Population-Based Fracture Risk Assessment and Osteoporosis Treatment Disparities by Race and Gender
- 295 Downloads
Undertreatment of osteoporosis has been recognized as a common problem in selected patient subgroups. However, primary prevention has been hampered by limited risk assessment tools that can be applied to large populations.
Using clinical risk factors with a new tool from the World Health Organization (FRAX) and recommendations from the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF), we evaluated fracture risk and osteoporosis treatment in a US cohort.
African Americans and Caucasians recruited from 2003–7 across the US as part of a longitudinal study.
The number of persons receiving prescription osteoporosis medications was assessed by race, sex, and fracture risk. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association between receipt of osteoporosis medications and fracture risk after controlling for potential confounders.
Among 24,783 participants, estimated fracture risk was highest for Caucasian women. After multivariable adjustment for fracture-related risk factors, the likelihood of receipt of osteoporosis medications among African Americans was lower than among Caucasians [odds ratio (OR) = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37, 0.53] and for men compared to women (OR = 0.08, 95% CI 0.06–0.10). Even for the highest risk group, Caucasian women with 10-year hip fracture risk ≥3% (n = 3,025, 39.7%), only 26% were receiving treatment.
A substantial gap exists between 2008 NOF treatment guidelines based on fracture risk and the receipt of prescription osteoporosis medications. This gap was particularly notable for African Americans and men. FRAX is likely to be useful to assess risk at a population level and identify high-risk persons in need of additional evaluation.
KEY WORDSosteoporosis fracture African American Caucasian epidemiology FRAX bisphosphonate
Work for this analysis was supported in part by the National Institutes of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR053351) and the Arthritis Foundation. REGARDS is supported by a cooperative agreement U01 NS041588 from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke or the National Institutes of Health. Representatives of the funding agency have been involved in the review of the manuscript, but not directly involved in the collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data. The authors acknowledge the participating investigators and institutions for their valuable contributions: The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama (Study PI, Statistical and Data Coordinating Center, Survey Research Unit): George Howard DrPH, Leslie McClure PhD, Virginia Howard PhD, Libby Wagner MA, Virginia Wadley PhD, Rodney Go PhD, Monika Safford MD, Ella Temple PhD, Margaret Stewart MSPH, J. David Rhodes BSN; University of Vermont (Central Laboratory): Mary Cushman MD; Wake Forest University (ECG Reading Center): Ron Prineas MD, PhD; Alabama Neurological Institute (Stroke Validation Center, Medical Monitoring): Camilo Gomez MD, Susana Bowling MD; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (Survey Methodology): LeaVonne Pulley PhD; University of Cincinnati (Clinical Neuroepidemiology): Brett Kissela MD, Dawn Kleindorfer MD; Examination Management Services, Incorporated (In-Person Visits): Andra Graham; Medical University of South Carolina (Migration Analysis Center): Daniel Lackland DrPH; Indiana University School of Medicine (Neuropsychology Center): Frederick Unverzagt PhD; National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health (funding agency): Claudia Moy Ph.D.
Conflicts of Interest
JRC: Consulting: Roche, UCB, Procter & Gamble, CORRONA; speakers bureau: Procter & Gamble, Eli Lilly, Roche, Novartis; research grants: Merck, Procter & Gamble, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Novartis
KGS: Consulting: Merck, Novartis, Procter & Gamble, Amgen, Aventis, Eli Lilly; speakers bureau: Novartis; research grants: Amgen
ED: Research grants: Amgen
EO: E.O. has received honoraria from and served as a consultant for Merck. He has received research support from Amgen, Pfizer, Novartis, Zelos Therapeutics, Imaging Therapeutics, and Solvay Pharmaceuticals. He has received research support from and served as a consultant for Ely Lilly & Co. and served as a consultant for Servier.
- 1.National Osteoporosis Foundation: Clinician’s Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. 2008 [updated 2008; cited accessed April 10, 2008].Google Scholar
- 15.Kanis JA, for WHO Scientific Group. Assessment of Osteoporosis at the Primary Care Level. Technical Report.: World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases, University of Sheffield, UK; 2007.Google Scholar
- 18.Chen Z, Kooperberg C, Pettinger M, Bassford T, Cauley J, LaCroix AZ, et al. Validity of self-report for fractures among a multiethnic cohort of postmenopausal women: results from the Women’s Health Initiative observational study and clinical trials. Menopause. 2004;11(3):264–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool. Available from: http://shef.ac.uk/FRAX. Accessed May 31st, 2008.
- 22.Hosmer JDW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression: 2nd Edition. John Wiley and Sons; 2000.Google Scholar
- 24.Curtis JR, Arora T, Donaldson M, Alarcon G, Callahan L, Moreland L, Bridges L, Mikuls TR. Skeletal health among African Americans with recent onset rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care and Research. In press.Google Scholar