PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10982171

Vertebral morphometry: repeat scan precision using the Lunar Expert-XL and the Hologic 4500A. A study for the 'WISDOM' RCT of hormone replacement therapy.

Abstract

On radiation safety grounds there is concern about the morbidity attributable to routine radiographs of the spine for the identification of new fractures in large-scale trials of fracture prevention. However, the role of the potentially safer low-radiation-dose technique of vertebral morphometry performed by third generation dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry equipment requires evaluation for use in clinical trials. We have therefore investigated the short-term inter-scan imprecision as well as the imprecision attributable to different-day analyses by the same operator and differences in analyses by different operators. The volunteer subjects were participants in a pilot study for a randomized controlled trial of hormone replacement therapy (Women's International Study of long Duration Oestrogen after Menopause, WISDOM). Each subject had two morphometric X-ray analysis scans separated by 2-4 weeks. Exclusions were women with densitometrically defined osteoporosis, as defined by the WHO criterion, and women with a body mass index exceeding 30.9 kg/m2. On average, the women were 58.7 years of age and had bone mineral density values in the lumbar spine which were about 0.7 SD units higher than a reference US female age-matched population. Scans were assessed from vertebrae T7 through L4. In the study there were no clinically significant differences in performance between the Hologic QDR 4500A and the Lunar Expert XL equipment. Between-scan imprecision was significantly worse than imprecision attributable to reanalysis of the same scan by a different operator or the same operator after an interval. Vertebral level had an effect on measurement uncertainty, especially at the level of the diaphragm and at T7. Coefficients of variation, expressed as percentages of mean values, were better for absolute height measurements than for height ratios, ranging from 1.75% to 3.40% for the three heights measured on three separate machines and from 2.34% to 4.11% for the two height ratios. These results compared favorably with the equivalent figures from a parallel study of morphometry precision undertaken using standard lateral radiographs of the thoracic and lumbar spine (3.1-3.6% and 3.8-3.9%, respectively). We conclude that in trials of prevention therapy in women (or men) selected for not having osteoporosis, low-dose vertebral morphometry using the Hologic 4500A, the Lunar Expert XL or similar equipment is preferable on safety grounds to the classical technique based on standard radiographs, although conventional radiology may still be required in those with prevalent or incident deformities to exclude causes other than osteoporosis. The place of this low-dose technique in trials performed on patients with osteoporosis requires further study.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

N Crabtree, J Wright, A Walgrove, J Rea, L Hanratty, M Lunt, I Fogelman, R Palmer, M Vickers, J E Compston, J Reev. 2000. Vertebral morphometry: repeat scan precision using the Lunar Expert-XL and the Hologic 4500A. A study for the 'WISDOM' RCT of hormone replacement therapy.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001980070098

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A repeated measures concordance correlation coefficient.

The concordance correlation coefficient is commonly used to assess agreement between two raters or two methods of measuring a response when the data are measured on a continuous scale. However, the situation may arise in which repeated measurements are taken for each rater or method, e.g. longitudinal studies in clinical trials or bioassay data with subsamples. This paper proposes a coefficient for measuring agreement between two raters or two methods of measuring a response in the presence of repeated measurements. We illustrate the methodology with examples comparing (1) 1-hr versus 2-hr blood draws for measuring cortisol in an asthma clinical trial and (2) two measurements of percentage body fat, from skinfold calipers and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗

Crystallization and preliminary X-ray analysis of a domain in the Runx2 transcription factor that interacts with the 1alpha,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3 receptor.

The Runx2 transcription factor is a key regulator of osteoblast differentiation. In response to 1alpha,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3, Runx2 may interact with the 1alpha,25 dihydroxy vitamin D3 receptor (VDR) in the promoter of target genes, producing a synergic activation of their transcription. Previous studies have suggested that the motifs responsible for the VDR-Runx2 interaction are contained within the 230-361 domain of Runx2. In this work, we confirmed by GST-pull down that Runx2(I(209-361)) is sufficient to interact with the VDR. To obtain structural information, GST-Runx2(I(209-361)) protein was overexpressed in Escherichia coli, purified and crystallized using the hanging-drop vapor-diffusion method and polyethyleneglycol as a precipitant. The crystals were found to diffract to a maximum resolution of 2.7 A and a complete data set to a 3.3 A resolution was collected and analyzed. The crystals belong to the tetragonal system, with a space group P4 and unit-cell parameters of a = b = 90.8, and c = 57.2 A. The presence of a monomer of the recombinant GST-Runx2(I(209-361)) in the asymmetric unit gives a V(M) of 2.7 A(3) Da(-1) and a solvent content of 54.8%.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗

Quantifying the treatment effect explained by markers in the presence of measurement error.

Surrogate markers or intermediate markers are important in identifying subjects with high risk of a serious disease or for monitoring disease progression of a subject on treatment. Quantifying the proportion of treatment effect (PTE) explained by markers has been studied extensively. Due to reasons such as biological variation, limited machine precision, etc. markers are generally measured with error. The estimated PTE ignoring the measurement error could be biased, which may lead to incorrect conclusions. In this article, we adjust for the measurement error using regression calibration to construct a less biased estimator of excess relative odds, a quantity to measure the treatment effect explained by markers. The method is applied to data from a clinical study in osteoporosis.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗