Literature DB >> 29704696

Evaluation of cross-sectional and longitudinal changes in volumetric bone mineral density in postmenopausal women using single- versus dual-energy quantitative computed tomography.

Jad G Sfeir1, Matthew T Drake1, Elizabeth J Atkinson2, Sara J Achenbach2, Jon J Camp3, Amanda J Tweed1, Louise K McCready1, Lifeng Yu4, Mark C Adkins4, Shreyasee Amin5, Sundeep Khosla6.   

Abstract

Central quantitative computed tomography (QCT) is increasingly used in clinical trials and practice to assess bone mass or strength and to evaluate longitudinal changes in response to drug treatment. Current studies utilize single-energy (SE) QCT scans, which may be confounded both by the amount of bone marrow fat at baseline and changes in marrow fat over time. However, the extent to which marrow fat changes either underestimate volumetric BMD (vBMD) measurements at baseline or under-/overestimate longitudinal changes in vivo in humans remains unclear. To address this issue, 197 early postmenopausal women [median age (IQR) 56.7 (54.4-58.7) years] underwent spine and hip QCT scans at baseline and 3 years using a 128-slice dual-source dual-energy (DE) scanner. The scans were analyzed as either SE scans (100 kVp) or DE scans (100 kVp and 140 kVp), with the latter accounting for bone marrow fat. At baseline, vertebral trabecular vBMD was (median) 17.6% lower (P < 0.001) while femur neck (FN) cortical vBMD was only 3.2% lower (P < 0.001) when assessed by SE vs DE scanning. SE scanning overestimated the 3 year rate of bone loss for trabecular bone at the spine by 24.2% (P < 0.001 vs DE rates of loss) but only by 8.8% for changes in FN cortical vBMD (P < 0.001 vs DE rates of loss). The deviation between SE and DE rates of bone loss in trabecular vBMD became progressively greater as the rate of bone loss increased. These findings demonstrate that SE QCT scans underestimate trabecular vBMD and substantially overestimate rates of age-related bone loss due to ongoing conversion of red to yellow marrow. Further, the greater the rate of bone loss, the greater the overestimation of bone loss by SE scans. Although our findings are based on normal aging, recent evidence from animal studies demonstrates that the skeletal anabolic drugs teriparatide and romosozumab may markedly reduce marrow fat, perhaps accounting for the disproportionate increases in trabecular vBMD by SE QCT as compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry with these agents. As such, future studies using recently available DE scanning technology that has satisfactory precision and radiation exposure are needed to evaluate changes in trabecular vBMD independent of changes in marrow fat with aging and drugs that may alter marrow fat composition.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DXA; Menopause; Osteoporosis; Quantitative computed tomography

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29704696      PMCID: PMC5970096          DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2018.04.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  24 in total

1.  Bone marrow regeneration following large field radiation: influence of volume, age, dose, and time.

Authors:  E L Sacks; M L Goris; E Glatstein; E Gilbert; H S Kaplan
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1978-09       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  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

3.  Accuracy and the influence of marrow fat on quantitative CT and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements of the femoral neck in vitro.

Authors:  J W Kuiper; C van Kuijk; J L Grashuis; A G Ederveen; H E Schütte
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Vertebral mineral determination by quantitative computed tomography (QCT): accuracy of single and dual energy measurements.

Authors:  C C Glüer; U J Reiser; C A Davis; B K Rutt; H K Genant
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1988 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.826

Review 5.  Mechanisms of disease: is osteoporosis the obesity of bone?

Authors:  Clifford J Rosen; Mary L Bouxsein
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol       Date:  2006-01

Review 6.  The role of bone marrow and visceral fat on bone metabolism.

Authors:  Yahtyng Sheu; Jane A Cauley
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.096

7.  The skeletal cell-derived molecule sclerostin drives bone marrow adipogenesis.

Authors:  Heather Fairfield; Carolyne Falank; Elizabeth Harris; Victoria Demambro; Michelle McDonald; Jessica A Pettitt; Sindhu T Mohanty; Peter Croucher; Ina Kramer; Michaela Kneissel; Clifford J Rosen; Michaela R Reagan
Journal:  J Cell Physiol       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 6.384

8.  Parathyroid Hormone Directs Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Cell Fate.

Authors:  Yi Fan; Jun-Ichi Hanai; Phuong T Le; Ruiye Bi; David Maridas; Victoria DeMambro; Carolina A Figueroa; Serkan Kir; Xuedong Zhou; Michael Mannstadt; Roland Baron; Roderick T Bronson; Mark C Horowitz; Joy Y Wu; John P Bilezikian; David W Dempster; Clifford J Rosen; Beate Lanske
Journal:  Cell Metab       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 27.287

9.  Bone marrow fat composition as a novel imaging biomarker in postmenopausal women with prevalent fragility fractures.

Authors:  Janina M Patsch; Xiaojuan Li; Thomas Baum; Samuel P Yap; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Ann V Schwartz; Thomas M Link
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  A population-based assessment of rates of bone loss at multiple skeletal sites: evidence for substantial trabecular bone loss in young adult women and men.

Authors:  B Lawrence Riggs; L Joseph Melton; Richard A Robb; Jon J Camp; Elizabeth J Atkinson; Lisa McDaniel; Shreyasee Amin; Peggy A Rouleau; Sundeep Khosla
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  6 in total

1.  Impact of prior information on material decomposition in dual- and multienergy computed tomography.

Authors:  Liqiang Ren; Shengzhen Tao; Kishore Rajendran; Cynthia H McCollough; Lifeng Yu
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2019-03-14

2.  Quantitative accuracy and dose efficiency of dual-contrast imaging using dual-energy CT: a phantom study.

Authors:  Liqiang Ren; Kishore Rajendran; Cynthia H McCollough; Lifeng Yu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Combination denosumab and high dose teriparatide for postmenopausal osteoporosis (DATA-HD): a randomised, controlled phase 4 trial.

Authors:  Joy N Tsai; Hang Lee; Natalie L David; Richard Eastell; Benjamin Z Leder
Journal:  Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 32.069

Review 4.  Fracture prediction, imaging and screening in osteoporosis.

Authors:  Nicholas R Fuggle; Elizabeth M Curtis; Kate A Ward; Nicholas C Harvey; Elaine M Dennison; Cyrus Cooper
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 43.330

Review 5.  A Contemporary View of the Diagnosis of Osteoporosis in Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis.

Authors:  Mie Jin Lim; Kwi Young Kang
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-12-11

Review 6.  MRI Assessment of Bone Marrow Composition in Osteoporosis.

Authors:  Xiaojuan Li; Ann V Schwartz
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 5.163

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.