Change in bone mineral density as a function of age in women and men and association with the use of antiresorptive agents

Background

Measurement of bone mineral density is the most common method of diagnosing and assessing osteoporosis. We sought to estimate the average rate of change in bone mineral density as a function of age among Canadians aged 25–85, stratified by sex and use of antiresorptive agents.

Methods

We examined a longitudinal cohort of 9423 participants. We measured the bone mineral density in the lumbar spine, total hip and femoral neck at baseline in 1995–1997, and at 3-year (participants aged 40–60 years only) and 5-year follow-up visits. We used the measurements to compute individual rates of change.

Results

Bone loss in all 3 skeletal sites began among women at age 40–44. Bone loss was particularly rapid in the total hip and was greatest among women aged 50–54 who were transitioning from premenopause to postmenopause, with a change from baseline of –6.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] –7.5% to –4.9%) over 5 years. The rate of decline, particularly in the total hip, increased again among women older than 70 years. Bone loss in all 3 skeletal sites began at an earlier age (25–39) among men than among women. The rate of decline of bone density in the total hip was nearly constant among men 35 and older and then increased among men older than 65. Use of antiresorptive agents was associated with attenuated bone loss in both sexes among participants aged 50–79.

Interpretation

The period of accelerated loss of bone mineral density in the hip bones occurring among women and men older than 65 may be an important contributor to the increased incidence of hip fracture among patients in that age group. The extent of bone loss that we observed in both sexes indicates that, in the absence of additional risk factors or therapy, repeat testing of bone mineral density to diagnose osteoporosis could be delayed to every 5 years.Low bone mineral density is one of the most important risk factors for fracture.^1,2,3–7 Treatment with antiresorptive agents has been widely used for several decades, and the results of randomized controlled trials have shown that at least part of their efficacy is associated with their capacity to increase or stabilize bone density.⁴ Although clinical guidelines recommend measurement of bone density, among other important risk factors, when assessing a patient''s risk for fracture,^3,8,9 there is no international consensus on the optimal age at which to begin measurement, or on the frequency of measurement.¹⁰ The Canadian guidelines recommend it for patients aged 65 and older, even in the absence of risk factors or treatment, and suggest a frequency of every 2–3 years.⁸ Furthermore, it has been suggested that the rate of decline rather than a single measurement of bone density may better identify patients with an elevated risk for fracture.¹¹ Consequently, determining changes in bone density over time may provide clues on the pathophysiology of fractures and provide more accurate estimates of the optimal timing for repeat measurement.Previous studies of change in bone mineral density as a function of age have had a number of limitations. Many were cross-sectional; had small samples, limited age ranges or differing inclusion and exclusion criteria; and most excluded men.^12–20 The third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,²¹ a large cross-sectional study based in the United States included women and men aged 20 years and older but excluded only those who were pregnant or who had a fracture in both hips. It reported that, based on a single measurement of bone density in the hip, age-dependent bone loss in the hips begins early (20–40 years) and continues in both sexes throughout life. Cross-sectional data from the ongoing Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study suggested that, although this finding may hold true for the femoral neck, which consists of both cortical and trabecular bone, it is not true for the largely trabecular lumbar spine.²² Furthermore, the use of cross-sectional data to estimate changes over time has fundamental limitations: the effect of age cannot be separated from the effect of birth cohort and survivorship, and estimates are based on between-group differences rather than changes in an individual participant.The use of longitudinal data would allow examination of the rate of change of bone mineral density over time with and without antiresorptive therapy. We sought to assess the average rate of change in bone density as a function of age among Canadians aged 25–85, stratified by sex and use of antiresorptive agents.