Key result
Race-neutral FRAX calculator modestly shifts osteoporosis treatment eligibility from White to non-White women.
Why the study?
The effects of recommending a population-based, race-neutral FRAX calculator on osteoporosis treatment eligibility were not clear.
Does a race-neutral FRAX calculator change osteoporosis treatment eligibility compared to a race-specific FRAX calculator in US adults over 40?
Cross-Sectional (n=11,493)
Yes
Does a race-neutral FRAX calculator change osteoporosis treatment eligibility compared to a race-specific FRAX calculator in US adults over 40?
Implementing a race-neutral FRAX calculator in the US would only modestly increase osteoporosis treatment eligibility for Black, Hispanic, and Asian individuals, largely because most eligible individuals in these groups qualify based on bone mineral density rather than FRAX scores.
Modest eligibility shifts warrant no practice change yet; leaves open effects on equity and fracture outcomes in prospective studies.
To understand the effects of removing race from fracture calculators, we analyzed the changes in osteoporosis treatment eligibility between race-specific and race-neutral FRAX in NHANES. Overall, we found small changes in treatment eligibility (< 5%) with slight increases among Black, Hispanic, and Asian participants and a slight decrease among White participants. PURPOSE: The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) calculates the 10-year risk of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture. In the USA, the calculator adjusts the probability down by 0.43-0.64 in Black, Hispanic, and Asian people based on historical data. Recently, an ASBMR Taskforce recommended the creation of a population-based, race-neutral calculator. The effects of this recommendation on treatment eligibility are not clear, so this study sought to quantify changes in treatment eligibility in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). METHODS: We analyzed participants in NHANES 2013-2014 and 2005-2010 and calculated the current FRAX based on questionnaires and bone mineral density (BMD). We then calculated a separate race-neutral FRAX using census data and compared treatment eligibility between the two calculators based on thresholds of 20% for MOF or 3% for hip fracture. We also examined treatment eligibility based on either clinical criteria (BMD T-score ≤ -2.5 or prior hip or vertebral fracture) or FRAX eligibility. RESULTS: Among 3035 and 8458 participants in NHANES 2013-2014 and 2005-2010, we found small absolute changes to treatment eligibility. In NHANES 2013-2014, the percent eligible using race-neutral FRAX decreased from 18.4 to 14.9% for White women and increased from 1.9 to 5.2% for Black women, from 3.9 to 7.0% for Hispanic women, and from 9.3 to 12.6% for Asian women. Changes in men were even smaller. CONCLUSION: We found that changing US FRAX to a race-neutral calculator would only modestly increase treatment eligibility in US Black, Hispanic, and Asian people, while slightly decreasing eligibility in White people.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rajesh Jain (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Osteoporosis (n=11,493). Race-neutral FRAX calculator vs. Race-specific FRAX calculator was evaluated on Osteoporosis treatment eligibility based on thresholds of 20% for major osteoporotic fracture or 3% for hip fracture. A race-neutral US FRAX calculator modestly increased osteoporosis treatment eligibility in Black (1.9% to 5.2%), Hispanic, and Asian women, while decreasing eligibility in White women (18.4% to 14.9%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: