Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32808139›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2021

Cancer patients with fractures are rarely assessed or treated for osteoporosis: a population-based study.

W D Leslie, B Edwards, S Al-Azazi, L Yan, L M Lix, P Czaykowski, H Singh

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 51% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Comparative analysis of osteoporotic versus pathologic fracture in metastatic colorectal cancer patients.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

W D LeslieUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. bleslie@sbgh.mb.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1056-1691
B EdwardsUniversity of Texas Dell Medical School, Temple, TX, USA.
S Al-AzaziUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
L YanUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
L M LixUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
P CzaykowskiUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
H SinghUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
University of Manitoba · CACancerCare Manitoba · CACentral Texas Veterans Health Care System · USSt. Boniface Hospital · CA

Funding

CancerCare Manitoba Foundation #763045126
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among 4238 cancer and 16,418 cancer-free individuals with incident major non-traumatic fractures (hip, clinical vertebral, forearm, humerus), post-fracture osteoporosis care was equally poor for both groups, whether assessed from bone mineral density (BMD) testing, initiation of osteoporosis therapy or either intervention (BMD testing and/or osteoporosis therapy).

introductionMost individuals sustaining a fracture do not undergo evaluation and/or treatment for osteoporosis. Cancer survivors are at increased risk for osteoporosis and fracture. Whether cancer survivors experience a similar post-fracture "care gap" is unclear. Using population-based databases, we assessed whether cancer patients are evaluated and/or treated for osteoporosis after a major fracture.

methodsFrom the Manitoba Cancer Registry, we identified cancer cases (first cancer diagnosis between 1987 and 2013) and cancer-free controls with incident major non-traumatic fractures (from provincial physician billing claims and hospitalization databases). The outcomes were performance of BMD testing (from the BMD Registry), initiation of osteoporosis therapy (from drug dispensation database) or either intervention (BMD testing and/or osteoporosis therapy) in the 12 months post-fracture.

resultsThere were 4238 cancer and 16,418 cancer-free individuals who sustained a fracture after the index date (cancer diagnosis) and were followed for at least 1 year post-fracture. Subsequent BMD testing was performed in 11.0% of cancer cases versus 11.5% non-cancer controls (P = 0.43), osteoporosis treatment in 22.9% cancer cases versus 21.8% non-cancer controls (P = 0.15), and either testing or treatment in 28.9% cancer cases versus 28.4% non-cancer controls (P = 0.53). Predictors of BMD testing and/or initiation of therapy were similar for non-cancer and cancer patients. Post-fracture interventions were consistently used more frequently among women, older patients (age 50 years or older), those who sustained fractures in a later calendar period, and (for treatment) after vertebral fracture. Cancer-specific variables (cancer type, years from cancer diagnosis to fracture, specialty of care provider) showed only weak and inconsistent effects.

conclusionsA large care gap exists among cancer patients who sustain a fracture, similar to the general population, whereby the evaluation or treatment for osteoporosis is seldom conducted. Care maps may need to be developed for cancer populations to improve post-fracture care.

Indexed as

Bone Density Conservation AgentsFractures, BoneNeoplasmsOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesBone DensityFemaleHumansManitobaMiddle AgedBone Density Conservation AgentsBone densitometryCancerCare gapFractureOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID32808139
OpenAlexW3056678912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.