Literature DB >> 25187239

Impact of femoral neck and lumbar spine BMD discordances on FRAX probabilities in women: a meta-analysis of international cohorts.

H Johansson1, J A Kanis, A Odén, W D Leslie, S Fujiwara, C C Glüer, H Kroger, A Z LaCroix, E Lau, L J Melton, J A Eisman, T W O'Neill, D Goltzman, D M Reid, E McCloskey.   

Abstract

There are occasional marked discordances in BMD T-scores at the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). We investigated whether such discordances could contribute independently to fracture prediction using FRAX. We studied 21,158 women, average age 63 years, from 10 prospective cohorts with baseline FRAX variables as well as FN and LS BMD. Incident fractures were collected by self-report and/or radiographic reports. Extended Poisson regression examined the relationship between differences in LS and FN T-scores (ΔLS-FN) and fracture risk, adjusted for age, time since baseline and other factors including FRAX 10-year probability for major osteoporotic fracture calculated using FN BMD. To examine the effect of an adjustment for ΔLS-FN on reclassification, women were separated into risk categories by their FRAX major fracture probability. High risk was classified using two approaches: being above the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group intervention threshold or, separately, being in the highest third of each cohort. The absolute ΔLS-FN was greater than 2 SD for 2.5% of women and between 1 and 2 SD for 21%. ΔLS-FN was associated with a significant risk of fracture adjusted for baseline FRAX (HR per SD change = 1.09; 95% CI = 1.04-1.15). In reclassification analyses, only 2.3-3.2% of the women moved to a higher or lower risk category when using FRAX with ΔLS-FN compared with FN-derived FRAX alone. Adjustment of estimated fracture risk for a large LS/FN discrepancy (>2SD) impacts to a large extent on only a relatively small number of individuals. More moderate (1-2SD) discordances in FN and LS T-scores have a small impact on FRAX probabilities. This might still improve clinical decision-making, particularly in women with probabilities close to an intervention threshold.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25187239      PMCID: PMC4361897          DOI: 10.1007/s00223-014-9911-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int        ISSN: 0171-967X            Impact factor:   4.333


  35 in total

1.  The Women's Health Initiative recruitment methods and results.

Authors:  Jennifer Hays; Julie R Hunt; F Allan Hubbell; Garnet L Anderson; Marian Limacher; Catherine Allen; Jacques E Rossouw
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.797

2.  Prevalence and risk factors of radiographic vertebral fractures in elderly Chinese men and women: results of Mr. OS (Hong Kong) and Ms. OS (Hong Kong) studies.

Authors:  A W L Kwok; J-S Gong; Y-X J Wang; J C S Leung; T Kwok; J F Griffith; P C Leung
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-06-16       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Broadband ultrasound attenuation in the os calcis: relationship to bone mineral at other skeletal sites.

Authors:  E V McCloskey; S A Murray; C Miller; D Charlesworth; W Tindale; D P O'Doherty; D R Bickerstaff; N A Hamdy; J A Kanis
Journal:  Clin Sci (Lond)       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 6.124

4.  Effects of conjugated equine estrogen in postmenopausal women with hysterectomy: the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Garnet L Anderson; Marian Limacher; Annlouise R Assaf; Tamsen Bassford; Shirley A A Beresford; Henry Black; Denise Bonds; Robert Brunner; Robert Brzyski; Bette Caan; Rowan Chlebowski; David Curb; Margery Gass; Jennifer Hays; Gerardo Heiss; Susan Hendrix; Barbara V Howard; Judith Hsia; Allan Hubbell; Rebecca Jackson; Karen C Johnson; Howard Judd; Jane Morley Kotchen; Lewis Kuller; Andrea Z LaCroix; Dorothy Lane; Robert D Langer; Norman Lasser; Cora E Lewis; JoAnn Manson; Karen Margolis; Judith Ockene; Mary Jo O'Sullivan; Lawrence Phillips; Ross L Prentice; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; John Robbins; Jacques E Rossouw; Gloria Sarto; Marcia L Stefanick; Linda Van Horn; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Robert Wallace; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-04-14       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  BMD at multiple sites and risk of fracture of multiple types: long-term results from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures.

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

6.  Does the combination of two BMD measurements improve fracture discrimination?

Authors:  Glen M Blake; Rajesh Patel; Karen M Knapp; Ignac Fogelman
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Fracture prediction from bone mineral density in Japanese men and women.

Authors:  Saeko Fujiwara; Fumiyoshi Kasagi; Naomi Masunari; Kumiko Naito; Gen Suzuki; Masao Fukunaga
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  Association of five quantitative ultrasound devices and bone densitometry with osteoporotic vertebral fractures in a population-based sample: the OPUS Study.

Authors:  Claus C Glüer; Richard Eastell; David M Reid; Dieter Felsenberg; Christian Roux; Reinhard Barkmann; Wolfram Timm; Tilo Blenk; Gabi Armbrecht; Alison Stewart; Jackie Clowes; Friederike E Thomasius; Sami Kolta
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Relative contributions of bone density, bone turnover, and clinical risk factors to long-term fracture prediction.

Authors:  L Joseph Melton; Cynthia S Crowson; W Michael O'Fallon; Heinz W Wahner; B Lawrence Riggs
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Discordance in patient classification using T-scores.

Authors:  K G Faulkner; E von Stetten; P Miller
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  19 in total

Review 1.  Pathogenesis of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis and options for treatment.

Authors:  Pojchong Chotiyarnwong; Eugene V McCloskey
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 43.330

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

Authors:  J A Kanis; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Which is the preferred site for bone mineral density monitoring as an indicator of treatment-related anti-fracture effect in routine clinical practice? A registry-based cohort study.

Authors:  W D Leslie; P Martineau; M Bryanton; L M Lix
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Unravelling hip-spine bone mineral density discordance in people living with HIV.

Authors:  Pilar Vizcarra; José L Casado; Marta Rosillo; José M Del Rey; Ana Moreno; María J Vivancos
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 2.976

Review 5.  Update of the fracture risk prediction tool FRAX: a systematic review of potential cohorts and analysis plan.

Authors:  L Vandenput; H Johansson; E V McCloskey; E Liu; K E Åkesson; F A Anderson; R Azagra; C L Bager; C Beaudart; H A Bischoff-Ferrari; E Biver; O Bruyère; J A Cauley; J R Center; R Chapurlat; C Christiansen; C Cooper; C J Crandall; S R Cummings; J A P da Silva; B Dawson-Hughes; A Diez-Perez; A B Dufour; J A Eisman; P J M Elders; S Ferrari; Y Fujita; S Fujiwara; C-C Glüer; I Goldshtein; D Goltzman; V Gudnason; J Hall; D Hans; M Hoff; R J Hollick; M Huisman; M Iki; S Ish-Shalom; G Jones; M K Karlsson; S Khosla; D P Kiel; W-P Koh; F Koromani; M A Kotowicz; H Kröger; T Kwok; O Lamy; A Langhammer; B Larijani; K Lippuner; D Mellström; T Merlijn; A Nordström; P Nordström; T W O'Neill; B Obermayer-Pietsch; C Ohlsson; E S Orwoll; J A Pasco; F Rivadeneira; B Schei; A-M Schott; E J Shiroma; K Siggeirsdottir; E M Simonsick; E Sornay-Rendu; R Sund; K M A Swart; P Szulc; J Tamaki; D J Torgerson; N M van Schoor; T P van Staa; J Vila; N J Wareham; N C Wright; N Yoshimura; M C Zillikens; M Zwart; N C Harvey; M Lorentzon; W D Leslie; J A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 5.071

Review 6.  UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Celia L Gregson; David J Armstrong; Jean Bowden; Cyrus Cooper; John Edwards; Neil J L Gittoes; Nicholas Harvey; John Kanis; Sarah Leyland; Rebecca Low; Eugene McCloskey; Katie Moss; Jane Parker; Zoe Paskins; Kenneth Poole; David M Reid; Mike Stone; Julia Thomson; Nic Vine; Juliet Compston
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 2.879

Review 7.  A systematic review of intervention thresholds based on FRAX : A report prepared for the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group and the International Osteoporosis Foundation.

Authors:  John A Kanis; Nicholas C Harvey; Cyrus Cooper; Helena Johansson; Anders Odén; Eugene V McCloskey
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 8.  A brief history of FRAX.

Authors:  John A Kanis; Helena Johansson; Nicholas C Harvey; Eugene V McCloskey
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 2.617

9.  Evaluation of the validity of treatment decisions based on surrogate country models before introduction of the Polish FRAX and recommendations in comparison to current practice.

Authors:  Wojciech M Glinkowski; Jerzy Narloch; Bożena Glinkowska; Małgorzata Bandura
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 3.318

10.  UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  J Compston; A Cooper; C Cooper; N Gittoes; C Gregson; N Harvey; S Hope; J A Kanis; E V McCloskey; K E S Poole; D M Reid; P Selby; F Thompson; A Thurston; N Vine
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2017-04-19       Impact factor: 2.617

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.