Ability of FRAX Sri Lanka adjusted for trabecular bone score to discriminate between postmenopausal women with a recent fracture and without a fracture.
Bone density
Osteoporosis
Risk assessment
Sri Lanka
Trabecular bone score
Journal
Osteoporosis and sarcopenia
ISSN: 2405-5263
Titre abrégé: Osteoporos Sarcopenia
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101666399
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
28
03
2020
revised:
14
06
2020
accepted:
11
07
2020
entrez:
26
10
2020
pubmed:
27
10
2020
medline:
27
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We evaluated the ability of fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) Sri Lanka to discriminate between women with a recent fracture and without a fracture, when trabecular bone score (TBS) is added to the calculation. We studied 394 women without previous fractures and 87 women who underwent dual energy X-ray absorptiometry within 3 months after the first fragility fracture. Fracture probabilities (FP) were estimated with and without TBS using Sri Lankan FRAX model and their ability to discriminate those with and without fracture was tested. Women without fractures had higher bone mineral densities (BMDs) and lower FPs, compared to those with a recent fracture. Area under curves of receiver operating characteristic for FPs unadjusted were not different from those adjusted for TBS. The odd ratios of FPs unadjusted were not different from those of adjusted. The FPs estimated with TBS were higher, hence the intervention thresholds (ITs) were higher compared to FPs estimated without TBS. Thirty-two percent of women without previous fracture were above the ITs and the inclusion of TBS increased this to 36%. The integrated discriminatory index analysis showed a 8% increase in the discriminatory slope. The inclusion of TBS to Sri Lankan FRAX did not show an added advantage in discriminating between postmenopausal women with a recent fracture and without a fracture. TBS inclusion in fracture risk calculation among those without previous fractures, however, showed a marginal increase in the number of women above ITs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33102802
doi: 10.1016/j.afos.2020.07.001
pii: S2405-5255(20)30072-8
pmc: PMC7573498
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
106-110Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Korean Society of Osteoporosis. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.
Références
J Clin Densitom. 2016 Oct;19(4):507-514
pubmed: 27130256
Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32-5
pubmed: 15405679
Maturitas. 2013 Aug;75(4):392-6
pubmed: 23810490
J Bone Miner Metab. 2019 Jan;37(1):161-170
pubmed: 29468478
Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:148
pubmed: 23975235
Arch Osteoporos. 2019 Mar 9;14(1):33
pubmed: 30850909
Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2017 Dec;15(6):521-531
pubmed: 28988401
Osteoporos Int. 2011 Mar;22(3):839-47
pubmed: 20959961
Osteoporos Int. 2017 Jan;28(1):111-117
pubmed: 27565645
Osteoporos Int. 2018 Sep;29(9):2093-2099
pubmed: 29858633
Bone. 2015 Sep;78:216-24
pubmed: 25988660
J Bone Miner Res. 2014 Feb;29(2):399-407
pubmed: 23873699
J Clin Densitom. 2017 Jul - Sep;20(3):360-367
pubmed: 28732576
J Bone Miner Metab. 2018 Jan;36(1):111-118
pubmed: 28233186
J Bone Miner Res. 2011 Nov;26(11):2762-9
pubmed: 21887701
J Bone Miner Res. 2016 May;31(5):940-8
pubmed: 26498132
Osteoporos Int. 2012 May;23(5):1489-501
pubmed: 22083541
Osteoporos Int. 2011 Mar;22(3):809-16
pubmed: 21229233
Calcif Tissue Int. 2014 Dec;95(6):540-6
pubmed: 25348077
Osteoporos Int. 2013 Mar;24(3):991-8
pubmed: 22581295
Osteoporos Int. 2013 Mar;24(3):1073-8
pubmed: 23052939
Bone. 2017 Dec;105:269-275
pubmed: 28963079