Conventional MRI-based subchondral trabecular biomarkers as predictors of knee osteoarthritis progression: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.
Biomarkers
Knee joint
Magnetic resonance imaging
Osteoarthritis, knee
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
20
07
2020
accepted:
11
11
2020
revised:
08
10
2020
pubmed:
27
11
2020
medline:
21
5
2021
entrez:
26
11
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the reliability and validity of measuring subchondral trabecular biomarkers in "conventional" intermediate-weighted (IW) MRI sequences and to assess the predictive value of biomarker changes for predicting near-term symptomatic and structural progressions in knee osteoarthritis (OA). For this study, a framework for measuring trabecular biomarkers in the proximal medial tibia in the "conventional" IW MRI sequence was developed. The reliability of measuring these biomarkers (trabecular thickness [cTbTh], spacing [cTbSp], connectivity density [cConnD], and bone-to-total volume ratio [cBV/TV]) was evaluated in the Bone Ancillary Study (within the Osteoarthritis Initiative [OAI]). The validity of these measurements was assessed by comparing to "apparent" biomarkers (from high-resolution steady-state MRI sequence) and peri-articular bone marrow density (BMD, from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry). The association of these biomarker changes from baseline to 24 months (using the Reliable Change Index) with knee OA progression was studied in the FNIH OA Biomarkers Consortium (within the OAI). Pain and radiographic progression were evaluated by comparing baseline WOMAC pain score and radiographic joint space width with the 24-to-48-month scores/measurements. Associations between biomarker changes and these outcomes were studied using logistic regression adjusted for the relevant covariates. With acceptable reliability, the cTbTh and cBV/TV, but not cTbSp or cConnD, were modestly associated with the "apparent" biomarkers and peri-articular BMD (β: 1.10 [95% CI: 0.45-1.75], p value: 0.001 and β: 3.69 [95% CI: 2.56-4.83], p value: < 0.001, respectively). Knees with increased cTbTh had higher (OR: 1.44 [95% CI: 1.03-2.02], p value: 0.035) and knees with decreased cTbTh (OR: 0.69 [95% CI: 0.49-0.95], p value: 0.026) or decreased cBV/TV (OR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.48-0.93], p value: 0.018) had lower odds of experiencing OA pain progression over the follow-ups. Measurement of certain "conventional" MRI-based subchondral trabecular biomarkers has high reliability and modest validity. Though modest, there are significant associations between these biomarker changes and knee OA pain progression up to 48-month follow-up. • Despite the lower spatial resolution than what is required to accurately study the subchondral trabecular microstructures, the "conventional" IW MRI sequences may retain adequate information that allows quantification of trabecular microstructure biomarkers. • Subchondral trabecular biomarkers obtained from "conventional" IW MRI sequences (i.e., cTbTh, cTbSp, and cBV/TV) are reliable and valid measures of trabecular microstructure changes compared to those from "apparent" trabecular biomarkers (from the FISP MRI sequence) and peri-articular BMD (from DXA). • Increased trabecular thickness and bone-to-total ratio (cTbTh and cBV/TV, obtained from "conventional" IW MRI sequences) from baseline to 24-month visits may be associated with higher odds of knee OA pain progression over 48 months of follow-up.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33241511
doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07512-2
pii: 10.1007/s00330-020-07512-2
pmc: PMC9583892
mid: NIHMS1826632
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3564-3573Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : P01 AG066603
Pays : United States
Références
J Microsc. 2005 May;218(Pt 2):171-9
pubmed: 15857378
Arthritis Rheum. 2013 Feb;65(2):363-72
pubmed: 22961435
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018 Jan;70(1):80-87
pubmed: 29024470
Arthritis Res Ther. 2017 Jan 10;19(1):1
pubmed: 28073368
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008 Sep 02;9:116
pubmed: 18764949
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Aug;469(8):2179-93
pubmed: 21344275
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jan;76(1):186-195
pubmed: 27296323
J Pers Assess. 2004 Feb;82(1):50-9
pubmed: 14979834
Osteoporos Int. 2012 Feb;23(2):589-97
pubmed: 21359670
Osteoporos Int. 2002;13(4):278-87
pubmed: 12030542
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008 Feb;16(2):261-7
pubmed: 17825586
Eur Radiol. 2018 Oct;28(10):4134-4145
pubmed: 29651769
Eur Radiol. 2018 Nov;28(11):4687-4695
pubmed: 29721684
Int J Mol Sci. 2013 Sep 30;14(10):19805-30
pubmed: 24084727
Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Sep;75(9):1607-14
pubmed: 26483253
Magn Reson Med. 2013 Aug;70(2):568-75
pubmed: 22941674
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008 Oct;16(10):1150-9
pubmed: 18387828
Bone. 2015 Dec;81:364-369
pubmed: 26232375
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019 Jun;71(6):916-924
pubmed: 30663865
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2018 May 1;57(suppl_4):iv3-iv9
pubmed: 29506178
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1789-1858
pubmed: 30496104
Bone. 2010 Dec;47(6):1076-9
pubmed: 20817052
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2018 Jun;26(6):762-769
pubmed: 29572129
J Rheumatol. 2005 Jun;32(6):1156-8; discussion 1158-9
pubmed: 15977355
Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2018 Oct;48(2):155-161
pubmed: 29449014
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jan;76(1):179-185
pubmed: 27343253
Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2013 Jan;9(1):28-42
pubmed: 23232496
J Clin Invest. 2019 Mar 1;129(3):1076-1093
pubmed: 30530994
Eur Radiol. 2017 Feb;27(2):464-473
pubmed: 27221563
BMJ. 2009 Aug 21;339:b2844
pubmed: 19700505