P Khashayar1,2, A Keshtkar3, A Ostovar1, B Larijani4, H Johansson5,6, N C Harvey7,8, M Lorentzon5,9,10, E McCloskey6,11, J A Kanis5,6. 1. Osteoporosis Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 2. Center for Microsystems Technology, Imec and Ghent University, 9052, Gent-Zwijnaarde, Belgium. 3. Department of Health Sciences Education Development, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 4. Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. larijanib@tums.ac.ir. 5. Mary McKillop Health Institute, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. 6. Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 7. MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 8. NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Road, Southampton, UK. 9. Geriatric Medicine, Institute of Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 10. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Mölndal, Sweden. 11. Centre for Integrated research in Musculoskeletal Ageing (CIMA), Mellanby Centre for Bone Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
We compared the utility of the current Iranian guidelines that recommend treatment in women with a T-score ≤ - 2.5 SD with a FRAX-based intervention threshold equivalent to women of average BMI with a prior fragility fracture. Whereas the FRAX-based intervention threshold identified women at high fracture probability, the T-score threshold was less sensitive, and the associated fracture risk decreased markedly with age. INTRODUCTION: The fracture risk assessment algorithm FRAX® has been recently calibrated for Iran, but guidance is needed on how to apply fracture probabilities to clinical practice. METHODS: The age-specific ten-year probabilities of a major osteoporotic fracture were calculated in women with average BMI to determine fracture probabilities at two potential intervention thresholds. The first comprised the age-specific fracture probabilities associated with a femoral neck T-score of - 2.5 SD, in line with current guidelines in Iran. The second approach determined age-specific fracture probabilities that were equivalent to a woman with a prior fragility fracture, without BMD. The parsimonious use of BMD was additionally explored by the computation of upper and lower assessment thresholds for BMD testing. RESULTS: When a BMD T-score ≤ - 2.5 SD was used as an intervention threshold, FRAX probabilities in women aged 50 years was approximately two-fold higher than in women of the same age but with an average BMD and no risk factors. The relative increase in risk associated with the BMD threshold decreased progressively with age such that, at the age of 80 years or more, a T-score of - 2.5 SD was actually protective. The 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture by age, equivalent to women with a previous fracture rose with age from 4.9% at the age of 50 years to 17%, at the age of 80 years, and identified women at increased risk at all ages. CONCLUSION: Intervention thresholds based on BMD alone do not effectively target women at high fracture risk, particularly in the elderly. In contrast, intervention thresholds based on fracture probabilities equivalent to a "fracture threshold" target women at high fracture risk.
We compared the utility of the current Iranian guidelines that recommend treatment in women with a T-score ≤ - 2.5 SD with a FRAX-based intervention threshold equivalent to women of average BMI with a prior fragility fracture. Whereas the FRAX-based intervention threshold identified women at high fracture probability, the T-score threshold was less sensitive, and the associated fracture risk decreased markedly with age. INTRODUCTION: The fracture risk assessment algorithm FRAX® has been recently calibrated for Iran, but guidance is needed on how to apply fracture probabilities to clinical practice. METHODS: The age-specific ten-year probabilities of a major osteoporotic fracture were calculated in women with average BMI to determine fracture probabilities at two potential intervention thresholds. The first comprised the age-specific fracture probabilities associated with a femoral neck T-score of - 2.5 SD, in line with current guidelines in Iran. The second approach determined age-specific fracture probabilities that were equivalent to a woman with a prior fragility fracture, without BMD. The parsimonious use of BMD was additionally explored by the computation of upper and lower assessment thresholds for BMD testing. RESULTS: When a BMD T-score ≤ - 2.5 SD was used as an intervention threshold, FRAX probabilities in women aged 50 years was approximately two-fold higher than in women of the same age but with an average BMD and no risk factors. The relative increase in risk associated with the BMD threshold decreased progressively with age such that, at the age of 80 years or more, a T-score of - 2.5 SD was actually protective. The 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture by age, equivalent to women with a previous fracture rose with age from 4.9% at the age of 50 years to 17%, at the age of 80 years, and identified women at increased risk at all ages. CONCLUSION: Intervention thresholds based on BMD alone do not effectively target women at high fracture risk, particularly in the elderly. In contrast, intervention thresholds based on fracture probabilities equivalent to a "fracture threshold" target women at high fracture risk.
Authors: Olof Johnell; John A Kanis; Anders Oden; Helena Johansson; Chris De Laet; Pierre Delmas; John A Eisman; Seiko Fujiwara; Heikki Kroger; Dan Mellstrom; Pierre J Meunier; L Joseph Melton; Terry O'Neill; Huibert Pols; Jonathan Reeve; Alan Silman; Alan Tenenhouse Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2005-03-07 Impact factor: 6.741
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: Helena Johansson; Anders Oden; Olof Johnell; Bengt Jonsson; Chris de Laet; Alan Oglesby; Eugene V McCloskey; Karthik Kayan; Tarja Jalava; John A Kanis Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: John A Kanis; Eugene V McCloskey; Nicholas C Harvey; Helena Johansson; William D Leslie Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: J Compston; A Cooper; C Cooper; N Gittoes; C Gregson; N Harvey; S Hope; J A Kanis; E V McCloskey; K E S Poole; D M Reid; P Selby; F Thompson; A Thurston; N Vine Journal: Arch Osteoporos Date: 2017-04-19 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: G Naureen; H Johansson; R Iqbal; L Jafri; A H Khan; M Umer; E Liu; L Vandenput; M Lorentzon; N C Harvey; E V McCloskey; J A Kanis Journal: Arch Osteoporos Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 2.617