Bone Fracture Risk FAQs
How did you develop this risk assessment model?
The model was developed from data and experience acquired from the
Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study [1-8]. The Study, which began in
1989, has followed more than 2000 men and women who were at least 60
years old at the start. In addition to having their bone mineral
density measured, these participants answered extensive questionnaires
about their backgrounds and lifestyles. Subsequently, falls and
fractures were noted, and then correlated with all the other
data.
How did you define the risk factor?
After extensive analyses and consideration of more than 50 risk
factors, we found that 5 factors markedly affected fracture outcome:
age, bone mineral density, body weight, a history of prior fracture
after the age of 50, and any falls during the past 12 months. These
risk factors were then used to develop and internally validate the
prognostic model [1-2].
What does “T-score” mean?
Bone mineral density can be expressed as g/cm2 or as T-score. Someone’s
T-score is their bone mineral density compared to the average bone
mineral density of a young healthy person of the same gender, aged
between 20 and 30 years (also called “peak bone mass”). So, a T-score
of -2 means that the individual’s bone mineral density is 2 standard
deviations lower than peak bone mass. Any person with a T-score lower
than -2.5 is considered to have “osteoporosis” [9].
What about other risk factors that are not in the assessment
model?
While other risk factors such as cigarette smoking, excessive alcohol
consumption, use of high dose corticosteroids, and a family history of
fracture contribute to risk, they are largely reflected in the bone
mineral density measurement. Moreover, because we wanted to keep the
model simple, we strived to include only practical risk factors that
are readily available (without difficult measurement).
If an individual is on anti-fracture treatment, is the model
applicable?
Garvan’s prognostic model was developed based on data from men and
women among whom 95% were not on any anti-fracture treatment. However,
men and women whose T-scores are lower than -2.5 or have a pre-existing
fracture, anti-fracture treatment can reduce the risk of fracture by
between 35% and 50% [10]. Therefore, for individuals on
anti-fracture treatment the model’s risk estimate should be lowered by
35-50%.
Why use a 5-year and 10-year risks?
We consider that 5-year and 10-year risks are easier to manage than
lifetime risk. In fact, prognostic models for breast cancer [11] and
coronary heart disease [12] also provide 10-year risk. The models have
been used in developing practice guidelines that are well accepted by
clinicians.
Are there other fracture risk assessment models?
Yes. A number of fracture risk assessment models have been developed,
although most of them focused on hip fracture or women only [13-16].
Our model is applicable to both men and women. Recently, the World
Health Organization launched the FRAXTM tool [17] which is now
available online.
Will these models give different results?
Probably. As different prognostic models are developed from different
data sources and using different methods, the risk estimate from one
model is not necessarily the same as that of another. However, the
difference in risk estimates from different models is not likely to be
large enough to be of clinical concern.
Can risk of fracture change with time?
Definitely. Bone mineral density is known to decline with advancing
age, and excessive bone loss is a risk factor of fracture [18].
Therefore, the estimate fracture risk is not fixed, but is likely to
elevate with age, however for most people, this increase is expected to
be modest.
What is the risk threshold that is appropriate for
intervention?
That threshold is partly dependent on a person’s perception of risk of
fracture and should be discussed with a doctor. In broad terms,
however, we consider that a 5-year risk of >10% is high, 5-10% is
moderate, and <5% is low. Based on 35-50% risk reduction from
ant-fracture treatment such as bisphosphonates, the cost per fracture
prevented seems reasonable at a 5-year risk of 10% or 10-year risk of
20% or greater [19-20]. This threshold is also used in cardiovascular
disease prevention (National Cholesterol Education Program) and has
been adopted by expert osteoporosis groups [12] and recommended by
panel of osteoporosis experts [21]. Given the undertreatment and
underdiagnosis of osteoporosis [22], it is hoped that this prognostic
model will help to improve the uptake of treatment and reduce the
burden of osteoporosis in the general population.
References
1. Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, Eisman JA, Nguyen
TV. Development of Development of Prognostic Nomograms for
Individualizing 5-year and 10-year Risks of Fracture. Osteoporos
Int 2008 Mar 7
2. Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, Eisman JA, Nguyen
TV.Development of a nomogram for individualizing hip fracture risk in
men and women. Osteoporos Int 2007 Aug;18(8):1109-17.
3. Nguyen ND, Ahlborg HG, Center JR, Eisman JA,
Nguyen TV. Residual lifetime risk of fractures in women and men. J
Bone Miner Res 2007 Jun;22(6):781-8.
4. Nguyen TV, Sambrook PN, Kelly PJ, Jones G, Gilbert
C, Lord S, Freund J, Eisman JA. Prediction of osteoporotic fractures by
postural instability and bone density. Br Med J 1993;
307:1111-1115.
5. Nguyen TV, Eisman JA, Kelly PJ, Sambrook PN. Risk
factors for osteoporotic fractures in men. Am J Epidemiol
1996;144:255-263.
6. Nguyen TV, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA. Bone loss,
physical activity, and weight change in elderly women: The Dubbo
Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study. J Bone Miner Res 1998;
13:1458-1467.
7. Nguyen TV, Center JR, Sambrook PN, Eisman
JA. Risk factors for proximal humerus, forearm and wrist
fractures in elderly men and women: The Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology
Study. Am J Epidemiol 2001; 153:587-595.
8. Nguyen ND, Pongchaiyakul C, Center JR, Eisman JA,
Nguyen TV. Identification of high-risk individuals for hip fracture: a
14-year prospective study. J Bone Miner Res
2005;20(11):1921-8.
9. Kanis JA. Diagnosis of osteoporosis and
assessment of fracture risk. Lancet 2002: 359; 1929-1936.
10. Cranney A, Guyatt G, Griffith L, Wells G, Tugwell
P, Rosen C; Osteoporosis Methodology Group and The Osteoporosis
Research Advisory Group. Meta-analyses of therapies for
postmenopausal osteoporosis. IX: Summary of meta-analyses of therapies
for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Rev 2002
Aug;23(4):570-8.
11. Benichou J. A computer program for estimating
individualized probabilities of breast cancer. Comput Biomed Res
1993; 26:373-82.
12. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and
Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive Summary of the
third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP)
Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood
Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 2001;
285:2486-97.
13. Burger H, de Laet CE, Weel AE, Hofman A, Pols HA.
Added value of bone mineral density in hip fracture risk scores.
Bone 1999; 25:369-74.
14. Black DM, Steinbuch M, Palermo L, et al. An
assessment tool for predicting fracture risk in postmenopausal
women. Osteoporos Int 2001; 12:519-28.
15. Dargent-Molina P, Douchin MN, Cormier C, Meunier
PJ, Breart G; EPIDOS Study Group. Use of clinical risk factors in
elderly women with low bone mineral density to identify women at higher
risk of hip fracture: The EPIDOS prospective study. Osteoporos
Int 2002; 13:593-9.
16. McGrother CW, Donaldson MM, Clayton D, Abrams KR,
Clarke M. Evaluation of a hip fracture risk score for assessing elderly
women: the Melton Osteoporotic Fracture (MOF) study. Osteoporos
Int 2002; 13:89-96.
17. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, Johansson H,
McCloskey E. FRAXtrade mark and the assessment of fracture probability
in men and women from the UK. Osteoporos Int 2008 Feb 22.
18. Nguyen TV, Center JR, Eisman JA. Femoral
neck bone loss predicts fracture risk independent of baseline bone
mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 2005;20(8):1349-55.
19. Borgström F, Johnell O, Kanis JA, Jönsson B,
Rehnberg C. At what hip fracture risk is it cost-effective to treat?
International intervention thresholds for the treatment of
osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2006 Oct;17(10):1459-71.
20. Tosteson AN, Melton LJ 3rd, Dawson-Hughes B, Baim
S, Favus MJ, Khosla S, Lindsay RL. Cost-effective osteoporosis
treatment thresholds: the United States perspective. Osteoporos
Int 2008 Feb 22.
21. Siminoski K, Leslie WD, Frame H, et al.
Recommendations for bone mineral density reporting in Canada. Can
Assoc Radiol J 2005; 56:178-88.
22. Nguyen TV, Center JR, Eisman JA.
Osteoporosis: underrated, underdiagnosed and undertreated. Med J
Aust 2004 Mar 1;180(5 Suppl):S18-22.



