FRAX®调整仅使用L1的重组骨小梁评分(TBS)可能是骨折预测的最佳方法:曼尼托巴省BMD登记。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
William D. Leslie , Neil Binkley , Heenam Goel , Eugene V. McCloskey , Didier Hans
{"title":"FRAX®调整仅使用L1的重组骨小梁评分(TBS)可能是骨折预测的最佳方法:曼尼托巴省BMD登记。","authors":"William D. Leslie ,&nbsp;Neil Binkley ,&nbsp;Heenam Goel ,&nbsp;Eugene V. McCloskey ,&nbsp;Didier Hans","doi":"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Lumbar spine<span> trabecular bone<span> score (TBS) used in conjunction with FRAX® improves 10-year fracture prediction. The derived FRAX risk adjustment is based upon TBS measured from L1-L4, designated TBS</span></span></span><sub>L1-L4</sub><span>-FRAX. In prior studies, TBS measurements that include L1 and exclude L4 give better fracture stratification than L1-L4. We compared risk stratification from TBS-adjusted FRAX using TBS derived from different combinations of upper lumbar vertebral levels renormalized for level-specific differences in individuals from the Manitoba Bone Density Program aged &gt;40 years with baseline assessment of TBS and FRAX. TBS measurements for L1-L3, L1-L2 and L1 alone were calculated after renormalization for level-specific differences. Corresponding TBS-adjusted FRAX scores designated TBS</span><sub>L1-L3</sub>-FRAX, TBS<sub>L1-L2</sub>-FRAX and TBS<sub>L1</sub>-FRAX were compared with TBS<sub>L1-L4</sub><span>-FRAX for fracture risk stratification. Incident major osteoporotic fractures<span> (MOF) and hip fractures were assessed. The primary outcome was incremental change in area under the curve (ΔAUC). The study population included 71,209 individuals (mean age 64 years, 89.8% female). Before renormalization, mean TBS for L1-3, L1-L2 and L1 was significantly lower and TBS-adjusted FRAX significantly higher than from using TBS</span></span><sub>L1-L4</sub>. These differences were largely eliminated when TBS was renormalized for level-specific differences. During mean follow-up of 8.7 years 6745 individuals sustained incident MOF and 2039 sustained incident hip fractures. Compared with TBS<sub>L1-L4</sub>-FRAX, use of FRAX without TBS was associated with lower stratification (ΔAUC = −0.009, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). There was progressive improvement in MOF stratification using TBSL<sub>1-L3</sub>-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.001, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), TBS<sub>L1-L2</sub>-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.004, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and TBS<sub>L1</sub>-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.005, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). TBS<sub>L1</sub>-FRAX was significantly better than all other combinations for MOF prediction (<em>p</em><span> &lt; 0.001). Incremental improvement in AUC for hip fracture prediction showed a similar but smaller trend. In conclusion, this single large cohort study found that TBS-adjusted FRAX performance for fracture prediction was improved when limited to the upper lumbar vertebral levels and was best using L1 alone.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":50240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"FRAX® adjustment using renormalized trabecular bone score (TBS) from L1 alone may be optimal for fracture prediction: The Manitoba BMD registry\",\"authors\":\"William D. Leslie ,&nbsp;Neil Binkley ,&nbsp;Heenam Goel ,&nbsp;Eugene V. McCloskey ,&nbsp;Didier Hans\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101430\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>Lumbar spine<span> trabecular bone<span> score (TBS) used in conjunction with FRAX® improves 10-year fracture prediction. The derived FRAX risk adjustment is based upon TBS measured from L1-L4, designated TBS</span></span></span><sub>L1-L4</sub><span>-FRAX. In prior studies, TBS measurements that include L1 and exclude L4 give better fracture stratification than L1-L4. We compared risk stratification from TBS-adjusted FRAX using TBS derived from different combinations of upper lumbar vertebral levels renormalized for level-specific differences in individuals from the Manitoba Bone Density Program aged &gt;40 years with baseline assessment of TBS and FRAX. TBS measurements for L1-L3, L1-L2 and L1 alone were calculated after renormalization for level-specific differences. Corresponding TBS-adjusted FRAX scores designated TBS</span><sub>L1-L3</sub>-FRAX, TBS<sub>L1-L2</sub>-FRAX and TBS<sub>L1</sub>-FRAX were compared with TBS<sub>L1-L4</sub><span>-FRAX for fracture risk stratification. Incident major osteoporotic fractures<span> (MOF) and hip fractures were assessed. The primary outcome was incremental change in area under the curve (ΔAUC). The study population included 71,209 individuals (mean age 64 years, 89.8% female). Before renormalization, mean TBS for L1-3, L1-L2 and L1 was significantly lower and TBS-adjusted FRAX significantly higher than from using TBS</span></span><sub>L1-L4</sub>. These differences were largely eliminated when TBS was renormalized for level-specific differences. During mean follow-up of 8.7 years 6745 individuals sustained incident MOF and 2039 sustained incident hip fractures. Compared with TBS<sub>L1-L4</sub>-FRAX, use of FRAX without TBS was associated with lower stratification (ΔAUC = −0.009, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). There was progressive improvement in MOF stratification using TBSL<sub>1-L3</sub>-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.001, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), TBS<sub>L1-L2</sub>-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.004, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and TBS<sub>L1</sub>-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.005, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). TBS<sub>L1</sub>-FRAX was significantly better than all other combinations for MOF prediction (<em>p</em><span> &lt; 0.001). Incremental improvement in AUC for hip fracture prediction showed a similar but smaller trend. In conclusion, this single large cohort study found that TBS-adjusted FRAX performance for fracture prediction was improved when limited to the upper lumbar vertebral levels and was best using L1 alone.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Densitometry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Densitometry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109469502300080X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109469502300080X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

腰椎小梁骨评分(TBS)与FRAX®联合使用可改善10年骨折预测。衍生的FRAX风险调整基于从L1-L4测量的TBS,指定为TBSL1-L4-FRAX。在先前的研究中,包括L1和不包括L4的TBS测量比L1-L4给出更好的裂缝分层。我们比较了TBS调整的FRAX的风险分层,使用来自不同组合的上腰椎水平的TBS,对年龄>40岁的曼尼托巴省骨密度计划个体的水平特异性差异进行了重新规范化,并对TBS和FRAX进行了基线评估。L1-L3、L1-L2和L1单独的TBS测量是在对能级特异性差异进行重整化后计算的。将TBSL1-L3-FRAX、TBSL1-L2-FRAX和TBSL1-FRAX的相应TBS调整FRAX评分与TBSL1-L4-FRAX进行骨折风险分层比较。对发生的主要骨质疏松性骨折(MOF)和髋部骨折进行评估。主要结果是曲线下面积的增量变化(ΔAUC)。研究人群包括71209人(平均年龄64岁,女性89.8%)。在重正化之前,L1-3、L1-L2和L1的平均TBS显著低于使用TBSL1-L4时的TBS调整FRAX。当TBS被重新规范化用于特定水平的差异时,这些差异在很大程度上被消除了。在8.7年的平均随访中,6745人发生MOF,2039人发生髋部骨折。与TBSL1-L4-FRAX相比,使用不含TBS的FRAX可降低分层(ΔAUC = -0.009,p 1-L3-FRAX(ΔAUC = +0.001,p L1-L2-FRAX(ΔAUC = +0.004,p L1-FRAX(ΔAUC = +0.005,pL1-FRAX在MOF预测方面显著优于所有其他组合(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
FRAX® adjustment using renormalized trabecular bone score (TBS) from L1 alone may be optimal for fracture prediction: The Manitoba BMD registry

Lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS) used in conjunction with FRAX® improves 10-year fracture prediction. The derived FRAX risk adjustment is based upon TBS measured from L1-L4, designated TBSL1-L4-FRAX. In prior studies, TBS measurements that include L1 and exclude L4 give better fracture stratification than L1-L4. We compared risk stratification from TBS-adjusted FRAX using TBS derived from different combinations of upper lumbar vertebral levels renormalized for level-specific differences in individuals from the Manitoba Bone Density Program aged >40 years with baseline assessment of TBS and FRAX. TBS measurements for L1-L3, L1-L2 and L1 alone were calculated after renormalization for level-specific differences. Corresponding TBS-adjusted FRAX scores designated TBSL1-L3-FRAX, TBSL1-L2-FRAX and TBSL1-FRAX were compared with TBSL1-L4-FRAX for fracture risk stratification. Incident major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) and hip fractures were assessed. The primary outcome was incremental change in area under the curve (ΔAUC). The study population included 71,209 individuals (mean age 64 years, 89.8% female). Before renormalization, mean TBS for L1-3, L1-L2 and L1 was significantly lower and TBS-adjusted FRAX significantly higher than from using TBSL1-L4. These differences were largely eliminated when TBS was renormalized for level-specific differences. During mean follow-up of 8.7 years 6745 individuals sustained incident MOF and 2039 sustained incident hip fractures. Compared with TBSL1-L4-FRAX, use of FRAX without TBS was associated with lower stratification (ΔAUC = −0.009, p < 0.001). There was progressive improvement in MOF stratification using TBSL1-L3-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.001, p < 0.001), TBSL1-L2-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.004, p < 0.001) and TBSL1-FRAX (ΔAUC = +0.005, p < 0.001). TBSL1-FRAX was significantly better than all other combinations for MOF prediction (p < 0.001). Incremental improvement in AUC for hip fracture prediction showed a similar but smaller trend. In conclusion, this single large cohort study found that TBS-adjusted FRAX performance for fracture prediction was improved when limited to the upper lumbar vertebral levels and was best using L1 alone.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Densitometry
Journal of Clinical Densitometry 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
92
审稿时长
90 days
期刊介绍: The Journal is committed to serving ISCD''s mission - the education of heterogenous physician specialties and technologists who are involved in the clinical assessment of skeletal health. The focus of JCD is bone mass measurement, including epidemiology of bone mass, how drugs and diseases alter bone mass, new techniques and quality assurance in bone mass imaging technologies, and bone mass health/economics. Combining high quality research and review articles with sound, practice-oriented advice, JCD meets the diverse diagnostic and management needs of radiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists, rheumatologists, gynecologists, family physicians, internists, and technologists whose patients require diagnostic clinical densitometry for therapeutic management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信