Literature DB >> 28613988

Cost-effectiveness of Virtual Bone Strength Testing in Osteoporosis Screening Programs for Postmenopausal Women in the United States.

Christoph A Agten1, Austin J Ramme1, Stella Kang1, Stephen Honig1, Gregory Chang1.   

Abstract

Purpose To investigate whether assessment of bone strength with quantitative computed tomography (CT) in combination with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is cost-effective as a screening tool for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Materials and Methods A state-transition microsimulation model of osteoporosis for postmenopausal women aged 55 years or older was developed with a lifetime horizon and U.S. societal perspective. All model inputs were derived from published literature. Three strategies were compared: no screening, DXA with T score-dependent rescreening intervals, and a combination of DXA and quantitative CT with different intervals (3, 5, and 10 years) at different screening initiation ages (55-65 years). Oral bisphosphonate therapy was started if DXA hip T scores were less than or equal to -2.5, 10-year risk for hip fracture was greater than 3% (World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool score, or FRAX), 10-year risk for major osteoporotic fracture was greater than 20% (FRAX), quantitative CT femur bone strength was less than 3000 N, or occurrence of first fracture (eg, hip, vertebral body, wrist). Outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2015 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and number of fragility fractures. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also performed. Results The most cost-effective strategy was combined DXA and quantitative CT screening starting at age 55 with quantitative CT screening every 5 years (ICER, $2000 per QALY). With this strategy, 12.8% of postmenopausal women sustained hip fractures in their remaining life (no screening, 18.7%; DXA screening, 15.8%). The corresponding percentages of vertebral fractures for DXA and quantitative CT with a 5-year interval, was 7.5%; no screening, 11.1%; DXA screening, 9%; for wrist fractures, 14%, 17.8%, and 16.4%, respectively; for other fractures, 22.6%, 30.8%, and 27.3%, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, DXA and quantitative CT at age 55 years with quantitative CT screening every 5 years was the best strategy in more than 90% of all 1000 simulations (for thresholds of $50 000 per QALY and $100 000 per QALY). Conclusion Combined assessment of bone strength and bone mineral density is a cost-effective strategy for osteoporosis screening in postmenopausal women and has the potential to prevent a substantial number of fragility fractures. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28613988      PMCID: PMC5673038          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017161259

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  54 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Smita Nayak; Mark S Roberts; Susan L Greenspan
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 2.  Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography and peripheral quantitative computed tomography in the management of osteoporosis in adults: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions.

Authors:  Klaus Engelke; Judith E Adams; Gabriele Armbrecht; Peter Augat; Cesar E Bogado; Mary L Bouxsein; Dieter Felsenberg; Masako Ito; Sven Prevrhal; Didier B Hans; E Michael Lewiecki
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2008 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 4.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

Authors:  M C Weinstein; J E Siegel; M R Gold; M S Kamlet; L B Russell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-10-16       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025.

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

Review 6.  Clinical Practice. Postmenopausal Osteoporosis.

Authors:  Dennis M Black; Clifford J Rosen
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Meta-analysis: excess mortality after hip fracture among older women and men.

Authors:  Patrick Haentjens; Jay Magaziner; Cathleen S Colón-Emeric; Dirk Vanderschueren; Koen Milisen; Brigitte Velkeniers; Steven Boonen
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Upper gastrointestinal tract safety profile of alendronate: the fracture intervention trial.

Authors:  D C Bauer; D Black; K Ensrud; D Thompson; M Hochberg; M Nevitt; T Musliner; D Freedholm
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2000-02-28

9.  Population-based fracture risk assessment and osteoporosis treatment disparities by race and gender.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Curtis; Leslie A McClure; Elizabeth Delzell; Virginia J Howard; Eric Orwoll; Kenneth G Saag; Monika Safford; George Howard
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Prediction of Hip Failure Load: In Vitro Study of 80 Femurs Using Three Imaging Methods and Finite Element Models-The European Fracture Study (EFFECT).

Authors:  Pierre Pottecher; Klaus Engelke; Laure Duchemin; Oleg Museyko; Thomas Moser; David Mitton; Eric Vicaut; Judith Adams; Wafa Skalli; Jean Denis Laredo; Valérie Bousson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  11 in total

1.  Cost-Effectiveness of Osteoporosis Screening Using Biomechanical Computed Tomography for Patients With a Previous Abdominal CT.

Authors:  Maria Pisu; David L Kopperdahl; Cora E Lewis; Kenneth G Saag; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2019-03-24       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Osteoporosis and Hip Fracture Risk From Routine Computed Tomography Scans: The Fracture, Osteoporosis, and CT Utilization Study (FOCUS).

Authors:  Annette L Adams; Heidi Fischer; David L Kopperdahl; David C Lee; Dennis M Black; Mary L Bouxsein; Shireen Fatemi; Sundeep Khosla; Eric S Orwoll; Ethel S Siris; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Artificial Intelligence Applied to Osteoporosis: A Performance Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms in Predicting Fragility Fractures From MRI Data.

Authors:  Uran Ferizi; Harrison Besser; Pirro Hysi; Joseph Jacobs; Chamith S Rajapakse; Cheng Chen; Punam K Saha; Stephen Honig; Gregory Chang
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Fracture prediction and prevention: will newer technologies help?

Authors:  Gregory Chang; Stephen Honig
Journal:  Curr Opin Rheumatol       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 5.006

5.  Prediction of incident vertebral fracture using CT-based finite element analysis.

Authors:  B T Allaire; D Lu; F Johannesdottir; D Kopperdahl; T M Keaveny; M Jarraya; A Guermazi; M A Bredella; E J Samelson; D P Kiel; D E Anderson; S Demissie; M L Bouxsein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 6.  Are CT-Based Finite Element Model Predictions of Femoral Bone Strength Clinically Useful?

Authors:  Marco Viceconti; Muhammad Qasim; Pinaki Bhattacharya; Xinshan Li
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 5.096

7.  Medical costs of osteoporosis in the Iranian elderly patients.

Authors:  Vahid Alipour; Zahra Meshkani; Aziz Rezapour; Ali Aboutorabi; Rafat Bagherzadeh; Naser Saber
Journal:  Med J Islam Repub Iran       Date:  2020-04-22

8.  Bone density and strength from thoracic and lumbar CT scans both predict incident vertebral fractures independently of fracture location.

Authors:  F Johannesdottir; B Allaire; D L Kopperdahl; T M Keaveny; S Sigurdsson; M A Bredella; D E Anderson; E J Samelson; D P Kiel; V G Gudnason; M L Bouxsein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 9.  Opportunistic diagnosis of osteoporosis, fragile bone strength and vertebral fractures from routine CT scans; a review of approved technology systems and pathways to implementation.

Authors:  Veena Aggarwal; Christina Maslen; Richard L Abel; Pinaki Bhattacharya; Paul A Bromiley; Emma M Clark; Juliet E Compston; Nicola Crabtree; Jennifer S Gregory; Eleni P Kariki; Nicholas C Harvey; Kate A Ward; Kenneth E S Poole
Journal:  Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 5.346

Review 10.  Biomechanical Computed Tomography analysis (BCT) for clinical assessment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  T M Keaveny; B L Clarke; F Cosman; E S Orwoll; E S Siris; S Khosla; M L Bouxsein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-04-26       Impact factor: 5.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.