Prediction of major osteoporotic and hip fractures in Australian men using FRAX scores adjusted with trabecular bone score.

There was no significant difference between the areas under receiver operating characteristics (AUROCs) and diagnostic indexes (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value) for either major osteoporotic or hip fracture FRAX scores when comparing the unadjusted and trabecular bone score (TBS)-adjusted scores. FRAX 10-year probability of fracture can be calculated with adjustment for the TBS. Studies have shown that TBS can improve FRAX assessments in some populations. This study aimed to determine if TBS-adjusted FRAX score is better than the unadjusted score for predicting major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture in Australian men. This study involved 591 men aged 40-90 years, enrolled in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Incident MOF (n = 50) and hip fractures (n = 14) were ascertained using radiological reports. Median follow-up time was 9.5 years (IQR7.5-11.4). Diagnostic indexes were calculated using cut points of ≥20% for MOF and ≥3% for the hip. AUROC curves were also determined for adjusted and unadjusted scores as continuous variables. Sensitivity was higher in the TBS-adjusted scores (MOF 4%, hip 78.6%) than the unadjusted scores (MOF 2%, hip 57.1%), with a decrease in specificity (MOF 98.9 vs 99.3%; hip 79.9 vs 83.9%). When considering TBS-adjusted and unadjusted FRAX as continuous scores, AUROCs were 0.738 and 0.740, respectively, for MOF and 0.849 and 0.848 for the hip. Prediction of fractures by MOF or hip FRAX was not substantially improved by TBS adjustment. There was no difference in AUROCs or diagnostic indexes for cut-off points of ≥20 for MOF and ≥3% for hip FRAX

Prediction of major osteoporotic and hip fractures in Australian men using FRAX scores adjusted with trabecular bone score.

There was no significant difference between the areas under receiver operating characteristics (AUROCs) and diagnostic indexes (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value) for either major osteoporotic or hip fracture FRAX scores when comparing the unadjusted and trabecular bone score (TBS)-adjusted scores. FRAX 10-year probability of fracture can be calculated with adjustment for the TBS. Studies have shown that TBS can improve FRAX assessments in some populations. This study aimed to determine if TBS-adjusted FRAX score is better than the unadjusted score for predicting major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture in Australian men. This study involved 591 men aged 40-90 years, enrolled in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Incident MOF (n = 50) and hip fractures (n = 14) were ascertained using radiological reports. Median follow-up time was 9.5 years (IQR7.5-11.4). Diagnostic indexes were calculated using cut points of ≥20% for MOF and ≥3% for the hip. AUROC curves were also determined for adjusted and unadjusted scores as continuous variables. Sensitivity was higher in the TBS-adjusted scores (MOF 4%, hip 78.6%) than the unadjusted scores (MOF 2%, hip 57.1%), with a decrease in specificity (MOF 98.9 vs 99.3%; hip 79.9 vs 83.9%). When considering TBS-adjusted and unadjusted FRAX as continuous scores, AUROCs were 0.738 and 0.740, respectively, for MOF and 0.849 and 0.848 for the hip. Prediction of fractures by MOF or hip FRAX was not substantially improved by TBS adjustment. There was no difference in AUROCs or diagnostic indexes for cut-off points of ≥20 for MOF and ≥3% for hip FRAX

Fracture Risk and Use of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers

Published online: 14 July 2022Medications used to treat hypertension may affect fracture risk. This study investigated fracture risk for users of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB). Participants (899 men, median age 70.3 yr (59.9–79.1), range 50.0–96.6 yr; 574 women, median age 65.5 yr (58.1–75.4), range 50.1–94.6 yr) were from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Medication use was self-reported and incident fractures were ascertained using radiological reports. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured at the femoral neck. Participants were divided into four groups: (1) non-users without hypertension, (2) non-users with hypertension, (3) ACEI users and (4) ARB users. Dosage was calculated using the defined daily dose (DDD) criteria. Participants were followed from date of visit to first fracture, death or 31 December 2016, whichever occurred first. Cox proportional hazards models were used for analyses. At least one incident fracture was sustained by 156 men and 135 women over a median(IQR) of 11.5(6.2–13.2) and 10.9(6.3–11.6) years of follow-up, respectively. In unadjusted analyses, compared to non-users without hypertension, men in all three other groups had a higher risk of fracture (Hazard Ratio (HR, 95%CI) 1.54, 1.00–2.37; 1.90, 1.18–3.05; 2.15, 1.26–3.66), for non-users with hypertension, ACEI and ARB users, respectively). Following adjustment for age, prior fracture and BMD, these associations became nonsignificant. A dose effect for ARB use was observed; men using lower doses had a higher risk of fracture than non-users without hypertension, in both unadjusted (2.66, 1.34–5.29) and adjusted (2.03, 1.01–4.08) analyses, but this association was not observed at higher doses. For women, unadjusted analyses showed a higher risk for ACEI users compared to non-users without hypertension (1.74, 1.07–2.83). This was explained after adjustment for age, alcohol consumption, prior fracture and BMD (1.28, 0.74–2.22). No other differences were observed. In men, lower dose (0 < DDD ≤ 1) ARB use was associated with an increased risk of fracture. ACEI or ARB use was not associated with increased risk of incident fracture in women. These findings may be important for antihypertensive treatment decisions in individuals with a high risk of fracture.Kara L. Holloway, Kew, Amelia G. Betson, Kara B. Anderson, Filip Sepetavc, James Gaston, Mark A. Kotowicz, Wan, Hui Liao, Maciej Henneberg, Julie A. Pasc

How well do the FRAX (Australia) and Garvan calculators predict incident fractures? Data from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.

This study reports that both FRAX and Garvan calculators underestimated fractures in Australian men and women, particularly in those with osteopenia or osteoporosis. Major osteoporotic fractures were poorly predicted, while both calculators performed acceptably well for hip fractures. This study assessed the ability of the FRAX (Australia) and Garvan calculators to predict fractures in Australian women and men. Women (n = 809) and men (n = 821) aged 50-90 years, enrolled in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, were included. Fracture risk was estimated using FRAX and Garvan calculators with and without femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) (FRAX &lt;sub&gt;BMD&lt;/sub&gt; , FRAX &lt;sub&gt;noBMD&lt;/sub&gt; , Garvan &lt;sub&gt;BMD&lt;/sub&gt; , Garvan &lt;sub&gt;noBMD&lt;/sub&gt; ). Incident major osteoporotic (MOF), fragility, and hip fractures over the following 10 years were verified radiologically. Differences between observed and predicted numbers of fractures were assessed using a chi-squared test. Diagnostics indexes were calculated. In women, 115 MOF, 184 fragility, and 42 hip fractures occurred. For men, there were 73, 109, and 17 fractures, respectively. FRAX underestimated MOFs, regardless of sex or inclusion of BMD. FRAX accurately predicted hip fractures, except in women with BMD (20 predicted, p = 0.004). Garvan underestimated fragility fractures except in men using BMD (88 predicted, p = 0.109). Garvan accurately predicted hip fractures except for women without BMD (12 predicted, p &lt; 0.001). Fractures were underestimated primarily in the osteopenia and osteoporosis groups; MOFs in the normal BMD group were only underestimated by FRAX &lt;sub&gt;BMD&lt;/sub&gt; and fragility fractures by Garvan &lt;sub&gt;noBMD&lt;/sub&gt; , both in men. AUROCs were not different between scores with and without BMD, except for fragility fractures predicted by Garvan in women (0.696, 95% CI 0.652-0.739 and 0.668, 0.623-0.712, respectively, p = 0.008) and men, which almost reached significance (0.683, 0.631-0.734, and 0.667, 0.615-0.719, respectively, p = 0.051). Analyses of sensitivity and specificity showed overall that MOFs and fragility fractures were poorly predicted by both FRAX and Garvan, while hip fractures were acceptably predicted. Overall, the FRAX and Garvan calculators underestimated MOF and fragility fractures, particularly in individuals with osteopenia or osteoporosis. Hip fractures were predicted better by both calculators. AUROC analyses suggest that Garvan &lt;sub&gt;BMD&lt;/sub&gt; performed better than Garvan &lt;sub&gt;noBMD&lt;/sub&gt; for prediction of fragility fractures