Literature DB >> 31016351

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.

W D Leslie1, P Martineau2,3, M Bryanton2, L M Lix2.   

Abstract

Change in total hip bone mineral density (BMD) provides a robust indication of anti-fracture effect during treatment monitoring in routine clinical practice, whereas spine BMD change is not independently associated with fracture risk.
PURPOSE: The role of monitoring bone mineral density (BMD) as an indicator of an anti-fracture effect is controversial. Discordance between the spine and hip BMD is common and creates uncertainty in clinical practice.
METHODS: Using a population-based BMD Registry for the Province of Manitoba, Canada, we compared change in the spine and hip BMD as an indicator of treatment-related fracture risk reduction. The study cohort included 6093 women age > 40 years initiating osteoporosis treatment with two consecutive dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans (mean interval 4.7 years). We computed change in the spine, total hip, and femur neck BMD between the first and second DXA scans as categorical (categorized as stable, detectable decrease, or detectable increase) and continuous measures. We modeled time to first incident fracture, ascertained from health services data, using Cox regression adjusted for baseline fracture probability.
RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 12.1 years, 995 women developed incident major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) including 246 with hip fractures and 301 with clinical vertebral fractures. Women with a detectable decrease in total hip BMD compared with stable BMD experienced an increase in MOF (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-1.70) while those with a detectable increase in total hip BMD experienced a decrease in MOF (aHR 0.71, 95% CI 0.61-0.83), and these results were not attenuated when adjusted for change in spine BMD. Similar results were seen for hip and clinical vertebral fracture outcomes, when BMD change was assessed as a continuous measure, and when femur neck BMD monitoring was used instead of total hip BMD monitoring.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment-related increases in total hip BMD are associated with lower MOF, hip, and clinical vertebral fracture risk compared with stable BMD, while BMD decreases are associated with higher fracture risk. In contrast, spine BMD change is not independently associated with fracture risk.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anti-fracture effect; Bone mineral density; Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry; Osteoporosis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31016351     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-019-04975-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  37 in total

1.  2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary.

Authors:  Alexandra Papaioannou; Suzanne Morin; Angela M Cheung; Stephanie Atkinson; Jacques P Brown; Sidney Feldman; David A Hanley; Anthony Hodsman; Sophie A Jamal; Stephanie M Kaiser; Brent Kvern; Kerry Siminoski; William D Leslie
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-10-12       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Antifracture efficacy of antiresorptive agents are related to changes in bone density.

Authors:  R D Wasnich; P D Miller
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 3.  Monitoring osteoporosis treatment.

Authors:  Juliet Compston
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.098

4.  Validation of an electronic, population-based prescription database.

Authors:  A L Kozyrskyj; C A Mustard
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 3.154

5.  Accurate assessment of precision errors: how to measure the reproducibility of bone densitometry techniques.

Authors:  C C Glüer; G Blake; Y Lu; B A Blunt; M Jergas; H K Genant
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Construction of a FRAX® model for the assessment of fracture probability in Canada and implications for treatment.

Authors:  W D Leslie; L M Lix; L Langsetmo; C Berger; D Goltzman; D A Hanley; J D Adachi; H Johansson; A Oden; E McCloskey; J A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Screening for osteoporosis: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-01-17       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Factors affecting short-term bone density precision assessment and the effect on patient monitoring.

Authors:  William D Leslie
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Construction and validation of a population-based bone densitometry database.

Authors:  William D Leslie; Patricia A Caetano; Leonard R Macwilliam; Gregory S Finlayson
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  Osteoporosis-related fracture case definitions for population-based administrative data.

Authors:  Lisa M Lix; Mahmoud Azimaee; Beliz Acan Osman; Patricia Caetano; Suzanne Morin; Colleen Metge; David Goltzman; Nancy Kreiger; Jerilynn Prior; William D Leslie
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Total Hip Bone Mineral Density as an Indicator of Fracture Risk in Bisphosphonate-Treated Patients in a Real-World Setting.

Authors:  Jonas Banefelt; Jen Timoshanko; Emma Söreskog; Gustaf Ortsäter; Alireza Moayyeri; Kristina E Åkesson; Anna Spångéus; Cesar Libanati
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 6.390

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.