01). The calibration for MOF/hip ratios improved the prediction (17.5 %; 95 % CI: 13.7-21.4 %) (p = 0.2). After correcting for recency and for calibration, the predicted value was over-evaluated by 22 % (fracture rate of 26.1 %; 95 % CI, 21.6-30.5 %) but this over-evaluation was not significant (p = 0.1).

Conclusion

Our data indicate that the correction of the FRAX® score for fracture recency improves fracture prediction. However, correction for calibration and recency tends to overestimate fracture risk in this population of elderly women.

Osteoporosis in adults in clinical practice (1): diagnosis and differential diagnosis

Osteoporosis is a systemic metabolic disease of the skeleton characterized by low bone strength that results in an increased risk of fracture. Fractures are associated with serious clinical consequences, including pain, disability, loss of independence, and death, as well as high healthcare costs. Early identification and intervention with patients at high risk for fracture is needed to reduce the burden of osteoporotic fractures. The identification of a patient at high risk of fracture should be followed by evaluation for factors contributing to low bone mineral density (BMD) and/or low bone quality, falls, and fractures. Components of the osteological evaluation include an assessment of BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, osteoporosis-directed medical history and physical exam, laboratory studies, and possibly skeletal imaging. Disorders other than osteoporosis, requiring other types of treatment, may be found. This overview summarizes the basic procedures for the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of osteoporosis, which are necessary before starting treatment.

Should vertebral fracture assessment be performed in Fracture Liaison Service patients with non-vertebral fracture?

Prior non-vertebral fractures, except of the ankle, are associated with increased likelihood of vertebral fracture. As knowledge of vertebral fracture presence may alter care, vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) is indicated in patients with prior fracture.

INTRODUCTION

Vertebral fractures are often unappreciated. It was recently advocated that all Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) patients have densitometric VFA performed. We evaluated the likelihood of vertebral fracture identification with VFA in patients with prior fracture using the Manitoba Bone Density database. METHODS : VFA was performed in patients with T-scores below - 1.5 and age 70 + (or younger with height loss or glucocorticoid use) obtaining bone densitometry in Manitoba from 2010 to 2018. Those with prior clinical vertebral fracture, pathologic fracture, or uninterpretable VFA were excluded. Vertebral fractures were identified using the modified ABQ method. Health records were assessed for non-vertebral fracture (excluding head, neck, hand, foot) diagnosis codes unassociated with trauma prior to DXA. Multivariable odds ratios (ORs) for vertebral fracture were estimated without and with adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, ethnicity, area of residence, income level, comorbidity score, diabetes mellitus, falls in the last year, glucocorticoid use, and lowest BMD T-score.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 12,756 patients (94.4% women) with mean (SD) age 75.9 (6.8) years. Vertebral fractures were identified in 1925 (15.1%) overall. Vertebral fractures were significantly more likely (descending order) in those with prior pelvis, hip, humerus, other sites, and forearm, but not ankle fracture. There was modest attenuation with covariate adjustment but statistical significance was maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

Prior hip, humerus, pelvis, forearm, and other fractures are associated with an increased likelihood of previously undiagnosed vertebral fracture, information useful for risk stratification and monitoring. These data support recommending VFA in FLS patients who are age 70 + with low BMD.

Adjusting conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the number of prior fractures

The risk of a recurrent fragility fracture is high following a first fracture and higher still with more than one prior fracture. This study provides adjustments to FRAX-based fracture probabilities accounting for the number of prior fractures.

INTRODUCTION

Prior fractures increase subsequent fracture risk. The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of the number of prior fractures on the 10-year probability of fracture determined with FRAX®.

METHODS

The study used data from the Reykjavik Study fracture register that documented prospectively all fractures at all skeletal sites in a large sample of the population of Iceland. Ten-year probabilities of hip fracture and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) were determined according to the number of prior osteoporotic fractures over a 20-year interval from the hazards of death and fracture. Fracture probabilities were also computed for a prior osteoporotic fracture irrespective of the number of previous fractures. The probability ratios provided adjustments to conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the number of prior fractures.

RESULTS

Probability ratios to adjust 10-year FRAX probabilities of a hip fracture and MOF increased with the number of prior fractures but decreased with age in both men and women. Probability ratios were similar in men and women and for hip fracture and MOF. Mean probability ratios according to the number of prior fractures for all scenarios were 0.95, 1.08, 1.21 and 1.35, for 1,2, 3 and 4 or more prior fractures, respectively. Thus, a simple rule of thumb is to downward adjust FRAX-based fracture probabilities by 5% in the presence of a single prior fracture and to uplift probabilities by 10, 20 and 30% with a history of 2, 3 and 4 or more prior fractures, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The probability ratios provide adjustments to conventional FRAX estimates of fracture probability according to the number of prior fractures.

The role and place of the FRAX calculator in initiation osteoporosis treatment: an analysis of the osteoporosis center registry

Background: The growing frequency of fractures associated with osteoporosis, the significant costs of their treatment, disability and increased mortality make it an important and urgent task to optimize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in the Russian Federation.

Aim: The aim of this study was analyzed of using modern diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis by specialists when they making a clinical decision to initiate treatment for osteoporosis, including an estimate of the 10-year probability of fractures according to FRAX.

Materials and methods: The study was conducted in the city consultative and diagnostic center for the prevention of osteoporosis, St. Petersburg. The register of the osteoporosis center for 2018–2021 was used to select patients for the study. Based on the analysis of registry data, a sample of 362 patients with newly diagnosed osteoporosis was obtained. In the resulting sample, the existing FRAX value was assessed on the therapeutic intervention threshold graph, all of them analyzed the primary medical documentation, as well as the available DXA densitometry data.

Results: In this study, we assessed the place of FRAX 10-year risk of major osteoporotic fractures in the clinical decision of an osteoporosis specialist to start anti-osteoporosis therapy, in this case taken as the «gold standard». The study found that a positive FRAX score had a high predictive value of 100%. In contrast, the negative predictive value was very low (19.5%): a FRAX value below the intervention threshold did not guarantee a truly low fracture risk and no need to start osteoporosis treatment.

Conclusion: Despite the fact that both densitometry and FRAX have significant limitations in use, and cannot identify all patients with a high risk of fractures, their combined use increases the prognostic value of the methods. FRAX technology in routine practice allows, in addition to clinical and instrumental methods for diagnosing high-risk fractures, to identify candidates for the treatment of osteoporosis, and should be used in accordance with clinical recommendations.

Update of the fracture risk prediction tool FRAX: a systematic review of potential cohorts and analysis plan

We describe the collection of cohorts together with the analysis plan for an update of the fracture risk prediction tool FRAX with respect to current and novel risk factors. The resource comprises 2,138,428 participants with a follow-up of approximately 20 million person-years and 116,117 documented incident major osteoporotic fractures.

INTRODUCTION

The availability of the fracture risk assessment tool FRAX® has substantially enhanced the targeting of treatment to those at high risk of fracture with FRAX now incorporated into more than 100 clinical osteoporosis guidelines worldwide. The aim of this study is to determine whether the current algorithms can be further optimised with respect to current and novel risk factors.

METHODS

A computerised literature search was performed in PubMed from inception until May 17, 2019, to identify eligible cohorts for updating the FRAX coefficients. Additionally, we searched the abstracts of conference proceedings of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, European Calcified Tissue Society and World Congress of Osteoporosis. Prospective cohort studies with data on baseline clinical risk factors and incident fractures were eligible.

RESULTS

Of the 836 records retrieved, 53 were selected for full-text assessment after screening on title and abstract. Twelve cohorts were deemed eligible and of these, 4 novel cohorts were identified. These cohorts, together with 60 previously identified cohorts, will provide the resource for constructing an updated version of FRAX comprising 2,138,428 participants with a follow-up of approximately 20 million person-years and 116,117 documented incident major osteoporotic fractures. For each known and candidate risk factor, multivariate hazard functions for hip fracture, major osteoporotic fracture and death will be tested using extended Poisson regression. Sex- and/or ethnicity-specific differences in the weights of the risk factors will be investigated. After meta-analyses of the cohort-specific beta coefficients for each risk factor, models comprising 10-year probability of hip and major osteoporotic fracture, with or without femoral neck bone mineral density, will be computed.

CONCLUSIONS

These assembled cohorts and described models will provide the framework for an updated FRAX tool enabling enhanced assessment of fracture risk (PROSPERO (CRD42021227266)).

Osteoporosis in 2022: Care gaps to screening and personalised medicine

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment, and a range of effective pharmacological agents. However, it is apparent that both in the context of primary and secondary fracture prevention, there is a considerable gap between the population at high fracture risk and those actually receiving appropriate antiosteoporosis treatment. In this narrative review article, we document recent work describing the burden of disease, approaches to management, and service provision across Europe, emerging data on gaps in care, and existing/new ways in which these gaps may be addressed at the level of healthcare systems and policy. We conclude that although the field has come a long way in recent decades, there is still a long way to go, and a concerted, integrated effort is now required from all of us involved in this field to address these urgent issues to ensure the best possible outcomes for our patients.

Implications of FRAX® adjusted for recent fracture on the indication of treatment in an FLS

We analyzed the practical consequences of applying an adjusted FRAX® for recent fractures in a FLS. After analyzing 2777 patients, we concluded that the adjusted FRAX® is irrelevant when calculating FRAX® with DXA and is only useful for fractures of the humerus when DXA is not available.

PURPOSE

A FRAX® adjusted to fractures less than 2 years old has been proposed. The objective of this work was to analyze the clinical implications of applying the adjusted FRAX® instead of the classic FRAX® in a fracture liaison service (FLS) unit.

METHODS

Adults aged 50 years or older with fragility fractures (hip, spine, humerus, and forearm) that occurred in the 12 months prior to the baseline visit were included. We recorded demographic data, type of fracture, DXA, classic FRAX®, and FRAX® adjusted for recent fractures and indications for anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) following the guidelines of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology.

RESULTS

A total of 2777 patients were included, mean age 73 years, 84% women. The type of fracture was as follows: forearm (n = 958; 34.5%), hip (n = 781; 28.1%), humerus (n = 642; 23.1%), and spine (n = 397, 14.3%). DXA was performed in 2134 cases (76.8%). A total of 2522 patients (90.8%) were candidates for AOM (100% involving the hip and spine, 83% forearm, and 85% humerus). FRAX®-hip ≥ 3% increased from 1601 to 1775 cases (57.6 to 64%). The average FRAX®-hip (SD) increased from 5.7 (6) to 7.5 (9) (4.6 to 8.8 in males and 5.9 to 7.3 in females). The percentage of forearm fracture candidates for AOM, with or without DXA, did not change after FRAX®-hip adjustment, while the number of patients with humerus fractures increased from 59 to 80% in those who did not have DXA. In the entire sample, FRAX®-adjusted led to an indication of AOM for 15 additional patients (0.5% of major fractures): 14 with a humerus fracture and 1 with a forearm fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjusted FRAX® for recent fractures in an FLS unit in an adjusted FRAX® is irrelevant when calculating FRAX® with DXA; in fact, it is only useful for fractures of the humerus when DXA is not available.

Improved fracture risk prediction by adding VFA-identified vertebral fracture data to BMD by DXA and clinical risk factors used in FRAX

Vertebral fracture (VF) is a strong predictor of subsequent fracture. In this study of older women, VF, identified by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), were associated with an increased risk of incident fractures and had a substantial impact on fracture probability, supporting the utility of VFA in clinical practice.

PURPOSE

Clinical and occult VF can be identified using VFA with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent VFA-identified VF improve fracture risk prediction, independently of bone mineral density (BMD) and clinical risk factors used in FRAX.

METHODS

A total of 2852 women, 75-80 years old, from the prospective population-based study SUPERB cohort, were included in this study. At baseline, BMD was measured by DXA, VF diagnosed by VFA, and questionnaires used to collect data on risk factors for fractures. Incident fractures were captured by X-ray records or by diagnosis codes. An extension of Poisson regression was used to estimate the association between VFA-identified VF and the risk of fracture and the 5- and 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) was calculated from the hazard functions for fracture and death.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 5.15 years (IQR 4.3-5.9 years), the number of women who died or suffered a MOF, clinical VF, or hip fracture was 229, 422, 160, and 124, respectively. A VFA-identified VF was associated with an increased risk of incident MOF (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.46-2.18), clinical VF (HR = 2.88; 95% [CI] 2.11-3.93), and hip fracture (HR = 1.67; 95% [CI] 1.15-2.42), adjusted for age, height, and weight. For women at age 75 years, a VFA-identified VF was associated with 1.2-1.4-fold greater 10-year MOF probability compared with not taking VFA into account, depending on BMD.

CONCLUSION

Identifying an occult VF using VFA has a substantial impact on fracture probability, indicating that VFA is an efficient method to improve fracture prediction in older women.

Muscle density is an independent risk factor of second hip fracture: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with a first hip fracture are at high risk of fracturing their other hip. Despite this, preventive therapy is often not given. Because little is known about specific risk factors of a second hip fracture, we investigated the association with areal bone mineral density (aBMD), muscle size, and density. We also investigated whether muscle parameters predict the risk of a contralateral fracture independently of aBMD.

METHODS

Three groups were included, one without hip fracture (a subcohort of the China Action on Spine and Hip Status study), one with a first, and one with a second hip fracture. Subjects with fractures were recruited from the longitudinal Chinese Second Hip Fracture Evaluation (CSHFE). Computed tomography scans of CSHFE patients, which were obtained immediately following their first fracture, were used to measure cross-sectional area and density of the gluteus maximus (G.MaxM) and gluteus medius and minimus (G.Med/MinM) muscles. Computed tomography X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure aBMD of the contralateral femur. Median follow-up time to second fracture was 4.5 years. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute hazard ratios (HR) of second hip fracture risk in subjects with a first hip fracture. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to compare odds ratios (OR) for the risk of a first and second hip fracture.

RESULTS

Three hundred and one participants (68.4 ± 6.1 years, 64% female) without and 302 participants (74.6 ± 9.9 years, 71% female) with a first hip fracture were included in the analysis. Among the latter, 45 (79.2 ± 7.1 years) sustained a second hip fracture. ORs for first hip fracture were significant for aBMD and muscle size and density. ORs for a second fracture were smaller by a factor of 3 to 4 and no longer significant for femoral neck (FN) aBMD. HRs for predicting second hip fracture confirmed the results. G.Med/MinM density (HR, 1.68; CI, 1.20-2.35) and intertrochanter aBMD (HR, 1.62; CI, 1.13-2.31) were the most significant. FN aBMD was not significant. G.Med/MinM density remained significant for predicting second hip fracture after adjustment for FN (HR, 1.66; Cl, 1.18-2.30) or total hip aBMD (HR, 1.50; 95% Cl, 1.04-2.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Density of the G.Med/MinM muscle is an aBMD independent predictor of the risk of second hip fracture. Intertrochanteric aBMD is a better predictor of second hip fracture than FN and total hip aBMD. These results may trigger a paradigm shift in the assessment of second hip fracture risk and prevention strategies.

The Effect of Fracture Recency on Observed 10-Year Fracture Probability: A Registry-Based Cohort Study

FRAX estimates 10-year fracture major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture probability from multiple risk factors. FRAX does not consider prior fracture site or time since fracture. Fracture risk is greater in the initial 2-year post-fracture period (imminent risk), implying that FRAX may underestimate risk in this setting. We used the population-based Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Program registry to examine the effect of fracture recency and site on incident fracture risk predictions using FRAX. We identified women aged 40 years or older with baseline BMD and FRAX scores. Observed fracture outcomes to 10 years were compared with predicted 10-year fracture probability stratified by prior fracture status: none, recent (<2 years [median 0.3 years]), and remote (≥2 years [median 10.6 years]). For women with recent fractures, we also examined proposed multipliers to adjust FRAX for the effect of fracture recency and site. The cohort comprised 33,465 women aged 40 to 64 years (1897 recent fracture, 2120 remote fracture) and 33,806 women aged ≥65 years (2365 fracture, 4135 remote fracture). Observed fracture probability was consistent with predicted probability in most analyses. In women aged 40 to 64 years, there was a significant effect of recent vertebral and humerus fracture on MOF (observed to predicted 1.61 and 1.48, respectively), but these effects were still lower than the proposed multipliers (2.32 and 1.67, respectively). No significant effect of fracture recency was found after hip or forearm fracture in either age group. Our findings contribute to accumulating evidence of the importance of recent fracture. The effect of fracture recency was not consistent across fracture sites and with a lower magnitude than previously reported. Further quantification of effect size and specificity in additional independent cohorts is warranted to validate and refine recent-fracture multipliers in fracture risk assessment. © 2022 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis

The National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) has revised the UK guideline for the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50 years and older. Accredited by NICE, this guideline is relevant for all healthcare professionals involved in osteoporosis management.

INTRODUCTION

The UK National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) first produced a guideline on the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in 2008, with updates in 2013 and 2017. This paper presents a major update of the guideline, the scope of which is to review the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50 years and older.

METHODS

Where available, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials were used to provide the evidence base. Conclusions and recommendations were systematically graded according to the strength of the available evidence.

RESULTS

Review of the evidence and recommendations are provided for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, fracture-risk assessment and intervention thresholds, management of vertebral fractures, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, including duration and monitoring of anti-resorptive therapy, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, and models of care for fracture prevention. Recommendations are made for training; service leads and commissioners of healthcare; and for review criteria for audit and quality improvement.

CONCLUSION

The guideline, which has received accreditation from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), provides a comprehensive overview of the assessment and management of osteoporosis for all healthcare professionals involved in its management. This position paper has been endorsed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation and by the European Society for the Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases.

Management of patients at very high risk of osteoporotic fractures through sequential treatments

Osteoporosis care has evolved markedly over the last 50 years, such that there are now an established clinical definition, validated methods of fracture risk assessment and a range of effective pharmacological agents. Currently, bone-forming (anabolic) agents, in many countries, are used in those patients who have continued to lose bone mineral density (BMD), patients with multiple subsequent fractures or those who have fractured despite treatment with antiresorptive agents. However, head-to-head data suggest that anabolic agents have greater rapidity and efficacy for fracture risk reduction than do antiresorptive therapies. The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) convened an expert working group to discuss the tools available to identify patients at high risk of fracture, review the evidence for the use of anabolic agents as the initial intervention in patients at highest risk of fracture and consider the sequence of therapy following their use. This position paper sets out the findings of the group and the consequent recommendations. The key conclusion is that the current evidence base supports an "anabolic first" approach in patients found to be at very high risk of fracture, followed by maintenance therapy using an antiresorptive agent, and with the subsequent need for antiosteoporosis therapy addressed over a lifetime horizon.

Evaluating Patients for Secondary Causes of Osteoporosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides suggestions for the evaluation of patients with osteoporosis in order to assure that the diagnosis is correct, to identify potentially correctable conditions contributing to skeletal fragility and fracture risk, and to assist in individualizing management decisions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some patients who appear to have osteoporosis have another skeletal disease, such as osteomalacia, that requires further evaluation and treatment that is different than for osteoporosis. Many patients with osteoporosis have contributing factors (e.g., vitamin D deficiency, high fall risk) that should be addressed before and after starting treatment to assure that treatment is effective and safe. Evaluation includes a focused medical history, skeletal-related physical examination, assessment of falls risk, appropriate laboratory tests, and rarely transiliac double-tetracycline labeled bone biopsy. Evaluation of patients with osteoporosis before starting treatment is essential for optimizing clinical outcomes.

Fracture risk assessment by the FRAX model

The introduction of the FRAX algorithms has facilitated the assessment of fracture risk on the basis of fracture probability. FRAX integrates the influence of several well-validated risk factors for fracture with or without the use of bone mineral density. Since age-specific rates of fracture and death differ across the world, FRAX models are calibrated with regard to the epidemiology of hip fracture (preferably from national sources) and mortality (usually United Nations sources). Models are currently available for 73 nations or territories covering more than 80% of the world population. FRAX has been incorporated into more than 80 guidelines worldwide, although the nature of this application has been heterogeneous. The limitations of FRAX have been extensively reviewed. Arithmetic procedures have been proposed in order to address some of these limitations, which can be applied to conventional FRAX estimates to accommodate knowledge of dose exposure to glucocorticoids, concurrent data on lumbar spine bone mineral density, information on trabecular bone score, hip axis length, falls history, type 2 diabetes, immigration status and recency of prior fracture.

Prediction of an Imminent Fracture After an Index Fracture - Models Derived From the Frisbee Cohort

Patients who sustain a fracture are at greatest risk of recurrent fracture during the next 2 years. We propose three models to identify subjects most at risk of an imminent fracture, according to fracture site (any fracture, major osteoporotic fracture [MOF] or central). They were constructed using data of the prospective Frisbee cohort, which includes 3560 postmenopausal women aged 60 to 85 years who were followed for at least 5 years. A total of 881 subjects had a first incident validated fragility fracture before December 2018. Among these, we validated 130 imminent fractures occurring within the next 2 years; 79 were MOFs, and 88 were central fractures. Clinical risk factors were re-evaluated at the time of the index fracture. Fine and Gray proportional hazard models were derived separately for each group of fractures. The following risk factors were significantly associated with the risk of any imminent fracture: total hip bone mineral density (BMD) (p < 0.001), a fall history (p < 0.001), and comorbidities (p = 0.03). Age (p = 0.05 and p = 0.03, respectively) and a central fracture as the index fracture (p = 0.04 and p = 0.005, respectively) were additional predictors of MOFs and central fractures. The three prediction models are presented as nomograms. The calibration curves and the Brier scores based on bootstrap resampling showed calibration scores of 0.089 for MOF, 0.094 for central fractures, and 0.132 for any fractures. The predictive accuracy of the models expressed as area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve (AUC) were 0.74 for central fractures, 0.72 for MOFs, and 0.66 for all fractures, respectively. These AUCs compare well with those of FRAX and Garvan to predict the 5- or 10-year fracture probability. In summary, five predictors (BMD, age, comorbidities, falls, and central fracture as the incident fracture) allow the calculation with a reasonable accuracy of the imminent risk of fracture at different sites (MOF, central fracture, and any fracture) after a recent sentinel fracture. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Prediction of imminent fracture risk in Canadian women and men aged 45 years or older: external validation of the Fracture Risk Evaluation Model (FREM)

The Fracture Risk Evaluation Model (FREM) identifies individuals at high imminent risk of major osteoporotic fractures. We validated FREM on 74,828 individuals from Manitoba, Canada, and found significant fracture risk stratification for all FREM scores. FREM performed better than age alone but not as well as FRAX® with BMD.

INTRODUCTION

The FREM is a tool developed from Danish public health registers (hospital diagnoses) to identify individuals over age 45 years at high imminent risk of major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) and hip fracture (HF). In this study, our aim was to examine the ability of FREM to identify individuals at high imminent fracture risk in women and men from Manitoba, Canada.

METHODS

We used the population-based Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Program registry, and identified women and men aged 45 years or older undergoing baseline BMD assessment with 2 years of follow-up data. From linked population-based data sources, we constructed FREM scores using up to 10 years of prior healthcare information.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 74,828 subjects, and during the 2 years of observation, 1612 incident MOF and 299 incident HF occurred. We found significant fracture risk stratification for all FREM scores, with AUC estimates of 0.63-0.66 for MOF for both sexes and 0.84 for women and 0.65-0.67 for men for HF. FREM performed better than age alone but not as well as FRAX® with BMD. The inclusion of physician claims data gave slightly better performance than hospitalization data alone. Overall calibration for 1-year MOF prediction was reasonable, but HF prediction was overestimated.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the FREM algorithm shows significant fracture risk stratification when applied to an independent clinical population from Manitoba, Canada. Overall calibration for MOF prediction was good, but hip fracture risk was systematically overestimated indicating the need for recalibration.

Time dependency in early major osteoporotic and hip re-fractures in women and men aged 50 years and older: a population-based observational study

We analyzed patterns in recurrent major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) following a first major osteoporotic fracture in a large population-based cohort. Re-fracture risk remained elevated over 10 years, with only modest and inconsistent attenuation in risk over time.

INTRODUCTION

Recurrent fracture risk remains elevated for up to 25 years, and is reportedly highest in the initial 2 years (imminent risk). Our aim was to characterize early time dependency in re-fracture rates up to 10 years after a first fracture in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

Using Province of Manitoba (Canada) healthcare databases, we performed a matched cohort study in 22,105 women (mean age 74.1 ± 10.6 years) and 7589 men (mean age 71.8 ± 11.2 years) after a first MOF (age ≥ 50 years) during 1989-2006 and matched fracture-free controls (3 for each case). Incident fractures were ascertained over the next 10 years. Fracture rate ratios (RRs, cases versus controls) stratified by sex and age were computed, and tested for linear trend using linear regression. Joinpoint regression was performed to determine non-linear change in fracture rates over time, with particular attention to the first 2-year post-fracture.

RESULTS

RRs for incident MOF and hip fracture exceeded unity for the primary analyses in all subgroups and follow-up intervals. There was a tendency of RRs to decline over time, but this was inconsistent. Absolute rates per 100,000 person-years for fracture cases were consistently greater than for controls in all subgroups and observation times. Among fracture cases, there was a tendency for rates to decline gradually in all subgroups except younger women, but these temporal trends appeared monotonic without an inflection at 2 years. Joinpoint regression analyses did not detect an inflection in risk between the first 2 years and subsequent years. No significant time dependency was seen for incident hip fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

MOF and hip re-fracture risk was elevated in all age and sex subgroups over 10 years. There was inconsistent and only modest time dependency in early MOF risk, most evident in women after age 65 years. No strong transition in risk was seen between the first 2-year post-fracture and subsequent years.

The risk factors for developing clustered vertebral compression fractures: a single center study

OBJECTIVE

Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are common among elderly individuals, but clustered VCFs (C-VCFs) are rare and more severe. The risk factors for C-VCFs remain unclear. Thus, we investigated the clinical characteristics of C-VCFs to identify the imminent fracture risk and to improve the treatment for such patients.

METHODS

We reviewed records of VCF patients at a single medical center between January 2011 and September 2020. Patients who had four or more VCFs within one year were categorized into the C-VCF group, and the remaining patients were paired into the control group at a ratio of 2:1. We collected demographic, clinical, laboratory, and radiological information regarding these patients. Univariate analyses, stratified analyses, and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify the risk factors for C-VCFs.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were enrolled, of whom 52 were C-VCF patients. C-VCF patients had more severe fractures and pain, with fractures occurring at uncommon sites of the spine. The independent risk factors for C-VCFs included glucocorticoid treatment (P<0.001, HR: 12.7), recent fracture history (P=0.021, HR: 5.5), and lower trabecular bone score (TBS, P=0.044, HR: 1.6). TBS and bone mineral density had greater predictive values in patients without glucocorticoid treatment (P<0.001). Sex, age, and bone turnover biomarkers were not independent risk factors for C-VCFs.

CONCLUSION

C-VCFs are rare adverse consequences of severe osteoporosis, for which glucocorticoid treatment, recent fracture history, and lower TBS are unique risk factors that are valuable for the early identification and prevention of C-VCFs.

The current situation in the approach to osteoporosis in older adults in Turkey: areas in need of improvement with a model for other populations

PURPOSE

The total number of older adults in Turkey is striking, amounting to around 8 million, and this translates into considerably higher numbers of cases of osteoporosis (OP) and fractures in older adults. In this article, we outlined the current situation of OP in older adults in Turkey and investigated the differences between Turkey and a representative developed European country (Belgium), in terms of the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of OP. Our intention in this regard was to identify areas in need of improvement and subsequently to make a clear call for action to address these issues.

METHODS

Herein, considering the steps related to the OP approach, we made a complete review of the studies conducted in Turkey and compared with the literature recommendations.

RESULTS

There is a need for a national osteoporotic fracture registry; measures should be taken to improve the screening and treatment of OP in older males, such as educational activities; technicians involved in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning should undergo routine periodic training; all DXA centers should identify center-specific least significant change values; all older adults should be considered for routine lateral dorsolumbar X-ray imaging for the screening of vertebral fractures while ordering DXA scans; the inclusion of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) software in DXA assessments should be considered; screening using a fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) algorithm that is specific to Turkey should be integrated; the fortification of foods with vitamin D is required; the high fracture risk by country-specific FRAX algorithm and the presence of falls/high fall risk should be integrated in reimbursement terms; and finally, more "fracture liaison services" should be established.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that the practical consideration of our suggestions will provide considerable support to the efforts for combating with the adverse consequences of OP in society. This approach can be subsequently modeled for other populations to improve the management of OP globally.

Predicting Imminent Fractures in Patients With a Recent Fracture or Starting Oral Bisphosphonate Therapy: Development and International Validation of Prognostic Models

The availability of anti-osteoporosis medications with rapid onset and high potency requires tools to identify patients at high imminent fracture risk (IFR). There are few tools that predict a patient's IFR. We aimed to develop and validate tools for patients with a recent fracture and for patients initiating oral bisphosphonate therapy. Models for two separate cohorts, those with incident fragility fracture (IFx) and with incident oral bisphosphonate prescription (OBP), were developed in primary care records from Spain (SIDIAP database), UK (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD), and Denmark (Danish Health Registries). Separate models were developed for hip, major, and any fracture outcomes. Only variables present in all databases were included in Lasso regression models for the development and logistic regression models for external validation. Discrimination was tested using area under curve (AUC) and calibration was assessed using observed versus predicted risk plots stratified by age, sex, and previous fracture history. The development analyses included 35,526 individuals in the IFx and 41,401 in the OBP cohorts, with 671,094 in IFx and 330,256 in OBP for the validation analyses. Both the IFx and OBP models demonstrated similarly good performance for hip fracture at 1 year (with AUCs of 0.79 [95% CI 0.75 to 0.82] and 0.87 [0.83 to 0.91] in Spain, 0.71 [0.71 to 0.72] and 0.73 [0.72 to 0.74] in the UK, and 0.70 [0.70 to 0.70] and 0.69 [0.68 to 0.70] in Denmark), and lower discrimination for major osteoporotic and any fracture sites. Calibration was good across all three countries. Discrimination and calibration for the 2-year models was similar. The proposed IFR prediction models could be used to identify more precisely patients at high imminent risk of fracture and inform anti-osteoporosis treatment selection. The freely available model parameters permit local validation and implementation. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Improving bone health: addressing the burden through an integrated approach

As people age, maintaining mobility becomes increasingly imperative, therefore addressing bone health is the most important way to preserve mobility. Poor bone health encompasses a broad spectrum of diseases, but it is most often quantified as the cumulative burden of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures. Rates of these fractures have been increasing and are expected to continue rising globally, attributed to increasing life expectancy worldwide. No single strategy will be sufficient to address this global public health issue. Co-ordination across a wide array of stakeholders is vital to decrease the health and socioeconomic burden of poor bone health. Stakeholders include an assortment of specialists ranging from health professionals (primary and secondary care clinicians, nurses, physical therapists, and social care workers), policy-makers, government bodies (including departments of health and social services), employers, civil society, as well as patients and their caregivers.  We need to ensure that there is a better understanding of the socioeconomic and health consequences of poor bone health to promote better policies to address needs. Building a more resilient health system approach to bone health based on the evidence and sound decision-making will not only improve population health, but will provide cost savings to health systems by preventing poor bone health in the first place. Health systems around the world must prioritise bone health to preserve mobility and wellbeing in advance of the impending surge in demand from ageing populations. Poor bone health is not an inevitable part of ageing. Working across the lifespan, we can all benefit from improved bone health throughout our lives.

An assessment of intervention thresholds for very high fracture risk applied to the NOGG guidelines : A report for the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG)

The National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) has developed intervention thresholds based on FRAX® to characterise patients at high and very high risk of fracture.

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines for the assessment of fracture risk have begun to categorise patients eligible for treatment into high and very high risk of fracture to inform choice of therapeutic approach. The aim of the present study was to develop intervention thresholds based on the hybrid assessment model of NOGG.

METHODS

We examined the impact of intervention thresholds in a simulated cross-sectional cohort of women age 50 years or more from the UK with the distribution of baseline characteristics based on that in the FRAX cohorts. The prevalence of very high risk using the hybrid model was compared with age-dependent thresholds used by the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (IOF/ESCEO). The appropriateness of thresholds was tested based on the populations treated with anabolic agents.

RESULTS

With an upper intervention threshold using the IOF/ESCEO criteria, 56% of women age 50 years or more would be characterised at very high risk. This compares with 36% using the IOF/ESCEO criteria and an age-specific intervention threshold over all ages. With an upper intervention threshold of 1.6 times the pre-existing intervention threshold, 10% of women age 50 years or more would be characterised at very high risk. The data from phase 3 studies indicate that most trial participants exposed to romosozumab or teriparatide would fall into the very high-risk category.

CONCLUSIONS

Proposals for FRAX-based criteria for very high risk for the NOGG hybrid model categorise a small proportion of women age 50 years or more (10%) in this highest risk stratum. The level of risk identified was comparable to that of women enrolled in trials of anabolic agents.

Independent External Validation of FRAX and Garvan Fracture Risk Calculators: A Sub-Study of the FRISBEE Cohort

Probabilistic models including clinical risk factors with or without bone mineral density (BMD) have been developed to estimate the 5‐ or 10‐year absolute fracture risk. We investigated the performance of the FRAX and Garvan tools in a well‐characterized population‐based cohort of 3560 postmenopausal, volunteer women, aged 60 to 85 years at baseline, included in the Fracture Risk Brussels Epidemiological Enquiry (FRISBEE) cohort, during 5 years of follow‐up. Baseline data were used to calculate the estimated 10‐year risk of hip and major osteoporotic fractures (MOFs) for each participant using FRAX (Belgium). We computed the 5‐year risk according to the Garvan model with BMD. For calibration, the predicted risk of fracture was compared with fracture incidence across a large range of estimated fracture risks. The accuracy of the calculators to predict fractures was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). The FRAX tool was well calibrated for hip fractures (slope 1.09, p < 0.001; intercept −0.001, p = 0.46), but it consistently underestimated the incidence of major osteoporotic fractures (MOFs) (slope 2.12, p < 0.001; intercept −0.02, p = 0.06). The Garvan tool was well calibrated for “any Garvan” fractures (slope 1.05, p < 0.001; intercept 0.01, p = 0.37) but largely overestimated the observed hip fracture rate (slope 0.32, p < 0.001; intercept 0.006, p = 0.05). The predictive value for hip fractures was better for FRAX (AUC: 0.841, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.795–0.887) than for Garvan (AUC: 0.769, 95% CI 0.702–0.836, p = 0.01). The Garvan AUC for “any Garvan” fractures was 0.721 (95% CI 0.693–0.749) and FRAX AUC for MOFs was 0.708 (95% CI 0.675–0.741). In conclusion, in our Belgian cohort, FRAX estimated quite well hip fractures but underestimated MOFs, while Garvan overestimated hip fracture risk but showed a good estimation of “any Garvan” fractures. Both models had a good discriminatory value for hip fractures but only a moderate discriminatory ability for MOFs or “any Garvan” fractures. © 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

The effect on subsequent fracture risk of age, sex, and prior fracture site by recency of prior fracture

The risk of a recurrent fragility fracture varies by age and sex, as by site and recency of sentinel fracture.

INTRODUCTION

The recency of prior fractures affects subsequent fracture risk. Variable recency may obscure other factors that affect subsequent fracture risk. The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of a sentinel fracture by site, age, and sex where the recency was held constant.

METHODS

The study used data from the Reykjavik Study fracture register that documented prospectively all fractures at all skeletal sites in a large sample of the population of Iceland. Fracture incidence was compared to that of the general population determined at fixed times after a sentinel fracture (humeral, clinical vertebral, forearm, hip, and minor fractures). Outcome fractures comprised a major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture.

RESULTS

Sentinel osteoporotic fractures were identified in 9504 men and women. Of these, 3616 individuals sustained a major osteoporotic fracture as the first subsequent fracture, of whom 1799 sustained a hip fracture. Hazard ratios for prior fracture were consistently higher in men than in women and decreased progressively with age. Hazard ratios varied according to the site of sentinel fracture with higher ratios for hip and vertebral fracture than for humerus, forearm, or minor osteoporotic fracture.

CONCLUSION

The risk of a recurrent fragility fracture varies by age, sex, and site of sentinel fracture when recency is held constant.

Development of the Asia Pacific Consortium on Osteoporosis (APCO) Framework: clinical standards of care for the screening, diagnosis, and management of osteoporosis in the Asia-Pacific region

Guidelines for doctors managing osteoporosis in the Asia-Pacific region vary widely. We compared 18 guidelines for similarities and differences in five key areas. We then used a structured consensus process to develop clinical standards of care for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis and for improving the quality of care.

PURPOSE

Minimum clinical standards for assessment and management of osteoporosis are needed in the Asia-Pacific (AP) region to inform clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and to improve osteoporosis care. We present the framework of these clinical standards and describe its development.

METHODS

We conducted a structured comparative analysis of existing CPGs in the AP region using a "5IQ" model (identification, investigation, information, intervention, integration, and quality). One-hundred data elements were extracted from each guideline. We then employed a four-round Delphi consensus process to structure the framework, identify key components of guidance, and develop clinical care standards.

RESULTS

Eighteen guidelines were included. The 5IQ analysis demonstrated marked heterogeneity, notably in guidance on risk factors, the use of biochemical markers, self-care information for patients, indications for osteoporosis treatment, use of fracture risk assessment tools, and protocols for monitoring treatment. There was minimal guidance on long-term management plans or on strategies and systems for clinical quality improvement. Twenty-nine APCO members participated in the Delphi process, resulting in consensus on 16 clinical standards, with levels of attainment defined for those on identification and investigation of fragility fractures, vertebral fracture assessment, and inclusion of quality metrics in guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The 5IQ analysis confirmed previous anecdotal observations of marked heterogeneity of osteoporosis clinical guidelines in the AP region. The Framework provides practical, clear, and feasible recommendations for osteoporosis care and can be adapted for use in other such vastly diverse regions. Implementation of the standards is expected to significantly lessen the global burden of osteoporosis.

Long-Term Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is an incurable chronic condition, like heart disease, diabetes, or hypertension. A large gap currently exists in the primary prevention of fractures, and studies show that an estimated 80% to 90% of adults do not receive appropriate osteoporosis management even in the secondary prevention setting. Case finding strategies have been developed and effective pharmacological interventions are available. This publication addresses how best to use the pharmacological options available for postmenopausal osteoporosis to provide lifelong fracture protection in patients at high and very high risk of fracture. The benefit of osteoporosis therapies far outweighs the rare risks.

Risk factors for imminent fractures: a substudy of the FRISBEE cohort

Multiple factors increase the risk of an imminent fracture, including a recent fracture, older age, osteoporosis, comorbidities, and the fracture site. These findings could be a first step in the development of a model to predict an imminent fracture and select patients most at need of immediate treatment.

INTRODUCTION

The risk of a recurrent fragility fracture is maximal during the first 2 years following an incident fracture. In this prospective cohort study, we looked at the incidence of recurrent fractures within 2 years after a first incident fracture and we assessed independent clinical risk factors (CRFs) increasing this imminent fracture risk.

METHODS

A total of 3560 postmenopausal women recruited from 2007 to 2013 were surveyed yearly for the occurrence of fragility fractures. We identified patients who sustained a fracture during the first 2 years following a first incident fragility fracture. We quantified the risk of a new fracture and assessed independent CRFs, associated with an imminent fracture at various sites.

RESULTS

A recent fracture was a significant CRF for an imminent fracture (OR (95% CI): 3.7 (2.4-5.7) [p < 0.0001]). The incidence of an imminent fracture was higher in subjects above 80 years (p < 0.001). Other CRFs highly predictive in a multivariate analysis were osteoporosis diagnosis (p < 0.01), a central fracture as the index fracture (p < 0.01), and the presence of comorbidities (p < 0.05), with likelihood ratios of 1.9, 1.9, and 2.2, respectively. An imminent fracture was better predicted by a central fracture (p < 0.01) than by a major osteoporotic fracture. The hazard ratio was the highest for a central fracture.

CONCLUSION

In patients with a recent fracture, older age, osteoporosis, comorbidities, and fracture site were associated with an imminent fracture risk. These findings could be a first step in the development of a model to predict an imminent fracture and select patients most at need of immediate and most appropriate treatment.

Anabolic treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

Antiresorptive agents are generally recommended as first-line treatment for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. These drugs suppress bone resorption but do not rebuild bone, limiting their efficacy. Antiresorptive use is further hampered by concerns over rare side effects, including atypical femoral fractures and osteonecrosis of the jaw. Anabolic treatments overcome limitations of antiresorptive treatment by stimulating new bone formation, reducing the risk of fracture with greater efficacy. This review summarises the latest trial data for the three anabolic agents currently available for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: teriparatide, abaloparatide, and romosozumab. Data from head-to-head studies comparing anabolic and antiresorptive treatments are reviewed. At present, anabolic treatments are generally reserved for use in patients with severe osteoporosis at very high fracture risk; the factors limiting their more widespread use are discussed together with how this may change in the future.

Cost-effectiveness of romosozumab for the treatment of postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis at high risk of fracture in Sweden

Romosozumab is a novel bone-building drug that reduces fracture risk. This health economic analysis indicates that sequential romosozumab-to-alendronate can be a cost-effective treatment option for postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis at high risk of fracture.

PURPOSE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with romosozumab followed by alendronate ("romosozumab-to-alendronate") compared with alendronate alone in patients with severe osteoporosis at high risk of fracture in Sweden.

METHODS

A microsimulation model with a Markov structure was used to simulate fractures, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), for women treated with romosozumab-to-alendronate or alendronate alone. Patients aged 74 years with a recent major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) were followed from the start of treatment until the age of 100 years or death. Treatment with romosozumab for 12 months was followed by alendronate for up to 48 months or alendronate alone with a maximum treatment duration of 60 months. The analysis had a societal perspective. Efficacy of romosozumab and alendronate were derived from phase III randomized controlled trials. Resource use and unit costs were collected from the literature. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with QALYs as effectiveness measures.

RESULTS

The base case analysis showed that sequential romosozumab-to-alendronate treatment was associated with 0.089 additional QALYs at an additional cost of €3002 compared to alendronate alone, resulting in an ICER of €33,732. At a Swedish reference willingness-to-pay per QALY of €60,000, romosozumab-to-alendronate had a 97.9% probability of being cost-effective against alendronate alone. The results were most sensitive to time horizon, persistence assumptions, patient age, and treatment efficacy.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study indicate that sequential romosozumab-to-alendronate can be a cost-effective treatment option for postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis at high risk of fracture.

Vertebral fracture: epidemiology, impact and use of DXA vertebral fracture assessment in fracture liaison services

Vertebral fractures are independent risk factors for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Since vertebral fractures are often missed, the relatively new introduction of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) for imaging of the lateral spine during DXA-measurement of the spine and hips may contribute to detect vertebral fractures. We advocate performing a VFA in all patients with a recent fracture visiting a fracture liaison service (FLS). Fracture liaison services (FLS) are important service models for delivering secondary fracture prevention for older adults presenting with a fragility fracture. While commonly age, clinical risk factors (including fracture site and number of prior fracture) and BMD play a crucial role in determining fracture risk and indications for treatment with antiosteoporosis medications, prevalent vertebral fractures usually remain undetected. However, vertebral fractures are important independent risk factors for future vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. A development of the DXA technology, vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), allows for assessment of the lateral spine during the regular DXA bone mineral density measurement of the lumbar spine and hips. Recent approaches to the stratification of antiosteoporosis medication type according to baseline fracture risk, and differences by age in the indication for treatment by prior fracture mean that additional information from VFA may influence initiation and type of treatment. Furthermore, knowledge of baseline vertebral fractures allows reliable definition of incident vertebral fracture events during treatment, which may modify the approach to therapy. In this manuscript, we will discuss the epidemiology and clinical significance of vertebral fractures, the different methods of detecting vertebral fractures, and the rationale for, and implications of, use of VFA routinely in FLS. • Vertebral fracture assessment is a tool available on modern DXA instruments and has proven ability to detect vertebral fractures, the majority of which occur without a fall and without the signs and symptoms of an acute fracture. • Most osteoporosis guidelines internationally suggest that treatment with antiosteoporosis medications should be considered for older individuals (e.g., 65 years +) with a recent low trauma fracture without the need for DXA. • Younger individuals postfracture may be risk-assessed on the basis of FRAX® probability including DXA and associated treatment thresholds. • Future fracture risk is markedly influenced by both site, number, severity, and recency of prior fracture; awareness of baseline vertebral fractures facilitates definition of true incident vertebral fracture events occurring during antiosteoporosis treatment. • Detection of previously clinically silent vertebral fractures, defining site of prior fracture, might alter treatment decisions in younger or older FLS patients, consistent with recent IOF-ESCEO guidance on baseline-risk-stratified therapy, and provides a reliable baseline from which to define new, potentially therapy-altering, vertebral fracture events.