Objectives: Osteoporosis is often undiagnosed due to the shortcomings of conventional screening, resulting in missed chances for early treatment. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly deep learning applied to chest X-rays, offer a new opportunity for opportunistic screening. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of this approach in Japanese women aged ≥ 50 years. Methods: An economic model estimated the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (in 2024 Japanese Yen, ¥) for a strategy involving AI-assisted chest X-ray screening followed by treatment, compared to no screening. Patient trajectories were modeled using the AI system’s diagnostic performance and aligned with the Japanese osteoporosis guidelines. Analyses were conducted for Japan overall, in Kure City (a high-fractureincidence area), and in a lower-incidence scenario. Real-world medication persistence, the probabilities of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry examination after screening detection, and treatment initiation rates were incorporated. Results: Nationwide in Japan, the cost per QALY gained from opportunistic osteoporosis screening was estimated at ¥189,713 for women aged ≥ 50, substantially lower than the accepted cost-effectiveness threshold of ¥5 million. In Kure City, opportunistic screening was dominant (lower total costs for more QALYs). In the lowerincidence scenario, 25% below the national average, the cost per QALY was ¥1,055,095, remaining below the threshold. Results were robust across all age-specific populations and in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Leveraging AI-assisted chest X-rays for incidental osteoporosis detection demonstrates strong eco nomic viability for older Japanese women. This approach also proves to be a dominant strategy in areas with elevated fracture rates.

Osteoporosis in men remains a significantly underrecognized condition, with notable differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk between Asian and Western populations. Despite 30% of hip fractures globally occurring in men, they are less likely to be diagnosed or treated for osteoporosis, especially in resource-limited settings. Given these disparities, a deeper understanding of osteoporosis epidemiology and treatment efficacy in men is essential, particularly in Asian populations.This review synthesizes the latest evidence on the epidemiology, screening, and treatment of osteoporosis in men, with a focus on genetic, environmental, and epidemiological disparities between Eastern and Western populations. Additionally, the review examines existing controversies surrounding fracture risk screening in men and evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolic agents.Asian men exhibit lower peak BMD compared to their Caucasian counterparts, leading to potential misdiagnoses when using Caucasian-based BMD reference ranges. Screening tools like the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)® show variability in performance across populations. Data on pharmacological treatment in men remain limited, although studies suggest comparable benefits to those observed in women. Larger studies, particularly in male and Asian populations, are urgently needed to refine diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines.Osteoporosis in men is underdiagnosed and undertreated globally, with pronounced disparities between populations. Current diagnostic tools and treatment protocols are not fully tailored to male and Asian populations. There is an urgent need for longitudinal studies focusing on male-specific osteoporosis management to reduce fracture risk and improve outcomes.

Osteoporosis in men remains a significantly underrecognized condition, with notable differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk between Asian and Western populations. Despite 30% of hip fractures globally occurring in men, they are less likely to be diagnosed or treated for osteoporosis, especially in resource-limited settings. Given these disparities, a deeper understanding of osteoporosis epidemiology and treatment efficacy in men is essential, particularly in Asian populations.This review synthesizes the latest evidence on the epidemiology, screening, and treatment of osteoporosis in men, with a focus on genetic, environmental, and epidemiological disparities between Eastern and Western populations. Additionally, the review examines existing controversies surrounding fracture risk screening in men and evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolic agents.Asian men exhibit lower peak BMD compared to their Caucasian counterparts, leading to potential misdiagnoses when using Caucasian-based BMD reference ranges. Screening tools like the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)® show variability in performance across populations. Data on pharmacological treatment in men remain limited, although studies suggest comparable benefits to those observed in women. Larger studies, particularly in male and Asian populations, are urgently needed to refine diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines.Osteoporosis in men is underdiagnosed and undertreated globally, with pronounced disparities between populations. Current diagnostic tools and treatment protocols are not fully tailored to male and Asian populations. There is an urgent need for longitudinal studies focusing on male-specific osteoporosis management to reduce fracture risk and improve outcomes.

Osteoporosis in men remains a significantly underrecognized condition, with notable differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk between Asian and Western populations. Despite 30% of hip fractures globally occurring in men, they are less likely to be diagnosed or treated for osteoporosis, especially in resource-limited settings. Given these disparities, a deeper understanding of osteoporosis epidemiology and treatment efficacy in men is essential, particularly in Asian populations.This review synthesizes the latest evidence on the epidemiology, screening, and treatment of osteoporosis in men, with a focus on genetic, environmental, and epidemiological disparities between Eastern and Western populations. Additionally, the review examines existing controversies surrounding fracture risk screening in men and evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolic agents.Asian men exhibit lower peak BMD compared to their Caucasian counterparts, leading to potential misdiagnoses when using Caucasian-based BMD reference ranges. Screening tools like the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)® show variability in performance across populations. Data on pharmacological treatment in men remain limited, although studies suggest comparable benefits to those observed in women. Larger studies, particularly in male and Asian populations, are urgently needed to refine diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines.Osteoporosis in men is underdiagnosed and undertreated globally, with pronounced disparities between populations. Current diagnostic tools and treatment protocols are not fully tailored to male and Asian populations. There is an urgent need for longitudinal studies focusing on male-specific osteoporosis management to reduce fracture risk and improve outcomes.

Osteoporosis in men remains a significantly underrecognized condition, with notable differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk between Asian and Western populations. Despite 30% of hip fractures globally occurring in men, they are less likely to be diagnosed or treated for osteoporosis, especially in resource-limited settings. Given these disparities, a deeper understanding of osteoporosis epidemiology and treatment efficacy in men is essential, particularly in Asian populations.This review synthesizes the latest evidence on the epidemiology, screening, and treatment of osteoporosis in men, with a focus on genetic, environmental, and epidemiological disparities between Eastern and Western populations. Additionally, the review examines existing controversies surrounding fracture risk screening in men and evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolic agents.Asian men exhibit lower peak BMD compared to their Caucasian counterparts, leading to potential misdiagnoses when using Caucasian-based BMD reference ranges. Screening tools like the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)® show variability in performance across populations. Data on pharmacological treatment in men remain limited, although studies suggest comparable benefits to those observed in women. Larger studies, particularly in male and Asian populations, are urgently needed to refine diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines.Osteoporosis in men is underdiagnosed and undertreated globally, with pronounced disparities between populations. Current diagnostic tools and treatment protocols are not fully tailored to male and Asian populations. There is an urgent need for longitudinal studies focusing on male-specific osteoporosis management to reduce fracture risk and improve outcomes.

Osteoporosis in men remains a significantly underrecognized condition, with notable differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk between Asian and Western populations. Despite 30% of hip fractures globally occurring in men, they are less likely to be diagnosed or treated for osteoporosis, especially in resource-limited settings. Given these disparities, a deeper understanding of osteoporosis epidemiology and treatment efficacy in men is essential, particularly in Asian populations.This review synthesizes the latest evidence on the epidemiology, screening, and treatment of osteoporosis in men, with a focus on genetic, environmental, and epidemiological disparities between Eastern and Western populations. Additionally, the review examines existing controversies surrounding fracture risk screening in men and evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolic agents.Asian men exhibit lower peak BMD compared to their Caucasian counterparts, leading to potential misdiagnoses when using Caucasian-based BMD reference ranges. Screening tools like the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)® show variability in performance across populations. Data on pharmacological treatment in men remain limited, although studies suggest comparable benefits to those observed in women. Larger studies, particularly in male and Asian populations, are urgently needed to refine diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines.Osteoporosis in men is underdiagnosed and undertreated globally, with pronounced disparities between populations. Current diagnostic tools and treatment protocols are not fully tailored to male and Asian populations. There is an urgent need for longitudinal studies focusing on male-specific osteoporosis management to reduce fracture risk and improve outcomes.