Literature DB >> 21723768

Spine-hip T-score difference predicts major osteoporotic fracture risk independent of FRAX(®): a population-based report from CAMOS.

William D Leslie1, Christopher S Kovacs, Wojciech P Olszynski, Tanveer Towheed, Stephanie M Kaiser, Jerilynn C Prior, Robert G Josse, Sophie A Jamal, Nancy Kreiger, David Goltzman.   

Abstract

The WHO fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX(®)) estimates an individual's 10-yr major osteoporotic and hip fracture probabilities. When bone mineral density (BMD) is included in the FRAX calculation, only the femoral neck measurement can be used. Recently, a procedure was reported for adjusting major osteoporotic fracture probability from FRAX with femoral neck BMD based on the difference (offset) between the lumbar spine and the femoral neck T-score values. The objective of the current analysis was to independently evaluate this algorithm in a population-based cohort of 4575 women and 1813 men aged 50 yr and older from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. For women and men combined, there was a 15% (95% confidence interval 7-24%) increase in major osteoporotic fracture risk for each offset T-score after adjusting for FRAX probability calculated with femoral neck BMD. The effect was stronger in women than men, but a significant sex interaction was not detected. Among the full cohort, 5.5% had their risk category reclassified after using the offset adjustment. Sex- and age-dependent offsets (equivalent to an offset based on Z-scores) showed improved risk classification among individuals designated to be at moderate risk with the conventional FRAX probability measurement. In summary, the T-score difference between the lumbar spine and femoral neck is an independent risk factor for major osteoporotic fractures that is independent of the FRAX probability calculated with femoral neck BMD.
Copyright © 2011 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21723768      PMCID: PMC5096935          DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2011.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Densitom        ISSN: 1094-6950            Impact factor:   2.617


  25 in total

1.  Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-01-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Estimation of the prevalence of low bone density in Canadian women and men using a population-specific DXA reference standard: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos).

Authors:  A Tenenhouse; L Joseph; N Kreiger; S Poliquin; T M Murray; L Blondeau; C Berger; D A Hanley; J C Prior
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Fracture prediction and calibration of a Canadian FRAX® tool: a population-based report from CaMos.

Authors:  L-A Fraser; L Langsetmo; C Berger; G Ioannidis; D Goltzman; J D Adachi; A Papaioannou; R Josse; C S Kovacs; W P Olszynski; T Towheed; D A Hanley; S M Kaiser; J Prior; S Jamal; N Kreiger; J P Brown; H Johansson; A Oden; E McCloskey; J A Kanis; W D Leslie
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Differences in site-specific fracture risk among older women with discordant results for osteoporosis at hip and spine: study of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  Howard A Fink; Stephanie L Harrison; Brent C Taylor; Steven R Cummings; John T Schousboe; Michael A Kuskowski; Katie L Stone; Kristine E Ensrud
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2008-02-25       Impact factor: 2.617

5.  FRAX and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK.

Authors:  J A Kanis; O Johnell; A Oden; H Johansson; E McCloskey
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-02-22       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Assessing the value of risk predictions by using risk stratification tables.

Authors:  Holly Janes; Margaret S Pepe; Wen Gu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Single-site vs multisite bone density measurement for fracture prediction.

Authors:  William D Leslie; Lisa M Lix; James F Tsang; Patricia A Caetano
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2007 Aug 13-27

8.  Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  D Marshall; O Johnell; H Wedel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18

9.  Change in bone mineral density as a function of age in women and men and association with the use of antiresorptive agents.

Authors:  Claudie Berger; Lisa Langsetmo; Lawrence Joseph; David A Hanley; K Shawn Davison; Robert Josse; Nancy Kreiger; Alan Tenenhouse; David Goltzman
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Automated assessment of exclusion criteria for DXA lumbar spine scans.

Authors:  Howard S Barden; Paul Markwardt; Randy Payne; Brent Hawkins; Matt Frank; Kenneth G Faulkner
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  13 in total

1.  Predicting fracture using 2D finite element modelling.

Authors:  J A M MacNeil; J D Adachi; D Goltzman; R G Josse; C S Kovacs; J C Prior; W Olszynski; K S Davison; S M Kaiser
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2011-09-29       Impact factor: 2.242

Review 2.  Assessment of fracture risk.

Authors:  Sanford Baim; William D Leslie
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 5.096

3.  High prevalence of spine–femur bone mineral density discordance and comparison of vertebral fracture risk assessment using femoral neck and lumbar spine bone density in Korean patients.

Authors:  Hannah Seok; Kwang Joon Kim; Kyoung Min Kim; Yumie Rhee; Bong Soo Cha; Sung-Kil Lim
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.626

4.  Number of osteoporotic sites as a modifying factor for bone mineral density.

Authors:  Jong Seok Lee; Sungwha Lee; Ohk-Hyun Ryu; Moon-Gi Choi; Youn Ji Kim
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Clinical fracture risk evaluated by hierarchical agglomerative clustering.

Authors:  C Kruse; P Eiken; P Vestergaard
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Were you identified to be at high fracture risk by FRAX® before your osteoporotic fracture occurred?

Authors:  Xiao-feng Chen; Xiao-lin Li; Hui Zhang; Ge-jun Liu
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 7.  Risk Assessment Tools for Osteoporosis Screening in Postmenopausal Women: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Carolyn J Crandall
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 5.096

8.  European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  J A Kanis; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  What Do We Know about Individuals Who Are Assessed as Being at Moderate Risk for Future Fracture in Canada?

Authors:  Joanna E M Sale; Ravi Jain; Kosalan Akilan; Kevin Senior; Dorcas Beaton; Earl Bogoch; Gilles Boire; Marie-Claude Beaulieu; David Lightfoot; Larry Funnell
Journal:  Health (Irvine Calif)       Date:  2015-05

10.  Clinical guidelines for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: summary statements and recommendations from the Italian Society for Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

Authors:  Umberto Tarantino; Giovanni Iolascon; Luisella Cianferotti; Laura Masi; Gemma Marcucci; Francesca Giusti; Francesca Marini; Simone Parri; Maurizio Feola; Cecilia Rao; Eleonora Piccirilli; Emanuela Basilici Zanetti; Noemi Cittadini; Rosaria Alvaro; Antimo Moretti; Dario Calafiore; Giuseppe Toro; Francesca Gimigliano; Giuseppina Resmini; Maria Luisa Brandi
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2017-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.