R C Hamdy1, E Seier2, K Whalen3, W A Clark4, K Hicks3, T B Piggee3. 1. Osteoporosis Center, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, 37614, USA. Hamdy@etsu.edu. 2. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, 37614, USA. 3. Osteoporosis Center, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, 37614, USA. 4. College of Clinical and Rehabilitative Health Sciences, Department of Allied Health Sciences, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN, 37614, USA.
Abstract
The FRAX algorithm assesses the patient's probability of sustaining an osteoporotic fracture and can be calculated with or without densitometric data. This study seeks to determine whether in men, FRAX scores calculated without BMD, correctly identify patients with BMD-defined osteoporosis. INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of osteoporosis is based on densitometric data, the presence of a fragility fracture or increased fracture risk. The FRAX algorithm estimates the patient's 10-year probability of sustaining an osteoporotic fracture and can be calculated with or without BMD data. The purpose of this study is to determine whether in men, FRAX calculated without BMD, can correctly identify patients with BMD-defined osteoporosis. METHODS: Retrospectively retrieved data from 726 consecutive Caucasian males, 50 to 70 years old referred to our Osteoporosis Center. RESULTS: In the population studied, 11.8 and 25.3% had BMD-defined osteoporosis when female and male reference populations were used respectively. When the National Osteoporosis Foundation thresholds to initiate treatment are used, only 27% of patients with BMD-defined osteoporosis, but 4% with normal BMD reached/exceeded these thresholds. Lowering the threshold increased sensitivity, but decreased specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that FRAX without BMD is not sensitive/specific enough to be used to identify Caucasian men 50 to 70 years old with BMD-defined osteoporosis.
The FRAX algorithm assesses the patient's probability of sustaining an osteoporotic fracture and can be calculated with or without densitometric data. This study seeks to determine whether in men, FRAX scores calculated without BMD, correctly identify patients with BMD-defined osteoporosis. INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of osteoporosis is based on densitometric data, the presence of a fragility fracture or increased fracture risk. The FRAX algorithm estimates the patient's 10-year probability of sustaining an osteoporotic fracture and can be calculated with or without BMD data. The purpose of this study is to determine whether in men, FRAX calculated without BMD, can correctly identify patients with BMD-defined osteoporosis. METHODS: Retrospectively retrieved data from 726 consecutive Caucasian males, 50 to 70 years old referred to our Osteoporosis Center. RESULTS: In the population studied, 11.8 and 25.3% had BMD-defined osteoporosis when female and male reference populations were used respectively. When the National Osteoporosis Foundation thresholds to initiate treatment are used, only 27% of patients with BMD-defined osteoporosis, but 4% with normal BMD reached/exceeded these thresholds. Lowering the threshold increased sensitivity, but decreased specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that FRAX without BMD is not sensitive/specific enough to be used to identify Caucasian men 50 to 70 years old with BMD-defined osteoporosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone mineral density; FRAX; Management; Men; Osteoporosis
Authors: C H Chesnut; S Silverman; K Andriano; H Genant; A Gimona; S Harris; D Kiel; M LeBoff; M Maricic; P Miller; C Moniz; M Peacock; P Richardson; N Watts; D Baylink Journal: Am J Med Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: B Ettinger; D M Black; B H Mitlak; R K Knickerbocker; T Nickelsen; H K Genant; C Christiansen; P D Delmas; J R Zanchetta; J Stakkestad; C C Glüer; K Krueger; F J Cohen; S Eckert; K E Ensrud; L V Avioli; P Lips; S R Cummings Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-08-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Dennis M Black; Pierre D Delmas; Richard Eastell; Ian R Reid; Steven Boonen; Jane A Cauley; Felicia Cosman; Péter Lakatos; Ping Chung Leung; Zulema Man; Carlos Mautalen; Peter Mesenbrink; Huilin Hu; John Caminis; Karen Tong; Theresa Rosario-Jansen; Joel Krasnow; Trisha F Hue; Deborah Sellmeyer; Erik Fink Eriksen; Steven R Cummings Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-05-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Charles H Chesnut; Arne Skag; Claus Christiansen; Robert Recker; Jacob A Stakkestad; Arne Hoiseth; Dieter Felsenberg; Hermann Huss; Jennifer Gilbride; Ralph C Schimmer; Pierre D Delmas Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2004-03-29 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Ethel S Siris; Ya-Ting Chen; Thomas A Abbott; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Paul D Miller; Lois E Wehren; Marc L Berger Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2004-05-24
Authors: Rizky Suganda Prawiradilaga; Victoria Gunmalm; Trine Lund-Jacobsen; Eva Wulff Helge; Charlotte Brøns; Michael Andersson; Peter Schwarz Journal: J Osteoporos Date: 2018-10-04