Bone fragility in men - Where are we?

E. Seeman, G. Bianchi, S. Khosla, J. A. Kanis, Eric Orwoll

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

76 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: This is a summary of several aspects of the epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment arising directly and indirectly from the proceedings of the Third International Osteoporosis in Men meeting held in Genoa in May 2005. Advances in the study of bone fragility in men have taken place, but many challenges remain. Observations: Although the epidemiology of hip fractures is well documented, the epidemiology of other non-vertebral fractures is less well defined even though these fractures contribute substantially to the global burden of fractures in men. The epidemiology of vertebral fragility fractures is derived mostly from cross sectional data. The comparable prevalence of vertebral fractures in men and women is likely to be misleading because of traumatic vertebral fractures that arise in young men. Prospective studies are needed to define the proportion of these fractures that are traumatic. After the age of 50 years, the incidence of vertebral fractures in men is about one third to one half of that in women. As in women, most vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures occur in persons without osteoporosis. Identifying these individuals is an unmet challenge. The absolute risk for fractures appears no different by sex in men and women of the same age and bone mineral density (BMD) so that the diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis in women can be used in men. Fracture risk varies around the world and is unlikely to be explained solely by variations in BMD, though there are few data comparing men and women of different races. Both the notion that men lose less bone than women from the endosteal envelope and that they gain more on the periosteal envelope during advancing age needs reassessment as recent evidence challenges these observations. Sex differences in the net gain and loss from these surfaces are likely to be site specific, and research is needed to specify this heterogeneity and the reasons for it. The independent and co-dependent effects of sex hormones and the growth hormone/insulin like growth factor 1 axis on periosteal and endosteal modeling and remodeling during growth as well as ageing are poorly defined. The anti-fracture efficacy and safety of androgens and other agents remain incompletely investigated in men. Conclusion: A great deal of research is needed to advance our understanding of bone fragility in men.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1577-1583
Number of pages7
JournalOsteoporosis International
Volume17
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2006

Fingerprint

Bone and Bones
Epidemiology
Osteoporosis
Bone Density
Hip Fractures
Gonadal Steroid Hormones
Somatomedins
Research
Sex Characteristics
Androgens
Growth Hormone
Prospective Studies
Safety
Incidence
Growth

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Seeman, E., Bianchi, G., Khosla, S., Kanis, J. A., & Orwoll, E. (2006). Bone fragility in men - Where are we? Osteoporosis International, 17(11), 1577-1583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-006-0160-8

Bone fragility in men - Where are we? / Seeman, E.; Bianchi, G.; Khosla, S.; Kanis, J. A.; Orwoll, Eric.

In: Osteoporosis International, Vol. 17, No. 11, 11.2006, p. 1577-1583.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Seeman, E, Bianchi, G, Khosla, S, Kanis, JA & Orwoll, E 2006, 'Bone fragility in men - Where are we?', Osteoporosis International, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1577-1583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-006-0160-8
Seeman, E. ; Bianchi, G. ; Khosla, S. ; Kanis, J. A. ; Orwoll, Eric. / Bone fragility in men - Where are we?. In: Osteoporosis International. 2006 ; Vol. 17, No. 11. pp. 1577-1583.
@article{84b283e2d15b46efbf75da97a87a50c9,
title = "Bone fragility in men - Where are we?",
abstract = "Introduction: This is a summary of several aspects of the epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment arising directly and indirectly from the proceedings of the Third International Osteoporosis in Men meeting held in Genoa in May 2005. Advances in the study of bone fragility in men have taken place, but many challenges remain. Observations: Although the epidemiology of hip fractures is well documented, the epidemiology of other non-vertebral fractures is less well defined even though these fractures contribute substantially to the global burden of fractures in men. The epidemiology of vertebral fragility fractures is derived mostly from cross sectional data. The comparable prevalence of vertebral fractures in men and women is likely to be misleading because of traumatic vertebral fractures that arise in young men. Prospective studies are needed to define the proportion of these fractures that are traumatic. After the age of 50 years, the incidence of vertebral fractures in men is about one third to one half of that in women. As in women, most vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures occur in persons without osteoporosis. Identifying these individuals is an unmet challenge. The absolute risk for fractures appears no different by sex in men and women of the same age and bone mineral density (BMD) so that the diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis in women can be used in men. Fracture risk varies around the world and is unlikely to be explained solely by variations in BMD, though there are few data comparing men and women of different races. Both the notion that men lose less bone than women from the endosteal envelope and that they gain more on the periosteal envelope during advancing age needs reassessment as recent evidence challenges these observations. Sex differences in the net gain and loss from these surfaces are likely to be site specific, and research is needed to specify this heterogeneity and the reasons for it. The independent and co-dependent effects of sex hormones and the growth hormone/insulin like growth factor 1 axis on periosteal and endosteal modeling and remodeling during growth as well as ageing are poorly defined. The anti-fracture efficacy and safety of androgens and other agents remain incompletely investigated in men. Conclusion: A great deal of research is needed to advance our understanding of bone fragility in men.",
author = "E. Seeman and G. Bianchi and S. Khosla and Kanis, {J. A.} and Eric Orwoll",
year = "2006",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1007/s00198-006-0160-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "1577--1583",
journal = "Osteoporosis International",
issn = "0937-941X",
publisher = "Springer London",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bone fragility in men - Where are we?

AU - Seeman, E.

AU - Bianchi, G.

AU - Khosla, S.

AU - Kanis, J. A.

AU - Orwoll, Eric

PY - 2006/11

Y1 - 2006/11

N2 - Introduction: This is a summary of several aspects of the epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment arising directly and indirectly from the proceedings of the Third International Osteoporosis in Men meeting held in Genoa in May 2005. Advances in the study of bone fragility in men have taken place, but many challenges remain. Observations: Although the epidemiology of hip fractures is well documented, the epidemiology of other non-vertebral fractures is less well defined even though these fractures contribute substantially to the global burden of fractures in men. The epidemiology of vertebral fragility fractures is derived mostly from cross sectional data. The comparable prevalence of vertebral fractures in men and women is likely to be misleading because of traumatic vertebral fractures that arise in young men. Prospective studies are needed to define the proportion of these fractures that are traumatic. After the age of 50 years, the incidence of vertebral fractures in men is about one third to one half of that in women. As in women, most vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures occur in persons without osteoporosis. Identifying these individuals is an unmet challenge. The absolute risk for fractures appears no different by sex in men and women of the same age and bone mineral density (BMD) so that the diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis in women can be used in men. Fracture risk varies around the world and is unlikely to be explained solely by variations in BMD, though there are few data comparing men and women of different races. Both the notion that men lose less bone than women from the endosteal envelope and that they gain more on the periosteal envelope during advancing age needs reassessment as recent evidence challenges these observations. Sex differences in the net gain and loss from these surfaces are likely to be site specific, and research is needed to specify this heterogeneity and the reasons for it. The independent and co-dependent effects of sex hormones and the growth hormone/insulin like growth factor 1 axis on periosteal and endosteal modeling and remodeling during growth as well as ageing are poorly defined. The anti-fracture efficacy and safety of androgens and other agents remain incompletely investigated in men. Conclusion: A great deal of research is needed to advance our understanding of bone fragility in men.

AB - Introduction: This is a summary of several aspects of the epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment arising directly and indirectly from the proceedings of the Third International Osteoporosis in Men meeting held in Genoa in May 2005. Advances in the study of bone fragility in men have taken place, but many challenges remain. Observations: Although the epidemiology of hip fractures is well documented, the epidemiology of other non-vertebral fractures is less well defined even though these fractures contribute substantially to the global burden of fractures in men. The epidemiology of vertebral fragility fractures is derived mostly from cross sectional data. The comparable prevalence of vertebral fractures in men and women is likely to be misleading because of traumatic vertebral fractures that arise in young men. Prospective studies are needed to define the proportion of these fractures that are traumatic. After the age of 50 years, the incidence of vertebral fractures in men is about one third to one half of that in women. As in women, most vertebral and non-vertebral fragility fractures occur in persons without osteoporosis. Identifying these individuals is an unmet challenge. The absolute risk for fractures appears no different by sex in men and women of the same age and bone mineral density (BMD) so that the diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis in women can be used in men. Fracture risk varies around the world and is unlikely to be explained solely by variations in BMD, though there are few data comparing men and women of different races. Both the notion that men lose less bone than women from the endosteal envelope and that they gain more on the periosteal envelope during advancing age needs reassessment as recent evidence challenges these observations. Sex differences in the net gain and loss from these surfaces are likely to be site specific, and research is needed to specify this heterogeneity and the reasons for it. The independent and co-dependent effects of sex hormones and the growth hormone/insulin like growth factor 1 axis on periosteal and endosteal modeling and remodeling during growth as well as ageing are poorly defined. The anti-fracture efficacy and safety of androgens and other agents remain incompletely investigated in men. Conclusion: A great deal of research is needed to advance our understanding of bone fragility in men.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33749176102&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33749176102&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00198-006-0160-8

DO - 10.1007/s00198-006-0160-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 16896511

AN - SCOPUS:33749176102

VL - 17

SP - 1577

EP - 1583

JO - Osteoporosis International

JF - Osteoporosis International

SN - 0937-941X

IS - 11

ER -