Ukrainian FRAX version in the male osteoporosis management

Main Article Content

V.V. Povoroznyuk
H. Johansson
N.V. Grygorieva
J.A. Kanis
А.S. Musiіenko
M. Lorentzon
N.C. Harvey
E.V. McCloskey
E. Liu


Background. At present, FRAX is a well-known and widely-used risk assessment tool for major osteoporotic fractures. The Ukrainian version of the FRAX algorithm was presented in 2016; with the “intervention threshold” for additional DXA exa­mination and antiosteoporotic treatment of the Ukrainian women published in 2019. However, the data on its possible uses in men are limited. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the possibilities of using the previously developed criteria of the Ukrainian FRAX algorithm in Ukrainian men. Materials and me­thods. We exa­mined 653 outpatients aged 40–88 years (mean age (M ± SD) — 60.5 ± 11.8 years). We analyzed the results both in the general group and in the age subgroups; in particular, with an account of low-trauma fractures, included in the FRAX calculation, and compared them with the corresponding indices of the Ukrainian wo­men. Results. The most frequent (26.6 %) risk factor for osteoporo­tic fractures in the group of Ukrainian men was a history of low-trauma fracture (the corresponding index in women was 51.3 %), its presence being the reason for antiosteoporotic treatment initia­ting. Following upon the risk of major osteoporotic fractures calculated by FRAX, only 6.7 % of men without previous fractures were found to require additional DXA examination in order to re-evaluate the osteoporotic fracture risk, and none had a high fracture risk. 73 % of men without fractures did not have any risk factor inclu­ded in the FRAX algorithm. Conclusions. This study showed a grea­ter need for both antiosteoporotic treatment without DXA assessment and additional densitometric examination for the osteoporotic fracture risk assessment for the Ukrainian women rather than men, along with a special attention to the presence of previous fractures in men, and consideration of other risk factors for osteoporosis, even those not included in this FRAX algorithm.

Article Details

How to Cite
Povoroznyuk, V., H. Johansson, N. Grygorieva, J. Kanis, Musiіenko А., M. Lorentzon, N. Harvey, E. McCloskey, and E. Liu. “Ukrainian FRAX Version in the Male Osteoporosis Management”. PAIN, JOINTS, SPINE, vol. 11, no. 2, July 2021, pp. 53-61, doi:10.22141/2224-1507.11.2.2021.236563.
Original Researches


Johnell O, Kanis JA. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2006 Dec;17(12):1726-33. .

Bentler SE, Liu L, Obrizan M, et al. The aftermath of hip fracture: discharge placement, functional status change, and mortality. Am J Epidemiol. 2009 Nov 15;170(10):1290-9. .

Borgström F, Karlsson L, Ortsäter G, et al; International Osteoporosis Foundation. Fragility fractures in Europe: burden, management and opportunities. Arch Osteoporos. 2020 Apr 19;15(1):59. .

State Statistics Service of Ukraine. Distribution of the permanent population by sex, separate age groups and type of locality. Available from: .

ISCD Official Positions – Adult. 2019. Available from: .

Kanis JA, Bianchi G, Bilezikian JP, Kaufman JM, Khosla S, Orwoll E, Seeman E. Towards a diagnostic and therapeutic consensus in male osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2011 Nov;22(11):2789-98. .

Watts NB, Adler RA, Bilezikian JP, et al; Endocrine Society. Osteoporosis in men: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012 Jun;97(6):1802-22. .

Cosman F, de Beur SJ, LeBoff MS, et al; National Osteoporosis Foundation. Clinician's Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2014 Oct;25(10):2359-81. .

Almohaya M, Alobedollah A, Kendler DL. Management of Male Osteoporosis: an Update. Current Treatment Options in Rheumatology. 2018;4:355-366. .

Kanis JA, Johansson H, Harvey NC, McCloskey EV. A brief history of FRAX. Arch Osteoporos. 2018 Oct 31;13(1):118. .

Kanis JA, Harvey NC, Cooper C, Johansson H, Odén A, McCloskey EV; Advisory Board of the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group. A systematic review of intervention thresholds based on FRAX : A report prepared for the National Osteoporosis Guideline Group and the International Osteoporosis Foundation. Arch Osteoporos. 2016 Dec;11(1):25. .

Povoroznyuk VV, Grygorieva NV, Kanis JA, et al. Epidemiology of hip fracture and the development of FRAX in Ukraine. Arch Osteoporos. 2017 Dec;12(1):53. .

Povoroznyuk V, Grygorieva N, Johansson H, et al. FRAX-Based Intervention Thresholds for Osteoporosis Treatment in Ukraine. Journal of Osteoporosis. 2021;2021:ID 2043479. .

Compston J, Cooper A, Cooper C, et al; National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG). UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Arch Osteoporos. 2017 Dec;12(1):43. .

Harvey NC, McCloskey E, Kanis JA. Use of FRAX(®) in men. Joint Bone Spine. 2016 Oct;83(5):477-8. .

Adler RA, Hastings FW, Petkov VI. Treatment thresholds for osteoporosis in men on androgen deprivation therapy: T-score versus FRAX. Osteoporos Int. 2010 Apr;21(4):647-53. .

Marques A, Lucas R, Simões E, Verstappen SMM, Jacobs JWG, da Silva JAP. Do we need bone mineral density to estimate osteoporotic fracture risk? A 10-year prospective multicentre validation study. RMD Open. 2017 Sep 26;3(2):e000509. .

Diem SJ, Peters KW, Gourlay ML, et al; Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Research Group. Screening for Osteoporosis in Older Men: Operating Characteristics of Proposed Strategies for Selecting Men for BMD Testing. J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Nov;32(11):1235-1241. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-4153-4. .

Jain S, Bilori B, Gupta A, Spanos P, Singh M. Are Men at High Risk for Osteoporosis Underscreened? A Quality Improvement Project. Perm J. 2016 Winter;20(1):60-4. .

Tuzun S, Eskiyurt N, Akarirmak U, et al; Turkish Osteoporosis Society. The impact of a FRAX-based intervention threshold in Turkey: the FRAX-TURK study. Arch Osteoporos. 2012;7:229-35. .

Clark P, Denova-Gutiérrez E, Zerbini C, et al. FRAX-based intervention and assessment thresholds in seven Latin American countries. Osteoporos Int. 2018 Mar;29(3):707-715.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > >>