Bouxsein, Mary

ABSTRACT Vertebral augmentation is among the current standards of care to reduce pain in patients with vertebral fractures (VF), yet a lack of consensus regarding efficacy and safety of percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty raises questions on what basis clinicians should choose one therapy over another. Given the lack of consensus in the field, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) leadership charged this Task Force to address key questions on the efficacy and safety of vertebral augmentation and other nonpharmacological approaches for the treatment of pain after VF. This report details the findings and recommendations of this Task Force. For patients with acutely painful VF, percutaneous vertebroplasty provides no demonstrable clinically significant benefit over placebo. Results did not differ according to duration of pain. There is also insufficient evidence to support kyphoplasty over nonsurgical management, percutaneous vertebroplasty, vertebral body stenting, or KIVA®. There is limited evidence to determine the risk of incident VF or serious adverse effects (AE) related to either percutaneous vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. No recommendation can be made about harms, but they cannot be excluded. For patients with painful VF, it is unclear whether spinal bracing improves physical function, disability, or quality of life. Exercise may improve mobility and may reduce pain and fear of falling but does not reduce falls or fractures in individuals with VF. General and intervention-specific research recommendations stress the need to reduce study bias and address methodological flaws in study design and data collection. This includes the need for larger sample sizes, inclusion of a placebo control, more data on serious AE, and more research on nonpharmacologic interventions. Routine use of vertebral augmentation is not supported by current evidence. When it is offered, patients should be fully informed about the evidence. Anti-osteoporotic medications reduce the risk of subsequent vertebral fractures by 40–70%. © 2018 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

ABSTRACT Few pooled analyses of antiresorptive (AR) treatment trials relate short-term changes in bone turnover markers (BTMs) to subsequent fracture reduction. Such information would be useful to assess new ARs or novel dosing regimens. In the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Bone Quality project, we analyzed individual-level data from 28,000 participants enrolled in 11 bisphosphonate (BP) and three selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) placebo-controlled fracture endpoint trials. Using BTM results for two bone formation markers (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [bone ALP] and pro-collagen I N-propeptide [PINP]) and two bone resorption markers (N-terminal and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen) and incident fracture outcome data, we performed a meta-regression relating the mean net effect of treatment on change in bone turnover (active minus placebo % difference after 3 to 12 months) to the log of study-wide fracture risk reduction, and used linear regression to plot the best fitting line. Separate analyses were performed for incident morphometric vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 1 to 4 years of follow-up. Change in bone ALP and PINP were available for over 16,000 and 10,000 participants, respectively. For vertebral fracture, the results showed a strong relationship between treatment-related bone ALP or PINP changes and vertebral fracture risk reduction (r2 = 0.82 [p < 0.001] and r2 = 0.75 [p = 0.011], respectively) Relationships were weaker and no longer statistically significant for nonvertebral (r2 = 0.33 [p = 0.053] and r2 = 0.53 [p = 0.065], respectively) and hip fracture (r2 = 0.17 [p = 0.24] and r2 = 0.43 [p = 0.11], respectively) outcomes. Analyses limited to BP trials gave similar results. For all fracture types, relationships were weaker and nonsignificant for bone resorption markers. We conclude that short-term AR treatment-related changes in bone ALP and PINP strongly predict vertebral fracture treatment efficacy, but not nonvertebral or hip fracture treatment efficacy. Change in bone formation markers might be useful to predict the anti-vertebral fracture efficacy of new AR compounds or novel dosing regiments with approved AR drugs. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Abstract High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) has recently been introduced as a clinical research tool for in vivo assessment of bone quality. The utility of this technology to address important skeletal health questions requires translation to standardized multicenter data pools. Our goal was to evaluate the feasibility of pooling data in multicenter HR-pQCT imaging trials. Reproducibility imaging experiments were performed using structure and composition-realistic phantoms constructed from cadaveric radii. Single-center precision was determined by repeat scanning over short-term (<72 hours), intermediate-term (3–5 months), and long-term intervals (28 months). Multicenter precision was determined by imaging the phantoms at nine different HR-pQCT centers. Least significant change (LSC) and root mean squared coefficient of variation (RMSCV) for each interval and across centers was calculated for bone density, geometry, microstructure, and biomechanical parameters. Single-center short-term RMSCVs were <1% for all parameters except cortical thickness (Ct.Th) (1.1%), spatial variability in cortical thickness (Ct.Th.SD) (2.6%), standard deviation of trabecular separation (Tb.Sp.SD) (1.8%), and porosity measures (6% to 8%). Intermediate-term RMSCVs were generally not statistically different from short-term values. Long-term variability was significantly greater for all density measures (0.7% to 2.0%; p < 0.05 versus short-term) and several structure measures: cortical thickness (Ct.Th) (3.4%; p < 0.01 versus short-term), cortical porosity (Ct.Po) (15.4%; p < 0.01 versus short-term), and trabecular thickness (Tb.Th) (2.2%; p < 0.01 versus short-term). Multicenter RMSCVs were also significantly higher than short-term values: 2% to 4% for density and micro–finite element analysis (µFE) measures (p < 0.0001), 2.6% to 5.3% for morphometric measures (p < 0.001), whereas Ct.Po was 16.2% (p < 0.001). In the absence of subject motion, multicenter precision errors for HR-pQCT parameters were generally less than 5%. Phantom-based multicenter precision was comparable to previously reported in in vivo single-center precision errors, although this was approximately two to five times worse than ex vivo short-term precision. The data generated from this study will contribute to the future design and validation of standardized procedures that are broadly translatable to multicenter study designs. © 2013 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Abstract The incidence of distal forearm fractures peaks during the adolescent growth spurt, but the structural basis for this is unclear. Thus, we studied healthy 6- to 21-yr-old girls (n = 66) and boys (n = 61) using high-resolution pQCT (voxel size, 82 μm) at the distal radius. Subjects were classified into five groups by bone-age: group I (prepuberty, 6–8 yr), group II (early puberty, 9–11 yr), group III (midpuberty, 12–14 yr), group IV (late puberty, 15–17 yr), and group V (postpuberty, 18–21 yr). Compared with group I, trabecular parameters (bone volume fraction, trabecular number, and thickness) did not change in girls but increased in boys from late puberty onward. Cortical thickness and density decreased from pre- to midpuberty in girls but were unchanged in boys, before rising to higher levels at the end of puberty in both sexes. Total bone strength, assessed using microfinite element models, increased linearly across bone age groups in both sexes, with boys showing greater bone strength than girls after midpuberty. The proportion of load borne by cortical bone, and the ratio of cortical to trabecular bone volume, decreased transiently during mid- to late puberty in both sexes, with apparent cortical porosity peaking during this time. This mirrors the incidence of distal forearm fractures in prior studies. We conclude that regional deficits in cortical bone may underlie the adolescent peak in forearm fractures. Whether these deficits are more severe in children who sustain forearm fractures or persist into later life warrants further study.

Abstract Vertebral fractures are more strongly associated with specific bone density, structure, and strength parameters than with areal BMD, but all of these variables are correlated. Introduction: It is unclear whether the association of areal BMD (aBMD) with vertebral fracture risk depends on bone density per se, bone macro- or microstructure, overall bone strength, or spine load/bone strength ratios. Materials and Methods: From an age-stratified sample of Rochester, MN, women, we identified 40 with a clinically diagnosed vertebral fracture (confirmed semiquantitatively) caused by moderate trauma (cases; mean age, 78.6 ± 9.0 yr) and compared them with 40 controls with no osteoporotic fracture (mean age, 70.9 ± 6.8 yr). Lumbar spine volumetric BMD (vBMD) and geometry were assessed by central QCT, whereas microstructure was evaluated by high-resolution pQCT at the ultradistal radius. Vertebral failure load (∼strength) was estimated from voxel-based finite element models, and the factor-of-risk (ϕ) was determined as the ratio of applied spine loads to failure load. Results: Spine loading (axial compressive force on L3) was similar in vertebral fracture cases and controls (e.g., for 90° forward flexion, 2639 versus 2706 N; age-adjusted p = 0.173). However, fracture cases had inferior values for most bone density and structure variables. Bone strength measures were also reduced, and the factor-of-risk was 35–37% greater (worse) among women with a vertebral fracture. By age-adjusted logistic regression, relative risks for the strongest fracture predictor in each of the five main variable categories were bone density (total lumbar spine vBMD: OR per SD change, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1–4.3), bone geometry (vertebral apparent cortical thickness: OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1–4.1), bone microstructure (none significant); bone strength (“cortical” [outer 2 mm] compressive strength: OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3–4.8), and factor-of-risk (ϕ for 90° forward flexion/overall vertebral compressive strength: OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.4–7.5). These variables were correlated with spine aBMD (partial r, −0.32 to 0.75), but each was a stronger predictor of fracture in the logistic regression analyses. Conclusions: The association of aBMD with vertebral fracture risk is explained by its correlation with more specific bone density, structure, and strength parameters. These may allow deeper insights into fracture pathogenesis.

Abstract Bone structure, strength, and load-strength ratios contribute to forearm fracture risk independently of areal BMD. Introduction: Technological and conceptual advances provide new opportunities for evaluating the contributions of bone density, structure, and strength to the pathogenesis of distal forearm fractures. Materials and Methods: From an age-stratified random sample of Rochester, MN, women, we compared 18 with a distal forearm fracture (cases) to 18 age-matched women with no osteoporotic fracture (controls). High-resolution pQCT was used to assess volumetric BMD (vBMD), geometry, and microstructure at the ultradistal radius, the site of Colles' fractures. Failure loads in the radius were estimated from microfinite element (μFE) models derived from pQCT. Differences between case and control women were assessed, and the risk of fracture associated with each variable was estimated by logistic regression analysis. Results: Given similar heights, estimated loading in a fall on the outstretched arm was the same in cases and controls. However, women with forearm fractures had inferior vBMD, geometry, microstructure, and estimated bone strength. Relative risks for the strongest determinant of fracture in each of the five main variable categories were as follows: BMD (total vBMD: OR per SD change, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.4–12), geometry (cortical thickness: OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.4–11), microstructure (trabecular number: OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.02–5.1), and strength (axial rigidity: OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.4–10); the factor-of-risk (fall load/μFE failure load) was 24% greater (worse) in cases (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2–7.5). Areas under ROC curves ranged from 0.72 to 0.82 for these parameters. Conclusions: Bone geometry, microstructure, and strength contribute to forearm fractures, as does BMD, and these additional determinants of risk promise greater insights into fracture pathogenesis.

Abstract We used QCT scans obtained in 687 men and women, 21–97 years of age, to estimate the factor of risk for vertebral fracture, Φvert, defined as the ratio of spinal loading to vertebral strength. With age, vertebral strength declined and Φvert increased significantly more in women than men. Age- and sex-specific differences in Φvert closely resembled previously reported vertebral fracture incidence. Introduction: Despite the high prevalence of vertebral fractures, little is known about the interaction between spinal loading and vertebral fragility. Materials and Methods: We assessed the ratio of spinal loading to vertebral strength (i.e., the factor of risk, Φvert) in an age- and sex-stratified population-based sample of 700 women and men 21–97 years of age. We measured volumetric BMD (vBMD, mg/cm3) and cross-sectional area (CSA, cm2) of the midvertebral bodies of L1–L3 using QCT and computed vertebral compressive strength from these data using engineering beam theory. A biomechanical model of the trunk was used to estimate compressive forces applied to the L3 vertebral body during standing, bending forward, and bending forward while lifting 10 kg. The factor of risk for fracture, Φvert, was computed as the ratio of spinal compressive force to vertebral strength for each activity. Results: Men had a higher vertebral strength at all ages, largely because of their greater CSA. Whereas both sexes exhibited a marked decline in vertebral compressive strength with age (p < 0.001), the decline was greater in women than men (−43% versus −31%, p = 0.008). Compressive forces on L3 were greater in men than women, because of their greater body weight and height. For both sexes, forces during bending and lifting were 8-fold higher than those experienced during upright standing. For all activities, Φvert increased with age, but significantly more so in women than men (p < 0.001). For bending and lifting, Φvert-bending exceeded 1.0 in 30% of women and 12% of men ≥50 years of age, values that are similar to the reported frequency of vertebral fracture. Conclusion: These findings illustrate potential mechanisms underlying vertebral fractures and provide strong rationale for further evaluation of this QCT-based biomechanical approach for assessment of fracture risk.