Predictors of Mortality Subsequent to a Fracture in Diabetes Mellitus Patients

The authors conducted a systematic review of published data on the association between diabetes mellitus and fracture. The authors searched MEDLINE through June 2006 and examined the reference lists of pertinent articles (limited to studies in humans). Summary relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated with a random-effects model. The 16 eligible studies (two case-control studies and 14 cohort studies) included 836,941 participants and 139,531 incident cases of fracture. Type 2 diabetes was associated with an increased risk of hip fracture in both men (summary relative risk (RR) = 2.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2, 6.6) and women (summary RR = 2.1, 95% CI: 1.6, 2.7). Results were consistent between studies of men and women and between studies conducted in the United States and Europe. The association between type of diabetes and hip fracture incidence was stronger for type 1 diabetes (summary RR = 6.3, 95% CI: 2.6, 15.1) than for type 2 diabetes (summary RR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.3, 2.2). Type 2 diabetes was weakly associated with fractures at other sites, and most effect estimates were not statistically significant. These findings strongly support an association between both type 1 and type 2 diabetes and increased risk of hip fracture in men and women.

The study objective was to determine whether diabetes is a risk factor for incident hip or major osteoporotic fractures independent of the WHO fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX). Men and women with diabetes (n = 3518) and nondiabetics (n = 36,085) aged ≥50 years at the time of bone mineral density (BMD) testing (1990 to 2007) were identified in a large clinical database from Manitoba, Canada. FRAX probabilities were calculated, and fracture outcomes to 2008 were established via linkage with a population-based data repository. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine if diabetes was associated with incident hip fractures or major osteoporotic fractures after controlling for FRAX risk factors. Mean 10-year probabilities of fracture were similar between groups for major fractures (diabetic 11.1 ± 7.2 versus nondiabetic 10.9 ± 7.3, p = 0.116) and hip fractures (diabetic 2.9 ± 4.4 versus nondiabetic 2.8 ± 4.4, p = 0.400). Diabetes was a significant predictor of subsequent major osteoporotic fracture (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-1.83) after controlling for age, sex, medication use, and FRAX risk factors including BMD. Similar results were seen after adjusting for FRAX probability directly (HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.40-1.79). Diabetes was also associated with significantly higher risk for hip fractures (p < 0.001). Higher mortality from diabetes attenuated but did not eliminate the excess fracture risk. FRAX underestimated observed major osteoporotic and hip fracture risk in diabetics (adjusted for competing mortality) but demonstrated good concordance with observed fractures for nondiabetics. We conclude that diabetes confers an increased risk of fracture that is independent of FRAX derived with BMD. This suggests that diabetes might be considered for inclusion in future iterations of FRAX.

Statins have been shown to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality among individuals with clinical history of coronary heart disease. However, it remains uncertain whether statins have similar mortality benefit in a high-risk primary prevention setting. Notably, all systematic reviews to date included trials that in part incorporated participants with prior cardiovascular disease (CVD) at baseline. Our objective was to reliably determine if statin therapy reduces all-cause mortality among intermediate to high-risk individuals without a history of CVD. Trials were identified through computerized literature searches of MEDLINE and Cochrane databases (January 1970-May 2009) using terms related to statins, clinical trials, and cardiovascular end points and through bibliographies of retrieved studies. Prospective, randomized controlled trials of statin therapy performed in individuals free from CVD at baseline and that reported details, or could supply data, on all-cause mortality. Relevant data including the number of patients randomized, mean duration of follow-up, and the number of incident deaths were obtained from the principal publication or by correspondence with the investigators. Data were combined from 11 studies and effect estimates were pooled using a random-effects model meta-analysis, with heterogeneity assessed with the I(2) statistic. Data were available on 65,229 participants followed for approximately 244,000 person-years, during which 2793 deaths occurred. The use of statins in this high-risk primary prevention setting was not associated with a statistically significant reduction (risk ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.01) in the risk of all-cause mortality. There was no statistical evidence of heterogeneity among studies (I(2) = 23%; 95% confidence interval, 0%-61% [P = .23]). This literature-based meta-analysis did not find evidence for the benefit of statin therapy on all-cause mortality in a high-risk primary prevention set-up.