骨折联络服务队列中FRISBEE 2年和5年骨折预测模型的外部验证
External validation of FRISBEE 2-year and 5-year fracture prediction models in a fracture liaison service cohort.
作者信息
Borgen Tove T, Brunborg Cathrine, Frihagen Frede, Solberg Lene B, Andreasen Camilla, Figved Wender, Apalset Ellen M, Gjertsen Jan-Erik, Basso Trude, Stutzer Jens-Meinhard, Nordsletten Lars, Eriksen Erik F, Bjørnerem Åshild
机构信息
Department of Rheumatology, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen Hospital, Postbox 800, N-3004, Drammen, Norway.
Oslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Research Support Services, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
出版信息
Arch Osteoporos. 2025 Aug 2;20(1):107. doi: 10.1007/s11657-025-01516-5.
UNLABELLED
We externally validated the FRISBEE models of 2-year and 5-year fracture risk prediction in 517 women with index fractures. Both models overestimated the fracture risk. Recalibration of the FRISBEE models are needed before use in Norwegian women with recent fractures.
PURPOSE
We externally validated the Fracture Risk Brussels Epidemiological Enquiry (FRISBEE) groups' 2-year and 5-year fracture risk models.
METHODS
We included women above 50 years with a recent fracture from the consent-based part of the Norwegian Capture the Fracture Initiative study (NoFRACT). They had bone mineral density assessed and filled in a questionnaire including risk factors for fracture at baseline between October 2015 and December 2017. We calculated and validated the 2-year and 5-year fracture risk using the FRISBEE equation models.
RESULTS
Of 517 women aged 65.5 ± 8.6 years with fractures, 94 (18%), 55 (11%), and 31 (6%) sustained a subsequent fracture of any type, major osteoporotic fractures (MOF), or central fracture, during 4.7 ± 1.3 years mean follow-up. The area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) (95% confidence interval (CI)) for any type of fracture, MOF, and central fracture was 0.57 (0.51-0.63), 0.57 (0.46-0.67), and 0.65 (0.53-0.77), respectively, for the FRISBEE 2-year risk models and 0.57 (0.51-0.64), 0.58 (0.50-0.67), and 0.67 (0.57-0.76) for the FRISBEE 5-year risk models. The calibration slopes (with 95% CI) that compared observed vs. predicted probabilities for fracture across deciles of risk for any type of fracture, MOF, and central fracture were all low: 0.34 (0.02-0.64), 0.33 (- 0.09-0.74), and 0.61 (0.16-1.06), in the FRISBEE 2-year models, and 0.54 (0.13-0.95), 0.43 (0.05-0.80), and 0.69 (0.31-1.08), in the FRISBEE 5-year models.
CONCLUSION
Overall, the FRISBEE models overestimated both 2-year and 5-year fracture risk. Recalibration is needed before these models can be used in Norwegian women with recent fractures.
未标注
我们在517名发生过初次骨折的女性中对2年和5年骨折风险预测的FRISBEE模型进行了外部验证。两个模型均高估了骨折风险。在挪威近期发生骨折的女性中使用之前,需要对FRISBEE模型进行重新校准。
目的
我们对骨折风险布鲁塞尔流行病学调查(FRISBEE)小组的2年和5年骨折风险模型进行了外部验证。
方法
我们纳入了挪威“捕获骨折倡议”研究(NoFRACT)基于同意参与部分中50岁以上近期发生骨折的女性。她们进行了骨密度评估,并在2015年10月至2017年12月期间的基线时填写了一份包括骨折风险因素的问卷。我们使用FRISBEE方程模型计算并验证了2年和5年骨折风险。
结果
在517名年龄为65.5±8.6岁且发生过骨折的女性中,在平均4.7±1.3年的随访期间,94名(18%)、55名(11%)和31名(6%)分别发生了任何类型的后续骨折、严重骨质疏松性骨折(MOF)或椎体骨折。对于任何类型的骨折、MOF和椎体骨折,FRISBEE 2年风险模型的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)(95%置信区间(CI))分别为0.57(0.51 - 0.63)、0.57(0.46 - 0.67)和0.65(0.53 - 0.77),FRISBEE 5年风险模型的分别为0.57(0.51 - 0.64)、0.58(0.50 - 0.67)和0.67(0.57 - 0.76)。比较任何类型骨折、MOF和椎体骨折风险十分位数中观察到的与预测的骨折概率的校准斜率(及其95%CI)均较低:FRISBEE 2年模型中分别为0.34(0.02 - 0.64)、0.33( - 0.09 - 0.74)和0.61(0.16 - 1.06),FRISBEE 5年模型中分别为0.54(0.13 - 0.95)、0.43(0.05 - 0.80)和0.69(0.31 - 1.08)。
结论
总体而言,FRISBEE模型高估了2年和5年骨折风险。在这些模型可用于挪威近期发生骨折的女性之前,需要进行重新校准。