W D Leslie1, E Shevroja2, H Johansson3,4, E V McCloskey3, N C Harvey5,6, J A Kanis3,4, D Hans2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Manitoba, (C5121) 409 Tache Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada. bleslie@sbgh.mb.ca. 2. Bone and Joint Department, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK. 4. Institute for Health and Aging, Catholic University of Australia, Melbourne, Australia. 5. MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 6. NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Road, Southampton, UK.
Abstract
Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS) can be used to modify the output from the fracture risk assessment tool, FRAX, to enhance fracture prediction. An alternative approach for using TBS in clinical practice, based upon an adjustment to the bone mineral density (BMD) T-score, may be helpful in regions where intervention guidelines and/or reimbursement are primarily based on BMD T-score. INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to develop an approach for using TBS in clinical practice based upon a "risk-equivalent" adjustment to the BMD T-score. METHODS: We identified 45,185 women age 40 years and older with baseline spine and hip DXA, TBS, and FRAX probabilities including femoral neck BMD. Incident major osteoporotic fractures (MOF, n = 3925) were identified from population-based health services data (mean follow-up 7.4 years comprising 335,910 person-years). Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age and BMI were first used to estimate the risk for MOF from BMD T-score alone, then after including TBS and a multiplicative age interaction term. From the parameter estimates, we developed a TBS offset to the BMD T-score based upon change in TBS that would give the same risk as a unit change in BMD T-score for the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine. RESULTS: All BMD measurements, TBS, and the age interaction term independently predicted MOF (p < 0.001). Measures of risk stratification and model fit were improved for the TBS-adjusted BMD T-score versus the unadjusted BMD T-score (p < 0.001). There was a high level of agreement between MOF probability estimated from TBS-adjusted MOF FRAX probability and FRAX probability using the "risk-equivalent" femoral BMD T-score: MOF probability r2 = 0.98, slope = 1.02, intercept = - 0.3; hip probability r2 = 0.95, slope = 1.07, intercept = 0.0. CONCLUSIONS: The BMD-independent effect of lumbar spine TBS on fracture risk can be estimated as a simple offset to the BMD T-score.
Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS) can be used to modify the output from the fracture risk assessment tool, FRAX, to enhance fracture prediction. An alternative approach for using TBS in clinical practice, based upon an adjustment to the bone mineral density (BMD) T-score, may be helpful in regions where intervention guidelines and/or reimbursement are primarily based on BMD T-score. INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to develop an approach for using TBS in clinical practice based upon a "risk-equivalent" adjustment to the BMD T-score. METHODS: We identified 45,185 women age 40 years and older with baseline spine and hip DXA, TBS, and FRAX probabilities including femoral neck BMD. Incident major osteoporotic fractures (MOF, n = 3925) were identified from population-based health services data (mean follow-up 7.4 years comprising 335,910 person-years). Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age and BMI were first used to estimate the risk for MOF from BMD T-score alone, then after including TBS and a multiplicative age interaction term. From the parameter estimates, we developed a TBS offset to the BMD T-score based upon change in TBS that would give the same risk as a unit change in BMD T-score for the femoral neck, total hip, and lumbar spine. RESULTS: All BMD measurements, TBS, and the age interaction term independently predicted MOF (p < 0.001). Measures of risk stratification and model fit were improved for the TBS-adjusted BMD T-score versus the unadjusted BMD T-score (p < 0.001). There was a high level of agreement between MOF probability estimated from TBS-adjusted MOF FRAX probability and FRAX probability using the "risk-equivalent" femoral BMD T-score: MOF probability r2 = 0.98, slope = 1.02, intercept = - 0.3; hip probability r2 = 0.95, slope = 1.07, intercept = 0.0. CONCLUSIONS: The BMD-independent effect of lumbar spine TBS on fracture risk can be estimated as a simple offset to the BMD T-score.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone densitometry; DXA; Fracture prediction; Osteoporosis; Trabecular bone score
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
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
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: N C Harvey; C C Glüer; N Binkley; E V McCloskey; M-L Brandi; C Cooper; D Kendler; O Lamy; A Laslop; B M Camargos; J-Y Reginster; R Rizzoli; J A Kanis Journal: Bone Date: 2015-05-16 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Eugene V McCloskey; Anders Odén; Nicholas C Harvey; William D Leslie; Didier Hans; Helena Johansson; John A Kanis Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2015-03-22 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Pedro Paulo Martins Alvarenga; Barbara Campolina Silva; Mariana Picoli Diniz; Milena Bellei Leite; Caroline Alves Moreira da Silva; Jessica de Cássia Mendes Eleutério; Maria Marta Sarquis Soares; John P Bilezikian; Bruno Muzzi Camargos Journal: Endocrine Date: 2019-07-13 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: M S LeBoff; S L Greenspan; K L Insogna; E M Lewiecki; K G Saag; A J Singer; E S Siris Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 5.071
Authors: J A Kanis; N C Harvey; E McCloskey; O Bruyère; N Veronese; M Lorentzon; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; G Adib; N Al-Daghri; C Campusano; M Chandran; B Dawson-Hughes; K Javaid; F Jiwa; H Johansson; J K Lee; E Liu; D Messina; O Mkinsi; D Pinto; D Prieto-Alhambra; K Saag; W Xia; L Zakraoui; J -Y Reginster Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 4.507