Temporal changes in access to FRAX® in Thailand between 2010 and 2018

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.

The proportion of Thai postmenopausal women who would be eligible for anti-osteoporosis therapy

PURPOSE

To determine the proportion of postmenopausal Thai women who would be classified as having high risk of fracture and eligible for anti-osteoporosis therapy according to the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) criteria.

METHODS

Postmenopausal Thai women aged 40-90 years who had been screened for osteoporosis during 2014-2019 were recruited. Demographic data and osteoporosis risk factors were collected based on the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) questionnaire. Bone mineral density (BMD) at the femoral neck and lumbar spine measured using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Ten-year probabilities of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) were calculated based on the Thai FRAX model with BMD. The study's protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee (HE581241).

RESULTS

A total of 3,280 postmenopausal women were included. The mean ± SD age was 63.6 ± 10.1 years. A total of 170 (5.2%) participants had a history of hip and/or vertebral fracture. After excluding these participants with fracture history, 699 (21.3%) had osteoporosis, 355 (10.8%) had osteopenia with high risk of fracture (FRAX 10-year probability of hip fracture ≥ 3% and/or MOF ≥ 20%), 1192 (36.3%) had osteopenia with low risk of fracture (FRAX 10-year probability of hip fracture < 3% and MOF < 20%) and 864 (26.3%) had normal BMD. Taken together, a total of 1,224 (37.3%) participants would be eligible for anti-osteoporosis therapy (prior fracture, osteoporosis or osteopenia with high risk of fracture).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of Thai postmenopausal women who would be eligible for anti-osteoporosis therapy was 37.3%.

Is it time to consider population screening for fracture risk in postmenopausal women? A position paper from the International Osteoporosis Foundation Epidemiology/Quality of Life Working Group

The IOF Epidemiology and Quality of Life Working Group has reviewed the potential role of population screening for high hip fracture risk against well-established criteria. The report concludes that such an approach should strongly be considered in many health care systems to reduce the burden of hip fractures.

INTRODUCTION

The burden of long-term osteoporosis management falls on primary care in most healthcare systems. However, a wide and stable treatment gap exists in many such settings; most of which appears to be secondary to a lack of awareness of fracture risk. Screening is a public health measure for the purpose of identifying individuals who are likely to benefit from further investigations and/or treatment to reduce the risk of a disease or its complications. The purpose of this report was to review the evidence for a potential screening programme to identify postmenopausal women at increased risk of hip fracture.

METHODS

The approach took well-established criteria for the development of a screening program, adapted by the UK National Screening Committee, and sought the opinion of 20 members of the International Osteoporosis Foundation's Working Group on Epidemiology and Quality of Life as to whether each criterion was met (yes, partial or no). For each criterion, the evidence base was then reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The report concludes that evidence supports the proposal that screening for high fracture risk in primary care should strongly be considered for incorporation into many health care systems to reduce the burden of fractures, particularly hip fractures. The key remaining hurdles to overcome are engagement with primary care healthcare professionals, and the implementation of systems that facilitate and maintain the screening program.

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.

An optimal intervention threshold of FRAX in postmenopausal Thai women

This study was designed to determine a FRAX intervention threshold in postmenopausal Thais, based on a history of hip fracture. The optimal FRAX thresholds for hip fracture were 4.9% (without BMD) and 4% (with BMD), while the thresholds for major osteoporotic fracture were 9.8% (without BMD) and 8.9% (with BMD).

INTRODUCTION

Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) has been widely used as an intervention threshold for initiating osteoporosis treatment. However, there is a lack of data to validate the threshold in Thai population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2014 to February 2019. Postmenopausal women in the Northeast of Thailand whom has bone mineral density (BMD) measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the study period were recruited. Participants who had previously received anti-osteoporotic treatment were not eligible. FRAX score, both with and without BMD, was calculated using a Thai reference. Prevalent hip fracture was identified by reviewing the ICD-10 diagnosis from the hospital database during the study period. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Youden index were used to determine the FRAX threshold in predicting hip fracture, based on the rationale that women with a prevalent hip fracture would be eligible for treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 2872 postmenopausal Thai women were recruited, with 45 sustained a recent hip fracture. In association with hip fracture, the optimal FRAX thresholds for hip fracture without and with BMD were 4.9% and 4%, respectively, with 71.1% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity, and 82.2% sensitivity and 78.6% specificity, while the optimal FRAX thresholds for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) without and with BMD were 9.8% and 8.9%, respectively, with 75.6% sensitivity and 77.0% specificity, and 86.7% sensitivity and 70.9% specificity.

CONCLUSION

An optimal intervention threshold based on FRAX of hip fracture and MOF in postmenopausal Thai women is slightly different from the standard recommendation, which confirmed the marked variations of thresholds across ethnicities. The proposed threshold should be considered as new cutoff for initiating osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal Thais.

Prevalence of FRAX risk factors and the osteoporosis treatment gap among women ≥ 70 years of age in routine primary care across 8 countries in Europe

We studied whether elderly women at risk for fractures receive primary care treatment to prevent fracture. We found that across Europe, women at risk are often not identified, and less than half of such women receive appropriate treatment. Finally, women diagnosed with osteoporosis are much more likely to receive treatment.

PURPOSE

To examine the relationship between risk factors for fragility fracture (FF) and osteoporosis (OP) treatment gap in elderly women across Europe, and compare the prevalence of risk factors between countries.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical information was collected from women ≥ 70 years visiting primary care physicians in Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Poland, Slovakia, Switzerland, and the UK. Increased risk of FF was defined by the presence of 1 or more criteria (history of fracture, 10-year fracture probability, or T-score ≤  - 2.5).

RESULTS

There were 3798 women in total. Treatment gap (proportion at increased risk of FF not receiving treatment for OP) varied from 53.1 to 90.8% across countries, and the proportion of patients at increased risk of FF varied from 41.2 to 76.1%. Across countries, less than 50% of patients with increased risk of FF had a diagnosis of OP. Previous fracture was the most common risk factor, with similar prevalence across most countries; other risk factors varied widely. The treatment gap was reduced in patients with an OP diagnosis in all countries, but this reduction varied from 36.5 to 79.4%. The countries with the lowest rates of bone densitometry scans (Poland, France, and Germany; 8.3-12.3%) also had the highest treatment gap (82.2 to 90.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights differences across Europe in clinical risk factors for fracture, rates of densitometry scanning, and the rates of OP diagnosis. More emphasis is needed on risk assessment to improve the identification and treatment of elderly women at risk for fracture.

Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis During COVID-19: Systematic Review and Practical Guidance

It is acknowledged that the COVID-19 pandemic has caused profound disruption to the delivery of healthcare services globally. This has affected the management of many long-term conditions including osteoporosis as resources are diverted to cover urgent care. Osteoporosis is a public health concern worldwide and treatment is required for the prevention of further bone loss, deterioration of skeletal micro-architecture, and fragility fractures. This review provides information on how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. We also provide clinical recommendations on the adaptation of care pathways based on experience from five referral centres to ensure that patients with osteoporosis are still treated and to reduce the risk of fractures both for the individual patient and on a societal basis. We address the use of the FRAX tool for risk stratification and initiation of osteoporosis treatment and discuss the potential adaptations to treatment pathways in view of limitations on the availability of DXA. We focus on the issues surrounding initiation and maintenance of treatment for patients on parenteral therapies such as zoledronate, denosumab, teriparatide, and romosozumab during the pandemic. The design of these innovative care pathways for the management of patients with osteoporosis may also provide a platform for future improvement to osteoporosis services when routine clinical care resumes.

The osteoporosis treatment gap in patients at risk of fracture in European primary care: a multi-country cross-sectional observational study

This study in 8 countries across Europe found that about 75% of elderly women seen in primary care who were at high risk of osteoporosis-related fractures were not receiving appropriate medication. Lack of osteoporosis diagnosis appeared to be an important contributing factor.

INTRODUCTION

Treatment rates in osteoporosis are documented to be low. We wished to assess the osteoporosis treatment gap in women ≥ 70 years in routine primary care across Europe.

METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study in 8 European countries collected data from women 70 years or older visiting their general practitioner. The primary outcome was treatment gap: the proportion who were not receiving any osteoporosis medication among those at increased risk of fragility fracture (using history of fracture, 10-year probability of fracture above country-specific Fracture Risk Assessment Tool [FRAX] thresholds, T-score ≤ - 2.5).

RESULTS

Median 10-year probability of fracture (without bone mineral density [BMD]) for the 3798 enrolled patients was 7.2% (hip) and 16.6% (major osteoporotic). Overall, 2077 women (55%) met one or more definitions for increased risk of fragility fracture: 1200 had a prior fracture, 1814 exceeded the FRAX threshold, and 318 had a T-score ≤ - 2.5 (only 944 received a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA] scan). In those at increased fracture risk, the median 10-year probability of hip and major osteoporotic fracture was 11.2% and 22.8%, vs 4.1% and 11.5% in those deemed not at risk. An osteoporosis diagnosis was recorded in 804 patients (21.2%); most (79.7%) of these were at increased fracture risk. The treatment gap was 74.6%, varying from 53% in Ireland to 91% in Germany. Patients with an osteoporosis diagnosis were found to have a lower treatment gap than those without a diagnosis, with an absolute reduction of 63%.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a large treatment gap in women aged ≥ 70 years at increased risk of fragility fracture in routine primary care across Europe. The gap appears to be related to a low rate of osteoporosis diagnosis.

Global impact of COVID-19 on non-communicable disease management: descriptive analysis of access to FRAX fracture risk online tool for prevention of osteoporotic fractures

The COVID-19 pandemic, and its management, is markedly impacting the management of osteoporosis as judged by access to online FRAX fracture risk assessments. Globally, access was 58% lower in April than in February 2020. Strategies to improve osteoporosis care, with greater use of fracture risk assessments, offer a partial solution.

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic is having a significant detrimental impact on the management of chronic diseases including osteoporosis. We have quantified the global impact by examining changes in the usage of online FRAX fracture risk assessments before and after the declaration of the pandemic (11 March 2020).

METHODS

The study comprised a retrospective analysis using GoogleAnalytics data on daily sessions on the FRAX® website ( www.sheffield.ac.uk/FRAX ) from November 2019 to April 2020 (main analysis period February-April 2020), and the geographical source of that activity.

RESULTS

Over February-April 2020, the FRAX website recorded 460,495 sessions from 184 countries, with 210,656 sessions in February alone. In March and April, the number of sessions fell by 23.1% and 58.3% respectively, a pattern not observed over the same period in 2019. There were smaller reductions in Asia than elsewhere, partly related to earlier and less-marked nadirs in some countries (China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Vietnam). In Europe, the majority of countries (24/31, 77.4%) reduced usage by at least 50% in April. Seven countries showed smaller reductions (range - 2.85 to - 44.1%) including Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Germany, Norway, Sweden and Finland. There was no significant relationship between the reduction in FRAX usage and measures of disease burden such as COVID-attributed deaths per million of the population.

CONCLUSION

This study documents a marked global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of osteoporosis as reflected by FRAX online fracture risk assessments. The analysis suggests that impact may relate to the societal and healthcare measures taken to ameliorate the pandemic.