Elsevier

Bone

Volume 42, Issue 3, March 2008, Pages 467-475
Bone

Review
A reference standard for the description of osteoporosis

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2007.11.001Get rights and content

Abstract

In 1994, the World Health Organization published diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis. Since then, many new technologies have been developed for the measurement of bone mineral at multiple skeletal sites. The information provided by each assessment will describe the clinical characteristics, fracture risk and epidemiology of osteoporosis differently. Against this background, there is a need for a reference standard for describing osteoporosis. In the absence of a true gold standard, this paper proposes that the reference standard should be based on bone mineral density (BMD) measurement made at the femoral neck with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). This site has been the most extensively validated, and provides a gradient of fracture risk as high as or higher than that of many other techniques. The recommended reference range is the NHANES III reference database for femoral neck measurements in women aged 20–29 years. A similar cut-off value for femoral neck BMD that is used to define osteoporosis in women can be used for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men — namely, a value for BMD 2.5 SD or more below the average for young adult women. The adoption of DXA as a reference standard provides a platform on which the performance characteristics of less well established and new methodologies can be compared.

Introduction

The internationally agreed description of osteoporosis is: ‘A systemic skeletal disease characterised by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue with a consequent increase in bone fragility and susceptibility to fracture’ [1]. This description captures the notion that low bone mass is an important component of the risk of fracture, but that other abnormalities occur in the skeleton that contribute to skeletal fragility. Thus, ideally, clinical assessment of the skeleton should capture all these aspects of fracture risk. At present, however, the assessment of bone mineral is the only aspect that can be readily measured in clinical practice, and it now forms the cornerstone for the general management of osteoporosis.

In 1994, the World Health Organization (WHO) published diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, intended primarily for descriptive epidemiology [2], [3]. These criteria have since been widely accepted and are commonly used to provide intervention thresholds, treatment and inclusion criteria for drug trials, and a basis for health technology assessments. The strength of these diagnostic categories as a reference standard has been the fashioning of a common approach to describe the disease. Developments since 1994, however, have eroded their value. These include the development of many new technologies for the measurement of bone mineral, the plethora of skeletal sites available for assessment, an increased understanding of osteoporosis in men (not provided for in the WHO reports) and the move towards risk-based assessment.

The objectives of bone mineral measurement are to provide diagnostic criteria, prognostic information on the risk of future fractures, and a baseline on which to monitor the natural history of the treated or untreated patient. The multiple sites and technologies available have increased the armamentarium at our disposal for clinical research and for the management of patients. This is important because no one site or technique subserves all the clinical requirements of a bone mineral measurement. For example, even with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), the use of measurements at a single site is problematic. Whereas hip fracture risk is more accurately assessed by DXA at the hip than by DXA at the forearm, measurement at the forearm may detect skeletal losses earlier in secondary causes of osteoporosis than measurements at the spine or hip; neither the hip nor forearm is a particularly responsive site for monitoring of treatment. Thus, each site and technique has its own unique performance characteristics, and the information provided by each will describe the clinical characteristics, fracture risk and epidemiology of osteoporosis differently. Against this background, there is a need for a reference standard for describing osteoporosis. In the absence of a true gold standard, this paper argues the case that the reference standard should be based on bone mineral density (BMD) measured at the femoral neck.

Section snippets

Methods of assessment

Bone mineral density is the amount of bone mass per unit volume (volumetric density, g/cm3), or per unit area (areal density, g/cm2), and both can be measured in vivo by densitometric techniques. A wide variety of techniques is available to assess bone mineral that are reviewed elsewhere [4]. The most widely used techniques are based on X-ray absorptiometry in bone, particularly DXA, since the absorption of X-rays is very sensitive to the calcium content of tissue, of which bone is the most

Performance characteristics of bone mineral measurements

The performance characteristics of many measurement techniques have been well documented [2], [7], [8]. For the purpose of risk assessment and for diagnosis, the characteristic of major importance is the ability of a technique to predict future fractures. This is traditionally expressed as the increase in relative risk of fracture per unit SD decrease in bone mineral measurements — termed the “gradient of risk”.

There are significant differences in the performance of different techniques at

Diagnosis of osteoporosis

Total skeletal mass and density remain relatively constant once growth has ceased, until the age of 50 years or so [15]. The distribution of bone mineral content or density in young healthy adults (‘peak bone mass’) is approximately normally distributed, irrespective of the measurement technique used. Because of this normal distribution, bone density values in individuals may be expressed in relation to a reference population in standard deviation units. This reduces the problems associated

Choice of reference site and technology

The original 1994 WHO criteria provided for diagnosis of osteoporosis at the hip, lumbar spine or forearm. With the techniques available for measuring bone mineral at that time, the prevalence of osteoporosis was roughly equal at any one of these sites, and this sufficed for the descriptive epidemiology of osteoporosis. Since introduction of the WHO working definition of osteoporosis, much attention has focussed on its application to clinical trials and patient care, and several problems have

Diagnostic criteria for men

Suitable diagnostic cut-off values for osteoporosis in men are less well defined than those for white women. Many studies that have examined fracture risk in men and women have come to disparate conclusions concerning the relationship between fracture risk and BMD [27], [28], [29], [30], [31]. There are several reasons for these discrepancies: Firstly, the relation between BMD and fracture risk changes with age [32], [33], so that age-adjustment is required. Second, a difference between sexes

Diagnostic criteria for non-white women

Within the US the prevalence rates for osteoporosis are 6% for black women and 14% for Mexican Americans compared to 17% in postmenopausal white women when NHANES III reference values are used [16]. The use of race-specific reference ranges would minimise the differences in prevalence of osteoporosis among women of different races, in contrast to the marked differences in their fracture risk [39]. Moreover, there is substantial heterogeneity in fracture risk even within populations of a given

Normative reference ranges

The prevalence of osteoporosis, as defined by the T-score, depends critically upon the reference range adopted. As noted above, it is suggested that the US reference data generated from the NHANES III study [17] serve as a reference standard for the proximal femur. Thus, the threshold for diagnosing osteoporosis using DXA at the femoral neck is 0.577 g/cm2 derived from the young white female population aged 20–29 years. The NHANES III data are derived using Hologic equipment and appropriate

Measurement of multiple skeletal sites

A number of investigators favour the concurrent use of BMD at the proximal femur and at the lumbar spine for patient assessment, with patients defined as having osteoporosis on the basis of the lower of two T-scores. For example, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry recommends that patients who have a BMD test receive scans of both the lumbar spine and hip [9], [57]. Patients are characterised as having osteoporosis where the T-score is − 2.5 SD or less at the spine, femoral neck,

Osteopenia

It is recommended that diagnostic criteria be reserved for osteoporosis and that “osteopenia” (or low bone mass) should not be considered to be a disease category. Provision is still, however, made for the description of osteopenia in epidemiologic studies. The original intention of the WHO was to choose a threshold that would make osteopenia and osteoporosis uncommon at the time of the menopause, on the assumption that bone loss began at that time. It is now evident that bone loss from the

Limitations

There are a number of limitations in the general application of DXA for the diagnosis of osteoporosis which should be recognised [67]. The presence of osteomalacia, a complication of poor nutrition in the elderly, will underestimate total bone mass because of decreased mineralization of bone. Osteoarthrosis at the spine or osteoarthritis at the hip is common in the elderly, and contributes to the density measurement, but not necessarily to skeletal strength. Heterogeneity of density due to

Acknowledgments

The programme of work has been supported by unrestricted grants from: Alliance for Better Bone Health, Hologic, IGEA, Lilly, Lunar, Merck Research Laboratories, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Servier and Wyeth.

References (72)

  • J.A. Kanis et al.

    The diagnosis of osteoporosis

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1994)
  • Kanis JA on behalf of the World Health Organization Scientific Group. Assessment of osteoporosis at the primary...
  • H.K. Genant et al.

    Non invasive assessment of bone mineral and structure: state of the art

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1996)
  • R. Mazess et al.

    Performance evaluation of a dual energy X-ray bone densitometer

    Calcif Tissue Int

    (1998)
  • C.C. Glüer

    Quantitative ultrasound techniques for the assessment of osteoporosis: expert agreement on current status

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1997)
  • D. Marshall et al.

    Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures

    Br Med J

    (1996)
  • J.A. Kanis et al.

    International Osteoporosis Foundation. An update on the diagnosis and assessment of osteoporosis with densitometry

    Osteoporos Int

    (2000)
  • National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) Physician's Guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis 2003. National...
  • C. De Laet et al.

    The impact of the use of multiple risk indicators for fracture on case-finding strategies: a mathematical approach

    Osteoporos Int

    (2005)
  • S. Grampp et al.

    Comparisons of non-invasive bone mineral measurements in assessing age related loss, fracture discrimination, and diagnostic classification

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1997)
  • J.P. Bonjour et al.

    Bone acquisition in adolescence

  • A.C. Looker et al.

    Prevalence of low femoral bone density in older US adults from NHANES III

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1997)
  • A.C. Looker et al.

    Updated data on proximal femur bone mineral levels of US adults

    Osteoporos Int

    (1998)
  • H. Kroger et al.

    Bone density reduction in various measurement sites in men and women with osteoporotic fractures of spine and hip. The European Quantitation of Osteoporosis Study

    Calcif Tissue Int

    (1999)
  • E.W. Gregg et al.

    The epidemiology of quantitative ultrasound. A review of the relationship with bone mass, osteoporosis and fracture risk

    Osteoporos Int

    (1997)
  • A.D. Simmons et al.

    The effects of standardisation and reference values on patient classification for spine and femur dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

    Osteoporos Int

    (1997)
  • M.E. Arlot et al.

    Apparent pre and postmenopausal bone loss evaluated by DXA at different skeletal sites in women: the OFELY cohort

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1997)
  • O. Johnell et al.

    Predictive value of bone mineral density for hip and other fractures

    Osteoporos Int

    (2005)
  • L.J. Melton

    Adverse outcomes of osteoporotic fractures in the general population

    J Bone Miner Res

    (2003)
  • O. Johnell et al.

    A comparison of total hip BMD as a predictor of fracture risk: a meta-analysis

    J Bone Miner Res

    (2005)
  • E. Orwoll

    Assessing bone density in men

    J Bone Miner Res

    (2000)
  • P.L. Selby et al.

    Do men and women fracture bones at similar bone densities?

    Osteoporos Int

    (2000)
  • M. Lunt et al.

    Bone density variation and its effects on risk of vertebral deformity in men and women studied in 13 European centres: the EVOS study

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1997)
  • T. Nguyen et al.

    Prediction of osteoporotic fractures by postural instability and bone density

    Br Med J

    (1993)
  • L.J. Melton et al.

    Bone density and fracture risk in men

    J Bone Miner Res

    (1998)
  • J.A. Kanis et al.

    Diagnosis of osteoporosis and fracture threshold in men

    Calcif Tissue Int

    (2001)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text