Advanced lung cancer inflammation index as a diagnostic indicator of bone turnover in osteoporotic fracture patients: a non-linear analysis

Background: Osteoporotic fractures (OPFs) are a major health concern in older adults and are strongly influenced by systemic inflammation and nutritional status. The Advanced Lung Cancer Inflammation Index (ALI), which combines body mass index, serum albumin, and neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio, has been linked to outcomes in chronic diseases, but its relationship with bone turnover markers (BTMs) in OPF remains unclear.

Methods: We analyzed 826 Chinese patients with OPFs admitted from 2017 to 2024. Bone formation and resorption were assessed using serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (P1NP) and β-isomerized C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (β-CTX). ALI was log-transformed (lnALI) for analysis. Multivariable linear, generalized additive, and piecewise regression models were applied, adjusting for demographic, clinical, biochemical, and perioperative factors.

Results: A higher ALI was independently and positively associated with P1NP (β = 9.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.82–12.84, p < 0.001) and β-CTX (β = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.06–0.12, p < 0.001). Patients in the highest ALI tertile showed 15%–30% higher BTMs compared with those in the lowest tertile (all p < 0.01). Spline models revealed non-linear relationships with inflection points at ALI ≈ 2.15 for P1NP and 2.47 for β-CTX. No significant associations were observed below these cutoffs, whereas above them, the ALI was positively correlated with both markers. Findings were consistent across subgroups.

Conclusion: The ALI is positively and non-linearly associated with bone turnover in OPF patients. A low ALI indicates suppressed remodeling, whereas higher ALI values correspond to increased turnover and potentially greater healing capacity. Incorporating systemic health indices such as ALI may represent a diagnostic advance beyond BMD, improving fracture risk stratification and individualized management. Prospective studies should assess its prognostic utility.

1 Introduction

Osteoporotic fractures (OPFs) are a major public health concern in aging populations, contributing substantially to disability, mortality, and healthcare burden (1). In China, their prevalence among older adults is estimated at ~18.9%, highlighting the urgent need for improved prevention and early detection (2). Despite advances in osteoporosis management, the disease remains undiagnosed among many high-risk individuals until a fragility fracture occurs (3). These fractures not only impair quality of life but also impose considerable societal and economic costs (4). Consequently, increasing attention has been directed toward biomarkers of bone metabolism and systemic health that may enhance fracture risk stratification and disease monitoring.

Biochemical bone turnover markers (BTMs) provide important insights into skeletal metabolism (5). International guidelines recommend serum procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (P1NP) and β-isomerized C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (β-CTX) as the preferred markers of bone formation and resorption, respectively. These are widely employed for fracture risk prediction and therapy monitoring (6, 7). Compared with bone mineral density (BMD), BTMs respond more rapidly to therapeutic interventions, offering earlier indications of treatment efficacy. However, their levels are also influenced by systemic factors such as inflammation and renal function, which complicates interpretation when used in isolation (8). Thus, combining systemic indices such as ALI with established BTMs may represent a diagnostic advance beyond BMD alone, providing earlier insight into skeletal imbalance.

Chronic low-grade inflammation and poor nutritional status are established contributors to osteoporosis (9). The concept of “immunoporosis” highlights how immune-inflammatory processes promote bone loss. This involves stimulation of osteoclasts and inhibition of osteoblasts by pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and interleukin (IL)-6, eventually accelerating bone resorption (10). Consistently, patients with osteoporosis often exhibit elevated systemic inflammatory indices, including neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet–lymphocyte ratio (PLR), linking subclinical inflammation to reduced bone mass (11). Similarly, undernutrition and frailty, both reflected by low body mass index (BMI) and hypoalbuminemia, are associated with reduced BMD and increased risk of fractures (12). In particular, low serum albumin has been linked to impaired bone formation, diminished bone quality, and a higher incidence of OPFs (13). Collectively, these findings emphasize that OPF risk is not purely a skeletal phenomenon but also reflects systemic alterations in inflammation, nutrition, and metabolism (14). Incorporating the ALI into clinical assessment could therefore facilitate earlier identification of high-risk individuals, supporting preventive strategies to reduce fragility fractures.

The Advanced Lung Cancer Inflammation Index (ALI) is a composite biomarker that integrates nutritional status and systemic inflammation (15). Defined as BMI (kg/m²) × serum albumin (g/L)/NLR, a lower ALI reflects heightened inflammation and/or poor nutritional status. Initially developed as a prognostic tool in advanced lung cancer, where a low ALI was associated with worse survival (16), its predictive value has since been demonstrated across a wide range of chronic diseases, including hypertension (17), type 2 diabetes (T2DM) (18), cardiovascular disorders such as heart failure (19), and Crohn’s disease (20). In conditions like heart failure and chronic kidney disease, the ALI has been shown to correlate inversely with survival and disease severity (21). As it is derived from readily available clinical parameters, the ALI offers a practical and cost-effective approach for risk stratification in diverse patient populations (22).

Given the central roles of inflammation and nutrition in bone homeostasis, the ALI may also be relevant to osteoporosis and fragility fractures. By quantifying both inflammatory burden and nutritional state, the ALI captures systemic factors known to influence bone turnover and fracture healing (23). Evidence in this area remains limited. A cross-sectional study in older adults with T2DM found that a lower ALI was independently associated with higher osteoporosis prevalence and reduced femoral BMD (24), suggesting its potential as an early marker of impaired bone health. Yet, whether the ALI correlated with biochemical BTMs in patients with OPFs is unknown. Addressing this question may clarify the inflammatory–nutritional mechanisms underlying skeletal fragility and highlight the ALI as a practical tool for identifying high-risk patients and monitoring their recovery.

In this study, we investigated the association between the ALI and BTMs, specifically P1NP and β-CTX, in Chinese patients with OPFs. Our primary objective was to determine whether systemic inflammation and nutritional status, as reflected by the ALI, are correlated with alterations in bone formation and resorption. We further explored potential dose–response relationships, including non-linear effects and threshold values of the ALI that may influence bone turnover. Identifying such threshold effects may enable personalized management, tailoring nutritional, anti-inflammatory, or antiresorptive strategies to individual risk profiles. By integrating concepts from immunology, nutrition, and skeletal biology, this work evaluates the potential of the ALI as a clinically useful index in osteoporosis. As the ALI relies on routine clinical parameters, it may serve as a simple and translational tool to complement densitometry and bone microstructure analysis in both research and clinical practice. Ultimately, our findings may support a more holistic management strategy for OPF patients, aligning with advances in diagnosis, prevention, and individualized care.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Study design and subjects

Between January 2017 and March 2024, 4,782 patients with OPFs admitted to the First People’s Hospital of Kunshan were screened. Osteoporosis was defined as a T-score ≤ −2.5 at the femoral neck, lumbar spine, total hip, or distal forearm, or by the occurrence of a low-trauma fracture indicative of osteoporotic etiology (25).

Patients were excluded for the following reasons:

1. Missing P1NP or β-CTX data (n = 3,732);

2. Missing monocyte or neutrophil counts (n = 9);

3. Missing serum albumin data (n = 18);

4. Missing serum creatinine (Cr) or uric acid (UA) data (n = 1);

5. Long-term use of bone-active agents such as zoledronic acid, alendronate, or denosumab (n = 189);

6. Or a diagnosis of malignant tumor (n = 7).

After these exclusions, 826 patients were included in the final analysis (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Flowchart of the study population selection process.

2.2 Exposure and outcome variables

Preoperative complete blood counts were measured using an automated hematology analyzer (Sysmex XN-10; Sysmex Corporation, Kobe, Japan), providing absolute counts of neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes, along with serum albumin levels. The ALI was calculated as BMI × serum albumin (g/L)/NLR, following established methods (26). As ALI values were right-skewed, a natural logarithmic transformation (lnALI) was applied for analysis; unless otherwise noted, ALI refers to the log-transformed value (26, 27).

Serum P1NP and β-CTX were measured using electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) on the Roche Cobas 8000 platform. All laboratory tests were performed by certified technicians according to standardized operating procedures.

2.3 Covariate variables

Covariates considered in the analysis included age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, smoking and drinking status, serum calcium, hemoglobin, serum Cr, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), UA, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), platelet count, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification. ASA scores, assigned preoperatively by anesthesiologists, reflected the overall physical health of the patient and the perioperative risk (28). All blood samples were collected after an overnight fast of at least 8 h, and biochemical and hematological parameters were measured using standardized automated assays in the hospital laboratory. Information on smoking and alcohol use was obtained from admission records (29).

2.4 Statistical analysis

Continuous variables were expressed as means ± standard deviations (SD) or median with interquartile range (IQR), as appropriate, and categorical variables as counts and percentages. Between-group comparisons were performed using Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables, and chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. Baseline characteristics across ALI tertiles were compared using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Kruskal–Wallis tests, according to data distribution.

Univariate linear regression analyses were first conducted to assess associations between ALI and BTMs (P1NP and β-CTX). Variables with p ≤ 0.10 in univariate analyses, or those that changed the ALI β-coefficient by ≥10%, were considered for inclusion in multivariable models. Multicollinearity was evaluated using variance inflation factor (VIF), with VIF < 5 indicating acceptable collinearity.

Three sequential regression models were developed to examine the association between ALI and BTMs. Model 1 was unadjusted, model 2 controlled for age and sex, and model 3 further adjusted for hypertension, diabetes, smoking and alcohol use, serum calcium, hemoglobin, Cr, BUN, UA, ALT, AST, platelet count, and ASA classification. Potential non-linear relationships between lnALI and each BTM were first explored using generalized additive models (GAMs) with smoothing splines. When these GAM plots demonstrated a statistically significant non-linear pattern (p for non-linearity < 0.05) or an evident inflection trend, we then applied two-piecewise linear regression to quantify the different slopes below and above the inflection point, which provides clinically interpretable effect estimates in the presence of threshold behavior. The optimal knot (inflection point) was not predetermined but was identified in a fully data-driven manner using EmpowerStats (X&Y Solutions, Boston, MA; based on R 4.2.2). The software iteratively evaluates all possible breakpoints across the lnALI range, compares the fit of a single-line model versus a two-segment (piecewise) linear model using log-likelihood ratio testing, and selects the breakpoint that yields the maximum log-likelihood. This procedure ensures that the threshold selection is objective, reproducible, and not dependent on an arbitrary clinically chosen cutoff.

Potential confounders were selected a priori based on clinical relevance and literature evidence to avoid overadjustment and collider bias. Effect modification was assessed through subgroup and interaction analyses across all prespecified covariates. All statistical analyses, including GAM fitting, piecewise regression, and likelihood-based knot selection, were performed using EmpowerStats (X&Y Solutions, Boston, MA; based on R 4.2.2) and R (version 4.2.2; R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria), with two-tailed values of p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

3 Results

3.1 Patient characteristics

Table 1 summarizes the baseline characteristics of 826 patients with OPF who underwent surgical intervention between January 2017 and March 2024. The mean age was 69.31 ± 10.82 years, with 28.45% men and 71.55% women. The mean concentrations of P1NP and β-CTX were 57.80 ± 35.47 and 0.54 ± 0.29 ng/mL, respectively, and the mean ALI was 3.05 ± 0.69. Across ALI tertiles, platelet counts, β-CTX, and P1NP increased progressively, whereas serum Cr decreased. ALT, AST, and BUN exhibited non-linear patterns, initially rising and then declining. Several of these differences were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05).

Table 1

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of patients with osteoporotic fractures across tertiles of ALI (n = 826).

3.2 Univariate analyses of factors associated with BTMs

Univariate analyses demonstrated significant associations of Cr, platelet count, and hemoglobin with both P1NP and β-CTX levels. Additionally, P1NP was significantly associated with BUN, whereas β-CTX showed significant associations with UA, AST, and ALT. No other variables exhibited statistically significant relationships (Table 2).

Table 2

Table 2. Univariate linear regression analyses between clinical variables and BTMs.

3.3 Associations between the ALI and BTMs

Table 3 displays the associations between the ALI and the two BTMs, P1NP and β-CTX. In the unadjusted model 1, the ALI was positively associated with P1NP (β = 8.41, 95% CI: 4.95–11.87, p < 0.001) and β-CTX (β = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.07–0.12, p < 0.001). These associations remained significant in model 2, adjusted for demographic and clinical factors (P1NP: β = 8.49, 95% CI: 5.02–11.97, p < 0.001; β-CTX: β = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.07–0.12, p < 0.001), and persisted in the fully adjusted model 3 (P1NP: β = 9.33, 95% CI: 5.82–12.84; β-CTX: β = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.06–0.12; both p < 0.001).

Table 3

Table 3. Multivariable linear regression analyses of the ALI associated with β-CTX and P1NP levels.

Tertile analyses revealed a stepwise increase in both P1NP and β-CTX, with a higher ALI. For P1NP, T3 showed the largest elevation (15.77–17.29 ng/mL across all models compared, all p < 0.001), whereas T2 showed smaller but significant increases (5.98 to 8.03 ng/mL; p = 0.045, 0.040, and 0.010 for models 1–3, respectively). Similarly, β-CTX increased by 0.17 ng/mL in T3 across all models (p < 0.001), with T2 showing smaller increases of 0.07–0.08 ng/mL (p < 0.002).

3.4 Spline smoothing plots and threshold effect analyses

A distinct non-linear relationship was observed between ALI and the BTMs, β-CTX, and P1NP (Figure 2). Inflection points were identified at ALI = 2.47 for β-CTX and ALI = 2.15 for P1NP. Below these thresholds, the ALI was not significantly associated with either marker (β-CTX: −0.02, 95% CI: −0.11–0.07, p = 0.61; P1NP: −9.59, 95% CI: −26.51–7.34, p = 0.27).

Figure 2

Figure 2. Smoothed spline curves showing the nonlinear association between ALI and BTMs in the fully adjusted model. (A) β-isomerized C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (β-CTX). (B) Procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (P1NP). The solid red line represents the fitted curve, and the blue dashed lines indicate the 95% confidence interval. The short black vertical lines along the x-axis represent the distribution of ALI values in the study population. Vertical dashed lines indicate the identified inflection points (K = 2.47 for β-CTX and K = 2.15 for P1NP). Models were fully adjusted for age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, calcium (Ca), hemoglobin, drinking, smoking, creatinine (Cr), urea nitrogen (UN), uric acid (UA), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), platelet, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score.

Above the threshold, the ALI showed positive and significant associations with both β-CTX (β = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.09–0.16, p < 0.001) and P1NP (β = 11.92, 95% CI: 7.75–16.10, p < 0.001). The differences in effect sizes between above- and below-threshold segments were also statistically significant for β-CTX (β difference = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04–0.26, p = 0.01) and P1NP (β difference = 21.51, 95% CI: 2.68–40.34, p = 0.03) (Table 4).

Table 4

Table 4. Threshold effect analysis of the association between ALI and BTMs in the fully adjusted model.

3.5 Subgroup and interaction analyses

To examine potential heterogeneity in the association between the ALI and BTMs, stratified analyses were performed using fully adjusted models. Most interaction tests, including gender, diabetes, ALT, AST, UA, smoking, and drinking, were not significant (p value for interaction > 0.05). Exceptions were observed for β-CTX, where significant interactions were found with hypertension, ASA classification, BUN level, and serum calcium levels. No significant interactions were detected for P1NP across any subgroups. Detailed results of the stratified analysis are shown in Table 5.

Table 5

Table 5. Stratified analysis for the association between ALI and BTMs.

4 Discussion

4.1 Main findings and interpretation

This study provides novel evidence that the ALI, a composite indicator of systemic inflammation and nutritional status, is positively associated with bone turnover in patients with OPFs. Higher ALI values were linked to elevated P1NP and β-CTX, and these associations remained robust after adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Importantly, a non-linear relationship was identified, as there was a sharp increase in BTMs when the ALI exceeded 2.2–2.5 whereas the association flattened at lower values. To our knowledge, this is the first report directly connecting the ALI with bone turnover activity in this population, highlighting the influence of systemic health on skeletal metabolism.

The observed relationship is biologically plausible (30). Malnutrition compromises osteoblast function by limiting nutrient availability and altering hormonal regulation, whereas hypoalbuminemia reduces mineralization capacity and antioxidant defense, collectively impairing bone formation (31). In parallel, chronic inflammation promotes bone resorption through proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-1β that suppress osteoblast differentiation, induce osteocyte apoptosis, and prolong osteoclast survival via the activation of receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL) signaling (32). These opposing forces may interact in a non-linear fashion, explaining the observed threshold behavior: When inflammation and malnutrition reach a critical degree, both osteoblast and osteoclast activities are simultaneously inhibited, producing a metabolically “frozen” or “floor” state of minimal bone turnover (33, 34). Once systemic balance improves—reflected by higher ALI—osteoblast-driven formation and osteoclast-coupled resorption resume, leading to a sharp rebound in BTMs (35).

Mechanistically, the three ALI components play distinct yet synergistic roles in skeletal remodeling. Albumin supports osteoblastic differentiation and counteracts oxidative stress; BMI reflects energy and hormonal sufficiency required for matrix synthesis (36); and a low NLR denotes reduced systemic inflammation and a favorable cytokine milieu for bone anabolism (37). Together, these parameters capture the dynamic balance between catabolic (inflammatory) and anabolic (nutritional) forces that regulate bone metabolism, thereby providing a mechanistic rationale for the observed threshold pattern of the ALI with BTMs.

The threshold effect provides additional insight. Below an ALI of ~2.2, further reductions were not associated with greater suppression of bone turnover, suggesting a physiological “floor effect” (38). Above this point, however, increases in the ALI corresponded to substantial rises in P1NP and β-CTX, implying that adequate nutritional and inflammatory balance permits greater remodeling capacity. Clinically, this indicates that the ALI in combination with BTMs could provide a more dynamic and integrative assessment of skeletal health than BMD alone, representing a diagnostic advance that captures metabolic imbalance earlier than conventional densitometry. Elevated BTMs in high-ALI patients may indicate either robust bone repair or high-turnover osteoporosis (39). In the setting of acute fracture, the former interpretation is more likely, supported by evidence that malnutrition delays healing and that restoration of systemic health through improved nutrition or anti-inflammatory treatment facilitates turnover and repair (40). These findings highlight that systemic inflammation and malnutrition are modifiable drivers of bone metabolism, and their correction may restore the osteoblast–osteoclast balance—a principle that is being explored in emerging bone-targeted nanotherapies (41). Recent studies have demonstrated that bone-targeted engineered exosome platforms delivering siRNA can modulate osteoclastogenesis (42), whereas biomimetic nanogels and bioinspired nanovesicles have been shown to reestablish osteoblast/osteoclast homeostasis (43) and convert the skeletal endothelial secretory phenotype (44), respectively, offering potential adjunctive strategies to correct dysregulated bone turnover in low-ALI patients and highlighting the emerging therapeutic convergence between systemic metabolic correction and local bone-targeted interventions. Taken together, these results underscore the potential value of ALI as an integrative marker linking systemic health with skeletal metabolism.

4.2 Relation to previous studies and clinical implications

Our findings expand upon prior evidence linking composite inflammatory–nutritional indices with bone health (37). Previous studies have shown that osteoporotic patients exhibit elevated inflammatory markers and that higher systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI) values are linked to reduced P1NP and β-CTX, with a threshold effect similar to that observed in our analysis (45). Compared with other indices such as the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) (46), prognostic nutritional risk index (PNRI) (47), and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) (48), the ALI provides a more comprehensive reflection of both nutritional and inflammatory states. PNI and PNRI primarily emphasize serum albumin and lymphocyte counts (46, 47), lacking the BMI component that reflects metabolic reserve, whereas SII captures inflammatory activity but omits the nutritional dimension (48). By integrating albumin, BMI, and NLR, the ALI encompasses both catabolic and anabolic influences, thereby offering greater physiological relevance to bone remodeling (23).

Notably, low serum albumin has independently predicted osteoporosis and fracture risk, likely through impaired osteoblast activity and diminished antioxidant defense (49). Consistent with this, patients in the lowest ALI tertile in our cohort had the lowest BTM levels. Supporting evidence from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) has likewise demonstrated that diabetic patients with a low ALI exhibit higher rates of osteoporosis and a lower BMD (24). Taken together, these observations support the utility of the ALI as a clinically relevant biomarker for skeletal health, reflective of the frailty phenotype that predisposes patients to low bone mass and impaired healing.

The clinical relevance of these associations is underscored by their magnitude. As compared with patients in the lowest tertile, those in the highest ALI tertile had 15%–30% higher P1NP and β-CTX, differences that were comparable with the effects of certain osteoporosis treatments (50). These observations suggest that the ALI could serve as a surrogate indicator of turnover state. More importantly, the threshold effect highlights its potential role in personalized medicine: patients with a low ALI may benefit from nutritional optimization or anabolic therapy, whereas those with a high ALI may require antiresorptive interventions. Incorporating the ALI into clinical algorithms alongside BMD and BTMs may therefore enhance early detection of metabolic imbalance and enable risk stratification before irreversible bone loss occurs (51).

Importantly, the ALI is derived from routine laboratory and clinical measurements, making it inexpensive and easily applicable in practice. Its integration into fracture risk models, alongside BMD and bone microstructure assessment, could provide a practical means of advancing diagnosis and individualized management in osteoporosis (52). Collectively, these results highlight the translational potential of ALI as a simple, integrative biomarker in osteoporosis research and clinical care.

4.3 Limitations and future directions

Several limitations warrant consideration. First, the cross-sectional design prevents causal inference, and variation in blood sampling relative to fracture or surgery may have influenced BTM measurements (53). Second, because only a subset of patients had complete BTM data, selection bias cannot be excluded, although the analyzed cohort remained broadly representative of an older OPF population (54). Third, ALI reflects systemic inflammatory and nutritional status rather than being bone-specific; thus, unmeasured comorbidities such as rheumatoid arthritis or chronic lung disease may have confounded the associations observed (55). Fourth, this study was conducted in a single Chinese hospital, which may limit generalizability to other ethnicities or community-based populations (56).

Further research should address these gaps. Longitudinal studies are needed to clarify whether ALI predicts outcomes such as fracture healing, recurrent fractures, or mortality. Interventional studies should test whether targeted strategies such as nutritional supplementation or anti-inflammatory therapies can improve ALI and in turn enhance skeletal recovery. Preventive strategies may also explore whether lifestyle or dietary modifications that enhance nutritional reserves and reduce inflammation can influence ALI and fracture risk, although such factors were not assessed here. Future mechanistic and longitudinal studies are warranted to elucidate how ALI components (neutrophils, lymphocytes, albumin, and BMI) modulate osteoblast–osteoclast coupling, to validate its prognostic value across diverse populations (48, 57), and to integrate the ALI with imaging-based bone microstructure assessments (e.g., high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography [HR-pQCT], trabecular bone score [TBS]) for improved clinical applicability (58). Such evidence will determine whether the ALI can evolve from a prognostic biomarker to a clinically actionable tool in osteoporosis management.

5 Conclusion

In summary, the ALI was independently associated with bone turnover in patients with OPFs. A low ALI, reflecting inflammation and poor nutrition, was linked to suppressed remodeling, whereas higher ALI values corresponded to increased turnover activity. These findings emphasize the interplay between systemic health and skeletal metabolism, positioning the ALI combined with bone turnover markers as a diagnostic advance beyond BMD.

The threshold effect suggests the value for personalized medicine: Patients with a low ALI may benefit from nutritional optimization or anabolic therapy, whereas those with a high ALI may require antiresorptive interventions. Moreover, preventive strategies targeting lifestyle and dietary improvements that enhance nutrition and reduce inflammation may favorably influence ALI and skeletal outcomes.

Given its simplicity and reliance on routine clinical measurements, the ALI represents an emerging translational tool that could be integrated into practice to complement densitometry and bone microstructure analysis for risk stratification, monitoring, and individualized treatment. Prospective and interventional studies are needed to validate its predictive utility and clinical role.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by Ethics Committee of the Affiliated Kunshan Hospital of Jiangsu University, Kunshan, China, Approval No. 2024–03-053-H00-K01. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study, the use of anonymized clinical data, and minimal risk to participants.

Author contributions

JW: Data curation, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Formal Analysis, Conceptualization. MZ: Visualization, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Methodology. WW: Formal Analysis, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Investigation. YH: Funding acquisition, Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Supervision. CL: Project administration, Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing, Supervision. KL: Funding acquisition, Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82172441, PI: Ke Lu); the Multicenter Clinical Research Project (DZXYJ202312) and Special Funding for Jiangsu Province Science and Technology Plan (PI: Chong Li); the Key Research and Development Program for Social Development (BE2023738), Key Laboratory Project in Suzhou City (SZS2024018), and Gusu Health Talent Plan Scientific Research Project (GSWS2022105) (PI: Chong Li); the Jiangsu Provincial Health Commission Medical Research Project (No. 22024054, PI: Yanming Hao); the Kunshan High-level Health Talent Plan Scientific Research Project (No. X25-192-101539, PI: Yanming Hao); and the Suzhou Municipal Health Young Backbone Talent “National Mentor System” Project (No. W24-181-101528, PI: Yanming Hao).

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the clinical staff and data management team of the Affiliated Kunshan Hospital of Jiangsu University for their support in patient recruitment and data collection. We also acknowledge the assistance of the Kunshan Biomedical Big Data Innovation Application Laboratory for technical support in database management and statistical analysis.

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2025.1699546/full#supplementary-material

References

1. Zhu Q and Ran C. Health outcomes and care needs after osteoporotic fractures in rural Chinese older adults: policy implications. Front Public Health. (2025) 13:1601892. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1601892

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Meng S, Tong M, Yu Y, Cao Y, Tang B, Shi X, et al. The prevalence of osteoporotic fractures in the elderly in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. (2023) 18:536. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04030-x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

3. LeBoff MS, Greenspan SL, Insogna KL, Lewiecki EM, Saag KG, Singer AJ, et al. The clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. (2022) 33:2049–102. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-05900-y

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Kim BJ, Lee SH, and Koh JM. Potential biomarkers to improve the prediction of osteoporotic fractures. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul). (2020) 35:55–63. doi: 10.3803/EnM.2020.35.1.55

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Mizgier M, Sansoni V, Więckowska B, Jarząbek-Bielecka G, Formanowicz D, Kędzia W, et al. The correlations between serum bone biomarkers and those related to metabolic and hormonal profile, low-grade inflammation and redox balance, in lean and overweight PCOS adolescent girls. Front Nutr. (2025) 12:1477992. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1477992

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Vasikaran SD, Miura M, Pikner R, Bhattoa HP, and Cavalier E. IOF-IFCC joint committee on bone metabolism (C-BM). Practical considerations for the clinical application of bone turnover markers in osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int. (2023) 112:148–57. doi: 10.1007/s00223-021-00930-4

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

7. López-Gómez JJ, Pérez-Castrillón JL, García de Santos I, Pérez-Alonso M, Izaola-Jauregui O, Primo-Martín D, et al. Influence of obesity on bone turnover markers and fracture risk in postmenopausal women. Nutrients. (2022) 14:1617. doi: 10.3390/nu14081617

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Rubin MR, de Boer IH, Backlund JC, Arends V, Gubitosi-Klug R, Wallia A, et al. Biochemical markers of bone turnover in older adults with type 1 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. (2022) 107:e2405–16. doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgac099

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Srivastava RK and Sapra L. The rising era of “Immunoporosis”: role of immune system in the pathophysiology of osteoporosis. J Inflammation Res. (2022) 15:1667–98. doi: 10.2147/JIR.S351918

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Liu T, Hou X, Luo Y, Jiang X, Gao K, Lv J, et al. To explore the association between the neutrophil percentage to albumin ratio and low bone mineral density/osteoporosis based on NHANES 2011-2018. Sci Rep. (2025) 15:29544. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-12732-x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Liu YC, Yang TI, Huang SW, Kuo YJ, and Chen YP. Associations of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio with osteoporosis: A meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel). (2022) 12:2968. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12122968

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Kamioka H, Saeki C, Oikawa T, Kinoshita A, Kanai T, Ueda K, et al. Low geriatric nutritional risk index is associated with osteoporosis and fracture risk in patients with chronic liver disease: a cross-sectional study. BMC Gastroenterol. (2024) 24:376. doi: 10.1186/s12876-024-03465-8

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

13. Fisher A, Srikusalanukul W, Fisher L, and Smith PN. Lower serum P1NP/βCTX ratio and hypoalbuminemia are independently associated with osteoporotic nonvertebral fractures in older adults. Clin Interv Aging. (2017) 12:1131–40. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S141097

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Luo Z, Chen P, Chen S, Kong X, Ma H, and Cao C. Relationship between advanced lung cancer inflammation index and all-cause and cause-specific mortality among chronic inflammatory airway diseases patients: a population-based study. Front Immunol. (2025) 16:1585927. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1585927

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

15. Jafri SH, Shi R, and Mills G. Advance lung cancer inflammation index (ALI) at diagnosis is a prognostic marker in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a retrospective review. BMC Cancer. (2013) 13:158. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-158

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Ding J, Zhang J, Lv W, Xiao Y, Fang F, Ma W, et al. Association between Advanced Lung Cancer Inflammation Index and 30-day mortality in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: a retrospective cohort study. Front Neurol. (2025) 16:1612333. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1612333

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Zhang Y, Pan Y, Tu J, Liao L, Lin S, Chen K, et al. The advanced lung cancer inflammation index predicts long-term outcomes in patients with hypertension: National health and nutrition examination study, 1999-2014. Front Nutr. (2022) 9:989914. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.989914

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Chen Y, Guan M, Wang R, and Wang X. Relationship between advanced lung cancer inflammation index and long-term all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: NHANES, 1999-2018. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). (2023) 14:1298345. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1298345

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Yuan X, Huang B, Wang R, Tie H, and Luo S. The prognostic value of advanced lung cancer inflammation index (ALI) in elderly patients with heart failure. Front Cardiovasc Med. (2022) 9:934551. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.934551

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Olivera PA and Silverberg MS. Biomarkers that predict crohn’s disease outcomes. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol. (2023) 7:59–67. doi: 10.1093/jcag/gwad024

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Zhou J, Liu W, Liu X, Wu J, and Chen Y. Independent and joint influence of depression and advanced lung cancer inflammation index on mortality among individuals with chronic kidney disease. Front Nutr. (2024) 11:1453062. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1453062

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Zhou Y, Li X, He Q, Feng Q, Liu Y, and Liao B. The advanced lung cancer inflammation index as a predictor of kidney stone risk in men: a cross-sectional analysis. Front Nutr. (2025) 12:1568427. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1568427

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Liu Y, Yang Y, Li Y, Ding W, and Yang X. Association between nutritional and inflammatory status and mortality outcomes in patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia. J Nutr Biochem. (2025) :143:109936. doi: 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2025.109936

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Xu Y, Yan Z, and Liu L. Association between advanced lung cancer inflammation index and osteoporosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: evidence from NHANES. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). (2024) 15:1421696. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1421696

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Aibar-Almazán A, Voltes-Martínez A, Castellote-Caballero Y, Afanador-Restrepo DF, Carcelén-Fraile MDC, and López-Ruiz E. Current status of the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. Int J Mol Sci. (2022) 23:9465. doi: 10.3390/ijms23169465

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Zhao HW and Wang CF. The relationship between advanced lung cancer inflammation index and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction with no-obstructive coronary arteries. J Inflammation Res. (2025) 18:9907–17. doi: 10.2147/JIR.S531821

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

27. Li J, Shao Y, Zheng J, Dai Q, Yu K, Qin S, et al. Advanced lung cancer inflammation index and short-term mortality in sepsis: a retrospective analysis. Front Nutr. (2025) 12:1563311. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1563311

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Horvath B, Kloesel B, Todd MM, Cole DJ, and Prielipp RC. The evolution, current value, and future of the american society of anesthesiologists physical status classification system. Anesthesiology. (2021) 135:904–19. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003947

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Zhu MC, Xu MZ, Li CX, Wang JH, Li C, Gong YQ, et al. A cross-sectional study on the correlation between fasting blood glucose and bone turnover markers in Chinese patients with osteoporotic fractures. Front Med (Lausanne). (2025) 12:1564957. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1564957

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

30. Rizzoli R, Biver E, and Brennan-Speranza TC. Nutritional intake and bone health. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. (2021) 9:606–21. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(21)00119-4

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Chaker AN, Rademacher AF, Easton M, Jafar Y, Telemi E, Mansour TR, et al. The impact of serum albumin levels on postoperative complications in lumbar and cervical spine surgery: an analysis of the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative registry. J Neurosurg Spine. (2024) 41:792–802. doi: 10.3171/2024.5.SPINE24113

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Zhou F, Zhang G, Wu Y, and Xiong Y. Inflammasome Complexes: Crucial mediators in osteoimmunology and bone diseases. Int Immunopharmacol. (2022) :110:109072. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2022.109072

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Gibson D, Filan Z, Westmoreland P, and Mehler PS. Loss of bone density in patients with anorexia nervosa food that alone will not cure. Nutrients. (2024) 16:3593. doi: 10.3390/nu16213593

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Martín-Nieto A, Chana-Valero P, Ruiz-Tovar J, Escobar-Aguilar G, Simarro-González M, Rodríguez-Bernal P, et al. Nutritional status impact on hip fracture patients in a rural environment. Nutrients. (2024) 16:3622. doi: 10.3390/nu16213622

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Wang JH, Zhu MC, Li C, Wang GH, Lu K, and Hao YM. Association between pan-immune-inflammation value and bone turnover markers in Chinese patients with osteoporotic fractures: a retrospective cross-sectional study. Front Med (Lausanne). (2025) 12:1660376. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1660376

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

36. Stefanakis K, Upadhyay J, Ramirez-Cisneros A, Patel N, Sahai A, and Mantzoros CS. Leptin physiology and pathophysiology in energy homeostasis, immune function, neuroendocrine regulation and bone health. Metabolism. (2024) 161:156056. doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2024.156056

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Xu J, Guo YQ, Guo SH, Xu MZ, Li C, Gong YQ, et al. Divergent associations of inflammatory markers with bone turnover markers in elderly patients with osteoporotic fractures. Sci Rep. (2024) 14:24907. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-75704-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

38. Lai B, Jiang H, Gao R, and Zhou X. Association between alcohol intake and bone mineral density: results from the NHANES 2005–2020 and two-sample Mendelian randomization. Arch Osteoporos. (2024) 19:21. doi: 10.1007/s11657-024-01382-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

39. Schini M, Vilaca T, Gossiel F, Salam S, and Eastell R. Bone turnover markers: basic biology to clinical applications. Endocr Rev. (2023) 44:417–73. doi: 10.1210/endrev/bnac031

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Janković T, Mikov M, Zvekić Svorcan J, Minaković I, Mikov J, Bošković K, et al. Changes in bone metabolism in patients with rheumatoid arthritis during tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy. J Clin Med. (2023) 12:1901. doi: 10.3390/jcm12051901

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Zhu YW, Wei YW, Ma JY, Chen W, Shen Z, and Qiu J. Bioactive deproteinized bovine bone mineral based on self-assembled albumin nanoparticles promoted bone regeneration via activation of Wnt/β-catenin pathway. Mater Today Bio. (2025) 32:101730. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.101730

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

42. Cui Y, Guo Y, Kong L, Shi J, Liu P, Li R, et al. A bone-targeted engineered exosome platform delivering siRNA to treat osteoporosis. Bioact Mater. (2021) :10:207–221. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.09.015

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Cui Y, Lv B, Li Z, Ma C, Gui Z, Geng Y, et al. Bone-targeted biomimetic nanogels re-establish osteoblast/osteoclast balance to treat postmenopausal osteoporosis. Small. (2024) 20:e2303494. doi: 10.1002/smll.202303494

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Cui Y, Li Z, Guo Y, Qi X, Yang Y, Jia X, et al. Bioinspired nanovesicles convert the skeletal endothelium-associated secretory phenotype to treat osteoporosis. ACS Nano. (2022) 16:11076–91. doi: 10.1021/acsnano.2c03781

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Zhou P, Lu K, Li C, Xu MZ, Ye YW, Shan HQ, et al. Association between systemic inflammatory response index and bone turnover markers in Chinese patients with osteoporotic fractures: a retrospective cross-sectional study. Front Med (Lausanne). (2024) 11:1404152. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1404152

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Bakılan F and Sarıçimen G. Prognostic nutritional index in patients with both vertebral and non-vertebral osteoporotic fractures. Turk J Osteoporos. (2024) 30:142–8. doi: 10.4274/tod.galenos.2024.50490

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Pan J, Xu G, Zhai Z, Sun J, Wang Q, Huang X, et al. Geriatric nutritional risk index as a predictor for fragility fracture risk in elderly with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A 9-year ambispective longitudinal cohort study. Clin Nutr. (2024) 43:1125–35. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2024.03.032

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

48. Tang Y, Peng B, Liu J, Liu Z, Xia Y, and Geng B. Systemic immune-inflammation index and bone mineral density in postmenopausal women: A cross-sectional study of the national health and nutrition examination survey (NHANES) 2007-2018. Front Immunol. (2022) :975400. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.975400

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

49. Li Q, Zhu M, Liu X, Tian C, Li D, Wang H, et al. Abnormally low serum albumin levels are associated with abnormal bone mineral density and osteoporotic fractures: a retrospective studies. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. (2024) 25:888. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-08021-9

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

50. Xu J, Yu L, Liu F, Wan L, and Deng Z. The effect of cytokines on osteoblasts and osteoclasts in bone remodeling in osteoporosis: a review. Front Immunol. (2023) 14:1222129. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1222129

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

51. Demir Cendek B, Bayraktar B, Sapmaz MA, Yıldırım AE, Can Ibanoglu M, and Engin Ustun Y. The role of inflammatory and nutritional indices in postmenopausal osteoporosis: A retrospective study. J Clin Med. (2024) 13:7741. doi: 10.3390/jcm13247741

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

52. Liang C, Yang C, Yang Q, Tang Y, Zhang W, Tan Q, et al. Survival prognosis evaluation in advanced breast cancer patients: a study on the application of the advanced lung cancer inflammation index. Front Oncol. (2025) 15:1598069. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1598069

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

53. Jin Z, Sun W, Huang J, and Wang G. Association between advanced lung cancer inflammation index and unstable asthma: a population-based study from the NHANES 2007-2018. Front Nutr. (2024) 11:1482328. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1482328

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

54. Song M, Wang Y, Jiang Y, Pi H, Lyu H, and Gao Y. Risk factors for subsequent fractures in hip fracture patients: a nested case-control study. J Orthop Surg Res. (2024) 19:348. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-04833-6

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

55. Li Y, Gao H, Zhao L, and Wang J. Osteoporosis in COPD patients: Risk factors and pulmonary rehabilitation. Clin Respir J. (2022) 16:487–96. doi: 10.1111/crj.13514

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

56. Starup-Linde J, Støy J, Grinderslev PB, Langdahl B, and Harsløf T. Prevalence and risk factors for osteoporosis in type 1 diabetes-results from an observational study. Osteoporos Int. (2025) 36:823–31. doi: 10.1007/s00198-025-07443-y

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

57. Chen Y, Yu J, Shi L, Han S, Chen J, Sheng Z, et al. Systemic inflammation markers associated with bone mineral density in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. J Inflammation Res. (2023) 16:297–309. doi: 10.2147/JIR.S385220

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

58. Maeda K, Yoshida K, Nishizawa T, Otani K, Yamashita Y, Okabe H, et al. Inflammation and bone metabolism in rheumatoid arthritis: molecular mechanisms of joint destruction and pharmacological treatments. Int J Mol Sci. (2022) 23:2871. doi: 10.3390/ijms23052871

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar