Transferability of Bone Phenotyping and Fracture Risk Assessment by μFRAC from First-generation High-resolution Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography to Second-generation Scan Data

Overview

Journal J Bone Miner Res

Publisher Oxford University Press

Date 2024 Mar 13

PMID 38477766

Authors

Annabel R Bugbird

Danielle E Whittier

Steven K Boyd

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: The continued development of high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) has led to a second-generation scanner with higher resolution and longer scan region. However, large multicenter prospective cohorts were collected with first-generation HR-pQCT and have been used to develop bone phenotyping and fracture risk prediction (μFRAC) models. This study establishes whether there is sufficient universality of these first-generation trained models for use with second-generation scan data.

Methods: HR-pQCT data were collected for a cohort of 60 individuals, who had been scanned on both first- and second-generation scanners on the same day to establish the universality of the HR-pQCT models. These data were each used as input to first-generation trained bone microarchitecture models for bone phenotyping and fracture risk prediction, and their outputs were compared for each study participant. Reproducibility of the models were assessed using same-day repeat scans obtained from first-generation (n = 37) and second-generation (n = 74) scanners.

Results: Across scanner generations, the bone phenotyping model performed with an accuracy of 93.1%. Similarly, the 5-year fracture risk assessment by μFRAC was well correlated with a Pearson's (r) correlation coefficient of r > 0.83 for the three variations of μFRAC (varying inclusion of clinical risk factors, finite element analysis, and dual X-ray absorptiometry). The first-generation reproducibility cohort performed with an accuracy for categorical assignment of 100% (bone phenotyping) and a correlation coefficient of 0.99 (μFRAC), whereas the second-generation reproducibility cohort performed with an accuracy of 96.4% (bone phenotyping) and a correlation coefficient of 0.99 (μFRAC).

Conclusion: We demonstrated that bone microarchitecture models trained using first-generation scan data generalize well to second-generation scans, performing with a high level of accuracy and reproducibility. Less than 4% of individuals' estimated fracture risk led to a change in treatment threshold, and in general, these dissimilar outcomes using second-generation data tended to be more conservative.

References

Shepherd J, Lu Y . A generalized least significant change for individuals measured on different DXA systems. J Clin Densitom. 2007; 10(3):249-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2007.05.002. View

Borgstrom F, Karlsson L, Ortsater G, Norton N, Halbout P, Cooper C . Fragility fractures in Europe: burden, management and opportunities. Arch Osteoporos. 2020; 15(1):59. PMC: 7166207. DOI: 10.1007/s11657-020-0706-y. View

Whittier D, Mudryk A, Vandergaag I, Burt L, Boyd S . Optimizing HR-pQCT workflow: a comparison of bias and precision error for quantitative bone analysis. Osteoporos Int. 2019; 31(3):567-576. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-019-05214-0. View

Cheung W, Hung V, Cheuk K, Chau W, Tsoi K, Wong R . Best Performance Parameters of HR-pQCT to Predict Fragility Fracture: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Bone Miner Res. 2021; 36(12):2381-2398. PMC: 9298023. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.4449. View

Manske S, Davison E, Burt L, Raymond D, Boyd S . The Estimation of Second-Generation HR-pQCT From First-Generation HR-pQCT Using In Vivo Cross-Calibration. J Bone Miner Res. 2017; 32(7):1514-1524. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.3128. View

Nguyen N, Frost S, Center J, Eisman J, Nguyen T . Development of prognostic nomograms for individualizing 5-year and 10-year fracture risks. Osteoporos Int. 2008; 19(10):1431-44. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-008-0588-0. View

Bugbird A, Klassen R, Bruce O, Burt L, Edwards W, Boyd S . Fixed and Relative Positioning of Scans for High Resolution Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography. J Clin Densitom. 2023; 27(1):101462. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101462. View

Hart N, Newton R, Tan J, Rantalainen T, Chivers P, Siafarikas A . Biological basis of bone strength: anatomy, physiology and measurement. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2020; 20(3):347-371. PMC: 7493450. View

Whittier D, Samelson E, Hannan M, Burt L, Hanley D, Biver E . Bone Microarchitecture Phenotypes Identified in Older Adults Are Associated With Different Levels of Osteoporotic Fracture Risk. J Bone Miner Res. 2021; 37(3):428-439. PMC: 9249128. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.4494. View

10.

Lu S, Fuggle N, Westbury L, Breasail M, Bevilacqua G, Ward K . Machine learning applied to HR-pQCT images improves fracture discrimination provided by DXA and clinical risk factors. Bone. 2022; 168:116653. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2022.116653. View

11.

Cauley J, Thompson D, Ensrud K, Scott J, Black D . Risk of mortality following clinical fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2000; 11(7):556-61. DOI: 10.1007/s001980070075. View

12.

Siminoski K, Leslie W, Frame H, Hodsman A, Josse R, Khan A . Recommendations for bone mineral density reporting in Canada: a shift to absolute fracture risk assessment. J Clin Densitom. 2007; 10(2):120-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2007.01.001. View

13.

Fonseca H, Moreira-Goncalves D, Appell Coriolano H, Duarte J . Bone quality: the determinants of bone strength and fragility. Sports Med. 2013; 44(1):37-53. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-013-0100-7. View

14.

Whittier D, Boyd S, Burghardt A, Paccou J, Ghasem-Zadeh A, Chapurlat R . Guidelines for the assessment of bone density and microarchitecture in vivo using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Osteoporos Int. 2020; 31(9):1607-1627. PMC: 7429313. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-020-05438-5. View

15.

Johnell O, Oden A, Caulin F, Kanis J . Acute and long-term increase in fracture risk after hospitalization for vertebral fracture. Osteoporos Int. 2001; 12(3):207-14. DOI: 10.1007/s001980170131. View

16.

Agarwal S, Rosete F, Zhang C, McMahon D, Guo X, Shane E . In vivo assessment of bone structure and estimated bone strength by first- and second-generation HR-pQCT. Osteoporos Int. 2016; 27(10):2955-66. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-016-3621-8. View

17.

Langsetmo L, Peters K, Burghardt A, Ensrud K, Fink H, Cawthon P . Volumetric Bone Mineral Density and Failure Load of Distal Limbs Predict Incident Clinical Fracture Independent HR-pQCT BMD and Failure Load Predicts Incident Clinical Fracture of FRAX and Clinical Risk Factors Among Older Men. J Bone Miner Res. 2018; 33(7):1302-1311. PMC: 6048962. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.3433. View

18.

Burt L, Billington E, Rose M, Kremer R, Hanley D, Boyd S . Adverse Effects of High-Dose Vitamin D Supplementation on Volumetric Bone Density Are Greater in Females than Males. J Bone Miner Res. 2020; 35(12):2404-2414. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.4152. View

19.

Nguyen N, Frost S, Center J, Eisman J, Nguyen T . Development of a nomogram for individualizing hip fracture risk in men and women. Osteoporos Int. 2007; 18(8):1109-17. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-007-0362-8. View

20.

Papaioannou A, Morin S, Cheung A, Atkinson S, Brown J, Feldman S . 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary. CMAJ. 2010; 182(17):1864-73. PMC: 2988535. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.100771. View