Discriminatory Accuracy of Fracture Risk Assessment Tool in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Q2 Medicine Journal of Bone Metabolism Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-30 DOI:10.11005/jbm.24.781
Dheeraj Jha, Manju Chandran, Namki Hong, Yumie Rhee, Seungjin Baek, Stephen J Ferguson, Benedikt Helgason, Anitha D Praveen
{"title":"Discriminatory Accuracy of Fracture Risk Assessment Tool in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Dheeraj Jha, Manju Chandran, Namki Hong, Yumie Rhee, Seungjin Baek, Stephen J Ferguson, Benedikt Helgason, Anitha D Praveen","doi":"10.11005/jbm.24.781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This review explores the discriminative ability of fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture (HF) risk prediction and the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in Asian populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched the EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases from the earliest indexing date to January 2024. Studies were included if FRAX was used to identify future osteoporotic fractures or a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in an Asian population and reported the area under the curve (AUC) values. Meta-analyses were conducted after quality assessment for AUC with 95% confidence intervals across the following categories: standard FRAX without/with bone mineral density (BMD), adjusted FRAX, and BMD alone for fracture prediction, as well as standard FRAX for densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 42 studies were included. The AUC values for predicting fracture risk using FRAX-MOF with BMD (0.73 [0.70-0.77]) was highest compared to FRAX-MOF without BMD (0.72 [0.66-0.77]), and adjusted FRAX-MOF (0.71 [0.65-0.77]). The AUC values for predicting fracture risk using FRAX-HF with BMD (0.77 [0.71-0.83]) was highest compared to FRAX-HF without BMD (0.72 [0.65-0.80]), and adjusted FRAX-HF (0.75 [0.63-0.86]). The AUC values for BMD alone (0.68 [0.62-0.73]) was lowest for fracture prediction. The AUC values for identifying a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis was 0.77 [0.70-0.84] and 0.76 [0.67-0.86] using FRAX-MOF and FRAX-HF, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FRAX with BMD tends to perform more reliably in predicting HF compared to MOF in Asia. However, its accuracy in predicting fracture risk in Asian populations can be improved through region-specific, long-term epidemiological data.</p>","PeriodicalId":15070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone Metabolism","volume":"31 4","pages":"296-315"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone Metabolism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11005/jbm.24.781","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This review explores the discriminative ability of fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) in major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture (HF) risk prediction and the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in Asian populations.

Methods: We systematically searched the EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases from the earliest indexing date to January 2024. Studies were included if FRAX was used to identify future osteoporotic fractures or a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in an Asian population and reported the area under the curve (AUC) values. Meta-analyses were conducted after quality assessment for AUC with 95% confidence intervals across the following categories: standard FRAX without/with bone mineral density (BMD), adjusted FRAX, and BMD alone for fracture prediction, as well as standard FRAX for densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Results: A total of 42 studies were included. The AUC values for predicting fracture risk using FRAX-MOF with BMD (0.73 [0.70-0.77]) was highest compared to FRAX-MOF without BMD (0.72 [0.66-0.77]), and adjusted FRAX-MOF (0.71 [0.65-0.77]). The AUC values for predicting fracture risk using FRAX-HF with BMD (0.77 [0.71-0.83]) was highest compared to FRAX-HF without BMD (0.72 [0.65-0.80]), and adjusted FRAX-HF (0.75 [0.63-0.86]). The AUC values for BMD alone (0.68 [0.62-0.73]) was lowest for fracture prediction. The AUC values for identifying a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis was 0.77 [0.70-0.84] and 0.76 [0.67-0.86] using FRAX-MOF and FRAX-HF, respectively.

Conclusions: FRAX with BMD tends to perform more reliably in predicting HF compared to MOF in Asia. However, its accuracy in predicting fracture risk in Asian populations can be improved through region-specific, long-term epidemiological data.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Bone Metabolism
Journal of Bone Metabolism Medicine-Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Incretin-Based Therapies: A Promising Approach for Modulating Oxidative Stress and Insulin Resistance in Sarcopenia. Zoledronate Therapy in Osteogenesis Imperfecta: Perspectives in Indonesia Tertiary Hospital. Age- and Sex-Related Volumetric Density Differences in Trabecular and Cortical Bone of the Proximal Femur in Healthy Population. Clinical Utility of Bone Turnover Markers in Chronic Kidney Disease. Discriminatory Accuracy of Fracture Risk Assessment Tool in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
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