Proceedings of the Texas A&M Medical Student Grand Rounds

Challenges and Opportunities in Osteoporosis Diagnosis

June 25, 2024 Carter Lurk

Carter Lurk

Background: Osteoporosis is loss of Bone Mineral Density (BMD) leading to an increased risk of fractures1. In the US, osteoporosis impacts 10.2 million adults aged over 50 with 43.1% experiencing a prevalence of low bone mass1. Osteoporosis is often diagnosed via Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) measuring BMD, fracture risk is assessed via the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), and treatment monitored via Bone Turnover Biomarkers (BTMs). DEXA diagnosed osteoporosis occurs when BMD is ≥2.5 standard deviations below peak bone mass2. The FRAX considers validated clinical risk factors to predict 10-year probabilities of major osteoporotic fractures and determines therapeutic intervention recommendations3. BTMs are byproducts produced during the bone remodeling process that are reflective of systemic bone turnover4,5. The loss of BMD and microarchitectural deterioration leads to increased risk of fragility fractures which are associated with an 8-36% excess mortality within 1 year and annual fracture-related costs expected to reach $95 billion by 20402,3.

Methods: PubMed searches including the terms: “Osteoporosis Diagnosis”, “Osteoporosis Biomarkers”, and “FRAX and DEXA”

Results: The diagnosis and management of osteoporosis is made through the DEXA defined BMD measurement, however, 47% of patients experiencing fragility fractures do not have a T-score indicating osteoporotic bone density4. Therefore, DEXA defined BMD is insufficient for evaluating bone strength and osteoporosis-associated fragility fractures4. The FRAX algorithm severely underestimates the risk to patients under 65 with scores below the threshold for treatment in 68% of patients at the time of a fragility fracture6. BTMs have significance in monitoring treatment response but currently have limited utility in diagnosing osteoporosis or predicting fragility fractures4,5. However, they represent the largest area of potential breakthrough to improve osteoporosis diagnosis and fracture prediction. Further research is required to improve the diagnostic potential of BTMs as well as implementation into the FRAX algorithm to enhance fracture prediction.

Conclusion: Currently, patients often experience a fragility fracture before reaching the T-score threshold for osteoporosis diagnosis. They are defined as below threshold for treatment according to the FRAX assessment despite suffering a fragility fracture. Additionally, the lack of BTMs further complicates accurate diagnosis and prediction of osteoporosis and fractures. These shortcomings exemplify the inadequacy of the current definition and assessment of osteoporosis, suggesting a need for adjustments that prioritize patient needs. Rather than continuing with the current ineffective and reactive standards, it is crucial to adapt treatments to better serve patients in a proactive manner that does not fit the conventional criteria.

Works Cited:

  1. CDC. Products – Data Briefs – Number 405 – March 2021. www.cdc.gov. Published March 26, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db405.htm
  2. Pouresmaeili F, Kamali Dehghan B, Kamarehei M, Yong Meng G. A comprehensive overview on osteoporosis and its risk factors. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management. 2018;14(1):2029-2049. doi:https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s138000
  3. LeBoff MS;Greenspan SL;Insogna KL;Lewiecki EM;Saag KG;Singer AJ;Siris ES; (n.d.). The Clinician’s Guide to Prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35478046/
  4. Williams, C. (2023, May 1). Osteoporosis markers. StatPearls [Internet]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559306/
  5. Lorentzon, M., Branco, J., Brandi, M. L., Bruyère, O., Chapurlat, R., Cooper, C., Cortet, B., Diez-Perez, A., Ferrari, S., Gasparik, A., Herrmann, M., Jorgensen, N. R., Kanis, J., Kaufman, J.-M., Laslop, A., Locquet, M., Matijevic, R., McCloskey, E., Minisola, S., … Cavalier, E. (2019a, August 22). Algorithm for the use of biochemical markers of bone turnover in the diagnosis, assessment and follow-up of treatment for osteoporosis – advances in therapy. SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-019-01063-9
  6. Roux, S., Cabana, F., Carrier, N., Beaulieu, M., April, P.-M., Beaulieu, M.-C., & Boire, G. (2014, July 1). The World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) underestimates incident and recurrent fractures in consecutive patients with fragility fractures. OUP Academic. https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/99/7/2400/2537750

 

 

Engineering Medicine Featured Abstracts Osteoporosis
Previous Post

PAD4’s Implications in the Pathogenesis and Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Next Post

Engineering Small Molecules to Bind the Interprotomer Pocket of the Capsid Hexamer in the Treatment of HIV-1

Scientific Editors

Steve A. Maxwell

Executive Editor
Tel: 979-436-0804
smaxwell@medicine.tamhsc.edu

Robin Fuchs-Young

Deputy Editor
Tel: 979-845-5109
fuchs-young@medicine.tamhsc.edu
Administrative Editor

Janis Chmiel

Tel: 979-436-0856
chmiel@medicine.tamhsc.edu
Editorial Office
Tel.: 979-845-2726
Fax: 979-847-9481
chmiel@medicine.tamhsc.edu
Archives
  • July 2026
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • May 2025
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • November 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • August 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • April 2021
  • October 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • February 2019
  • July 2018
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • January 2017
Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Fmi by Forrss.