The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The relationship between bone density and incident vertebral fracture in men and women

The relationship between bone density and incident vertebral fracture in men and women
The relationship between bone density and incident vertebral fracture in men and women
Bone mineral density (BMD) is an important predictor of future fracture risk in women; however, there are few prospective data in men. The aim of this analysis was to determine whether there are differences in the relationship between BMD and incident vertebral fracture in men and women. Men and women were recruited from population-based registers in 21 European centers. Those recruited were interviewed and had spinal radiographs performed. The radiographs were assessed morphometrically and prevalent vertebral deformity was defined using the McCloskey-Kanis method. Repeat spinal radiographs were performed at a mean of 3.8 years after the baseline radiographs. Incident fractures were defined using a combination of the point prevalence and 20% reduction in vertebral height (plus a 4-mm reduction in absolute height) criteria. BMD measurements were made in a subsample of those recruited. Poisson regression was used to explore the influence of gender, age, prevalent deformity, and BMD on the incidence of vertebral fracture. Thirty-four hundred sixty-one men and women had both paired spinal radiographs and bone density measurements performed. BMD at the spine and femoral neck was higher in men than in women. After adjusting for age, the risk of incident vertebral fracture was greater in women than in men (relative risk [RR] = 2.3; 95% CI, 1.5-3.6) and increased by a factor of 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.8), 1.5 (95% CI, 1.2-1.8), and 1.6 (95% CI, 1.3-1.9) per decrease of 0.1 g/cm2 in BMD at the spine, femoral neck, and trochanter, respectively. After adjusting for BMD at the spine or trochanter, the gender difference in the predicted age-specific incidence of vertebral fracture was no longer significant (RR = 1.1 and 95% CI, 0.6-1.9 at the spine; RR = 1.5 and 95% CI, 0.8-2.7 at the trochanter), although it persisted after adjusting for femoral neck BMD (RR = 1.9; 95%CI, 1.1-3.3). The presence of a prevalent vertebral deformity was a strong risk factor for future vertebral fracture, although the strength of the association was reduced after adjustment for age, sex, and spine BMD. However, adjustment for the presence of a baseline vertebral deformity did not alter the main findings. In conclusion, at a given age and spine (although not femoral neck) bone density, the risk of incident vertebral fracture is similar in men and women. Incident vertebral fractures are more common in women than men because at any age their spine BMD is lower.
0884-0431
2214-2221
O'Neill, T.W.
e05f5612-b493-4273-9b71-9e0ce32bdad6
Cooper, C.
bf1da25b-a7e3-4938-8b45-6961f8faf735
Lunt, M.
c2b3288c-62f9-4a6c-aca5-ad0c1cc76ce5
Silman, A.J.
9d44d748-a9d2-447e-87dd-6dfa3d4eb1ac
Felsenberg, D.
a8f19c6b-0781-4071-bfce-442eaa59e9bf
Benevolenskaya, L.I.
8671ccf0-02a4-4ecd-ba32-0b9aff77148d
Bhalla, A.K.
c26759b8-310e-45a5-bd46-74ddfe656bfc
Cannata, J.B.
5533a72c-dabd-4545-993b-7dc4619dda2c
Crabtree, N.
b7c1f191-bda3-410b-afd5-d5631a8176aa
Dequeker, J.
878c445b-2186-471e-a5c2-332415b99828
Hoszowski, K.
7058dc25-709e-4b80-a287-c953276102d6
Jajic, I.
645aaca1-2cb9-48d8-b3ae-7c4190f46846
Kanis, J.A.
8da04a36-08a7-4310-b4b4-a6d432439587
Kragl, G.
80efbbb1-ea92-4e75-9da4-b97bde3db818
Lopes, Vaz A.
7dcb2811-1ad3-4255-ad9b-e6880fffd229
Lorenc, R.
1440ab9e-6eba-4f15-b633-ccab192121f1
Lyritis, G.
4fa5b700-a006-4e8c-9e7a-9e8e95256de3
Masaryk, P.
9e142225-c883-4e7c-860b-1636f3051068
Miazgowski, T.
143dee06-3dca-43c4-a6c7-6c52f4928442
Parisi, G.
7208c501-7039-490c-8305-db84a5864964
Pols, H.A.P.
5cc05a43-5f5a-4c21-97a7-927949526d88
Poor, G.
71ab6355-df37-4e3b-955e-856f3b979b40
Reid, D.M.
80c8f859-f13a-4129-b884-c0fbc46d61b8
Scheidt-Nave, C.
0bcffa8d-9cd7-4b6a-adb5-f8123e01e9a8
Stepan, J.
10efd631-59ed-4760-b04e-eb7acb09b394
Todd, C.
fe86020b-6f0f-4226-a76f-089654c5163d
Weber, K.
61786c15-1301-4352-9cda-93f34794d0e2
Woolf, A.D.
7c05adbb-8e8c-49fa-9d03-e6f6e14fe720
Reeve, J.
8f5bc093-0e10-42ca-8d4a-07c1eaace565
EPOS Study Group
O'Neill, T.W.
e05f5612-b493-4273-9b71-9e0ce32bdad6
Cooper, C.
bf1da25b-a7e3-4938-8b45-6961f8faf735
Lunt, M.
c2b3288c-62f9-4a6c-aca5-ad0c1cc76ce5
Silman, A.J.
9d44d748-a9d2-447e-87dd-6dfa3d4eb1ac
Felsenberg, D.
a8f19c6b-0781-4071-bfce-442eaa59e9bf
Benevolenskaya, L.I.
8671ccf0-02a4-4ecd-ba32-0b9aff77148d
Bhalla, A.K.
c26759b8-310e-45a5-bd46-74ddfe656bfc
Cannata, J.B.
5533a72c-dabd-4545-993b-7dc4619dda2c
Crabtree, N.
b7c1f191-bda3-410b-afd5-d5631a8176aa
Dequeker, J.
878c445b-2186-471e-a5c2-332415b99828
Hoszowski, K.
7058dc25-709e-4b80-a287-c953276102d6
Jajic, I.
645aaca1-2cb9-48d8-b3ae-7c4190f46846
Kanis, J.A.
8da04a36-08a7-4310-b4b4-a6d432439587
Kragl, G.
80efbbb1-ea92-4e75-9da4-b97bde3db818
Lopes, Vaz A.
7dcb2811-1ad3-4255-ad9b-e6880fffd229
Lorenc, R.
1440ab9e-6eba-4f15-b633-ccab192121f1
Lyritis, G.
4fa5b700-a006-4e8c-9e7a-9e8e95256de3
Masaryk, P.
9e142225-c883-4e7c-860b-1636f3051068
Miazgowski, T.
143dee06-3dca-43c4-a6c7-6c52f4928442
Parisi, G.
7208c501-7039-490c-8305-db84a5864964
Pols, H.A.P.
5cc05a43-5f5a-4c21-97a7-927949526d88
Poor, G.
71ab6355-df37-4e3b-955e-856f3b979b40
Reid, D.M.
80c8f859-f13a-4129-b884-c0fbc46d61b8
Scheidt-Nave, C.
0bcffa8d-9cd7-4b6a-adb5-f8123e01e9a8
Stepan, J.
10efd631-59ed-4760-b04e-eb7acb09b394
Todd, C.
fe86020b-6f0f-4226-a76f-089654c5163d
Weber, K.
61786c15-1301-4352-9cda-93f34794d0e2
Woolf, A.D.
7c05adbb-8e8c-49fa-9d03-e6f6e14fe720
Reeve, J.
8f5bc093-0e10-42ca-8d4a-07c1eaace565

O'Neill, T.W., Cooper, C., Lunt, M., Silman, A.J., Felsenberg, D., Benevolenskaya, L.I., Bhalla, A.K., Cannata, J.B., Crabtree, N., Dequeker, J., Hoszowski, K., Jajic, I., Kanis, J.A., Kragl, G., Lopes, Vaz A., Lorenc, R., Lyritis, G., Masaryk, P., Miazgowski, T., Parisi, G., Pols, H.A.P., Poor, G., Reid, D.M., Scheidt-Nave, C., Stepan, J., Todd, C., Weber, K., Woolf, A.D. and Reeve, J. , EPOS Study Group (2002) The relationship between bone density and incident vertebral fracture in men and women. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 17 (12), 2214-2221. (doi:10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2214).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Bone mineral density (BMD) is an important predictor of future fracture risk in women; however, there are few prospective data in men. The aim of this analysis was to determine whether there are differences in the relationship between BMD and incident vertebral fracture in men and women. Men and women were recruited from population-based registers in 21 European centers. Those recruited were interviewed and had spinal radiographs performed. The radiographs were assessed morphometrically and prevalent vertebral deformity was defined using the McCloskey-Kanis method. Repeat spinal radiographs were performed at a mean of 3.8 years after the baseline radiographs. Incident fractures were defined using a combination of the point prevalence and 20% reduction in vertebral height (plus a 4-mm reduction in absolute height) criteria. BMD measurements were made in a subsample of those recruited. Poisson regression was used to explore the influence of gender, age, prevalent deformity, and BMD on the incidence of vertebral fracture. Thirty-four hundred sixty-one men and women had both paired spinal radiographs and bone density measurements performed. BMD at the spine and femoral neck was higher in men than in women. After adjusting for age, the risk of incident vertebral fracture was greater in women than in men (relative risk [RR] = 2.3; 95% CI, 1.5-3.6) and increased by a factor of 1.4 (95% CI, 1.2-1.8), 1.5 (95% CI, 1.2-1.8), and 1.6 (95% CI, 1.3-1.9) per decrease of 0.1 g/cm2 in BMD at the spine, femoral neck, and trochanter, respectively. After adjusting for BMD at the spine or trochanter, the gender difference in the predicted age-specific incidence of vertebral fracture was no longer significant (RR = 1.1 and 95% CI, 0.6-1.9 at the spine; RR = 1.5 and 95% CI, 0.8-2.7 at the trochanter), although it persisted after adjusting for femoral neck BMD (RR = 1.9; 95%CI, 1.1-3.3). The presence of a prevalent vertebral deformity was a strong risk factor for future vertebral fracture, although the strength of the association was reduced after adjustment for age, sex, and spine BMD. However, adjustment for the presence of a baseline vertebral deformity did not alter the main findings. In conclusion, at a given age and spine (although not femoral neck) bone density, the risk of incident vertebral fracture is similar in men and women. Incident vertebral fractures are more common in women than men because at any age their spine BMD is lower.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2002

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 25379
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/25379
ISSN: 0884-0431
PURE UUID: af9dd22b-0250-45d2-a70e-359df48f2bd6
ORCID for T.W. O'Neill: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-3510-0709

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 19 Apr 2006
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 02:44

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: T.W. O'Neill ORCID iD
Author: C. Cooper
Author: M. Lunt
Author: A.J. Silman
Author: D. Felsenberg
Author: L.I. Benevolenskaya
Author: A.K. Bhalla
Author: J.B. Cannata
Author: N. Crabtree
Author: J. Dequeker
Author: K. Hoszowski
Author: I. Jajic
Author: J.A. Kanis
Author: G. Kragl
Author: Vaz A. Lopes
Author: R. Lorenc
Author: G. Lyritis
Author: P. Masaryk
Author: T. Miazgowski
Author: G. Parisi
Author: H.A.P. Pols
Author: G. Poor
Author: D.M. Reid
Author: C. Scheidt-Nave
Author: J. Stepan
Author: C. Todd
Author: K. Weber
Author: A.D. Woolf
Author: J. Reeve
Corporate Author: EPOS Study Group

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×