Kahwati Leila C, Kistler Christine E, Booth Graham, Sathe Nila, Gordon Rachel D'Amico, Okah Ebiere, Wines Roberta C, Viswanathan Meera
RTI International-University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Evidence-based Practice Center.
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
JAMA. 2025 Feb 11;333(6):509-531. doi: 10.1001/jama.2024.21653.
Fragility fractures result in significant morbidity.
To review evidence on osteoporosis screening to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through January 9, 2024; references, experts, and literature surveillance through July 31, 2024.
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of screening; pharmacotherapy studies for primary osteoporosis; predictive and diagnostic accuracy studies.
Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, study quality, and extracted data; when at least 2 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.
Hip, clinical vertebral, major osteoporotic, and total fractures; mortality; harms; accuracy.
Three RCTs and 3 systematic reviews reported benefits of screening in older, higher-risk women. Two RCTs used 2-stage screening: Fracture Risk Assessment Tool estimate with bone mineral density (BMD) testing if risk threshold exceeded. One RCT used BMD plus additional tests. Screening was associated with reduced hip (pooled relative risk [RR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.73-0.93]; 3 RCTs; 42 009 participants) and major osteoporotic fracture (pooled RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88-0.99]; 3 RCTs; 42 009 participants) compared with usual care. Corresponding absolute risk differences were 5 to 6 fewer fractures per 1000 participants screened. The discriminative accuracy of risk assessment instruments to predict fracture or identify osteoporosis varied by instrument and fracture type; most had an area under the curve between 0.60 and 0.80 to predict major osteoporotic fracture, hip fracture, or both. Calibration outcomes were limited. Compared with placebo, bisphosphonates (pooled RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.45-1.00]; 6 RCTs; 12 055 participants) and denosumab (RR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.37-0.97] from the largest RCT [7808 participants]) were associated with reduced hip fractures. Compared with placebo, no statistically significant associations were observed for adverse events.
Screening in higher-risk women 65 years or older was associated with a small absolute risk reduction in hip and major fractures compared with usual care. No evidence evaluated screening with BMD alone or screening in men or younger women. Risk assessment instruments, BMD alone, or both have poor to modest discrimination for predicting fracture. Osteoporosis treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab over several years was associated with fracture reductions and no meaningful increase in adverse events.
脆性骨折会导致严重的发病率。
回顾关于骨质疏松症筛查的证据,为美国预防服务工作组提供参考。
截至2024年1月9日的PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和试验注册库;截至2024年7月31日的参考文献、专家和文献监测。
随机临床试验(RCT)和筛查的系统评价;原发性骨质疏松症的药物治疗研究;预测和诊断准确性研究。
两名评审员评估标题/摘要、全文文章、研究质量并提取数据;当至少有两项类似研究时,进行荟萃分析。
髋部、临床椎体、主要骨质疏松性和总体骨折;死亡率;危害;准确性。
三项RCT和三项系统评价报告了在年龄较大、风险较高的女性中进行筛查的益处。两项RCT采用两阶段筛查:使用骨折风险评估工具进行估计,若风险阈值超过,则进行骨密度(BMD)检测。一项RCT使用BMD加额外检测。与常规护理相比,筛查与髋部骨折(合并相对风险[RR],0.83[95%CI,0.73 - 0.93];3项RCT;42009名参与者)和主要骨质疏松性骨折(合并RR,0.94[95%CI,0.88 - 0.99];3项RCT;42009名参与者)减少相关。相应的绝对风险差异为每1000名接受筛查的参与者中骨折减少5至6例。风险评估工具预测骨折或识别骨质疏松症的鉴别准确性因工具和骨折类型而异;大多数工具预测主要骨质疏松性骨折、髋部骨折或两者的曲线下面积在0.60至0.80之间。校准结果有限。与安慰剂相比,双膦酸盐(合并RR,0.67[95%CI,0.45 - 1.00];6项RCT;12055名参与者)和地诺单抗(来自最大的RCT[7808名参与者]的RR,0.60[95%CI,0.37 - 0.97])与髋部骨折减少相关。与安慰剂相比,未观察到不良事件有统计学意义的关联。
与常规护理相比,对65岁及以上风险较高的女性进行筛查与髋部和主要骨折的绝对风险小幅降低相关。没有证据评估单独使用BMD进行筛查或在男性或年轻女性中进行筛查的情况。风险评估工具、单独使用BMD或两者对预测骨折的鉴别能力较差至中等。多年使用双膦酸盐或地诺单抗治疗骨质疏松症与骨折减少相关,且不良事件无有意义的增加。