Tony M. Keaveny

With the goal of preventing more hip fractures, a next generation of the VirtuOst Biomechanical Computed Tomography (BCT) test was developed that integrates measurements from a clinical CT scan related to fall risk, impact force, and femoral strength, the three main determinants of hip fracture. Here, we introduce the test and validate it against BMD and FRAX. Our source population from a large healthcare system comprised of 341364 patients (≥65 yr) with an abdominal-pelvic CT during care. Using data from 3035 patients (1790 with hip fracture), we developed a “BCT Risk Score” (range: 0-100) having input risk factors of age, femoral strength, ratio of trabecular/cortical BMD, muscle area, intramuscular fat, FN volume, hip width, and posterior fat thickness. In a geographically distinct set of 2124 patients (1293 with hip fracture), we then compared the BCT Risk Score against a DXA-equivalent hip BMD T-score (lowest hip value, measured from the CT scan by VirtuOst) and FRAX hip fracture risk (with BMD but without parental fracture history) for predicting a first incident hip fracture within 5 yr. For the women, the c-statistic for predicting fracture was higher for BCT (0.89, 95% CI: 0.87-0.90) than for BMD (0.81, 0.79-0.84) or FRAX (0.85, 0.83-0.87). Using binary thresholds to identify high-risk patients, sensitivity for BCT (Risk Score ≥ 75) was higher than for BMD (T-score ≤ −2.5) and FRAX (hip risk ≥ 3.0%): 81.4% vs 47.8% vs 75.9%, respectively; positive predictive values confirmed comparable high-risk status (BCT 13.6% vs BMD 15.3% vs FRAX 12.7%). Similar trends were observed for the men, 2-yr outcomes, and identifying very-high-risk patients. We conclude that, compared to both BMD and FRAX, the integrative BCT test better predicted hip fracture and its high sensitivity should improve fracture prevention.

The increased hip fracture risk in individuals with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes is not explained by areal BMD (aBMD), indicating that diabetes increases fracture risk through mechanisms independent of aBMD. To investigate, we used QCT to compare femoral strength, volumetric BMD (vBMD), and geometry in cadaveric femora from older adults with T1D (n = 23; 13 female) and T2D (n = 21; 11 female) to controls of similar age, sex, and race (n = 19; 11 female). While aBMD and vBMD measures were similar across groups, femoral strength was lower in the diabetic groups compared to controls. Geometric strength, based on external bone shape, was lower in T1D (−15%, p = .001) and T2D (−12%, p = .014) compared to controls. When combining geometry and density, femoral strength was significantly lower in T1D (−19%, p = .044). The strength-to-density ratio was also lower in T1D and T2D (p ≤ .013), indicating greater skeletal fragility in the diabetic groups beyond what is predicted by BMD. Diabetic groups had smaller bone size, including lower femoral neck volume (−8%, p ≤ .030), neck cross-sectional area (CSA) (−8%, p ≤ .030), and trochanter CSA (−7%, p ≤ .010). These findings suggest that lower femoral strength and smaller geometry contribute to elevated fracture risk in diabetes, warranting further study in larger populations.

Randomized trials have not been performed, and may never be, to determine if osteoporosis treatment prevents hip fracture in men. Addressing that evidence gap, we analyzed data from an observational study of new hip fractures in a large integrated healthcare system to compare the reduction in hip fractures associated with standard-of-care osteoporosis treatment in men versus women. Sampling from 271,389 patients aged ≥ 65 who had a hip-containing CT scan during care between 2005 and 2018, we selected all who subsequently had a first hip fracture (cases) after the CT scan (start of observation) and a sex-matched equal number of randomly selected patients. From those, we analyzed all who tested positive for osteoporosis (DXA-equivalent hip BMD T-score ≤ −2.5, measured from the CT scan using VirtuOst). We defined “treated” as at least six months of any osteoporosis medication by prescription fill data during follow-up; “not-treated” was no prescription fill. Sex-specific odds ratios of hip fracture for treated vs not-treated patients were calculated by logistic regression; adjustments included age, BMD T-score, BMD-treatment interaction, BMD, race/ethnicity, and seven baseline clinical risk factors. At two-year follow-up, 33.9% of the women (750/2,211 patients) and 24.0% of the men (175/728 patients) were treated primarily with alendronate; 51.3% and 66.3%, respectively, were not-treated; and 721 and 269, respectively, had a first hip fracture since the CT scan. Odds ratio of hip fracture for treated vs not-treated was 0.26 (95% confidence interval: 0.21–0.33) for women and 0.21 (0.13–0.34) for men; the ratio of these odds ratios (men:women) was 0.81 (0.47–1.37), indicating no significant sex effect. Various sensitivity and stratified analyses confirmed these trends, including results at five-year follow-up. Given these results and considering the relevant literature, we conclude that osteoporosis treatment prevents hip fracture similarly in both sexes.

An abstract is unavailable. This article is available as a PDF only.

Summary This study examines changes in bone density and strength in the spine over the year after hip fracture to see if there are differences in the changes between men and women. Results show losses in the spine that may increase the risk of subsequent vertebral fractures, particularly for women. Purpose Compare changes over the first year post-hip fracture in vertebral bone mineral density (BMD) and compressive strength, measured from quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scans of the spine (T12-L1), between women and men. Methods QCT scans were performed on 37 participants (21 men and 16 women) at 2 and 12 months post-hip fracture as part of an ancillary observational study of hip fracture recovery in older community-dwelling men and women. Vertebral BMD and compressive strength were calculated using VirtuOst® (O.N. Diagnostics, Berkeley, CA). Unpaired t-tests were used to compare men and women with respect to baseline demographics, measurements of BMD and bone strength for the whole vertebra and the cortical and trabecular compartments, and any changes in these parameters between months 2 and 12. Results At 2 months post-fracture, there were no significant sex differences in any measurements of vertebral strength or BMD. Between months 2 and 12, vertebral strength decreased significantly in women (− 3.8%, p < 0.05) but not in men (− 2.3%, p < 0.20), vertebral trabecular BMD decreased similarly in both sexes (− 5.7% women; − 6.0% men), but cortical BMD did not change for either sex. Conclusion Despite the small sample size, these findings suggest that appreciable loss of vertebral trabecular bone can occur for both sexes in the year following hip fracture, which may increase the risk of subsequent vertebral fracture, particularly for women.

Summary In a population-based study, we found that computed tomography (CT)-based bone density and strength measures from the thoracic spine predicted new vertebral fracture as well as measures from the lumbar spine, suggesting that CT scans at either the thorax or abdominal regions are useful to assess vertebral fracture risk. Introduction Prior studies have shown that computed tomography (CT)-based lumbar bone density and strength measurements predict incident vertebral fracture. This study investigated whether CT-based bone density and strength measurements from the thoracic spine predict incident vertebral fracture and compared the performance of thoracic and lumbar bone measurements to predict incident vertebral fracture. Methods This case-control study of community-based men and women (age 74.6 ± 6.6) included 135 cases with incident vertebral fracture at any level and 266 age- and sex-matched controls. We used baseline CT scans to measure integral and trabecular volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) and vertebral strength (via finite element analysis, FEA) at the T8 and L2 levels. Association between these measurements and vertebral fracture was determined by using conditional logistic regression. Sensitivity and specificity for predicting incident vertebral fracture were determined for lumbar spine and thoracic bone measurements. Results Bone measurements from T8 and L2 predicted incident vertebral fracture equally well, regardless of fracture location. Specifically, for predicting vertebral fracture at any level, the odds ratio (per 1-SD decrease) for the vBMD and strength measurements at L2 and T8 ranged from 2.0 to 2.7 (p < 0.0001) and 1.8 to 2.8 (p < 0.0001), respectively. Results were similar when predicting fracture only in the thoracic versus the thoracolumbar spine. Lumbar and thoracic spine bone measurements had similar sensitivity and specificity for predicting incident vertebral fracture. Conclusion These findings indicated that like those from the lumbar spine, CT-based bone density and strength measurements from the thoracic spine may be useful for identifying individuals at high risk for vertebral fracture.