Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Performance of the Garvan Fracture Risk Calculator in Individuals with Diabetes: A Registry-Based Cohort Study

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Calcified Tissue International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Diabetes increases fracture and falls risks. We evaluated the performance of the Garvan fracture risk calculator (FRC) in individuals with versus without diabetes. Using the population-based Manitoba bone mineral density (BMD) registry, we identified individuals aged 50–95 years undergoing baseline BMD assessment from 1 September 2012, onwards with diabetes and self-reported falls in the prior 12 months. Five-year Garvan FRC predictions were generated from clinical risk factors, with and without femoral neck BMD. We identified non-traumatic osteoporotic fractures (OF) and hip fractures (HF) from population-based data to 31 March 2018. Fracture risk stratification was assessed from area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC). Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the effect of diabetes on fractures, adjusted for Garvan FRC predictions. The study population consisted of 2618 women with and 14,064 without diabetes, and 636 and 2201 men with and without the same, respectively. The Garvan FRC provided significant OF and HF risk stratification in women with diabetes, similar to those without diabetes. Analyses of OF in men were limited by smaller numbers; no significant difference was evident by diabetes status. Cox regression showed that OF risk was 23% greater in women with diabetes adjusted for Garvan FRC including BMD (hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–1.49), suggesting it slightly underestimated risk; a non-significant increase in diabetes-related HF risk was noted (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.88–2.15). Garvan FRC shows similar fracture risk stratification in individuals with versus without diabetes, but may underestimate this risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leslie WD, Rubin MR, Schwartz AV, Kanis JA (2012) Type 2 diabetes and bone. J Bone Miner Res 27(11):2231–2237. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.1759

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Janghorbani M, Van Dam RM, Willett WC, Hu FB (2007) Systematic review of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus and risk of fracture. Am J Epidemiol 166(5):495–505. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwm106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vestergaard P (2007) Discrepancies in bone mineral density and fracture risk in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes—a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 18(4):427–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-006-0253-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kanis JA, Harvey NC, Cooper C, Johansson H, Oden A, McCloskey EV et al (2016) A systematic review of intervention thresholds based on FRAX: a report prepared for the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group and the International Osteoporosis Foundation. Arch Osteoporos 11(1):25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-016-0278-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Rubin KH, Friis-Holmberg T, Hermann AP, Abrahamsen B, Brixen K (2013) Risk assessment tools to identify women with increased risk of osteoporotic fracture: complexity or simplicity? A systematic review. J Bone Miner Res 28(8):1701–1717. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.1956

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Beaudoin C, Moore L, Gagne M, Bessette L, Ste-Marie LG, Brown JP et al (2019) Performance of predictive tools to identify individuals at risk of non-traumatic fracture: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Osteoporos Int 30(4):721–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-04919-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, Eisman JA, Nguyen TV (2008) Development of prognostic nomograms for individualizing 5-year and 10-year fracture risks. Osteoporos Int 19(10):1431–1444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-008-0588-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, Eisman JA, Nguyen TV (2007) Development of a nomogram for individualizing hip fracture risk in men and women. Osteoporos Int 18(8):1109–1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-007-0362-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Giangregorio LM, Leslie WD, Lix LM, Johansson H, Oden A, McCloskey E et al (2012) FRAX underestimates fracture risk in patients with diabetes. J Bone Miner Res 27(2):301–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Carnevale V, Morano S, Fontana A, Annese MA, Fallarino M, Filardi T et al (2014) Assessment of fracture risk by the FRAX algorithm in men and women with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 30(4):313–322. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.2497

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bhattoa HP, Onyeka U, Kalina E, Balogh A, Paragh G, Antal-Szalmas P et al (2013) Bone metabolism and the 10-year probability of hip fracture and a major osteoporotic fracture using the country-specific FRAX algorithm in men over 50 years of age with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a case-control study. Clin Rheumatol 32(8):1161–1167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-013-2254-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Blanchard JF, Ludwig S, Wajda A, Dean H, Anderson K, Kendall O et al (1996) Incidence and prevalence of diabetes in Manitoba, 1986–1991. Diabetes Care 19(8):807–811. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.19.8.807

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lix L, Yogendran M, Shaw S, Burchill C, Metge C, Bond R (2008) Population-based data sources for chronic disease surveillance. Chronic Dis Can 29(1):31–38. https://doi.org/10.24095/hpcdp.29.1.04

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lix LM, Azimaee M, Osman BA, Caetano P, Morin S, Metge C et al (2012) Osteoporosis-related fracture case definitions for population-based administrative data. BMC Public Health 12:301. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-301

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Leslie WD, Morin SN, Lix LM, Niraula S, McCloskey EV, Johansson H et al (2019) Performance of FRAX in women with breast cancer initiating aromatase inhibitor therapy: a registry-based cohort study. J Bone Miner Res 34(8):1428–1435. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.3726

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Peschken CA, Hitchon CA, Garland A, Bernstein CN, Chen H, Fransoo R et al (2016) A population-based study of intensive care unit admissions in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 43(1):26–33. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.150312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Yang S, Leslie WD, Yan L, Walld R, Roos LL, Morin SN et al (2016) Objectively verified parental hip fracture is an independent risk factor for fracture: a linkage analysis of 478,792 parents and 261,705 offspring. J Bone Miner Res 31(9):1753–1759. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.2849

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. O’Donnell S (2013) Use of administrative data for national surveillance of osteoporosis and related fractures in Canada: results from a feasibility study. Arch Osteoporos 8:143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-013-0143-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Leslie WD, Epp R, Morin SN, Lix LM (2021) Assessment of site-specific X-ray procedure codes for fracture ascertainment: a registry-based cohort study. Arch Osteoporos 16(1):107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-021-00980-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148(3):839–843. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.148.3.6878708

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Agarwal A, Leslie WD, Nguyen TV, Morin SN, Lix LM, Eisman JA (2021) Predictive performance of the Garvan fracture risk calculator: a registry-based cohort study. Osteoporos Int. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-021-06252-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schwartz AV, Vittinghoff E, Bauer DC, Hillier TA, Strotmeyer ES, Ensrud KE et al (2011) Association of BMD and FRAX score with risk of fracture in older adults with type 2 diabetes. JAMA 305(21):2184–2192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Leslie WD, Caetano PA, Macwilliam LR, Finlayson GS (2005) Construction and validation of a population-based bone densitometry database. J Clin Densitom 8(1):25–30. https://doi.org/10.1385/jcd:8:1:025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Leslie WD, Nguyen TV, Morin SN, Lix LM, Eisman JA (2020) Independent performance evaluation of the Garvan fracture risk calculator: a registry-based cohort study. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  25. Shah VN, Shah CS, Snell-Bergeon JK (2015) Type 1 diabetes and risk of fracture: meta-analysis and review of the literature. Diabet Med 32(9):1134–1142. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.12734

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Fan Y, Wei F, Lang Y, Liu Y (2016) Diabetes mellitus and risk of hip fractures: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 27(1):219–228

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy for use of data contained in the Population Health Research Data Repository (HIPC 2016/2017-29). The results and conclusions are those of the authors and no official endorsement by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, Manitoba Health, Seniors and Active Living, or other data providers is intended or should be inferred. This article has been reviewed and approved by the members of the Manitoba Bone Density Program Committee. SNM is chercheur-boursier des Fonds de Recherche du Québec en Santé. LML is supported by a Tier I Canada Research Chair. TVN is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Investigator Grant APP1195305.

Funding

No funding support was received for this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Arnav Agarwal

  2. Department of Medicine (C5121), University of Manitoba, 409 Tache Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada

    William D. Leslie & Lisa M. Lix

  3. University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia

    Tuan V. Nguyen

  4. School of Population Health, UNSW Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, Australia

    Tuan V. Nguyen

  5. McGill University, Montreal, Canada

    Suzanne N. Morin

  6. Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia

    John A. Eisman

  7. University of New South Wales Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    John A. Eisman

  8. St Vincent’s Hospital and School of Medicine Sydney, University of Notre Dame, Sydney, Australia

    John A. Eisman

Authors
  1. Arnav Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William D. Leslie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tuan V. Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Suzanne N. Morin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lisa M. Lix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. John A. Eisman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AA and WDL involved in conception, design, analysis, and drafting the article; all authors involved in interpretation of the data and critically revising the article for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be published and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. WDL had full access to all the data in the study and took the responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William D. Leslie.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

AA Agarwal, WD Leslie, LM Lix and SN Morin declare they have no conflict of interest. JA Eisman has consulted for and/or received research funding from Amgen, deCode, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Sanofi-Aventis. TV Nguyen has received research funding from Amgen and honoraria for consulting and symposia from Merck Sharp and Dohme, Roche, Servier, Sanofi-Aventis and Novartis.

Human and Animal Rights

All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was waived in accordance with provisions in the Manitoba Personal Health Information Act (PHIA) for approved research involving deidentified data.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agarwal, A., Leslie, W.D., Nguyen, T.V. et al. Performance of the Garvan Fracture Risk Calculator in Individuals with Diabetes: A Registry-Based Cohort Study. Calcif Tissue Int 110, 658–665 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-021-00941-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-021-00941-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation