Literature DB >> 31069862

Performance of FRAX in Women with Breast Cancer Initiating Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy: A Registry-Based Cohort Study.

William D Leslie1, Suzanne N Morin2, Lisa M Lix1, Saroj Niraula1, Eugene V McCloskey3, Helena Johansson3,4, Nicholas C Harvey5,6, John A Kanis3,4.   

Abstract

FRAX was developed to predict 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture in the general population. Aromatase inhibitors (AI) used in breast cancer induce loss in bone mineral density (BMD) and are reported to increase fracture risk. AI exposure is not a direct input to FRAX but is captured under "secondary osteoporosis". To inform use of FRAX in women treated with AI, we used a population-based registry for the Province of Manitoba, Canada, to identify women aged ≥40 years initiating AI for breast cancer with at least 12 months' AI exposure (n = 1775), women with breast cancer not receiving AI (n = 1016), and women from the general population (n = 34,205). Among AI users, fracture probability estimated without BMD (AI use coded as secondary osteoporosis) significantly overestimated risk (10-year observed/predicted ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.68; 10-year hip fracture observed/predicted ratio 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.49). However, when BMD was included in the fracture probability, there was no significant difference between observed and predicted fracture risk. In Cox proportional hazards models, FRAX stratified risk of MOF, hip, and any fracture equally well in all subgroups (p-interaction >0.1). When adjusted for FRAX score without BMD, with AI use coded as secondary osteoporosis, AI users were at significantly lower risk for MOF (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.95), hip fracture (HR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.73) and any fracture (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.89). AI use was no longer significantly associated with fractures when AI use was not entered as secondary osteoporosis in FRAX without BMD or when BMD was included in the FRAX calculation. In conclusion, FRAX scores stratify fracture risk equally well in women receiving AI therapy as in non-users, but including secondary osteoporosis as a risk factor for AI users overestimates fracture risk. Our results call this practice into question.
© 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AROMATASE INHIBITORS; BONE DENSITOMETRY; BREAST CANCER; FRACTURE RISK; FRAX; OSTEOPOROSIS

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31069862     DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.3726

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  9 in total

1.  Performance of the Garvan Fracture Risk Calculator in Individuals with Diabetes: A Registry-Based Cohort Study.

Authors:  Arnav Agarwal; William D Leslie; Tuan V Nguyen; Suzanne N Morin; Lisa M Lix; John A Eisman
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 4.333

2.  Reverse engineering the FRAX algorithm: Clinical insights and systematic analysis of fracture risk.

Authors:  Jules D Allbritton-King; Julia K Elrod; Philip S Rosenberg; Timothy Bhattacharyya
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 4.626

3.  Fracture prediction from self-reported falls in routine clinical practice: a registry-based cohort study.

Authors:  W D Leslie; S N Morin; L M Lix; P Martineau; M Bryanton; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; N C Harvey; J A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Evaluating the Performance of the WHO International Reference Standard for Osteoporosis Diagnosis in Postmenopausal Women of Varied Polygenic Score and Race.

Authors:  Qing Wu; Xiangxue Xiao; Yingke Xu
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 4.241

5.  Reassessment Intervals for Transition From Low to High Fracture Risk Among Adults Older Than 50 Years.

Authors:  William D Leslie; Suzanne N Morin; Lisa M Lix; Patrick Martineau; Mark Bryanton; Eugene V McCloskey; Helena Johansson; Nicholas C Harvey; John A Kanis
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2020-01-03

Review 6.  Cancer Treatment-Induced Bone Loss (CTIBL): State of the Art and Proper Management in Breast Cancer Patients on Endocrine Therapy.

Authors:  Anna Diana; Francesca Carlino; Emilio Francesco Giunta; Elisena Franzese; Luigi Pio Guerrera; Vincenzo Di Lauro; Fortunato Ciardiello; Bruno Daniele; Michele Orditura
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2021-04-16

Review 7.  Updated guidance on the management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in pre- and postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Komal Waqas; Joana Lima Ferreira; Elena Tsourdi; Jean-Jacques Body; Peyman Hadji; M C Zillikens
Journal:  J Bone Oncol       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 4.072

8.  Prediction of vertebral fractures in cancer patients undergoing hormone deprivation therapies: Reliability of who fracture risk assessment tool (frax) and bone mineral density in real-life clinical practice.

Authors:  Gherardo Mazziotti; Walter Vena; Rebecca Pedersini; Sara Piccini; Emanuela Morenghi; Deborah Cosentini; Paolo Zucali; Rosalba Torrisi; Silvio Sporeni; Edda L Simoncini; Roberto Maroldi; Luca Balzarini; Andrea G Lania; Alfredo Berruti
Journal:  J Bone Oncol       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 4.072

9.  Performance of FRAX in Predicting Fractures in US Postmenopausal Women with Varied Race and Genetic Profiles.

Authors:  Qing Wu; Xiangxue Xiao; Yingke Xu
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 4.241

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.