help button home button Endocrine Society JCEM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bertelloni, S.
Right arrow Articles by Saggese, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bertelloni, S.
Right arrow Articles by Saggese, G.
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 84, No. 9 3403-3404
Copyright © 1999 by The Endocrine Society


Letters to the Editor

Normal Volumetric Bone Mineral Density in Young Men with Histories of Constitutional Delay of Puberty—Authors’ Response

Silvano Bertelloni, Giampiero I. Baroncelli and Giuseppe Saggese

Department of Reproductive Medicine and Pediatrics "Santa Chiara" Hospital I-56125 Pisa, Italy

We thank Dr. Finkelstein and coworkers for their letter, giving us the opportunity to discuss some aspects of bone mineral density (BMD) in young men with histories of constitutional delay of puberty (CDP).

As indicated in the letter (above), there is evident discrepancy between our data (1) and those of Finkelstein et al. (2, 3). We found reduced lumbar BMD area but normal BMD volume in young men with CDP (1), while they reported that both lumbar BMD area (2, 3) and BMD volume (letter) were decreased. In agreement with our data, Moore et al. (4) showed reduced lumbar BMD area and normal BMD volume in young men with histories of CDP; they also found normal femoral neck BMD volume (4).

In their letter, Finkelstein et al. suggest that androgen therapies administered to some of our patients during puberty may have influenced BMD measurement in young adulthood. We think this hypothesis is incorrect. In fact, no significant difference, in both BMD area and BMD volume at lumbar spine (1, 4) and femoral neck (4), has been found between men who received androgens during puberty and those left untreated. Finkelstein et al. also suggest that our results might be the consequence of the mean age of the control group. On this matter, we used the same criteria proposed by Finkelstein et al. (2) in selecting the controls. In addition, all the controls had attained final height before the BMD measurement and were more than 17 yr old. Thus, they were approaching their peak lumbar BMD (5, 6). Indeed, comparing lumbar BMD values of adolescents and adult men, it has been shown that lumbar peak bone mass is achieved by the age 17 yr in males (6). Finkelstein et al. (3) also wrote "the peak bone density of the spine and the femoral neck is usually reached between the ages of 16–18 yr in boys" (3). Thus, it is unlikely that the cause of the discrepancy between Finkelstein’s (2, 3) and our data lies in the age of controls (19 yr). However, we are following up both patients and controls to elucidate this aspect.

Furthermore, keep in mind that both lumbar BMD area and BMD volume are surrogates of the true bone density (7). The calculation of BMD volume by the ancillary data of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry reflects only an estimation of true bone density (1, 7). To correct BMD area values, we used the mathematical Kroger’s formula (8) assuming the vertebral body as a cylinder. The data of Moore et al. (4) were also done with the formula of Kroger et al. (8). Finkelstein et al. calculated BMD volume (letter) by using the formula of Carter et al. (9), assuming the vertebral body as a cube. Because the lumbar spine vertebral body is neither a cylinder nor a cube (10), the discrepancy may be due, at least in part, to technical differences in estimating lumbar BMD volume. There may be differences in bone mass (weight of bone), which is caused by different bone sizes not entirely normalized by mathematical methods of correction, instead of true differences in bone density, which is fairly constant from birth to adulthood (11). Vertebral quantitative computed tomography analysis may give additional information on real BMD in patients with CDP, clarifying the inferences derived from the mathematical models used to estimate bone volume in these patients with altered growth pattern (12). Because this technique requires high radiation exposure, we have some concerns about its use in adolescents and young adults who are in good health except for their history of CDP and who have shown neither increased fracture rate (1) nor abnormalities in the serum levels of biochemical bone markers (1, 3).

CDP remains an intriguing diagnosis (13, 14). Under this diagnosis likely falls a mix of patients affected by various disorders associated with short stature and pubertal delay (e.g. partial gonadotropin deficiency, partial growth hormone deficiency, and a combination of CDP and familial short stature) (13, 14). Asymptomatic coeliac disease may also cause growth and pubertal delay (15). Because all these disorders can impair bone mass acquisition, selection of patients may affect BMD measurements. Geographical and life-style differences may be additional causes. As stated in our paper (1), longitudinal studies on carefully selected patients should be done to understand the behavior of BMD in CDP from preadolescence to young adulthood.

Finally, we apologize for the incorrect citation. At any rate, the statement of Finkelstein et al. (2) that "many adult men (with history of CDP) may have lower than average peak bone mineral density and thus may be at increased risk for osteoporotic fractures" has been used as a strong argument for therapeutic intervention in CDP, at least in Europe.

Footnotes

Address correspondence to: Dr. Silvano Bertelloni, Department of Reproductive Medicine and Pediatrics, University of Pisa, "Santa Chiara" Hospital, Via Roma, 67, Pisa, Italy I-56125.

Received May 25, 1999.

References

  1. Bertelloni S, Baroncelli GI, Ferdeghini M, Perri G, Saggese G. 1998 Normal volumetric bone mineral density and bone turnover in young men with histories of constitutional delay of puberty. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:4280–4283.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Finkelstein JS, Neer RM, Biller BMK, Crawford JD, Klibanski A. 1992 Osteopenia in men with history of delayed puberty. New Engl J Med. 326:600–604.[Abstract]
  3. Finkelstein JS, Klibanski A, Neer RM. 1996 A longitudinal evaluation of bone mineral density in adult men with histories of delayed puberty. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 81:1152–1155.[Abstract]
  4. Moore B, Briody J, Cowell CT, Mobbs E. 1997 Does maturational delay affect bone mineral density (BMD)? Horm Res. 48 (Suppl 2):91 (Abstract).
  5. Bonjour JPh, Theintz G, Law F, Slosman D, Rizzoli R. 1994 Peak bone mass. Osteoporosis Int. Suppl. 1:S7–S17.
  6. Takahashi Y, Minamitami K, Kobayashi Y, Misanori M, Yasuda T, Niimi H. 1996 Spinal and femoral bone mass accumulation: comparison with female patients with sexual precocity and with hypogonadism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 81:1248–1253.[Abstract]
  7. Seeman E. 1998 Editorial: Growth in bone mass and size—Are racial and gender differences in bone mineral density more apparent than real? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 83:1414–1419.[Free Full Text]
  8. Kroger H, Kotaniemi A, Vainio P, Alhava E. 1992 Bone densitometry of the spine and femur in children by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Bone Miner 17:75–85.
  9. Carter DR, Bouxsein ML, Marcus R. 1992 New approaches for interpreting projected bone densitometry data. J Bone Miner Res. 7:137–145.[Medline]
  10. Lu PW, Cowell CT, Lloyd-Jones SA, Briody JN, Howman-Giles R. 1996 Volumetric bone mineral density in normal subjects, aged 5–27 years. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 81:1586–1590.[Abstract]
  11. Trotter M, Hixon BB. 1974 Sequenzial changes in weight, density and percentage ash weight of human skeleton from an early fetal period through old age. Anat Rec. 179:1–18.[CrossRef][Medline]
  12. Albanese A, Stanhope R. 1993 Does constitutional delay of puberty cause segmental disproportion and short stature? Eur J Pediatr. 152:293–296.[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Prader A. 1977 Constitutional delay of growth and puberty. In: Chiumello G, Laron Z, eds. Recent progress in pediatric endocrinology. London, Academic Press Inc, Serono Symposia. 12:129–138.
  14. Kulin HE. 1996 Delayed puberty. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 81:3460–3464.[CrossRef][Medline]
  15. Auricchio S, Greco L, Troncone R. 1988 Gluten-sensitive enteropathy in childhood. Ped Clin North Am. 35:157–187.[Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
E. Seeman
Sexual Dimorphism in Skeletal Size, Density, and Strength
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2001; 86(10): 4576 - 4584.
[Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bertelloni, S.
Right arrow Articles by Saggese, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bertelloni, S.
Right arrow Articles by Saggese, G.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals