Utilize polygenic risk score to enhance fracture risk estimation and improve the performance of FRAX in patients with osteoporosis

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Archives of Osteoporosis Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1007/s11657-023-01357-0
Jian-Jiun Chen, I-Chieh Chen, Chia-Yi Wei, Shih-Yi Lin, Yi-Ming Chen
{"title":"Utilize polygenic risk score to enhance fracture risk estimation and improve the performance of FRAX in patients with osteoporosis","authors":"Jian-Jiun Chen,&nbsp;I-Chieh Chen,&nbsp;Chia-Yi Wei,&nbsp;Shih-Yi Lin,&nbsp;Yi-Ming Chen","doi":"10.1007/s11657-023-01357-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>\n <i>Summary</i>\n </h3><p>This study examined the use of polygenic risk scores (PGS) in combination with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) to enhance fragility fractures risk estimation in osteoporosis patients. Analyzing data from over 57,000 participants, PGS improved fracture risk estimation, especially for individuals with intermediate to low risks, allowing personalized preventive strategies.</p><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are multifactorial, with contributions from both clinical and genetic determinants. However, whether using polygenic risk scores (PGS) may enhance the risk estimation of osteoporotic fracture in addition to Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) remains unknown. This study investigated the collective association of PGS and FRAX with fragility fracture.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a cohort study from the Taiwan Precision Medicine Initiative (TPMI) at Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan. Genotyping was performed to compute PGS associated with bone mineral density (BMD). Phenome-wide association studies were executed to pinpoint phenotypes correlated with the PGS. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to ascertain factors associated with osteoporotic fractures.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Among all 57,257 TPMI participants, 3744 (904 men and 2840 women, with a mean age of 66.7) individuals had BMD testing, with 540 (14.42%) presenting with fractures. The 3744 individuals who underwent BMD testing were categorized into four quartiles (Q1-Q4) based on PGS; 540 (14.42%) presented with fractures. Individuals with PGS-Q1 exhibited lower BMD, a higher prevalence of major fractures, and elevated FRAX-major and FRAX-hip than those with PGS-Q4. PGS was associated with major fractures after adjusting age, sex, and FRAX scores. Notably, the risk of major fractures (PGS-Q1 vs. Q4) was significantly higher in the subgroups of FRAX-major scores &lt; 10% and 10–20%, but not in participants with a FRAX-major score ≧ 20%.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our study highlights the potential of PGS to augment fracture risk estimation in conjunction with FRAX, particularly in individuals with middle to low risks. Incorporating genetic testing could empower physicians to tailor personalized preventive strategies for osteoporosis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8283,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Osteoporosis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Osteoporosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11657-023-01357-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary

This study examined the use of polygenic risk scores (PGS) in combination with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) to enhance fragility fractures risk estimation in osteoporosis patients. Analyzing data from over 57,000 participants, PGS improved fracture risk estimation, especially for individuals with intermediate to low risks, allowing personalized preventive strategies.

Introduction

Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are multifactorial, with contributions from both clinical and genetic determinants. However, whether using polygenic risk scores (PGS) may enhance the risk estimation of osteoporotic fracture in addition to Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) remains unknown. This study investigated the collective association of PGS and FRAX with fragility fracture.

Methods

We conducted a cohort study from the Taiwan Precision Medicine Initiative (TPMI) at Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan. Genotyping was performed to compute PGS associated with bone mineral density (BMD). Phenome-wide association studies were executed to pinpoint phenotypes correlated with the PGS. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to ascertain factors associated with osteoporotic fractures.

Results

Among all 57,257 TPMI participants, 3744 (904 men and 2840 women, with a mean age of 66.7) individuals had BMD testing, with 540 (14.42%) presenting with fractures. The 3744 individuals who underwent BMD testing were categorized into four quartiles (Q1-Q4) based on PGS; 540 (14.42%) presented with fractures. Individuals with PGS-Q1 exhibited lower BMD, a higher prevalence of major fractures, and elevated FRAX-major and FRAX-hip than those with PGS-Q4. PGS was associated with major fractures after adjusting age, sex, and FRAX scores. Notably, the risk of major fractures (PGS-Q1 vs. Q4) was significantly higher in the subgroups of FRAX-major scores < 10% and 10–20%, but not in participants with a FRAX-major score ≧ 20%.

Conclusions

Our study highlights the potential of PGS to augment fracture risk estimation in conjunction with FRAX, particularly in individuals with middle to low risks. Incorporating genetic testing could empower physicians to tailor personalized preventive strategies for osteoporosis.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用多基因风险评分增强骨质疏松症患者骨折风险评估,提高FRAX的性能。
本研究探讨了将多基因风险评分(PGS)与骨折风险评估工具(FRAX)结合使用,以提高骨质疏松症患者脆性骨折的风险评估。通过分析来自57,000多名参与者的数据,PGS改进了骨折风险评估,特别是对于中低风险的个体,允许个性化的预防策略。骨质疏松症和脆性骨折是多因素的,有临床和遗传因素的影响。然而,除了骨折风险评估工具(FRAX)外,是否使用多基因风险评分(PGS)可以提高骨质疏松性骨折的风险评估仍不清楚。本研究探讨了PGS和FRAX与脆性骨折的共同关系。方法:采用台中退伍军人总医院台湾精准医疗计划(TPMI)的队列研究。通过基因分型计算PGS与骨密度(BMD)的相关性。进行全表型关联研究以确定与PGS相关的表型。采用Logistic回归分析确定骨质疏松性骨折的相关因素。结果:在所有57,257名TPMI参与者中,3744人(904名男性和2840名女性,平均年龄为66.7岁)进行了骨密度测试,其中540人(14.42%)出现骨折。3744名接受BMD测试的个体根据PGS分为四个四分位数(Q1-Q4);540例(14.42%)出现骨折。与PGS-Q4患者相比,PGS-Q1患者表现出较低的骨密度、较高的主要骨折患病率以及较高的FRAX-major和FRAX-hip。调整年龄、性别和FRAX评分后,PGS与主要骨折相关。值得注意的是,在FRAX-major评分< 10%和10-20%的亚组中,主要骨折的风险(PGS-Q1 vs. Q4)明显更高,而在FRAX-major评分≧20%的亚组中则没有。结论:我们的研究强调了PGS结合FRAX增加骨折风险评估的潜力,特别是在中低风险个体中。结合基因检测可以使医生为骨质疏松症量身定制个性化的预防策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Archives of Osteoporosis
Archives of Osteoporosis ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISMORTHOPEDICS -ORTHOPEDICS
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
133
期刊介绍: Archives of Osteoporosis is an international multidisciplinary journal which is a joint initiative of the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA. The journal will highlight the specificities of different regions around the world concerning epidemiology, reference values for bone density and bone metabolism, as well as clinical aspects of osteoporosis and other bone diseases.
期刊最新文献
Association between bone microarchitecture and sarcopenia in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes. Individuals with a fragility fracture and a prescription for bone active medication have a positive perception of the medication but do not associate it with fracture risk reduction. Prevalence of fractures in adults over 50 years of age with osteoporosis in Colombia. Correction to: Incidence and excess mortality of hip fractures in a predominantly Caucasian population in the South of Brazil. Perspectives of healthcare providers on osteoporosis, falls and fracture risk: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1