The effect of exercise and estrogen on osteoprotegerin in premenopausal women

Abstract Background The benefits of exercise are widely recognized, however physically active women can develop exercise associated menstrual cycle disturbances such as amenorrhea (i.e., estrogen deficiency) secondary to a chronic energy deficiency. Objective To assess the effects of exercise status...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBone (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 44; no. 1; pp. 137 - 144
Main Authors West, Sarah L, Scheid, Jennifer L, De Souza, Mary Jane
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Amsterdam Elsevier Inc 01.01.2009
Elsevier
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract Background The benefits of exercise are widely recognized, however physically active women can develop exercise associated menstrual cycle disturbances such as amenorrhea (i.e., estrogen deficiency) secondary to a chronic energy deficiency. Objective To assess the effects of exercise status and estrogen deficiency on osteoprotegerin (OPG) and its relationship to bone resorption in premenopausal exercising women. Design Cross-sectional study of serum OPG, urinary c-telopeptides (uCTX), urinary estrone 3-glucuronide (E1G), urinary pregnanediol 3-glucuronide (PdG) and bone mineral density (BMD) measured on multiple occasions in 67 women. Volunteers were retrospectively grouped: 1) sedentary menstruating group (SedMen n = 8), 2) exercising menstruating group (ExMen, n = 36), and 3) exercising amenorrheic group (ExAmen, n = 23). One-way ANOVAs were performed, and LSD post-hoc tests were performed when differences were detected. Results Subjects were similar with respect to age (24.2 ± 1.0 years), weight (57.8 ± 1.7 kg), and height (164.3 ± 1.3 cm) ( p > 0.05). ExMen and ExAmen groups were more aerobically fit ( p = 0.003) and had less body fat ( p = 0.002) than the SedMen group. Resting energy expenditure/fat free mass was lowest ( p = 0.001) in the ExAmen groups. Mean E1G across the measurement period ( p < 0.001) and overall E1G exposure as assessed by E1G area under the curve (AUC) ( p < 0.001) were lower in the ExAmen group vs. the SedMen and ExMen groups. U-CTX-I was elevated ( p = 0.033) in the ExAmen group (281.8 ± 40.3 μg/L/mmCr), compared with the SedMen and ExMen groups (184.5 ± 22.4, 197.2 ± 14.7 μg/L/mmCr, respectively). OPG was suppressed ( p = 0.005) in the ExAmen group (4.6 ± 0.2 pmol/L) vs. ExMen group (5.2 ± 0.2 pmol/L), and OPG was lower in the SedMen group (4.1 ± 0.3 pmol/L) compared with the ExMen group. Findings were translated to BMD; the ExAmen group had suppressed total body BMD ( p = 0.014) and L2–L4 BMD ( p = 0.015) vs. the ExMen group. Conclusions Our results suggest that OPG responds to the bone loading effect of exercise, and that suppressed OPG may play a role in the etiology of increased bone resorption observed in exercising women with chronic estrogen deficiency secondary to hypothalamic amenorrhea.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:8756-3282
1873-2763
DOI:10.1016/j.bone.2008.09.008