| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Jarvinen, T. L. N., et al.
(author)
-
Osteoporosis: the emperor has no clothes
- 2015
-
In: Journal of Internal Medicine. - : Wiley: 12 months. - 0954-6820 .- 1365-2796. ; 277:6, s. 662-673
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Current prevention strategies for low-trauma fractures amongst older persons depend on the notions that fractures are mainly caused by osteoporosis (pathophysiology), that patients at high risk can be identified (screening) and that the risk is amenable to bone-targeted pharmacotherapy (treatment). However, all these three notions can be disputed. PathophysiologyMost fracture patients have fallen, but actually do not have osteoporosis. A high likelihood of falling, in turn, is attributable to an ageing-related decline in physical functioning and general frailty. ScreeningCurrently available fracture risk prediction strategies including bone densitometry and multifactorial prediction tools are unable to identify a large proportion of patients who will sustain a fracture, whereas many of those with a high fracture risk score will not sustain a fracture. TreatmentThe evidence for the viability of bone-targeted pharmacotherapy in preventing hip fracture and other clinical fragility fractures is mainly limited to women aged 65-80years with osteoporosis, whereas the proof of hip fracture-preventing efficacy in women over 80years of age and in men at all ages is meagre or absent. Further, the antihip fracture efficacy shown in clinical trials is absent in real-life studies. Many drugs for the treatment of osteoporosis have also been associated with increased risks of serious adverse events. There are also considerable uncertainties related to the efficacy of drug therapy in preventing clinical vertebral fractures, whereas the efficacy for preventing other fractures (relative risk reductions of 20-25%) remains moderate, particularly in terms of the low absolute risk reduction in fractures with this treatment.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Zheng, Hou-Feng, et al.
(author)
-
WNT16 influences bone mineral density, Cortical bone thickness, bone strength, and Osteoporotic fracture risk
- 2012
-
In: PLoS genetics. - SAN FRANCISCO, USA : PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE. - 1553-7404. ; 8:7, s. e1002745-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We aimed to identify genetic variants associated with cortical bone thickness (CBT) and bone mineral density (BMD) by performing two separate genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analyses for CBT in 3 cohorts comprising 5,878 European subjects and for BMD in 5 cohorts comprising 5,672 individuals. We then assessed selected single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for osteoporotic fracture in 2,023 cases and 3,740 controls. Association with CBT and forearm BMD was tested for ∼2.5 million SNPs in each cohort separately, and results were meta-analyzed using fixed effect meta-analysis. We identified a missense SNP (Thr>Ile; rs2707466) located in the WNT16 gene (7q31), associated with CBT (effect size of -0.11 standard deviations [SD] per C allele, P = 6.2×10(-9)). This SNP, as well as another nonsynonymous SNP rs2908004 (Gly>Arg), also had genome-wide significant association with forearm BMD (-0.14 SD per C allele, P = 2.3×10(-12), and -0.16 SD per G allele, P = 1.2×10(-15), respectively). Four genome-wide significant SNPs arising from BMD meta-analysis were tested for association with forearm fracture. SNP rs7776725 in FAM3C, a gene adjacent to WNT16, was associated with a genome-wide significant increased risk of forearm fracture (OR = 1.33, P = 7.3×10(-9)), with genome-wide suggestive signals from the two missense variants in WNT16 (rs2908004: OR = 1.22, P = 4.9×10(-6) and rs2707466: OR = 1.22, P = 7.2×10(-6)). We next generated a homozygous mouse with targeted disruption of Wnt16. Female Wnt16(-/-) mice had 27% (P<0.001) thinner cortical bones at the femur midshaft, and bone strength measures were reduced between 43%-61% (6.5×10(-13)
|
|
