Predictive Performance of the FRAX Tool Calibrated for Spain vs. an Age and Sex Model: Prospective Cohort Study with 9082 Women and Men Followed for up to 8 Years

Abstract

In Spain, the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) was adapted using studies with a small number of patients, and there are only a few external validation studies that present limitations. In this prospective cohort study, we compared the performance of FRAX and a simple age and sex model. We used data from the ESOSVAL cohort, a cohort composed of a Mediterranean population of 11,035 women and men aged 50 years and over, followed for up to 8 years, to compare the discrimination, calibration, and reclassification of FRAX calibrated for Spain and a logistic model including only age and sex as variables. We found virtually identical AUC, 83.55% for FRAX (CI 95%: 80.46, 86.63) and 84.10% for the age and sex model (CI 95%: 80.91, 87.29), and there were similar observed-to-predicted ratios. In the reclassification analyses, patients with a hip fracture that were reclassified correctly as high risk by FRAX, compared to the age and sex model, were −2.86%, using either the 3% threshold or the observed incidence, 1.54% (95%CI: −8.44, 2.72 for the 3% threshold; 95%CI: −7.68, 1.97 for the incidence threshold). Remarkably simple and inexpensive tools that are easily transferable into electronic medical record environments may offer a comparable predictive ability to that of FRAX.