Controversies Surrounding the BMD Reporting Standard for the Determination of 10-Year Absolute Fracture Risk: A Canadian Perspective.

The Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada currently endorse a fracture risk prediction tool called CAROC. It has been used in Canada since 2005 with an update in 2010. It is an integral part of bone mineral densitometry reporting across the country. New osteoporosis guidelines from Osteoporosis Canada (OC) are expected in the near future. There has been pressure on radiologists to report fracture risk using an alternative fracture risk prediction platform called FRAX. In addition, OC collaborated in the development of the Canadian FRAX model and has been copromoting both FRAX and CAROC, raising the prospect that new guidelines may seek to replace CAROC with FRAX for fracture risk determination. A number of concerns have been raised about FRAX, including: (1) FRAX has not released its algorithms to the public domain with the consequence that it is impossible to verify results for an individual patient; (2) FRAX has incorrectly claimed that it was developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and has used this affiliation to promote itself until recently ordered by the WHO to desist; (3) FRAX requires collection of additional clinical information beyond that needed for CAROC, and this patient-reported medical data is prone to substantial error; and (4) despite claims to the contrary, there are no valid studies comparing FRAX to CAROC. We believe it is important that radiologists be aware of these issues in order to provide input into future Technical Standards for Bone Mineral Densitometry Reporting of the Canadian Association of Radiologists.

Recommendations for bone mineral density reporting in Canada: a shift to absolute fracture risk assessment.

In June 2005, new Canadian recommendations for bone mineral density (BMD) reporting in postmenopausal women and older men were published by Osteoporosis Canada (formerly the Osteoporosis Society of Canada) and the Canadian Association of Radiologists. The recommendations were developed by a multidisciplinary working group that included the Canadian Panel of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and were reviewed and endorsed by multiple stakeholders. Previous Canadian osteoporosis guidelines advised intervention based on an individual's World Health Organization category (normal, osteopenia, or osteoporosis) as a marker of relative fracture risk. In the new approach, an individual's 10-yr absolute fracture risk, rather than BMD alone, is used for fracture risk categorization. Absolute fracture risk is determined using not only BMD results, but also age, sex, fragility fracture history, and glucocorticoid use. A procedure is presented for estimating absolute 10-yr fracture risk in untreated individuals, leading to assigning an individual to 1 of 3 absolute fracture risk categories: low risk (<10% 10-yr fracture risk), moderate risk (10-20%), and high risk (>20%). We propose that an individual's absolute fracture risk category should be the basis for deciding on treatment and frequency of BMD monitoring.

Recognizing and reporting vertebral fractures: reducing the risk of future osteoporotic fractures.

OBJECTIVE: Given the increasing evidence that vertebral fractures are underdiagnosed and not acted on, Osteoporosis Canada and the Canadian Association of Radiologists initiated a project to develop and publish a set of recommendations to promote and facilitate the diagnosis and reporting of vertebral fractures. OPTIONS: The identification of spinal fractures is not uniform. More than 65% of vertebral fractures cause no symptoms. It is also apparent that vertebral fractures are inadequately recognized when the opportunity for diagnosis arises fortuitously. It is to patients' benefit that radiologists report vertebral fractures evident on a chest or other radiograph, no matter how incidental to the immediate clinical indication for the examination. OUTCOMES: The present recommendations can help to close the gap in care in recognizing and treating vertebral fractures, to prevent future fractures and thus reduce the burden of osteoporosis-related morbidity and mortality, as well as fracture-related costs to the health care system. EVIDENCE: Several studies indicate that a gap exists in regard to the diagnosis of vertebral fractures and the clinical response following such diagnosis. All recommendations presented here are based on consensus. VALUES: These recommendations were developed by a multidisciplinary working group under the auspices of the Scientific Advisory Council of Osteoporosis Canada and the Canadian Association of Radiologists. BENEFITS, HARM, AND COSTS: Prevalent vertebral fractures have important clinical implications in terms of future fracture risk. Recognizing and reporting fractures incidental to radiologic examinations done for other reasons has the potential to reduce health care costs by initiating further steps in osteoporosis diagnosis and appropriate therapy. RECOMMENDATIONS: Physicians should be aware of the importance of vertebral fracture diagnosis in assessing future osteoporotic fracture risk. Vertebral fractures incidental to radiologic examinations done for other reasons should be identified and reported. Vertebral fractures should be assessed from lateral spinal or chest radiographs according to the semiquantitative method of Genant and colleagues. Grade II and Grade III fractures as classified by this method should be given the greatest emphasis. Semiquantitative fracture recognition should include the recognition of changes such as loss of vertebral end-plate parallelism, cortical interruptions, and quantitative changes in the anterior, midbody, and posterior heights of vertebral bodies. When spine radiographs are performed to assess the presence of vertebral fractures, anteroposterior examinations may assist in the initial evaluation. The standard follow-up need only consist of single lateral views of the thoracic and lumbar spine that include T4 to L4 vertebrae. The radiographic technique described in this paper, or a technique of comparable efficacy, should be used. Dual X-ray absorptiometry examinations that include lateral spinal morphological assessments (vertebral fracture assessment) may contribute to fracture recognition. Educational material about the clinical importance of vertebral fracture recognition as a potential indicator of future osteoporotic fracture risk with its associated morbidity and mortality should be directed to all physicians. VALIDATION: Recommendations were based on consensus opinion.

Recommendations for bone mineral density reporting in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To propose a set of recommendations for optimal bone mineral density (BMD) reporting in postmenopausal women and older men and to provide clinicians with both a BMD diagnostic category and a useful tool to assess an individual's risk of osteoporotic fracture. OPTIONS: The current methods of BMD reporting were reviewed. In this document, we propose that an individual's 10-year absolute fracture risk, rather than BMD alone, be used for fracture risk categorization. Consequently, age, sex, BMD, fragility fracture history, and glucocorticoid use are the basis for the approach outlined in this document. OUTCOMES: An optimal BMD report as proposed in this document will provide clinicians with both a BMD diagnostic category and a useful tool to assess an individual's risk of osteoporotic fracture. A BMD report format, a checklist, and a patient questionnaire are meant to further encourage its use. EVIDENCE: All recommendations were developed using a consensus from clinicians and experts in the field of BMD testing and a standard method for the evaluation and citation of the supporting evidence. VALUES: These recommendations were developed by a multidisciplinary working group under the auspices of the Scientific Advisory Council of the Osteoporosis Society of Canada and the Canadian Association of Radiologists. BENEFITS, HARM, AND COSTS: Optimal BMD reports help the practitioner to assess an individual's risk for osteoporotic fracture and to decide whether medical therapy is warranted. RECOMMENDATIONS: The BMD report should include: patient identifiers. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner identifier. BMD results expressed in absolute values (g/cm2; 3 decimal places) and T-score (1 decimal place) for lumbar spine; proximal femur (total hip, femoral neck, and trochanter); and an alternate site (forearm BMD preferred: 1/3 radius, 33% radius or proximal radius) if either hip or spine is not valid. A statement about any limitations due to artifacts, if present. The fracture risk category (low, moderate, or high) as determined by using Tables 3 and 4 and by including major clinical factors that modify absolute fracture risk probability (with an indication of the corresponding absolute 10-year fracture risk of <10%, 10-20%, or >20%). A statement as to whether the change is statistically significant or not for serial measurements. The BMD centre's least significant change for each skeletal site (in g/cm2) should be included. VALIDATION: Recommendations were based on consensus opinion. Since these are the first Canadian recommendations integrating clinical risk factors in a quantitative fracture risk assessment, it is anticipated that these "Recommendations for BMD Reporting in Canada" will be a work in progress and will be updated periodically to accommodate advances in this field.