CONTEXT: Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-derived bone mineral density (BMD) does not explain interracial differences in fracture risk; thus, BMD-based fracture risk assessment requires patient race/ethnicity information and ethnicity-specific BMD reference databases. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate whether composite femoral neck strength indices, which integrate dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-derived femoral neck size, femoral neck BMD, and body size, will allow fracture risk assessment without requiring race/ethnicity information. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1940 community-dwelling women aged 42-53 yr from four race/ethnicity groups (968 Caucasian, 512 African-American, 239 Japanese, and 221 Chinese) were followed up for 9 yr. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported, nondigital, noncraniofacial fractures were measured. RESULTS: Two hundred and two women (10.4%) sustained fractures and 82 (4.3%) had minimum-trauma fractures. Each sd increment in any of the strength indices was associated with a 34-41% reduction in fracture hazard over 9 yr (each P<0.001). Race/ethnicity predicted fracture hazard independent of BMD (P=0.02) but did not predict fracture hazard independent of any of the composite indices (P=0.11-0.22). Addition of race/ethnicity did not improve risk discrimination ability of the strength indices, but did significantly improve the discrimination ability of BMD. The discrimination ability of BMD with race/ethnicity was not statistically different from that of any of the strength indices without race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Composite strength indices of the femoral neck can predict fracture risk without race/ethnicity information as accurately as bone mineral density does in combination with race/ethnicity information and therefore would allow risk prediction in people of mixed race/ethnicity and in groups without a BMD reference database.
CONTEXT: Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-derived bone mineral density (BMD) does not explain interracial differences in fracture risk; thus, BMD-based fracture risk assessment requires patient race/ethnicity information and ethnicity-specific BMD reference databases. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to investigate whether composite femoral neck strength indices, which integrate dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-derived femoral neck size, femoral neck BMD, and body size, will allow fracture risk assessment without requiring race/ethnicity information. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1940 community-dwelling women aged 42-53 yr from four race/ethnicity groups (968 Caucasian, 512 African-American, 239 Japanese, and 221 Chinese) were followed up for 9 yr. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported, nondigital, noncraniofacial fractures were measured. RESULTS: Two hundred and two women (10.4%) sustained fractures and 82 (4.3%) had minimum-trauma fractures. Each sd increment in any of the strength indices was associated with a 34-41% reduction in fracture hazard over 9 yr (each P<0.001). Race/ethnicity predicted fracture hazard independent of BMD (P=0.02) but did not predict fracture hazard independent of any of the composite indices (P=0.11-0.22). Addition of race/ethnicity did not improve risk discrimination ability of the strength indices, but did significantly improve the discrimination ability of BMD. The discrimination ability of BMD with race/ethnicity was not statistically different from that of any of the strength indices without race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Composite strength indices of the femoral neck can predict fracture risk without race/ethnicity information as accurately as bone mineral density does in combination with race/ethnicity information and therefore would allow risk prediction in people of mixed race/ethnicity and in groups without a BMD reference database.
Authors: Russel Burge; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Daniel H Solomon; John B Wong; Alison King; Anna Tosteson Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: E S Siris; P D Miller; E Barrett-Connor; K G Faulkner; L E Wehren; T A Abbott; M L Berger; A C Santora; L M Sherwood Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Henrik G Ahlborg; Olof Johnell; Charles H Turner; Gunnar Rannevik; Magnus K Karlsson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-07-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Katie L Stone; Dana G Seeley; Li-Yung Lui; Jane A Cauley; Kristine Ensrud; Warren S Browner; Michael C Nevitt; Steven R Cummings Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Shinya Ishii; Jane A Cauley; Gail A Greendale; Carrie Nielsen; Carrie Karvonen-Gutierrez; Kristine Ruppert; Arun S Karlamangla Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: S Ishii; J A Cauley; G A Greendale; C J Crandall; M-H Huang; M E Danielson; A S Karlamangla Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Gail A Greendale; MeiHua Huang; Jane A Cauley; Sioban Harlow; Joel S Finkelstein; Arun S Karlamangla Journal: Bone Date: 2020-07-27 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Shinya Ishii; Jane A Cauley; Gail A Greendale; Carolyn J Crandall; Michelle E Danielson; Yasuyoshi Ouchi; Arun S Karlamangla Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Preethi Srikanthan; Carolyn J Crandall; Dana Miller-Martinez; Teresa E Seeman; Gail A Greendale; Neil Binkley; Arun S Karlamangla Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 6.741