Agreement between FRAX scores calculated with and without bone mineral density in women with osteopenia in Turkey

Evaluation of the effects of β1-selective beta-blockers on bone mineral density and fracture risk in postmenopausal women

Background/aim

β1-selective beta-blockers (BBs) are sympatholytic agents, and discerning their effects on bone health would be of great importance. This study aimed to investigate the influence of β1-selective BBs on bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk.

Materials and methods

This study included postmenopausal women who used β1-selective BBs (BB group) and control group. Sociodemographic characteristics, BMD and previous fragility fractures were recorded. Additionally, the 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic and hip fracture was calculated using the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX).

Results

A total of 60 participants were included in the study. L1-4 and L2-4 BMD values were significantly higher in BB group than control group (P = 0.015 and P = 0.025, respectively). Moreover, T-scores of lumbar and femur total were significantly higher in the BB group. Two patients in BB and 6 patients in control group had previous fragility fracture. No statistically significant intergroup difference was noted regarding FRAX.

Conclusion

Based on our results, β1-selective BB usage was associated with higher BMD at the lumbar region in postmenopausal women.

The role of bone mineral density in therapeutic decision-making using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX): a sub-study of the Taiwan OsteoPorosis Survey (TOPS)

Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)-based intervention threshold (IT) is widely applied for treatment decision-making; however, an IT based on FRAX without the measurement of bone mass density (BMD) has not been validated. The study demonstrated that estimates of fracture risk by FRAX without BMD were higher than those by FRAX with BMD in women with old age.

INTRODUCTION

BMD is an integral component for bone strength assessment, but age-specific impacts of BMD on fracture risk assessment and therapeutic decision-making remained unclear. We aimed to investigate whether using BMD measurement changed the interpretation of the FRAX-based fracture probability assessment and treatment decision.

METHODOLOGY

The database was provided by the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association (TOA) which conducted a nationwide survey of BMD. We calculated the 10-year major and hip fracture probabilities using the FRAX for each participant, either with (FRAX + BMD) or without BMD (FRAX - BMD). Age-specific individual intervention thresholds (IITs) were established using the FRAX-based fracture risk, equivalent to a woman with a prior fracture. Participants whose FRAX scores of major fracture were greater than or equal to their IITs were deemed suitable for therapeutic intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 14,007 postmenopausal women were enrolled. Compared with FRAX + BMD, FRAX - BMD predicted lower FRAX scores in major and hip fractures in subjects aged 40-60 years; however, FRAX - BMD estimated higher risks for those aged 61-90 years. The therapeutic decision using FRAX - BMD was concordant to that using FRAX + BMD in 90.5% of the subjects, especially in the younger age group (40-70 years). FRAX - BMD identified more treatment candidates (7.7-16.4%) among those aged 71-90 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The FRAX scores are influenced by age, irrespective of the consideration of BMD. FRAX - BMD is able to identify more subjects for therapeutic intervention in the elderly population. We should reconsider the role of BMD at different ages for therapeutic decision-making.

State of the art in osteoporosis risk assessment and treatment

BACKGROUND

Osteoporosis constitutes a major public health problem, through its association with age-related fractures, particularly of the hip, vertebrae, distal forearm, and humerus. Over recent decades, it has evolved from being viewed as an inevitable consequence of ageing, to being recognised as a serious and eminently treatable disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this article, we review the literature pertaining to the epidemiology of osteoporosis, associated health burden, approaches to risk assessment and treatment.

RESULTS

Although there is some evidence that fracture incidence has reached a plateau, or even started to decline, in the developed world, an ageing population and adoption of westernised lifestyles in transitioning populations is leading to an increasing burden of osteoporosis across the world. Whilst the clinical definition of osteoporosis has been based solely on bone mineral density, the prediction of fracture at the individual level has been improved by consideration of clinical risk factors in tools such as FRAX®, derived from a greater understanding of the epidemiology of osteoporosis. Such advances in approaches to primary and secondary prevention of fractures, coupled with elucidation of the underlying biology, and the development of a range of highly effective antiosteoporosis medications, have enabled a step change in our ability to prevent osteoporosis-related fractures. However, there remains a substantial disparity between the number of individuals at high fracture risk and number treated globally.

CONCLUSION

Urgent work is needed at the level of health care systems, national and international policy, and in communication with patients and public, to ensure that all patients who should receive treatment for osteoporosis actually do so.

FRAX 10-yr Fracture Risk in Rheumatoid Arthritis-Assessments With and Without Bone Mineral Density May Lead to Very Different Results in the Individual Patient

OBJECTIVES

FRAX is a computer-based algorithm developed by the World Health Organisation for estimation of the 10-yr risk of a hip or major osteoporotic fracture. Inclusion of femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) in the estimation is optional. The study aimed to investigate the intra-individual agreement between FRAX fracture risk calculated with and without BMD in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Clinical data and BMD results from 50 RA patients registered in the Danish rheumatology registry (DANBIO) were used for analysis. Using the Bland-Altman method, lower and upper 95% limits of agreement [LLoA;ULoA] between intraindividual assessments of fracture risk with and without BMD and the bias (mean of individual differences) were calculated. Categorization of patients according to the National Osteoporosis foundation (NOF) treatment thresholds were also assessed with and without BMD.

RESULTS

Mean age was 63.6 ± 11.7 yr, mean disease activity score (DAS28-CRP) 3.3 ± 3.5 and mean femoral neck T-score -1.43 ± 1.15. The mean 10-yr risk of a major fracture and a hip fracture calculated with BMD was 22.9 ± 15.8% and 8.5 ± 10.8%, respectively. The LLoA and ULoA [bias] calculated without vs with BMD were -14.5 and 20.4 percent point (pp) [2.9 pp] for major fracture risk and -14.0 and 23.2 pp [4.6 pp] for hip fracture. NOF treatment categorization was only dependent on BMD in 4% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The FRAX fracture risk estimated with and without BMD may disagree substantially in individual patients with RA but this seems to have only little impact on treatment categorization based on the NOF guidelines.

Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®) Results Calculated With and Without Bone Mineral Density Values for the Evaluation of Fracture Risk in Postmenopausal Women With Osteopenia

The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement between fracture risk predictions based on calculations made with and without bone mineral density (BMD) values using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®) in Turkish postmenopausal women with osteopenia and to compare the treatment recommendations. This descriptive, cross-sectional study included postmenopausal women aged 50-79 yr with a diagnosis of osteoporosis who were not receiving any treatment. A questionnaire was administered to the participants face-to-face to obtain sociodemographic characteristics, medical history, and fracture history. Fracture risk was calculated with FRAX® separately with and without BMD. The study included 230 postmenopausal patients with osteopenia. The mean age of the patients was determined as 63.16 ± 7.59 yr, and the mean body mass index was 30.61 ± 5.02. The intraclass correlation coefficient values of the 10-yr major osteoporotic (MO) fracture and hip fracture score agreement with FRAX® with and without BMD were mean 0.486 and 0.462, respectively. The risk of MO fracture with an intervention threshold of ≥20 was determined in 227/230 patients (98.7%), and the risk of hip fracture with treatment recommendations of ≥3 was determined in 204/230 patients (88.7%). Treatment recommendations in patients with no fracture history and secondary osteoporosis were 100% for MO fracture and 94.7% (123/130) for hip fracture risk. The treatment recommendation rates of FRAX® with and without BMD were similar for the majority of postmenopausal women with osteopenia. The agreement between the values was of a moderate level. When patients with a fracture history and secondary osteoporosis were excluded, the agreement increased. Even though values with BMD are of basic importance for medical treatment in postmenopausal women, the use of measurements evaluating fracture risk, such as FRAX® without BMD, could be useful in postmenopausal women with osteopenia.

The association between 10-year fracture risk by FRAX and osteoporotic fractures with disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

As rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an independent risk factor for osteoporotic fractures, the severity of disease activity may correlate with fracture risk. Our objectives were to determine the prevalence of major osteoporotic and hip fractures in patients with RA and to identify the factors related to their 10-year probabilities. This study enrolled 232 patients with RA, aged 40-90 years, who participated in the Siriraj RA Cohort in 2016 and 2017. Demographic data, disease activity scores 28 (DAS28), and health assessment questionnaires (HAQ) were collected. All participants were evaluated for asymptomatic vertebral fractures by thoracolumbar spine radiography. The osteoporotic fracture risks were determined using the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX). Most subjects were postmenopausal women in their sixth decade; the median disease duration was 12.95 years. Forty-six percent of patients had osteoporotic fractures, and most (87%) were vertebral fractures. Eighty-one patients had asymptomatic vertebral compression fractures. Of those, 57%, 25%, and 18% had low, moderate, and high 10-year probabilities of major osteoporotic fractures, respectively, while 51%, 34%, and 15% had low, moderate, and high 10-year probabilities of hip fractures, respectively. Factors significantly associated with the 10-year probabilities of major osteoporotic and hip fractures were disease duration (p 0.017, 0.009), menopause duration (p < 0.001 both), cumulative disease activity (DAS28; p 0.004, 0.029), and cumulative functional disability (HAQ; p < 0.001 both). Moderate to high 10-year probabilities of major osteoporotic and hip fractures are common in RA. Cumulative disease severity is a high risk for osteoporotic fractures.

The impact of fragility fracture and approaches to osteoporosis risk assessment worldwide

Osteoporosis constitutes a major public health problem, through its association with age-related fractures, particularly of the hip, vertebrae, distal forearm and humerus. Substantial geographic variation has been noted in the incidence of osteoporotic fractures worldwide, with Western populations (North America, Europe and Oceania), reporting increases in hip fracture throughout the second half of the 20th century, with a stabilisation or decline in the last two decades. In developing populations however, particularly in Asia, the rates of osteoporotic fracture appears to be increasing. The massive global burden consequent to osteoporosis means that fracture risk assessment should be a high priority among health measures considered by policy makers. The WHO operational definition of osteoporosis, based on a measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), has been used globally since the mid-1990s. However, although this definition identifies those at greatest individual risk of fracture, in the population overall a greater total number of fractures occur in individuals with BMD values above the threshold for osteoporosis diagnosis. A number of web-based tools to enable the inclusion of clinical risk factors, with or without BMD, in fracture prediction algorithms have been developed to improve the identification of individuals at high fracture risk, the most commonly used globally being FRAX®. Access to DXA, osteoporosis risk assessment, case finding and treatment varies worldwide, but despite such advances studies indicate that a minority of men and women at high fracture risk receive treatment. Importantly, research is ongoing to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis case finding and risk assessment strategies worldwide. The huge burden caused by osteoporosis related fractures to individuals, healthcare systems and societies should provide a clear impetus for the progression of such approaches.

Reprint of: The impact of fragility fracture and approaches to osteoporosis risk assessment worldwide

Osteoporosis constitutes a major public health problem, through its association with age-related fractures, particularly of the hip, vertebrae, distal forearm and humerus. Substantial geographic variation has been noted in the incidence of osteoporotic fractures worldwide, with Western populations (North America, Europe and Oceania), reporting increases in hip fracture throughout the second half of the 20th century, with a stabilisation or decline in the last two decades. In developing populations however, particularly in Asia, the rates of osteoporotic fracture appears to be increasing. The massive global burden consequent to osteoporosis means that fracture risk assessment should be a high priority amongst health measures considered by policy makers. The WHO operational definition of osteoporosis, based on a measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), has been used globally since the mid-1990s. However, although this definition identifies those at greatest individual risk of fracture, in the population overall a greater total number of fractures occur in individuals with BMD values above threshold for osteoporosis diagnosis. A number of web-based tools to enable the inclusion of clinical risk factors, with or without BMD, in fracture prediction algorithms have been developed to improve the identification of individuals at high fracture risk, the most commonly used globally being FRAX®. Access to DXA, osteoporosis risk assessment, case finding and treatment varies worldwide, but despite such advances studies indicate that a minority of men and women at high fracture risk receive treatment. Importantly, research is ongoing to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis case finding and risk assessment strategies worldwide. The huge burden caused by osteoporosis related fractures to individuals, healthcare systems and societies should provide a clear impetus for the progression of such approaches.

Correlation between osteoporotic fracture risk in Brazilian postmenopausal women calculated using the FRAX with and without the inclusion of bone densitometry data

The risks of fracture were calculated in 402 postmenopausal Brazilian women by FRAX with or without the inclusion of bone densitometry values. The correlation between the risk of major osteoporosis fracture or hip fracture calculated by FRAX with or without BMD was similar in this population, 0.76 and 0.64, respectively.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the degree of agreement between the 10-year fracture risk in postmenopausal Brazilian women, calculated using the WHO Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)-Brazil, with and without the inclusion of bone mineral density (BMD) values.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted with 402 postmenopausal women (≥40 years) who had undergone bone densitometry prior to initiating any pharmacological treatment for osteopenia or osteoporosis. The risks of a major osteoporosis fracture or hip fracture were calculated according to FRAX-Brazil either using clinical risk factors alone or with the inclusion of BMD value. The tests used were intraclass correlation coefficient, Mann-Whitney test, and univariate linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

When the patients were classified according to the cutoff point defined as determining a high risk of a major osteoporosis fracture (≥20 %), 0.75 % were defined as high risk when BMD values were included and 1 % when they were not. With respect to the hip, 5.22 % were defined as having a high risk of fracture (≥3 %) when BMD values were included and 11.44 % when they were not. Intraclass correlation coefficient between the FRAX-Brazil assessed risk with and without the inclusion of BMD values was 0.76 (95 % CI 0.716-0.799) for a major osteoporosis fracture and 0.64 (95 %CI 0.583-0.698) for a hip fracture.

CONCLUSION

The correlation found for the FRAX-Brazil score obtained with and without the inclusion of BMD values was good for the risk of a major osteoporosis fracture and moderate for the risk of a hip fracture. The fracture risk calculated was similar in this population irrespective of whether or not BMD values were included in the algorithm.

Influence of bone mineral density measurement on fracture risk assessment tool® scores in postmenopausal Indian women

AIM

Fracture risk assessment tool® calculations can be performed with or without addition of bone mineral density; however, the impact of this addition on fracture risk assessment tool® scores has not been studied in Indian women. Given the limited availability and high cost of bone mineral density testing in India, it is important to know the influence of bone mineral density on fracture risk assessment tool® scores in Indian women. Therefore, our aim was to assess the contribution of bone mineral density in fracture risk assessment tool® outcome in Indian women.

METHODS

Apparently healthy postmenopausal Indian women (n = 506), aged 40-72 years, without clinical risk factors for bone disease, were retrospectively selected, and their fracture risk assessment tool® scores calculated with and without bone mineral density were compared.

RESULTS

Based on WHO criteria, 30% women were osteoporotic, 42.9% were osteopenic and 27.1% had normal bone mineral density. Fracture risk assessment tool® scores for risk of both major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture significantly increased on including bone mineral density (P < 0.0001). When criteria of National Osteoporosis Foundation, US was applied number of participants eligible for medical therapy increased upon inclusion of bone mineral density, (for major osteoporotic fracture risk number of women eligible without bone mineral density was 0 and with bone mineral density was 1, P > 0.05, whereas, for hip fracture risk number of women eligible without bone mineral density was 2 and with bone mineral density was 17, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Until the establishment of country-specific medication intervention thresholds, bone mineral density should be included while calculating fracture risk assessment tool® scores in Indian women.

Comparison between frailty index of deficit accumulation and fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in prediction of risk of fractures

A frailty index (FI) of deficit accumulation could quantify and predict the risk of fractures based on the degree of frailty in the elderly. We aimed to compare the predictive powers between the FI and the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in predicting risk of major osteoporotic fracture (hip, upper arm or shoulder, spine, or wrist) and hip fracture, using the data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) 3-year Hamilton cohort. There were 3985 women included in the study, with the mean age of 69.4 years (standard deviation [SD] = 8.89). During the follow-up, there were 149 (3.98%) incident major osteoporotic fractures and 18 (0.48%) hip fractures reported. The FRAX and FI were significantly related to each other. Both FRAX and FI significantly predicted risk of major osteoporotic fracture, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.05) and 1.02 (95% CI: 1.01-1.04) for per-0.01 increment for the FRAX and FI respectively. The HRs were 1.37 (95% CI: 1.19-1.58) and 1.26 (95% CI: 1.12-1.42) for an increase of per-0.10 (approximately one SD) in the FRAX and FI respectively. Similar discriminative ability of the models was found: c-index = 0.62 for the FRAX and c-index = 0.61 for the FI. When cut-points were chosen to trichotomize participants into low-risk, medium-risk and high-risk groups, a significant increase in fracture risk was found in the high-risk group (HR = 2.04, 95% CI: 1.36-3.07) but not in the medium-risk group (HR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.82-1.84) compared with the low-risk women for the FI, while for FRAX the medium-risk (HR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.09-3.68) and high-risk groups (HR = 2.61, 95% CI: 1.48-4.58) predicted risk of major osteoporotic fracture significantly only when survival time exceeded 18months (550 days). Similar findings were observed for hip fracture and in sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, the FI is comparable with FRAX in the prediction of risk of future fractures, indicating that measures of frailty status may aid in fracture risk assessment and fracture prevention in the elderly. Further evidence from randomized controlled trials of osteoporosis medication interventions is needed to support the FI and FRAX as validated measures of fracture risk.

Validation of FRAX without BMD: an age-related analysis of the Fifth Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES V-1, 2010)

Although the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) is widely used to evaluate probabilities of fractures, there is no consensus regarding whether it is accurate when bone mineral density (BMD) is not included. This cross-sectional study aimed to compare the 10-year predicted fracture probabilities calculated using FRAX with and without BMD. Data were collected from the 2010 Fifth Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and 2706 participants (1260 men and 1446 women) aged 50-90 years were analyzed. Ten-year predicted probabilities for major osteoporotic and hip fractures were calculated using the FRAX model. In men, the 10-year probabilities without BMD were 3.9±1.8% and 1.3±1.4% for major osteoporotic and hip fractures, respectively. In women, the 10-year probabilities without BMD were 7.7±4.4% and 2.6±2.9% for major osteoporotic and hip fractures, respectively. These probabilities were significantly correlated with the probabilities calculated using FRAX with BMD (all, p<0.001). When participants were divided into 10-year age groups and compared with the 10-year predicted fracture probability with BMD, the 10-year predicted fracture probability without BMD was lower in men 50-59 years old, similar to men 60-69 years old, and higher in men ≥70 years old. The FRAX scores without BMD were generally lower for all women. The FRAX model without BMD appears to be a slightly lower fracture probability compared to that calculated with BMD, especially in younger participants. Although these results have important clinical implications for areas with limited ability to evaluate BMD, they must be confirmed by a large prospective study.

Identification of patient profile for treatment

The WHO clinical definition of osteoporosis, based on a measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) by Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry, has been used globally since the mid-1990s. However, although this definition identifies those at greatest individual risk of fracture, in the population overall a greater total number of fractures occur in individuals with BMD values above the osteoporosis threshold. The inclusion of clinical risk factors, with or without BMD, in fracture prediction algorithms can improve the identification of individuals at high fracture risk; thus a number of web-based tools have been developed, the most commonly used globally being FRAX(®). In this review, we will discuss the epidemiology of osteoporosis, clinical risk factors for fragility fracture, and how this knowledge is being used to aid risk stratification. Importantly, research is on-going to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of such case-finding strategies.