This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Copyright Permission Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Eisman, J. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Eisman, J. A.

Genetics of Osteoporosis

Bone and Mineral Research Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia

	Abstract

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 

I. Introduction

II. Determinants of Bone Mass

III. Inherited Predisposition For and Against Osteoporosis

IV. Genetic Factors in Bone Phenotype

V. Vitamin D Receptor (VDR) Gene Polymorphisms and Bone Phenotype

A. VDR gene polymorphisms and bone phenotype

B. VDR gene polymorphisms and calcium homeostatic responses

C. VDR gene polymorphisms, body size, and development

D. Potential mechanisms for VDR allelic associations

VI. Collagen I1 Gene

VII. Other Candidate Genes and Chromosomal Loci

VIII. Gene-Environment Interaction

IX. Summary

	I. Introduction

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
OSTEOPOROSIS is a common disease affecting the majority of older women and a significant minority of older men. It is defined as the gradual reduction in bone strength with advancing age, particularly in women post menopause, such that bones fracture with minimal trauma (1, 2, 3, 4). Although fractures of the hip, wrist, and spine are often focused upon, almost any bone can fracture (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21). Age per se is the strongest risk factor for osteoporotic fracture; however, the variance in bone density is similar across all ages. A range of hormonal and environmental factors heighten the risk of osteoporosis, yet together these risk factors explain only a small proportion of the overall risk. Trauma is an important factor with the event of fracture often the result of a relatively weak bone being subjected to force, such as in a fall. Any bone will fracture if subjected to excessive force, e.g., in a motor vehicle accident. However weakened, osteoporotic bones can fracture without any obvious antecedent trauma. This complete spectrum in bone strength is the focus of this review, particularly the genetic factors that may influence sensitivity to environmental and hormonal factors. These factors and their interactions contribute to the end result of bone strength in later adult life when the risk for osteoporotic fractures rises.

Osteoporosis is one of the major and growing health care problems around the world largely related to the general aging of societies with improvement in public and preventive health and delay in mortality. In a recent community- based study in an Australian country town, it was estimated that for a 60-yr-old Caucasian woman the remaining life-time risk of an osteoporotic fracture was about 60% and almost 30% for a man of the same age (5). Moreover, the prevalence of vertebral deformities and fractures, including those in men, appears to have been underestimated (8, 12, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24). Based on the Australian population mentioned above, the overall direct costs, including rehabilitation, of osteoporosis in both men and women were estimated to be about 30 million US$ per million of population annually (25). A similar population-based analysis in the United States in 1995 estimated 52.5 million US$ per million (26). The age-adjusted incidence of hip fractures is reported to be lower in Asian than Caucasian populations, but there are wide differences in the incidence of hip fractures even across various Caucasian communities (14, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30). However, osteoporosis is becoming a major problem even in developing countries and, by the middle of the next century, more hip fractures are predicted in the populous Asian countries than in the rest of the world combined (7, 14, 18, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30). The difference in incidence between ethnic and racial groups may relate to environmental factors, but also may reflect inherited differences in susceptibility. Thus osteoporosis affects both women and men and has an impact comparable to, if not greater than, the major health problems, such as cardiovascular disease and malignancy. Given the increased mortality associated with major osteoporotic fractures (6, 31, 32), the impact of this disease on mortality also cannot be ignored. Understanding the inherited factors involved and their potential interaction with environmental factors may hold the key to better prevention and treatment.

The likelihood of a fracture event relates to the forces applied and the strength of the bone (33) and of course to the duration of observation. Fractures without major trauma, e.g., falls from standing height or less, suggest inadequate structural integrity of the bone. Falls are important contributors to fracture risk; however, their causes are beyond the scope of this review. Bone strength relates to the total amount of bone and to its structural and microstructural integrity. These latter components are measured to some extent independently of bone size by quantitative ultrasound, which is also predictive of fracture risk independent of bone density (34, 35, 36, 37). Bone strength depends upon the total amount of bone, size, and density as well as its structural and material properties. The bone mass of an individual at any time in their life depends upon the amount of bone formed and consolidated by the late teens or early twenties and the subsequent loss with aging and postmenopause (38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48). The determinants of peak bone mass, turnover, and loss are a major focus of osteoporosis research. The role of genetic factors as a determinant of these phenotypic characteristics is the subject of this review.

	II. Determinants of Bone Mass

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
The assessment of bone structure is particularly important in relation to genetic studies. The tools used over the past few decades have advantages over earlier invasive measurements, which were not readily applicable for large population studies. The new noninvasive techniques include the radiological measures of quantitative computerized tomography and more recently dual photon absorptiometry or dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. However, these techniques do not completely correct for bone size, which may itself be under genetic control. Quantitative ultrasound has also been shown to provide comparable predictive power for osteoporotic fracture risk in some epidemiological studies (34, 35). Although there is debate about the best parameter (e.g., ultrasound velocity or broad band attenuation) or site of measurement (e.g., heel, digit) this approach has the potential advantage of lesser influence from bone and body size. Each of the densitometric and ultrasound techniques has particular advantages and disadvantages but their safety and noninvasive nature have allowed rapid expansion of knowledge of the behavior of bone and the prediction of fracture risk. Bone phenotype measured by any of these techniques remains the most powerful predictor of subsequent fracture risk.

Peak bone mass achieved by late childhood-early adulthood appears to be under genetic control but also is influenced by life-style factors such as physical loading and calcium intake. With puberty, bone mass increases about 3-fold over just a few years (46, 49, 50, 51) and remains relatively stable thereafter until the late forties or early fifties after which it starts to decline in both men and women. There is accelerated bone loss with sex hormone deficiency after the onset of menopause and for 10–15 yr after (13, 40, 44, 48, 52, 53, 54). This also occurs with estrogen deficiency of any cause, e.g., due to anorexia. Bone loss continues and actually accelerates with aging in both men and women (55). Thus, bone mass in later life depends upon peak bone mass achieved and subsequent loss due to natural aging processes and various hormone-deficiency and disease-related insults (Fig. 1). Androgen deficiency is also associated with osteoporosis in men (56, 57, 58). Importantly, sex hormone deficiency-related bone loss can be prevented and at least partially reversed by estrogen replacement (44, 54, 59, 60, 61) and to a somewhat lesser extent by treatment with selective estrogens (62).

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Bone density change with age in women and men. Bone density (solid lines) follows a gradual decline from the peak values achieved by early adulthood in both women (left panel) and men (right panel). In women there is additional loss due to menopause. Low bone density in later life thus can result from achievement of a relatively low peak bone density (dashed line) or excessive bone loss (dotted line) with advancing age in both men and women. Both adverse patterns may coexist in some individuals.

Before considering the effect of inherited factors on bone mass, it is necessary to consider the effects of lifestyle and hormonal factors. The actual effect of these factors may relate to underlying inherited susceptibilities or resistances. Lifestyle factors include diet, exercise, alcohol intake, and tobacco use among a range of others that are less well characterized. Excessive intake of common salt (NaCl), phosphate, caffeine, and excessive use of tobacco and alcohol have been associated with increased fracture incidence in epidemiological studies (1, 11, 60, 63, 64, 65, 66). Dietary intake of calcium has been a major focus. Although dietary calcium is considered an important component of skeletal development, there is considerable disagreement about what is "adequate" (1, 30, 45, 46, 50, 51, 54, 63, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76). Intakes of 1,200–1,500 mg/day have been recommended around puberty and after menopause and 800–1,000 mg/day suggested for other life stages. The rationale for such figures is difficult to establish. In many countries, particularly those with little dairy intake for cultural reasons, the average dietary calcium intake is considerably below those figures, yet the age-adjusted incidence of osteoporotic fracture is not notably increased. Such discrepancies may relate to ethnic or racial differences in sensitivity to these environmental factors or to bone size or geometry or be confounded by other lifestyle factors (77, 78). Interestingly, lactase deficiency, which could be expected to result in lower calcium intake by limiting dairy intake, was not associated with differences in bone density in one mid-Western United States twin study (79). These apparent discrepancies between dietary calcium intake and osteoporotic fracture incidence may also relate to inherited components of calcium handling, which will be addressed below.

Physical loading on the skeleton has a role in maintaining bone mass. This effect is most apparent in studies of immobilization and micro-gravity, which result in rapid bone loss in animal as well as human models (44, 46, 49, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87). In athletes, increased loading has been shown to be associated with increased bone mass often localized to the sites of loading (88, 89, 90). Life-long loading may be central to such effects in view of limited evidence of beneficial bone effect of achievable physical exercise levels and duration in older people. The "dose-response" between bone mass and physical loading over the physiologically relevant range is shallow and variable. It is unclear to what extent genetic factors may have an impact on that relationship.

Hormonal factors include sex hormone deficiency as well as excesses of glucocorticoids, T₄, and PTH. Certainly the best characterized effect on the skeleton is the accelerated loss that occurs in relation to sex hormone deficiency and continues for at least 10–15 yr after menopause. The rate and extent of this bone loss vary widely between individuals, leading to categorization of slow and fast losers. The mechanisms for these differences are unexplained but appear to depend in part upon inherited factors. Glucocorticoid excess, either endogenous as in Cushing’s disease or from exogenous sources for therapeutic reasons, results in significant bone loss (91, 92). A limiting factor for long-term use of glucocorticoids can be their effects on bone mass resulting in severe osteoporosis. Nevertheless, there is no clear relationship between the level of glucocorticoid exposure and the resultant loss of bone. This also indicates the possible operation of inherited factors relating to the sensitivity of bone to glucocorticoids. Similar variability of effects on bone can be seen for thyroid hormone excess (2, 11). Finally, the effect of PTH excess on bone mass, particularly of cortical bone mass, has been reported in hyperparathyroidism (92A 92B ). However, PTH has anabolic effects on bone and therapy with PTH has been associated with increases in bone mass. For this hormone the final effect may relate to its competing effects on bone formation and resorption, and genetic factors may modulate the development and/or progression of hyperparathyroidism.

	III. Inherited Predisposition For and Against Osteoporosis

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
Several key studies have focused on the inheritance of the predisposition to development of osteoporotic fractures. Although not always considered, inherited factors are logically as likely to operate to protect against as to predispose to the development of osteoporosis. Generally, epidemiological studies have examined family history of osteoporotic fracture as a risk factor for the development of osteoporotic fracture (3, 4, 46, 47, 48, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102). In such epidemiological studies, which necessarily examine this relationship on a group rather than an individual basis, family history of fractures and indeed specific types of fractures are consistent with an inherited component (3, 93, 96, 97, 98). Importantly, any apparent inherited predisposition to fracture would not necessarily be related to inherited alterations in bone strength. For example, predisposition to falling and, for that matter, longevity per se would increase the apparent risk obtained from a family history. However, family studies have demonstrated that mothers with osteoporotic fractures have daughters with lower bone density. Interestingly, the bone density "deficit" seems to be relatively specific for skeletal sites (3, 93, 96, 97, 98). Thus, it seems that a large part of the inherited predisposition to osteoporotic fractures is due to inherited factors in bone mass, density, and/or material quality of bone. The concept of inherited predisposition in terms of bone mass leads naturally to the question of how such an inherited predisposition could be mediated. The assumption has been that it would be the result of the interaction between a relatively large number of genes, i.e., complex multifactorial genetic factors.

Child-parent resemblances are taken for granted in terms of externally obvious and less obvious traits, such as personality. Yet relatively little is known about the mediation of such apparently genetically determined traits. Indeed the degree of physical resemblance varies widely, yet such resemblances relate to a range of structural parameters, such as height and build. Presumably, bone mass is one of these genetically modulated parameters. Groups involved in osteoporosis research have been particularly interested in addressing how the familial similarity in various anthropomorphic features could translate to similarities in bone density.

A number of family (and animal) studies of bone density have now shown apparently high levels of heritability of bone phenotype, as assessed by bone densitometry (3, 4, 46, 83, 86, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112). Other studies of familial association have shown similarly high degrees of heritability for other parameters such as quantitative ultrasound (105, 113). Overall these studies suggest that 60–80% of variance in bone phenotype measurement at any age or group is genetically determined. One interesting study of young girls and their mothers indicated half-heritability contributions of 23–35%. This would be equivalent to 46–70% heritability from both parents if, as suggested from other studies, there are similar contributions from both parents (114). Moreover, this heritability, which was comparable to that for height (38%), was apparent in these girls before puberty, and the correlation changed little as they progressed through puberty (114). These data are consistent with genetic factors playing a major role in inherent bone structural characteristics and skeletal size and that these heritable effects are already programmed before puberty. Recent studies have started to address the extent to which other anthropomorphic parameters segregate with bone density and other bone phenotypes. They suggest that a significant part of the heritability is related to shared genetic contributions to skeletal size and body composition. These studies also suggest that there are both shared and distinct genetic factors contributing to the determination of bone density at different skeletal sites. These data are yet to be extended to examine differences between ethnic and racial groups.

	IV. Genetic Factors in Bone Phenotype

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
Family-based studies can be confounded by the inevitable comparisons of individuals of widely different ages and year-of-birth cohorts and by familial similarities in lifestyle choices (46, 47, 48, 66, 86, 94, 95, 104). Heritability has been investigated using the twin model by studying the relative degree of the difference between monozygotic (identical) and same-sex dizygotic (nonidentical) twins. These analyses make the assumption that twin pairs of the same age and sex share their environments and other lifestyle factors to a similar extent whether they are mono- or dizygotic. This assumption can be and usually is examined for many external factors that could impact on bone phenotype. Incidentally, monozygotic twins can be used to examine the impact of various environmental and lifestyle factors since the twin pairs are of the same age, sex, and genetic make-up (66, 115, 116).

Using this approach we (see Fig. 2) and others have shown that both lumbar spine and femoral neck bone density are more similar in monozygotic than in dizygotic twins (39, 66, 105, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 118, 119, 120). This genetic effect appeared to be greater at some sites than others, however it is not clear whether this relates to real differences in genetic vs. environmental effects or to the relative precision of measurement at any site or even side-to-side differences (37). Overall, however, several studies suggest that different genes may regulate bone density at different skeletal sites as measured by different modalities such as densitometry and ultrasound (105, 109, 110, 112, 113). More recent studies have shown similar genetic determination of bone parameters assessed by quantitative ultrasound and bone geometry (66, 105, 108, 120, 121). In several such studies 50–80% of the age-related variability of bone phenotypic parameters appeared to be genetically determined.

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Similarity of bone density in monozygotic and dizygotic twins. Lumbar spine bone density is more similar between monozygotic twins, who are genetically identical, than between dizygotic twins, who share on average half their genes. Analysis of these data suggests that 75–80% of the variance in bone density in individuals matched for age, sex, and general health is genetically determined. [Derived from Ref. 117.]

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Normal and mutational variation in bone density. Bone density, as for any physiological parameter, has a normal "mean" with a distribution around that age-matched mean. This distribution can be conceptualized as above with some extreme outliers distinct from the "normal" population but related to mutations, which cause very weak (e.g., osteogenesis imperfecta) or very dense bones (e.g., osteopetrosis). Fracture risk increases with age as the age-matched mean declines relative to the young normal mean. With advancing age many within the normal age-matched range, i.e., within 2 SD of the mean, will fall more than 2 SD below young normal mean and are thus likely to suffer such fractures. The high lifetime risk of osteoporotic fractures indicates that many more people from within the normal range will suffer fractures compared with the small numbers with extreme mutations. Thus, genetic changes, which could result in shifts in bone density within that normal range, are of considerable importance for the targeting and prevention of osteoporosis from a public health point of view.

The concept of inherited components to the risk of development of osteoporosis could lead to a negative approach in relation to osteoporosis prevention, since any inherited factor would by its very genetic nature be "immutable." This may be true for mutations in a structural gene or for mutations associated with gross loss- or gain-of-function. However, this may not be relevant to less severely modified forms of genes where the normal physiological counter-regulatory systems could overcome minor "deficiencies" in their function. This concept is central to the understanding of the possibility of "normal" genetic variability and its exploitation for better understanding of genetic predisposition to disease and in response to therapy. Indeed, it was found that genetic factors contribute to the determination of bone turnover as assessed by various biochemical indices. This indicates that the genetic factors may be modulating bone turnover and thus mediating their effects on bone mass through changes in this normal bone regulation of bone. On the other hand, it is important to recognize that bone turnover is itself related to environmental and other genetic factors. Thus genetic variants could be expected to have distinctly different effects on physiological parameters and phenotypic expression of bone depending upon the genetic as well as the environmental background (66, 110, 112, 119, 127).

	V. Vitamin D Receptor (VDR) Gene Polymorphisms and Bone Phenotype

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
A. VDR gene polymorphisms and bone phenotype
One of the first genes to be associated with the common form of osteoporosis is that for the VDR. In the first set of studies, common polymorphic alleles in the VDR gene were reported to be linked with different serum levels of a marker of bone turnover, osteocalcin (128). Osteocalcin, the functions of which are still poorly understood, is produced almost exclusively by osteoblasts and is the most common protein in bone after collagen. In earlier twin studies it had been shown to be under strong genetic "control" (119, 129). Other markers, e.g., the procollagen type I propeptide, cleaved and released when collagen is produced, were also shown to be genetically linked in some (130) but not all studies (131, 132, 133). The reasons for these differences may be similar to those related to the differences observed in relationships between candidate genes and bone density in various ethnic and environmental backgrounds as discussed below.

In the earlier twin studies the linkage in bone turnover markers were shown to be related to differences in bone density, so it was reasonable to examine various samples for a linkage between the VDR gene alleles and bone density. In the first such study a strong relationship was reported between common VDR alleles and bone density in twin and nontwin Caucasian populations in Australia (134). We subsequently reported problems in our original genotyping of the dizygotic twin part of the study, such that the heritability component attributable to this gene is somewhat less (135, 136). Our initial population data had suggested a difference between the extreme homozygote genotypes of up to 1 SD unit (10%) in bone density, while later twin studies have found weak effects on bone density (137, 138) or no effect on either bone density or ultrasound characteristics (131, 138). This work generated much interest resulting in a large number of follow-up studies and considerable controversy. Several population studies have shown a weak effect, perhaps 0.3–0.5 SD unit (4–13%), in several Caucasian and Asian populations (130, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158). However others, including some large carefully performed studies, have found no discernible effect in various Caucasian and Asian populations (131, 132, 133, 138, 156, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168). Among those studies that did find a VDR bone density relationship, a Dutch study (144) has reported a VDR gene allele effect in a sample of several thousand elderly individuals; however, the effect is in the opposite direction to the previous studies. Another smaller Scottish study and a US study have reported similar findings (146, 151). The conflicting findings have been reviewed (169, 170, 171), and two meta-analyses suggest that the VDR effect is real and likely to account for about 0.3 SD between alternate homozygotes (172, 173). Reasons for the differences in apparent effect of the VDR alleles remain uncertain; however, it is likely that differences in genetic (racial/ethnic) background and possibly environmental factors may alter the expression of subtle genetic differences. Interaction of the VDR gene allelic differences with the genetic background may relate to differences noted between Asian and Caucasian studies. However, positive and negative studies have been observed in both Asian and Caucasian cohorts.

In addition to the original polymorphisms in the 3'-region of the VDR gene, a start codon polymorphism has been reported. It has been reported to be associated with differences in bone density in different population groups, particularly Mexican-American groups (142, 143, 174) and in Japanese women (175), although not in a study of premenopausal French women (159). Interestingly, in one of these Mexican-American study groups (141), the allelic sites further 3' in the gene were associated with differences in bone density, which were not statistically significant but of the same magnitude, 0.25–0.5 SD suggested from the earlier meta-analysis (172).

B. VDR gene polymorphisms and calcium homeostatic responses
Gene-environment interaction has been examined for VDR alleles and dietary calcium intakes, which have varied widely across studies with mean intakes from 300–400 mg/day to more than 1,000 mg/day. A possible relationship between VDR genotype and calcium homeostasis via calcium intake has been addressed in two longitudinal studies (176, 177). In the Ferrari study there were genotype-related differences in change in bone density over time, such that the "Bb" heterozygotes responded to calcium intake while the "bb" maintained and "BB" lost bone density over time irrespective of calcium intake. In the Krall study there appeared to be genotype-related differences such that at low dietary calcium intakes the "BB" genotype subjects responded best to calcium supplementation. In a further short-term study, intestinal calcium absorption was studied at low (<300 mg/day) and high (1,500 mg/day) calcium intakes (178). The BB genotype subjects did not increase their intestinal calcium absorption at lower calcium intake as well as the bb genotype subjects. There have been variable findings of differences in calcium handling and bone responses to calcium therapy with respect to VDR genotype in some (113, 152, 178, 179, 180, 181) but not all (162, 163, 182, 183) studies. In a study in Thai women, VDR genotype was not associated with differences in bone density but was associated with urinary calcium excretion, which presumably reflects differences in efficiency of gut calcium absorption (160). In this study, urinary calcium excretion was 38% greater in "bb" than "Bb" genotype subjects. As in other studies in Asian subjects the frequency of "BB" genotype was too low for meaningful analysis. However, in another study in young children, the VDR gene start codon polymorphism (Fok1) was associated with major differences in calcium absorption (42% between extreme homozygotes) as well as in bone density (184). In relation to gut calcium absorption, two separate but small studies did not identify any genotype-related difference in intestinal VDR level (147, 183, 185) suggesting that the intestine is not the primary mediator of any genotype-related differences. In fact, VDR polymorphisms have been reported to have effects on parathyroid gland regulation (186, 187, 188, 189). This suggests differences in PTH regulation as a possible pathway for subtle differences in vitamin D regulation of bone and calcium homeostasis.

The various studies of calcium absorption and response to calcium intake suggest that any potential VDR genotype effect would be largely masked at high effective calcium intakes. Looked at another way, this would suggest that VDR genotype could be considered as a guide to the identification of individuals in whom calcium supplementation could be expected to be most efficacious. Thus calcium supplementation would be most effective (and justifiable) in "BB" and possibly in "Bb" genotype subjects with little if any value in "bb" genotype subjects. Despite some conflicting data, which may relate to ethnic and environmental heterogeneity, it seems clear that polymorphisms of the VDR gene are associated with differences in bone density, bone size, gut calcium absorption, and bone turnover. These data provide a basis for understanding the studies of differential bone density responses of the different VDR genotype subjects not only to long-term calcium supplementation but also to vitamin D intake and treatment with "active" vitamin D compounds, as considered below.

Several Japanese studies have reported differences in bone density response to 1-hydroxylated vitamin D metabolites or analogs (129, 190, 191). The "bb" genotype, which is most common in Japanese cohorts (75% of the subjects), was more responsive to the vitamin D compounds compared with the "Bb" genotype, which either did not respond as well or actually worsened with the treatment. Given that the "Bb" genotype is the most common (50%) in Caucasian populations, VDR genotype differences could contribute to the variable and generally less impressive responses to vitamin D metabolites and analogs in Caucasian as opposed to Japanese studies. A Dutch study of simple vitamin D supplementation in the prevention of hip fracture found that the bone density response to the supplement varied according to VDR genotype (161). In this relatively small study, bone density increased significantly in the "BB" and "Bb" genotype subjects (>4%) but not in "bb" genotype subjects (-0.3%). These two groups of studies, albeit in different racial groups, suggest that "BB" and "Bb" subjects may respond positively to simple vitamin D but not to 1-hydroxylated vitamin D. By contrast, "bb" subjects may respond positively to 1-hydroxylated vitamin D but not to simple vitamin D.

These data suggest that some of the differences observed in relation to VDR alleles and bone density end-points may relate to their environment. For example, any differences between "BB" and "bb" genotypes could be expected to be least apparent in a population with relatively high calcium or relatively high vitamin D intake and amplified in those with low calcium and thus habitually relatively high 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D levels. However, it remains to be shown in prospective randomized studies if VDR genotype-related differences do determine bone density responses.

C. VDR gene polymorphisms, body size, and development
Body size, as measured by body weight, lean mass, fat mass, or height, has one of the strongest associations with bone density and bone mass in a wide range of studies (3, 49, 80, 86, 104, 107, 109, 112, 147, 192, 193, 194, 195). Depending upon the parameter used, it has been argued that fat mass or lean mass is the stronger predictor (116, 192, 193, 194), particularly of spine bone mass or density. In this regard some studies suggest a relationship between body size and VDR genotypes. One study in 589 French children reported that at 2 yr, body length and weight were greater in "BB" than "bb" girls but less in "BB" than "bb" boys. They noted the same relationships at birth and 2 yr in longitudinal studies of 145 infants (196). This is consistent with a retrospective study in infant health records of 66 postmenopausal British women in whom those with the BB genotype had 7% higher weight than "bb" cohorts at 1 yr of age (197). Higher weight and higher bone mineral content in "bb" genotype subjects was found in another small study of 32 premenopausal women (147). Another study in 146 men over a wide age range suggested that lower forearm bone mineral density in "BB" than "Bb" or "bb" individuals was due to larger bone area for the same bone mineral content (198). Another large study found bone density was associated with VDR genotype in nonobese (body mass index < 30 kg/m²) older women (140). Importantly, this association appeared to be driven by an interaction between VDR and muscle strength (153). A Japanese study found an association between bone density and VDR genotype that was possibly due to an effect on age at menarche (199). These relationships between bone density and bone and body size and development may explain some of the differences observed between studies. Relationships between VDR genotypes and insulin secretion (200, 201) and between serum insulin levels and bone density (202) may underlie some of these effects.

D. Potential mechanisms for VDR allelic associations
The association or linkage of the VDR with bone or body phenotype could be due to the linkage of these polymorphisms to differences in a nearby gene or genes or to a functional or regulatory change in the VDR gene itself. Although changes in nearby genes cannot be excluded, the studies, indicative of variations in various aspects of bone and calcium homeostasis in relation to VDR genotypes, suggest that the changes are related in some way to functions of the vitamin D endocrine system. Any functional difference in the vitamin D-endocrine system could be due to a coding region mutation resulting in an altered receptor protein or due to an altered regulatory mechanism resulting in an altered amount of normal receptor protein produced in different tissues. Importantly, the initially described polymorphisms do not produce any coding region differences, and even the start codon polymorphism, which encodes a VDR protein shorter by three amino acids, may not generate any functional differences. In Japanese women, the start codon polymorphism has been reported to be associated with bone density and to be associated with a 70% difference in efficiency of transcriptional responses to 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D in vitro (175). By contrast, two other studies found no relationship of VDR protein level in relation to BsmI genotypes in monocytic cells and skin fibroblasts, respectively (203, 204). Although the original report of the VDR gene alleles and bone density suggested that the 3'-untranslated region altered stability of heterologous gene transcripts, a more recent study found no effect of these regions on mRNA stability of heterologous gene transcripts in vitro (134, 206). In a recent development, the single human VDR gene has been reported to have multiple promoters resulting in multiple transcripts with evidence for tissue specificity of promoter activities and encoded receptor proteins, differing by up to 10% in size (207). Subtle differences in the balance of these different isoforms within and between tissues could mediate bone and calcium homeostatic differences. As yet no functional differences have been ascribed to the distinct VDR protein isoforms nor have any differences in these distinct promoter regions been linked to any of the previously described polymorphisms. Further studies on these alternative transcripts will be of considerable interest.

	VI. Collagen I1 Gene

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
The collagen I1 gene is another most interesting gene to emerge in the search for candidate genes in the determination of osteoporosis risk. In the initial studies a polymorphism in intron 1 of the collagen I1 gene was shown to be associated with differences in bone density (151, 208). In subsequent studies this effect has been noted to be of varying strength or absent in various studies (48). In particularly interesting recent studies, the collagen I1 alleles have been associated with risk of nonvertebral fractures in the large Dutch population study (209) and for vertebral but not hip fractures, respectively, in smaller Danish and Swedish studies (210, 211). In a French study in healthy premenopausal women (212) there was a relationship between the collagen gene alleles and bone density but not after adjustment for height. This suggests that the collagen gene effects may be related to body size as has been suggested for the VDR gene alleles (see Section V.C. above). In the Dutch study the effect on bone density was not particularly strong in 50- to 80-yr-old women, and the association with fracture was most marked in the relatively small number of older subjects (209). It remains to be seen whether there is a stronger and unequivocal effect in older old (80+ year old) subjects, among whom the majority of hip fractures occur. An effect in older subjects could suggest that the collagen gene alleles affect bone turnover and loss; however, there were only weak or no relationships with biochemical markers of bone turnover in the French study (212).

In studies of possible functional differences, the intron 1 polymorphism has been reported to involve a consensus binding site for a transcriptional regulator, SpI. The polymorphism associated with lower bone density appears to result in less efficient transcription (208). This could be a causative pathway analogous with the effects of collagen gene mutations in osteogenesis imperfecta.

The collagen I1 gene polymorphisms are unique in the genetics of osteoporosis in that they have been associated, at least in some studies, with fracture risk. However, the overall strength of this effect is still modest, and it is not clear whether any effect is direct on bone density or on other characteristics of the bone phenotype.

	VII. Other Candidate Genes and Chromosomal Loci

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
Although both the VDR and collagen I1 gene polymorphisms have been associated with bone density, it is clear that a large number of other genes with modest effects and possibly some major effect genes remain to be identified. Several studies suggest that other genes involved in homeostasis of bone density, including potential regulators of bone cell function and calcium homeostasis, may be determinants of bone phenotype. Genome screening in human linkage studies and mouse models is now providing exciting results.

Polymorphisms of another steroid receptor gene, the estrogen receptor gene, have been associated with differences in bone density. These results initially reported in Japanese women (213) have been found in other (150, 191, 214, 215, 216) but not all studies (217). Interactions between estrogen receptor and VDR polymorphisms on bone density (150) and of estrogen receptor gene polymorphisms’ effects on calcium homeostasis in postmenopausal women with parathyroid gland dysfunction (218) suggest potential gene-gene interactions.

Polymorphisms of genes for cytokines and factors involved in regulation of bone cell function have been involved in bone phenotypic differences in human and mouse models. Interleukin-6 gene polymorphisms were associated with a relatively large difference in bone density between one homozygote and the heterozygote (219) and according to a CA repeat polymorphism (220). Interleukin-6 may also be associated with bone density in a mouse model of accelerated senescence (221). The interleukin-1 receptor antagonist gene allelic variation has been reported to be associated with bone loss at the spine in women within 5 yr of the menopause (222). However, allele selection appeared to be made post-hoc, which can lead to type 2 statistical errors particularly in small studies. Moreover, in these studies there was no clear effect in the alternate homozygote, suggesting that some of the differences could relate to sampling biases. The interleukin 6 (and 4) genes have also been linked to bone density in a family linkage study (223). The transforming growth factor (TGF) pathway has also been implicated with bone density being associated with alleles of the TGF receptor gene (224) and weakly linked and associated with polymorphisms of the TGFß1 gene (225). The insulin-like growth factor-I pathway has also been associated with bone density in some human studies (226, 227) as well as in mouse models (228, 229, 230).

Calcitonin and PTH receptor gene alleles have been associated with bone density. In an Italian study a calcitonin receptor gene polymorphism was associated with lumbar spine bone density (231). In another study based on linkage in more than 600 family members, a number of candidate loci (i.e., collagen I1, collagen II1, epidermal growth factor, and interleukins 4 and 6) were shown to have weak linkage to bone density (223). However, in that study, the strongest linkage was with the PTH receptor gene, consistent with the central regulatory role of this pathway in bone and calcium homeostasis.

In Japanese women, phenotypes of the apolipoprotein E have been reported to be associated with differences in bone density (191). However, another recent US study found no relationship of apolipoprotein E polymorphisms with bone density or hip fracture incidence (232). Interestingly, in the Japanese population sample, the estrogen receptor and VDR genotypes had similar effects to the apolipoprotein E polymorphisms of about 0.5 SD between extreme homozygotes. The role of the apolipoprotein E in transport of vitamin K and hence in -carboxylation of both osteocalcin and matrix -carboxylated proteins is suggestive of a bone-regulatory role. Another small Japanese study has identified an HLA type as being associated with bone density (233).

A recent US family linkage study has identified a region of chromosome 11q12–13 associated with very high bone density (234). The gene(s) involved are expected to be identified and reported in the near future (235). The genome screening approach being pursued in determination of bone density in extended family groups has confirmed a chromosome 11q locus and identified other candidate chromosomal loci at 1p36, 2p23–24, and 4qter and chromosomes 2 and 13 in various studies (124, 236, 237). The genome screening approach seems likely to surpass and replace the candidate gene approach (238). This approach is strongly supported and complemented by breeding and genome screening studies in mouse models of high and low bone mass (106, 239, 240, 241) and of early senescence (221, 242, 243).

	VIII. Gene-Environment Interaction

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
A large number of studies on the VDR polymorphisms have found effects on bone phenotype or calcium homeostasis (139, 140, 142, 145, 147, 148, 149, 150, 152, 157, 174, 176, 177, 178, 181, 190, 198, 244, 245, 246, 247). Nevertheless, a number of carefully conducted studies in similar ethnic and racial groups have not found such effects (48, 131, 132, 133, 138, 141, 159, 162, 163, 164, 165, 168, 175, 183, 248). Some of the reported differences in the apparent strength and even direction of the vitamin D allelic effects may relate to the genetic backgrounds in different studies and environmental factors such as calcium and vitamin D intakes, as discussed above. For example, in two recent studies a VDR association with bone density was apparent only in a subgroup selected according to estrogen receptor genotype (150, 156). It may well be that allelic differences beneficial in one environmental or lifestyle context are detrimental in another (Fig. 4). This is not an unusual suggestion given that even some of the most clearly deleterious mutations in human disease have been proposed to offer some benefit under some circumstances, e.g., hemoglobinopathies and malarial resistance. That potentially adverse and beneficial effects coexist in relation to allelic differences, such as for the VDR gene alleles, is a plausible hypothesis but yet to be formally tested. However, one recent large case-control study in Africa found that the tt (equivalent to the BB) genotype of the VDR was underrepresented in individuals with chronic infections, i.e., tuberculosis and hepatitis B but not malaria (249).

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Gene-environment interaction. The concept that a gene variant could be an advantage under one set of conditions and a disadvantage under another is depicted. Under conditions A, individuals with genotype 1 would be worse off compared with those with genotype 2 or 3. However, under conditions B, the reverse order would apply. For the VDR gene alleles, the environmental factors expected to impact in this way would include dietary calcium and vitamin D availability. For the estrogen receptor gene alleles, these conditions would include estrogen exposure. Importantly, these environmental factors could change at different ages.

An important corollary of any VDR gene effect on bone density could be an influence on the frequency of osteoporosis or its age of onset. Two small studies seeking a difference in VDR gene allele frequencies between osteoporotic and "control" subjects found no VDR genotype effects (151, 255). A larger case-control cohort study based on the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures found no association of any fracture type with VDR genotype even after adjustment for age, bone density, or calcium intake (255A ). By contrast, a recent nested case-control study in the Nurse Health Study found a greater than 2-fold increased risk for hip fracture associated with the BB genotype, and the risk increased with age, leanness, inactivity, and lower calcium intake (256). The need for large samples has been analyzed in relation to adequacy of statistical power to identify or exclude a biologically relevant effect (257, 258).

Several studies have examined whether VDR alleles might be related to postmenopausal bone loss. Some studies (130, 190) suggested differences in rate of bone loss in Japanese women according to VDR gene alleles. However, other studies in Caucasian women have not found a similar effect (131, 132, 133, 248). In studies in young children with calcium supplementation, an improvement was seen in bone density in prepubertal children but not in those going through puberty (51). Also increase in forearm density in peripubertal children and young adults was not associated with VDR genotype (182). These studies suggest that the major effects of introduction (puberty) or removal (menopause) of sex hormones overwhelm other effects. In that regard it is interesting that the inherited bone density similarity of daughters and their parents was already apparent before puberty (114), although in one study VDR genotype was associated with age of menarche (199). Given that sex hormone effects are so great, VDR alleles might not be expected to alter the major changes of sex hormone withdrawal associated with postmenopausal bone loss. In any case, the issue of genetic effect on rates of bone loss remains uncertain. A genetic effect on change of bone density over time was reported in one short-term study in women (118) but not in longer term studies in men, where shared environment appeared to be more important than genetic predisposition (13, 84). Heaney and co-workers have been studying bone density and size in relation to calcium intake in a large group of nuns for more than 20 yr (258A ). They have found a VDR genotype effect on femoral shaft cortical area, suggesting that any gene effect could be on material or structural characteristics as well as on bone turnover and density. This may be similar to the relationships mentioned above in relation to body and bone size, which may be central in studying and understanding genetic effects on bone structure.

Interestingly, associations have now been reported between VDR gene alleles and PTH function in primary (186, 187, 188) and secondary (189) hyperparathyroidism. This has also been linked with changes in bone density over time in subjects with renal disease (259, 260) and rheumatoid arthritis (250). These findings are consistent with these alleles of the VDR being linked to subtly altered physiological regulatory processes. For example, the initially described 3'-alleles of the VDR, but not the more 5'-start codon polymorphism, has been associated with altered VDR levels and differences in PTH mRNA and calcium-sensing receptor mRNA levels (261, 262, 263).

The examples of gene-environment interaction for the VDR gene have been described since such effects in bone and calcium homeostasis have been addressed largely in relation to allelic differences in that gene. However, these reports should only be seen as examples of what will presumably be identified for many different genes. This area of "pharmacogenetics" will undoubtedly be one of the major new areas for therapeutic advance in which different genetic (and ethnic) backgrounds will be shown to determine responses to different modalities of therapy. Understanding of such differences in relation to drug metabolism already can influence drug dose in chemotherapy. Knowledge of gene allelic differences in type of response could underpin targeted selection of optimal therapy according to genetic background.

	IX. Summary

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 
There is clear evidence of genetic modulation of bone phenotype parameters including bone density, quantitative ultrasound, bone size, and bone turnover. At any particular age and phase of life, genetic factors explain about 70% of the variance in bone phenotype after adjustment for major medical and disease factors. Hormonal factors, diet, and lifestyle interact with those genetic factors over time.

Common allelic variation in the VDR was the first of several genes and now chromosomal loci to be implicated in the genetic determination of bone phenotype. The VDR polymorphisms have an effect weaker than originally reported, and part of the allelic effects may be mediated by effects on body size and development and even other hormonal regulators such as PTH or insulin. Irrespective of the strength or mechanism of these associations, these initial findings on the VDR stimulated the field of the genetics of osteoporosis with targeted genetic studies and now genome scan approaches.

Intronic polymorphisms of the collagen I1 gene have been shown to be related to bone density and to fracture risk in several studies, although not all findings concur. Common allelic variations have now been associated with bone density for the estrogen receptor, TGFß receptor, and TGFß1, for the insulin-like growth factor-I pathway, for interleukin-4 and -6 and the interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, for calcitonin and the PTH receptors and for apolipoprotein E. Of considerable interest, chromosomal loci, notably 11q 12–13, have now been linked to bone phenotypes in human and mouse studies. The mouse strain studies seem likely to be powerful tools providing insight to important human loci based on the mouse-human chromosomal synteny.

Variability of genetic findings across studies seems to be the rule rather than the exception. This variability may relate to interaction of particular loci with specific environmental or even other genetic loci. The importance of genetic heterogeneity, including ethnicity, as well as environmental and hormonal confounders, such as calcium and vitamin D intake, hormonal status and skeletal and body size, will need to be taken into account in future gene search approaches. Genome scans in relation to bone density and fracture endpoints will need to account for such important potential confounders in each target population.

Interactions between genetic and environmental factors, including lifestyle, have been investigated initially for the VDR polymorphisms in relation to the response of bone density and turnover to calcium intake and treatment with simple vitamin D and active vitamin D compounds. Gene-gene and gene-environment interactions in human and animal models will be critical targets for future research. Further genes with positive and negative effects on bone phenotype are certain to be identified in the near future. Each of these will need to be evaluated in relation to potential environmental modulators in pharmacogenetic models. Understanding the molecular physiology of such gene effects is likely to lead to more specific treatments and to allow the selection of more appropriate and effective treatment options.

	Footnotes

 
Address reprint requests to: John A. Eisman, Ph.D., M.B., B.S., Bone and Mineral Research Program, The Garvan Institute of Medical Research, St. Vincent’s Hospital, 384 Victoria Street, Darlinghurst, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia.

	References

Top Abstract I. Introduction II. Determinants of Bone... III. Inherited Predisposition... IV. Genetic Factors in... V. Vitamin D Receptor... VI. Collagen I{alpha}1 Gene VII. Other Candidate Genes... VIII. Gene-Environment... IX. Summary References

 

1. Blaauw R, Albertse EC, Beneke T, Lombard CJ, Laubscher R, Hough FS 1994 Risk factors for the development of osteoporosis in a South African population. A prospective analysis. S Afr Med J 84:328–332[Medline]
2. Orwoll ES, Bauer DC, Vogt TM, Fox KM 1996 Axial bone mass in older women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Ann Intern Med 124:187–196[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Seeman E, Tsalamandris C, Formica C, Hopper JL, McKay J 1994 Reduced femoral neck bone density in the daughters of women with hip fractures: the role of low peak bone density in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 9:739–743[Medline]
4. Torgerson DJ, Campbell MK, Thomas RE, Reid DM 1996 Prediction of perimenopausal fractures by bone mineral density and other risk factors. J Bone Miner Res 11:293–297[Medline]
5. Jones G, Nguyen T, Sambrook PN, Kelly PJ, Gilbert C, Eisman JA 1994 Symptomatic fracture incidence in elderly men and women: the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study (DOES). Osteoporos Int 4:277–282[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Center J, Eisman J 1997 The epidemiology and pathogenesis of osteoporosis. Baillieres Clin Endocrinol Metab 11:23–62[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Cooper C, Campion G, Melton III LJ 1992 Hip fractures in the elderly: a world-wide projection. Osteoporos Int 2:285–289[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Cooper C, Melton LJ 1992 Vertebral fractures [editorial]. Br Med J 304:793–794
9. Nguyen TV, Eisman JA, Kelly PJ, Sambrook PN 1996 Risk factors for osteoporotic fractures in elderly men. Am J Epidemiol 144:255–263[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Cumming RG, Nevitt MC, Cummings SR 1997 Epidemiology of hip fractures. Epidemiol Rev 19:244–257[Free Full Text]
11. Cummings SR, Nevitt MC, Browner WS, Stone K, Fox KM, Ensrud KE, Cauley J, Black D, Vogt TM 1995 Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. N Engl J Med 332:767–773[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Jacobsen SJ, Cooper C, Gottlieb MS, Goldberg J, Yahnke DP, Melton III LJ 1992 Hospitalization with vertebral fracture among the aged: a national population-based study, 1986–1989. Epidemiology 3:515–518[Medline]
13. Johnston Jr CC, Slemenda CW 1992 Changes in skeletal tissue during the aging process. Nutr Rev 50:385–387[Medline]
14. Kanis JA 1993 The incidence of hip fracture in Europe. Osteoporos Int 3[Suppl 1]:10–15
15. Kanis JA, Adami S 1994 Bone loss in the elderly. Osteoporos Int 4 [Suppl 1]:59–65
16. Kotowicz MA, Melton III LJ, Cooper C, Atkinson EJ, O’Fallon WM, Riggs BL 1994 Risk of hip fracture in women with vertebral fracture. J Bone Miner Res 9:599–605[Medline]
17. Melton III LJ, Lane AW, Cooper C, Eastell R, O’Fallon WM, Riggs BL 1993 Prevalence and incidence of vertebral deformities. Osteoporos Int 3:113–119[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Spector TD, McCloskey EV, Doyle DV, Kanis JA 1993 Prevalence of vertebral fracture in women and the relationship with bone density and symptoms: the Chingford Study. J Bone Miner Res 8:817–22[Medline]
19. Johnell O, Gullberg B, Allander E, Kanis JA 1992 The apparent incidence of hip fracture in Europe: a study of national register sources. MEDOS Study Group. Osteoporos Int 2:298–302[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Johnell O, Gullberg B, Kanis JA, Allander E, Elffors L, Dequeker J, Dilsen G, Gennari C, Lopes Vaz A, Lyritis G, Mazzuoli GF, Miravet L, Passeri M, Perez Cano R, Rapado A, Ribot C 1995 Risk factors for hip fracture in European women: the MEDOS Study. Mediterranean Osteoporosis Study. J Bone Miner Res 10:1802–1815[Medline]
21. Johnell O, O’Neill T, Felsenberg D, Kanis J, Cooper C, Silman AJ 1997 Anthropometric measurements and vertebral deformities. European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study (EVOS) Group. Am J Epidemiol 146:287–293[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Jones G, White C, Nguyen T, Sambrook PN, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1996 Prevalent vertebral deformities: relationship to bone mineral density and spinal osteophytosis in elderly men and women. Osteoporos Int 6:233–239[Medline]
23. Cooper C, Atkinson EJ, Kotowicz M, O’Fallon WM, Melton III LJ 1992 Secular trends in the incidence of postmenopausal vertebral fractures. Calcif Tissue Int 51:100–104[CrossRef][Medline]
24. Kanis JA, McCloskey EV 1992 Epidemiology of vertebral osteoporosis. Bone 13[Suppl 2]:S1–10
25. Randell A, Sambrook PN, Nguyen TV, Lapsley H, Jones G, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1995 Direct clinical and welfare costs of osteoporotic fractures in elderly men and women. Osteoporos Int 5:427–32[CrossRef][Medline]
26. Ray NF, Chan JK, Thamer M, Melton III LJ 1997 Medical expenditures for the treatment of osteoporotic fractures in the United States in 1995: report from the National Osteoporosis Foundation. J Bone Miner Res 12:24–35[CrossRef][Medline]
27. Gullberg B, Johnell O, Kanis JA 1997 World-wide projections for hip fracture. Osteoporos Int 7:407–413[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Kanis JA 1997 Osteoporosis: a view into the next century. Neth J Med 50:198–203[CrossRef][Medline]
29. Elffors I, Allander E, Kanis JA, Gullberg B, Johnell O, Dequeker J, Dilsen G, Gennari C, Lopes Vaz AA, Lyritis G, Mazzuoli GF, Miravet L, Passeri M, Perez Cano R, Rapado A, Ribot C 1994 The variable incidence of hip fracture in southern Europe: the MEDOS Study. Osteoporos Int 4:253–263[CrossRef][Medline]
30. Kanis JA 1991 Calcium requirements for optimal skeletal health in women. Calcif Tissu Int 49[Suppl]:S33–41
31. Browner WS, Pressman AR, Nevitt MC, Cummings SR 1996 Mortality following fractures in older women. The study of osteoporotic fractures. Arch Intern Med 156:1521–1555[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Cooper C, Atkinson EJ, Jacobsen SJ, O’Fallon WM, Melton III LJ 1993 Population-based study of survival after osteoporotic fractures. Am J Epidemiol 137:1001–1005[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Nguyen T, Sambrook P, Kelly P, Jones G, Lord S, Freund J, Eisman J 1993 Prediction of osteoporotic fractures by postural instability and bone density. Br Med J 307:1111–1115
34. Turner CH, Peacock M, Timmerman L, Neal JM, Johnson Jr CC 1995 Calcaneal ultrasonic measurements discriminate hip fracture independently of bone mass. Osteoporos Int 5:130–135[CrossRef][Medline]
35. Gluer CC, Cummings SR, Bauer DC, Stone K, Pressman A, Mathur A, Genant HK 1996 Osteoporosis: association of recent fractures with quantitative US findings. Radiology 199:725–732[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Pocock NA, Noakes KA, Howard GM, Nguyen TV, Kelly PJ, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA, Freund J 1996 Screening for osteoporosis: what is the role of heel ultrasound? Med J Aust 164:367–370[Medline]
37. Howard GM, Nguyen TV, Pocock NA, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1997 Influence of handedness on calcaneal ultrasound: implications for assessment of osteoporosis and study design. Osteoporos Int 7:190–194[CrossRef][Medline]
38. Johnston Jr CC, Slemenda CW 1993 Determinants of peak bone mass. Osteoporos Int 3[Suppl 1]:54–55
39. Johnston Jr CC, Slemenda CW 1994 Peak bone mass, bone loss and risk of fracture. Osteoporos Int 4[Suppl 1]:43–45
40. Hui SL, Slemenda CW, Johnston Jr CC 1990 The contribution of bone loss to postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 1:30–34[CrossRef][Medline]
41. Kelly P J, Twomey L, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1990 Sex differences in peak adult bone mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 5:1169–1175[Medline]
42. Eisman JA, Kelly PJ, Morrison NA, Pocock NA, Yeoman R, Birmingham J, Sambrook PN 1993 Peak bone mass and osteoporosis prevention. Osteoporos Int 1:56–60
43. Kroger H, Heikkinen J, Laitinen K, Kotaniemi A 1992 Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in normal women: a cross-sectional study of 717 Finnish volunteers. Osteoporos Int 2:135–140[CrossRef][Medline]
44. Kroger H, Tuppurainen M, Honkanen R, Alhava E, Saarikoski S 1994 Bone mineral density and risk factors for osteoporosis–a population-based study of 1600 perimenopausal women. Calcif Tissue Int 55:1–7[CrossRef][Medline]
45. Teegarden D, Proulx WR, Martin BR, Zhao J, McCabe GP, Lyle RM, Peacock M, Slemenda C, Johnston CC, Weaver CM 1995 Peak bone mass in young women. J Bone Miner Re 10:711–715
46. Lonzer MD, Imrie R, Rogers D, Worley D, Licata A, Secic M 1996 Effects of heredity, age, weight, puberty, activity, and calcium intake on bone mineral density in children. Clin Pediatr 35:185–189
47. Lysen VC, Walker R 1997 Osteoporosis risk factors in eighth grade students. J Sch Health 67:317–321[Medline]
48. Willing MC, Torner JC, Burns TL, Segar ET, Werner JR 1997 Determinants of bone mineral density in postmenopausal white Iowans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 52:M337–342
49. Slemenda CW, Reister TK, Hui SL, Miller JZ, Christian JC, Johnston Jr CC 1994 Influences on skeletal mineralization in children and adolescents: evidence for varying effects of sexual maturation and physical activity. J Pediatr 125:201–207[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Weaver CM, Peacock M, Martin BR, Plawecki KL, McCabe GP 1996 Calcium retention estimated from indicators of skeletal status in adolescent girls and young women. Am J Clin Nutr 64:67–70[Abstract/Free Full Text]
51. Johnston CJ, Miller JZ, Slemenda CW, Reister TK, Hui S, Christian JC, Peacock M 1992 Calcium supplementation and increases in bone mineral density in children. N Engl J Med 327:82–87[Abstract]
52. Nguyen TV, Jones G, Sambrook PN, White CP, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1995 Effects of estrogen exposure and reproductive factors on bone mineral density and osteoporotic fractures. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:2709–2714[Abstract]
53. Harris SS, Dawson-Hughes B 1996 Weight, body composition, and bone density in postmenopausal women. Calcif Tissue Int 59:428–432[Medline]
54. Tuppurainen M, Honkanen R, Kroger H, Saarikoski S, Alhava E 1993 Osteoporosis risk factors, gynaecological history and fractures in perimenopausal women — the results of the baseline postal enquiry of the Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study. Maturitas 17:89–100[CrossRef][Medline]
55. Jones G, Nguyen T, Sambrook P, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1994 Progressive loss of bone in the femoral neck in elderly people: longitudinal findings from the Dubbo osteoporosis epidemiology study. Br Med J 309:691–695[Abstract/Free Full Text]
56. Seeman E 1995 The dilemma of osteoporosis in men. Am J Med 98 (2A):76S–88S
57. Soule SG, Conway G, Prelevic GM, Prentice M, Ginsburg J, Jacobs HS 1995 Osteopenia as a feature of the androgen insensitivity syndrome. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 43:671–675[Medline]
58. Slemenda CW, Longcope C, Zhou L, Hui SL, Peacock M, Johnston CC 1997 Sex steroids and bone mass in older men. Positive associations with serum estrogens and negative associations with androgens. J Clin Invest 100:1755–1759[Medline]
59. Slemenda C, Longcope C, Peacock M, Hui S, Johnston CC 1996 Sex steroids, bone mass, and bone loss. A prospective study of pre-, peri-, and postmenopausal women. J Clin Invest 97:14–21[Medline]
60. Slemenda CW, Hui SL, Longcope C, Wellman H, Johnston Jr CC 1990 Predictors of bone mass in perimenopausal women. A prospective study of clinical data using photon absorptiometry. Ann Intern Med 112:96–101
61. Armamento-Villareal R, Villareal DT, Avioli LV, Civitelli R 1992 Estrogen status and heredity are major determinants of premenopausal bone mass. J Clin Invest 90:2464–2471
62. Delmas PD, Bjarnason NH, Mitlak BH, Ravoux AC, Shah AS, Huster WJ, Draper M, Christiansen C 1997 Effects of raloxifene on bone mineral density, serum cholesterol concentrations, and uterine endometrium in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 337:1641–1647[Abstract/Free Full Text]
63. Massey LK, Whiting SJ 1996 Dietary salt, urinary calcium, and bone loss. J Bone Miner Res 11:731–736[Medline]
64. Cooper C, Atkinson EJ, Wahner HW, O’Fallon WM, Riggs BL, Judd HL, Melton III LJ 1992 Is caffeine consumption a risk factor for osteoporosis? J Bone Miner Res 7:465–471[Medline]
65. Nieves JW, Grisso JA, Kelsey JL 1992 A case-control study of hip fracture: evaluation of selected dietary variables and teenage physical activity. Osteoporos Int 2:122–127[CrossRef][Medline]
66. Slemenda CW, Christian JC, Williams CJ, Norton JA, Johnston Jr CC 1991 Genetic determinants of bone mass in adult women: a reevaluation of the twin model and the potential importance of gene interaction on heritability estimates. J Bone Miner Res 6:561–567[Medline]
67. Nordin BE 1997 Calcium and osteoporosis. Nutrition 13:664–686[CrossRef][Medline]
68. Dawson-Hughes B, Fowler SE, Dalsky G, Gallagher C 1996 Sodium excretion influences calcium homeostasis in elderly men and women. J Nutr 126:2107–2112
69. Dawson-Hughes B, Harris SS, Krall EA, Dallal GE 1997 Effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on bone density in men and women 65 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 337:670–676[Abstract/Free Full Text]
70. Jackman LA, Millane SS, Martin BR, Wood OB, McCabe GP, Peacock M, Weaver CM 1997 Calcium retention in relation to calcium intake and postmenarcheal age in adolescent females. Am J Clin Nutr 66:327–333[Abstract/Free Full Text]
71. Kelly PJ, Pocock NA, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1990 Dietary calcium, sex hormones, and bone mineral density in men. Br Med J 300:1361–1364
72. Wastney ME, Ng J, Smith D, Martin BR, Peacock M, Weaver CM 1996 Differences in calcium kinetics between adolescent girls and young women. Am J Physiol 271:R208–216
73. Weaver CM, Martin BR, Plawecki KL, Peacock M, Wood OB, Smith DL, Wastney ME 1995 Differences in calcium metabolism between adolescent and adult females. Am J Clin Nutr 61:577–581[Abstract]
74. Kanis JA, Passmore R 1990 Calcium supplementation of the diet [letter]. Br Med J 300:1523
75. Kanis JA 1994 Calcium nutrition and its implications for osteoporosis. Part I. Children and healthy adults. Eur J Clin Nutr 48:757–767[Medline]
76. Kanis JA 1994 Calcium nutrition and its implications for osteoporosis. Part II. After menopause. Eur J Clin Nutr 48:833–841[Medline]
77. Xu L, Lu A, Zhao X, Chen X, Cummings SR 1996 Very low rates of hip fracture in Beijing, People’s Republic of China the Beijing Osteoporosis Project. Am J Epidemiol 144:901–907[Abstract/Free Full Text]
78. Nakamura T, Turner CH, Yoshikawa T, Slemenda CW, Peacock M, Burr DB, Mizuno Y, Orimo H, Ouchi Y, Johnston Jr CC 1994 Do variations in hip geometry explain differences in hip fracture risk between Japanese and white Americans? J Bone Miner Res 9:1071–1076[Medline]
79. Slemenda CW, Christian JC, Hui S, Fitzgerald J, Johnston Jr CC 1991 No evidence for an effect of lactase deficiency on bone mass in pre- or postmenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res 6:1367–1371[Medline]
80. Ensrud KE, Lipschutz RC, Cauley JA, Seeley D, Nevitt MC, Scott J, Orwoll ES, Genant HK, Cummings SR 1997 Body size and hip fracture risk in older women: a prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Am J Med 103:274–280[CrossRef][Medline]
81. Ensrud KE, Cauley J, Lipschutz R, Cummings SR 1997 Weight change and fractures in older women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Arch Intern Med 157:857–863[Abstract/Free Full Text]
82. Recker R R, Davies KM, Hinders SM, Heaney RP, Stegman MR, Kimmel DB 1992 Bone gain in young adult women. JAMA 268:2403–2408[Abstract/Free Full Text]
83. Salamone LM, Glynn NW, Black DM, Ferrell RE, Palermo L, Epstein RS, Kuller LH, Cauley JA 1996 Determinants of premenopausal bone mineral density: the interplay of genetic and lifestyle factors. J Bone Miner Res 11:1557–1565[Medline]
84. Slemenda CW, Christian JC, Reed T, Reister TK, Williams CJ, Johnston Jr CC 1992 Long-term bone loss in men: effects of genetic and environmental factors. Ann Intern Med 117:286–291
85. Slemenda CW, Miller JZ, Hui SL, Reister TK, Johnston Jr CC 1991 Role of physical activity in the development of skeletal mass in children. J Bone Miner Res 6:1227–1233[Medline]
86. Ulrich CM, Georgiou CC, Snow-Harter CM, Gillis DE 1996 Bone mineral density in mother-daughter pairs: relations to lifetime exercise, lifetime milk consumption, and calcium supplements. Am J Clin Nutr 63:72–79[Abstract/Free Full Text]
87. Pocock N, Eisman Gwinn T, Sambrook P, Kelly P, Freund J, Yeates M 1989 Muscle strength, physical fitness, and weight but not age predict femoral neck bone mass. J Bone Miner Res 4:441–448[Medline]
88. Sessions ND, Halloran BP, Bikle DD, Wronski TJ, Cone CM, Morey-Holton E 1989 Bone response to normal weight bearing after a period of skeletal unloading. Am J Physiol 257:E606–E610
89. Slemenda CW, Johnston CC 1993 High intensity activities in young women: site specific bone mass effects among female figure skaters. Bone Miner 20:125–132[Medline]
90. Khan KM, Green RM, Saul A, Bennell KL, Crichton KJ, Hopper JL, Wark JD 1996 Retired elite female ballet dancers and nonathletic controls have similar bone mineral density at weightbearing sites. J Bone Miner Res 11:1566–1574[Medline]
91. Sambrook PN, Cohen ML, Eisman JA, Pocock NA, Champion GD, Yeates MG 1989 Effects of low dose corticosteroids on bone mass in rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal study. Ann Rheum Dis 48:535–538[Abstract/Free Full Text]
92. Sambrook P, Birmingham J, Kempler S, Kelly P, Eberl S, Pocock N, Yeates M, Eisman J 1990 Corticosteroid effects on proximal femur bone loss. J Bone Miner Res 5:1211–1216[Medline]
92. Duan Y, De Luca V, Seeman E 1999 Parathyroid hormone deficiency and excess: similar effects on trabecular bone but differing effects on cortical bone. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84:718–722[Abstract/Free Full Text]
92. Guo CY, Thomas WE, al-Dehaimi AW, Assiri AM, Eastell R 1996 Longitudinal changes in bone mineral density and bone turnover in postmenopausal women with primary hyperthyroidism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 81:3487–3491[Abstract]
93. Evans RA, Marel GM, Lancaster EK, Kos S, Evans M, Wong SY 1988 Bone mass is low in relatives of osteoporotic patients. Ann Intern Med 109:870–873
94. Sowers MR, Boehnke M, Jannausch ML, Crutchfield M, Corton G, Burns TL 1992 Familiality and partitioning the variability of femoral bone mineral density in women of child-bearing age. Calcif Tissue Int 50:110–114[CrossRef][Medline]
95. Krall EA, Dawson-Hughes B 1993 Heritable and life-style determinants of bone mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 8:1–9[Medline]
96. Seeman E 1994 Reduced bone density in women with fractures: contribution of low peak bone density and rapid bone loss. Osteoporos Int 4 [Suppl 1]:15–25
97. Soroko SB, Barrett-Connor E, Edelstein SL, Kritz-Silverstein D 1994 Family history of osteoporosis and bone mineral density at the axial skeleton: the Rancho Bernardo Study. J Bone Miner Res 9:761–769[Medline]
98. McKay HA, Bailey DA, Wilkinson AA, Houston CS 1994 Familial comparison of bone mineral density at the proximal femur and lumbar spine. Bone Miner 24:95–107[Medline]
99. Gueguen R, Jouanny P, Guillemin F, Kuntz C, Pourel J, Siest G 1995 Segregation analysis and variance components analysis of bone mineral density in healthy families. J Bone Miner Res 10:2017–2022[Medline]
100. Krall EA, Dawson-Hughes B 1995 Soft tissue body composition: familial resemblance and independent influences on bone mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 10:1944–1950[Medline]
101. Diaz MN, O’Neill TW, Silman AJ 1997 The influence of family history of hip fracture on the risk of vertebral deformity in men and women: the European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study. Bone 20:145–149[Medline]
102. Lips P 1997 Epidemiology and predictors of fractures associated with osteoporosis. Am J Med 103 (2A):3S–8S; discussion 8S–11S
103. Garabedian M 1995 Genetic aspects of osteoporosis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 7:237–239[Medline]
104. Jouanny P, Guillemin F, Kuntz C, Jeandel C, Pourel J 1995 Environmental and genetic factors affecting bone mass. Similarity of bone density among members of healthy families. Arthritis Rheum 38:61–67[Medline]
105. Arden NK, Baker J, Hogg C, Baan K, Spector TD 1996 The heritability of bone mineral density, ultrasound of the calcaneus and hip axis length: a study of postmenopausal twins. J Bone Miner Res 11:530–534[Medline]
106. Beamer WG, Donahue LR, Rosen CJ, Baylink DJ 1996 Genetic variability in adult bone density among inbred strains of mice. Bone 18:397–403[Medline]
107. Seeman E, Hopper JL, Young NR, Formica C, Goss P, Tsalamandris C 1996 Do genetic factors explain associations between muscle strength, lean mass, and bone density? A twin study. Am J Physiol 270:E320–E327
108. Slemenda CW, Turner CH, Peacock M, Christian JC, Sorbel J, Hui SL, Johnston CC 1996 The genetics of proximal femur geometry, distribution of bone mass and bone mineral density. Osteoporos Int 6:178–182[Medline]
109. Arden NK, Spector TD 1997 Genetic influences on muscle strength, lean body mass, and bone mineral density: a twin study. J Bone Miner Res 12:2076–2081[CrossRef][Medline]
110. Harris M, Nguyen TV, Howard GM, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1998 Genetic and environmental correlations between bone formation and bone mineral density: a twin study. Bone 22:141–145[Medline]
111. Hopper JL, Green RM, Nowson CA, Young D, Sherwin AJ, Kaymakci B, Larkins RG, Wark JD 1998 Genetic, common environment, and individual specific components of variance for bone mineral density in 10- to 26-year-old females: a twin study. Am J Epidemiol 147:17–29[Abstract/Free Full Text]
112. Nguyen TV, Howard GM, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1998 Bone mass, lean mass, and fat mass: same genes or same environments? Am J Epidemiol 147:3–16[Abstract/Free Full Text]
113. Howard GM, Nguyen TV, Harris M, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1998 Genetic and environmental contributions to the association between quantitative ultrasound and bone mineral density measurements: a twin study. J Bone Miner Res 13:1318–1327[CrossRef][Medline]
114. Ferrari S, Rizzoli R, Slosman D, Bonjour JP 1998 Familial resemblance for bone mineral mass is expressed before puberty. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:358–361[Abstract/Free Full Text]
115. Pocock NA, Eisman JA, Kelly PJ, Sambrook PN, Yeates MG 1989 Effects of tobacco use on axial and appendicular bone mineral density. Bone 10:329–331[Medline]
116. Young D, Hopper JL, Nowson CA, Green RM, Sherwin AJ, Kaymakci B, Smid M, Guest CS, Larkins RG, Wark JD 1995 Determinants of bone mass in 10- to 26-year-old females: a twin study. J Bone Miner Res 10:558–567[Medline]
117. Pocock NA, Eisman JA, Hopper JL, Yeates MG, Sambrook PN, Eberl S 1987 Genetic determinants of bone mass in adults. A twin study. J Clin Invest 80:706–710
118. Kelly PJ, Nguyen T, Hopper J, Pocock N, Sambrook P, Eisman J 1993 Changes in axial bone density with age: a twin study. J Bone Miner Res 8:11–17[Medline]
119. Kelly PJ, Morrison NA, Sambrook PN, Nguyen TV, Eisman JA 1995 Genetic influences on bone turnover, bone density and fracture. Eur J Endocrinol 133:265–271[Abstract/Free Full Text]
120. Flicker L, Faulkner KG, Hopper JL, Green RM, Kaymacki B, Nowson CA, Young D, Wark JD 1996 Determinants of hip axis length in women aged 10–89 years: a twin study. Bone 18:41–45[Medline]
121. Slemenda CW, Hui SL, Williams CJ, Christian JC, Meaney FJ, Johnston Jr CC 1990 Bone mass and anthropometric measurements in adult females. Bone Miner 11:101–109[CrossRef][Medline]
122. Spotila LD, Constantinou CD, Sereda L, Ganguly A, Riggs BL, DJ Prockop DJ 1991 Mutation in a gene for type I procollagen (COL1A2) in a woman with postmenopausal osteoporosis: evidence for phenotypic and genotypic overlap with mild osteogenesis imperfecta. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88:5423–5427[Abstract/Free Full Text]
123. Spotila LD, Colige A, Sereda L, Constantinou-Deltas CD, Whyte MP, Riggs BL, Shaker JL, Spector TD, Hume E, Olsen N, Attie M, Terenhouse A, Shane E, Briney W, Prockop DJ 1994 Mutation analysis of coding sequences for type I procollagen in individuals with low bone density. J Bone Miner Res 9:923–932[Medline]
124. Spotila LD, Caminis J, Devoto M, Shimoya K, Sereda L, Ott J, Whyte MP, Tenenhouse A, Prockop DJ 1996 Osteopenia in 37 members of seven families: analysis based on a model of dominant inheritance. Mol Med 2:313–324[Medline]
125. Shapiro JR, Stover ML, Burn VE, McKinstry MB, Burshell AL, Chipman SD, Rowe DW 1992 An osteopenic nonfracture syndrome with features of mild osteogenesis imperfecta associated with the substitution of a cysteine for glycine at triple helix position 43 in the pro 1 (I) chain of type I collagen. J Clin Invest 89:567–573
126. Paterson CR, Mole PA 1994 Bone density in osteogenesis imperfecta may well be normal. Postgrad Med J 70:104–107[Abstract/Free Full Text]
127. Kelly PJ, Hopper JL, Macaskill GT, Pocock NA, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1991 Genetic factors in bone turnover. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 72:808–813[Abstract/Free Full Text]
128. Morrison NA, Yeoman R, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1992 Contribution of trans-acting factor alleles to normal physiological variability: vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism and circulating osteocalcin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:6665–6659[Abstract/Free Full Text]
129. Tokita A, Kelly PJ, Nguyen TV, Qi JC, Morrison NA, Risteli L, Risteli J, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1994 Genetic influences on type I collagen synthesis and degradation: further evidence for genetic regulation of bone turnover. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 78:1461–1466[Abstract]
130. Tokita A, Matsumoto H, Morrison NA, Tawa T, Miura Y, Fukamauchi K, Mitsuhashi N, Irimoto M, Yamamori S, Miura M, Watanabe T, Kuwabara Y, Yabuta K, Eisman JA 1996 Vitamin D receptor alleles, bone mineral density and turnover in premenopausal Japanese women. J Bone Miner Res 11:1003–1009[Medline]
131. Hustmyer FG, Peacock M, Hui S, Johnston CC, Christian J 1994 Bone mineral density in relation to polymorphism at the vitamin D receptor gene locus. J Clin Invest 94:2130–2134
132. Garnero P, Borel O, Sornay-Rendu E, Delmas PD 1995 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms do not predict bone turnover and bone mass in healthy premenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res 10:1283–1288[Medline]
133. Garnero P, Borel O, Sornay-Rendu E, Arlot ME, Delmas PD 1996 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms are not related to bone turnover, rate of bone loss, and bone mass in postmenopausal women: the OFELY Study. J Bone Miner Res 11:827–834[Medline]
134. Morrison NA, Qi JC, Tokita A, Kelly PJ, Crofts L, Nguyen TV, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1994 Prediction of bone density from vitamin D receptor alleles. Nature 367:284–287[CrossRef][Medline]
135. Eisman J 1996 Genetics of osteoporosis. In: Papapoulos S (ed) Osteoporosis 1996. Elsevier Science, New York, pp 131–135
136. Morrison NA, Qi JC, Tokita A, Kelly PJ, Crofts L, Nguyen TV, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1997 Prediction of bone density from vitamin D receptor alleles. Nature 387:106
137. Spector TD, Keen RW, Arden NK, Morrison NA, Major PJ, Nguyen TV, Kelly PJ, Baker JR, Sambrook PN, Lanchbury JS, Eisman JA1995 Influence of vitamin D receptor genotype on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women: a twin study in Britain. Br Med J 310:1357–1360
138. Arden NK, Keen RW, Lanchbury JS, Spector TD 1996 Polymorphisms of the vitamin D receptor gene do not predict quantitative ultrasound of the calcaneus or hip axis length. Osteoporos Int 6:334–337[CrossRef][Medline]
139. Zmuda JM, Cauley JA, Danielson ME, Wolf RL, Ferrell RE 1997 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms, bone turnover, and rates of bone loss in older African-American women. J Bone Miner Res 12:1446–1452[CrossRef][Medline]
140. Vandevyver C, Wylin T, Cassiman JJ, Raus J, Geusens P 1997 Influence of the vitamin D receptor gene alleles on bone mineral density in postmenopausal and osteoporotic women. J Bone Miner Res 12:241–247[CrossRef][Medline]
141. McClure L, Eccleshall TR, Gross C, Villa ML, Lin N, Ramaswamy V, Kohlmeier L, Kelsey JL, Marcus R, Feldman D 1997 Vitamin D receptor polymorphisms, bone mineral density, and bone metabolism in postmenopausal Mexican-American women. J Bone Miner Res 12:234–240[CrossRef][Medline]
142. Harris SS, Eccleshall TR, Gross C, Dawson-Hughes B, Feldman D 1997 The vitamin D receptor start codon polymorphism (FokI) and bone mineral density in premenopausal American black and white women. J Bone Miner Res 12:1043–1048[CrossRef][Medline]
143. Gross C, Eccleshall TR, Malloy PJ, Villa ML, Marcus R, Feldman D 1996 The presence of a polymorphism at the translation initiation site of the vitamin D receptor gene is associated with low bone mineral density in postmenopausal Mexican-American women. J Bone Miner Res 11:1850–1855[Medline]
144. Uitterlinden AG, Pols HA, Burger H, Huang Q, Van Daele PL, Van Duijn CM, Hofman A, Birkenhager JC, Van Leeuwen JP 1996 A large-scale population-based study of the association of vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms with bone mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 11:1241–1248[Medline]
145. Viitanen A, Karkkainen M, Laitinen K, Lamberg-Allardt C, Kainulainen K, Rasanen L, Viikari J, Valimaki MJ, Kontula K 1996 Common polymorphism of the vitamin D receptor gene is associated with variation of peak bone mass in young finns. Calcif Tissue Int 59:231–234[CrossRef][Medline]
146. Salamone LM, Ferrell R, Black DM, Palermo L, Epstein RS, Petro N, Steadman N, Kuller LH, Cauley JA 1996 The association between vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms and bone mineral density at the spine, hip and whole-body in premenopausal women [published erratum appears in Osteoporos Int 1996;6:187–188]. Osteoporos Int 6:63–68[CrossRef][Medline]
147. Barger-Lux MJ, Heaney RP, Hayes J, DeLuca HF, Johnson ML, Gong G 1995 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism, bone mass, body size, and vitamin D receptor density. Calcif Tissue Int 57:161–162[CrossRef][Medline]
148. Riggs BL, Nguyen TV, Melton III LJ, Morrison NA, O’Fallon WM, Kelly PJ, Egan KS, Sambrook PN, Muhs JM, Eisman JA 1995 The contribution of vitamin D receptor gene alleles to the determination of bone mineral density in normal and osteoporotic women. J Bone Miner Res 10:991–996[Medline]
149. Fleet JC, Harris SS, Wood RJ, Dawson-Hughes B 1995 The BsmI vitamin D receptor restriction fragment length polymorphism (BB) predicts low bone density in premenopausal black and white women. J Bone Miner Res 10:985–990[Medline]
150. Gennari L, Becherini L, Masi L, Mansani R, Gonnelli S, Cepollaro C, Martini S, Montagnani A, Lentini G, Becorpi AM, Brandi ML 1998 Vitamin D and estrogen receptor allelic variants in Italian postmenopausal women: evidence of multiple gene contribution to bone mineral density. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:939–944[Abstract/Free Full Text]
151. Houston LA, Grant SF, Reid DM, Ralston SH 1996 Vitamin D receptor polymorphism, bone mineral density, and osteoporotic vertebral fracture: studies in a UK population. Bone 18:249–252[Medline]
152. Kiel DP, Myers RH, Cupples LA, Kong XF, Zhu XH, Ordovas J, Schaefer EJ, Felson DT, Rush D, Wilson PW, Eisman JA, Holick MF 1997 The BsmI vitamin D receptor restriction fragment length polymorphism (bb) influences the effect of calcium intake on bone mineral density. J Bone Miner Res 12:1049–1057[CrossRef][Medline]
153. Geusens P, Vandevyver C, Vanhoof J, Cassiman JJ, Boonen S, Raus J 1997 Quadriceps and grip strength are related to vitamin D receptor genotype in elderly nonobese women. J Bone Miner Res 12:2082–2088[CrossRef][Medline]
154. Lazaretti-Castro M, Duarte-de-Oliveira MA, Russo EM, Vieira JG 1997 Vitamin D receptor alleles and bone mineral density in a normal premenopausal Brazilian female population. Braz J Med Biol Res 30:929–932[Medline]
155. Tamai M, Yokouchi M, Komiya S, Mochizuki K, Hidaka S, Narita S, Inoue A, Itoh K 1997 Correlation between vitamin D receptor genotypes and bone mineral density in Japanese patients with osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 60:229–232[CrossRef][Medline]
156. Willing M, Sowers M, Aron D, Clark MK, Burns T, Bunten C, Crutchfield M, D’Agostino D, Jannausch M 1998 Bone mineral density and its change in white women: estrogen and vitamin D receptor genotypes and their interaction. J Bone Miner Res 13:695–705[CrossRef][Medline]
157. Ferrari S, Rizzoli R, Manen D, Slosman D, Bonjour JP 1998 Vitamin D receptor gene start codon polymorphisms (FokI) and bone mineral density: interaction with age, dietary calcium, and 3'-end region polymorphisms. J Bone Miner Res 13:925–930[CrossRef][Medline]
158. Hauache OM, Lazaretti-Castro M, Andreoni S, Gimeno SG, Brandao C, Ramalho AC, Kasamatsu TS, Kunii I, Hayashi LF, Dib SA, Vieira JG 1998 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism: correlation with bone mineral density in a Brazilian population with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Osteoporos Int 8:204–210[CrossRef][Medline]
159. Eccleshall TR, Garnero P, Gross C, Delmas PD, Feldman D 1998 Lack of correlation between start codon polymorphism of the vitamin D receptor gene and bone mineral density in premenopausal French women: the OFELY study. J Bone Miner Res 13:31–35[CrossRef][Medline]
160. Ongphiphadhanakul B, Rajatanavin R, Chanprasertyothin S, Chailurkit L, Piaseu N, Teerarungsikul K, Sirisriro R, Komindr S, Puavilai G 1997 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism is associated with urinary calcium excretion but not with bone mineral density in postmenopausal women. J Endocrinol Invest 20:592–596[Medline]
161. Graafmans WC, Lips P, Ooms ME, van Leeuwen JP, Pols HA, Uitterlinden AG 1997 The effect of vitamin D supplementation on the bone mineral density of the femoral neck is associated with vitamin D receptor genotype. J Bone Miner Res 12:1241–1245[CrossRef][Medline]
162. Francis RM, Harrington F, Turner E, Papiha SS, Datta HK 1997 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism in men and its effect on bone density and calcium absorption. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 46:83–86[CrossRef][Medline]
163. Rauch F, Radermacher A, Danz A, Schiedermaier U, Golucke A, Michalk D, Schonau E 1997 Vitamin D receptor genotypes and changes of bone density in physically active German women with high calcium intake. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 105:103–108[Medline]
164. Tsai KS, Hsu SH, Cheng WC, Chen CK, Chieng PU, Pan WH 1996 Bone mineral density and bone markers in relation to vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms in Chinese men and women. Bone 19:513–518[Medline]
165. Lim SK, Park YS, Park JM, Song YD, Lee EJ, Kim KR, Lee HC, Huh KB 1995 Lack of association between vitamin D receptor genotypes and osteoporosis in Koreans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:3677–3681[Abstract]
166. Alahari KD, Lobaugh B, Econs MJ 1997 Vitamin D receptor alleles do not correlate with bone mineral density in premenopausal Caucasian women from the southeastern United States. Metab Clin Exp 46:224–226
167. Spotila LD, Caminis J, Johnston R, Shimoya KS, O’Connor MP, Prockop DJ, Tenenhouse A, Tenenhouse HS 1996 Vitamin D receptor genotype is not associated with bone mineral density in three ethnic/regional groups. Calcif Tissue Int 59:235–237[CrossRef][Medline]
168. Boschitsch E, Suk EK, Mayr WR, Lang T, Schwartz WM, Panzer S 1996 Genotypes of the vitamin-D-receptor gene and bone mineral density in Caucasoid postmenopausal females [published erratum appears in Maturitas 1996 Aug;25:84]. Maturitas 24:91–96[CrossRef][Medline]
169. Eisman JA 1995 Vitamin D receptor gene alleles and osteoporosis: an affirmative view [editorial]. J Bone Miner Res 10:1289–1293[Medline]
170. Peacock M, Hustmyer FG, Hui S, Johnston CC, Christian J 1995 Vitamin D receptor genotype and bone mineral density. Evidence conflicts on link [letter; comment] [published erratum appears in Br Med J 1995 Nov 25;311 (7017):1439]. Br Med J 311:874–875[Free Full Text]
171. Peacock M 1995 Vitamin D receptor gene alleles and osteoporosis: a contrasting view [editorial]. J Bone Miner Res 10:1294–1297[Medline]
172. Cooper GS, Umbach DM 1996 Are vitamin D receptor polymorphisms associated with bone mineral density? A meta-analysis [see comments]. J Bone Miner Res 11:1841–1849[Medline]
173. Gong G, Stern H, Cheng S, Fong N, Mordeson J, Deng H, Recker R 1999 The association of bone mineral density with vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms. Osteoporos Int 9:55–64[CrossRef][Medline]
174. Sainz J, Van Tornout JM, Loro ML, Sayre J, Roe TF, Gilsanz V 1997 Vitamin D-receptor gene polymorphisms and bone density in prepubertal American girls of Mexican descent. N Engl J Med 337:77–82[Abstract/Free Full Text]
175. Arai H, Miyamoto K, Taketani Y, Yamamoto H, Iemori Y, Morita K, Tonai T, Nishisho T, Mori S, Takeda E 1997 A vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism in the translation initiation codon: effect on protein activity and relation to bone mineral density in Japanese women. J Bone Miner Res 12:915–921[CrossRef][Medline]
176. Ferrari S, Rizzoli R, Chevalley T, Slosman D, Eisman JA, Bonjour JP 1995 Vitamin-D-receptor-gene polymorphisms and change in lumbar-spine bone mineral density. Lancet 345:423–424[CrossRef][Medline]
177. Krall EA, Parry P, Lichter JB, Dawson-Hughes B 1995 Vitamin D receptor alleles and rates of bone loss: influences of years since menopause and calcium intake. J Bone Miner Res 10:978–984[Medline]
178. Dawson-Hughes B, Harris SS, Finneran S 1995 Calcium absorption on high and low calcium intakes in relation to vitamin D receptor genotype. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:3657–3661[Abstract]
179. Howard G, Nguyen T, Morrison N, Watanabe T, Sambrook P, Eisman J, Kelly PJ 1995 Genetic influences on bone density: physiological correlates of vitamin D receptor gene alleles in premenopausal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:2800–2805[Abstract]
180. Howard G, Nguyen T, Morrison N, Watanabe T, Sambrook P, Eisman J, Kelly P 1998 Genetic influences on bone density: physiological correlates of vitamin D receptor gene alleles in premenopausal women. Notification of genotype corrections [letter]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:1043[Free Full Text]
181. Wishart JM, Horowitz M, Need AG, Scopacasa F, Morris HA, Clifton PM, Nordin BE 1997 Relations between calcium intake, calcitriol, polymorphisms of the vitamin D receptor gene, and calcium absorption in premenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr 65:798–802[Abstract/Free Full Text]
182. Gunnes M, Berg JP, Halse J, Lehmann EH 1997 Lack of relationship between vitamin D receptor genotype and forearm bone gain in healthy children, adolescents, and young adults. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 82:851–855[Abstract/Free Full Text]
183. Kinyamu HK, Gallagher JC, Knezetic JA, DeLuca HF, Prahl JM, Lanspa SJ 1997 Effect of vitamin D receptor genotypes on calcium absorption, duodenal vitamin D receptor concentration, and serum 1,25 dihydroxyvitamin D levels in normal women. Calcif Tissue Int 60:491–495[CrossRef][Medline]
184. Ames S, Ellis K, Gunn S, Copeland K, Abrams S 1999 Vitamin D receptor gene Fok1 polymorphism predicts calcium absorption and bone mineral density in children. J Bone Miner Res 14:740–746[CrossRef][Medline]
185. Kinyamu HK, Gallagher JC, Prahl JM, DeLuca HF, Petranick KM, Lanspa SJ 1997 Association between intestinal vitamin D receptor, calcium absorption, and serum 1,25 dihydroxyvitamin D in normal young and elderly women. J Bone Miner Res 12:922–928[CrossRef][Medline]
186. Carling T, Kindmark A, Hellman P, Lundgren E, Ljunghall S, Rastad J, Akerstrom G, Melhus H 1995 Vitamin D receptor genotypes in primary hyperparathyroidism. Nat Med 1:1309–1311[CrossRef][Medline]
187. Carling T, Kindmark A, Hellman P, Holmberg L, Akerstrom G, Rastad J 1997 Vitamin D receptor alleles b, a, and T: risk factors for sporadic primary hyperparathyroidism (HPT) but not HPT of uremia or MEN 1. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 231:329–332[CrossRef][Medline]
188. Carling T, Ridefelt P, Hellman P, Rastad J, Akerstrom G 1997 Vitamin D receptor polymorphisms correlate to parathyroid cell function in primary hyperparathyroidism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 82:1772–1775[Abstract/Free Full Text]
189. Yokoyama K, Shigematsu T, Tsukada T, Ogura Y, Takemoto F, Hara S, Yamada A, Kawaguchi Y, Hosoya T 1998 ApaI polymorphism in the vitamin D receptor gene may affect the parathyroid response in Japanese with end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int 53:454–458[CrossRef][Medline]
190. Yamagata Z, Miyamura T, Iijima A, Asaka A, Sasaki M, Kato J, Koizumi K 1994 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism and bone mineral density in healthy Japanese women [letter]. Lancet 344:1027[Medline]
191. Shiraki M, Shiraki Y, Aoki C, THosoi T, Inoue S, Kaneki M, Ouchi Y 1997 Association of bone mineral density with apolipoprotein E phenotype. J Bone Miner Res 12:1438–1445[CrossRef][Medline]
192. Reid IR, Plank LD, Evans MC 1992 Fat mass is an important determinant of whole body bone density in premenopausal women but not in men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 75:779–782[Abstract]
193. Reid IR, Ames R, Evans MC, Sharpe S, Gamble G, France JT, Lim TM, Cundy TF 1992 Determinants of total body and regional bone mineral density in normal postmenopausal women — a key role for fat mass. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 75:45–51[Abstract]
194. Reid IR, Evans MC, Ames RW 1994 Volumetric bone density of the lumbar spine is related to fat mass but not lean mass in normal postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 4:362–367[CrossRef][Medline]
195. Miller JZ, Slemenda CW, Meaney FJ, Reister TK, Hui S, Johnston CC 1991 The relationship of bone mineral density and anthropometric variables in healthy male and female children. Bone Miner 14:137–152[CrossRef][Medline]
196. Suarez F, Zeghoud F, Rossignol C, Walrant O, Garabedian M 1997 Association between vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism and sex-dependent growth during the first two years of life. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 82:2966–2970[Abstract/Free Full Text]
197. Keen RW, Egger P, Fall C, Major PJ, Lanchbury JS, Spector TD, Cooper C 1997 Polymorphisms of the vitamin D receptor, infant growth, and adult bone mass. Calcif Tissue Int 60:233–235[CrossRef][Medline]
198. Need AG, Horowitz M, Stiliano A, Scopacasa F, Morris HA, Chatterton BE 1996 Vitamin D receptor genotypes are related to bone size and bone density in men. Eur J Clin Invest 26:793–796[CrossRef][Medline]
199. Kitagawa I, Kitagawa Y, Kawase Y, Nagaya T, Tokudome S 1998 Advanced onset of menarche and higher bone mineral density depending on vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism. Eur J Endocrinol 139:522–527[Abstract]
200. Hitman GA, Mannan N, McDermott MF, Aganna E, Ogunkolade BW, Hales CN, Boucher BJ 1998 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms influence insulin secretion in Bangladeshi Asians. Diabetes 47:688–690[Medline]
201. McDermott MF, Ramachandran A, Ogunkolade BW, Aganna E, Curtis D, Boucher BJ, Snehalatha C, Hitman GA 1997 Allelic variation in the vitamin D receptor influences susceptibility to IDDM in Indian Asians. Diabetologia 40:971–975[CrossRef][Medline]
202. Reid IR, Evans MC, Cooper GJ, Ames RW, Stapleton J 1993 Circulating insulin levels are related to bone density in normal postmenopausal women. Am J Physiol 265:E655–E659
203. Mocharla H, Butch AW, Pappas AA, Flick JT, Weinstein RS, De Togni P, Jilka RL, Roberson PK, Parfitt AM, Manolagas SC 1997 Quantification of vitamin D receptor mRNA by competitive polymerase chain reaction in PBMC: lack of correspondence with common allelic variants. J Bone Miner Res 12:726–733[CrossRef][Medline]
204. Gross C, Musiol IM, Eccleshall TR, Malloy PJ, Feldman D 1998 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms: analysis of ligand binding and hormone responsiveness in cultured skin fibroblasts. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 242:467–473[CrossRef][Medline]
205. Deleted in proof
206. Durrin LK, Haile RW, Ingles SA, Coetzee GA 1999 Vitamin D receptor 3'-untranslated region polymorphisms: lack of effect on mRNA stability. Biochim Biophys Acta 1453:311–320[Medline]
207. Crofts L, Hancock M, Morrison N, Eisman J 1998 Multiple promoters direct the tissue-specific expression of novel N-terminal variant human vitamin D receptor gene transcripts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:10529–10534[Abstract/Free Full Text]
208. Grant SF, Reid DM, Blake G, Herd R, Fogelman I, Ralston SH 1996 Reduced bone density and osteoporosis associated with a polymorphic Sp1 binding site in the collagen type I 1 gene. Nat Genet 14:203–205[CrossRef][Medline]
209. Uitterlinden AG, Burger H, Huang Q, Yue F, McGuigan FE, Grant SF, Hofman A, van Leeuwen JP, Pols HA, Ralston SH 1998 Relation of alleles of the collagen type Ialpha1 gene to bone density and the risk of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 338:1016–1021[Abstract/Free Full Text]
210. Langdahl BL, Ralston SH, Grant SF, Eriksen EF 1998 An Sp1 binding site polymorphism in the COLIA1 gene predicts osteoporotic fractures in both men and women. J Bone Miner Res 13:1384–1389[CrossRef][Medline]
211. Liden M, Wilen B, Ljunghall S, Melhus H 1998 Polymorphism at the Sp 1 binding site in the collagen type I 1 gene does not predict bone mineral density in postmenopausal women in Sweden. Calcif Tissue Int 63:293–295[CrossRef][Medline]
212. Garnero P, Borel O, Grant SF, Ralston SH, Delmas PD 1998 Collagen I1 Sp1 polymorphism, bone mass, and bone turnover in healthy French premenopausal women: the OFELY study. J Bone Miner Res 13:813–817[CrossRef][Medline]
213. Sano M, Inoue S, Hosoi T, Ouchi Y, Emi M, Shiraki M, Orimo H 1995 Association of estrogen receptor dinucleotide repeat polymorphism with osteoporosis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 217:378–383[CrossRef][Medline]
214. Qi J, Morrison N, Nguyen T, White C, Kelly P, Sambrook P, Eisman J 1995 Estrogen receptor genotypes and bone mineral density in women and men. J Bone Miner Res 10[Suppl 1]:S170
215. Mizunuma H, Hosoi T, Okano H, Soda M, Tokizawa T, Kagami I, Miyamoto S, Ibuki Y, Inoue S, Shiraki M, Ouchi Y 1997 Estrogen receptor gene polymorphism and bone mineral density at the lumbar spine of pre- and postmenopausal women. Bone 21:379–383[Medline]
216. Kobayashi S, Inoue S, Hosoi T, Ouchi Y, Shiraki M, Orimo H 1996 Association of bone mineral density with polymorphism of the estrogen receptor gene. J Bone Miner Res 11:306–311[Medline]
217. Han KO, Moon IG, Kang YS, Chung HY, Min HK, Han IK 1997 Nonassociation of estrogen receptor genotypes with bone mineral density and estrogen responsiveness to hormone replacement therapy in Korean postmenopausal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 82:991–995[Abstract/Free Full Text]
218. Carling T, Rastad J, Kindmark A, Lundgren E, Ljunghall S, Akerstrom G 1997 Estrogen receptor gene polymorphism in postmenopausal primary hyperparathyroidism. Surgery 122:1101–1105; discussion 1106[CrossRef][Medline]
219. Murray RE, McGuigan F, Grant SF, Reid DM, Ralston SH 1997 Polymorphisms of the interleukin-6 gene are associated with bone mineral density. Bone 21:89–92[Medline]
220. Tsukamoto K, Yoshida H, Watanabe S, Suzuki T, Miyao M, Hosoi T, Orimo H, Emi M 1999 Association of radial bone mineral density with CA repeat polymorphism at the interleukin 6 locus in postmenopausal Japanese women. J Hum Genet 44:148–151[CrossRef][Medline]
221. Kajkenova O, Lecka-Czernik B, Gubrij I, Hauser SP, Takahashi K, Parfitt AM, Jilka RL, Manolagas SC, Lipschitz DA 1997 Increased adipogenesis and myelopoiesis in the bone marrow of SAMP6, a murine model of defective osteoblastogenesis and low turnover osteopenia. J Bone Miner Res 12:1772–1779[CrossRef][Medline]
222. Keen RW, Woodford-Richens KL, Lanchbury JS, Spector TD 1998 Allelic variation at the interleukin-1 receptor antagonist gene is associated with early postmenopausal bone loss at the spine. Bone 23:367–371[Medline]
223. Duncan EL, Brown MA, Sinsheimer J, Bell J, Carr AJ, Wordsworth BP, Wass JAH 1999 Suggestive linkage of the parathyroid receptor type 1 to osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res, in press
224. Langdahl BL, Knudsen JY, Jensen HK, Gregersen N, Eriksen EF 1997 A sequence variation: 713–8delC in the transforming growth factor-ß 1 gene has higher prevalence in osteoporotic women than in normal women and is associated with very low bone mass in osteoporotic women and increased bone turnover in both osteoporotic and normal women. Bone 20:289–294[Medline]
225. Keen RW, Snieder H, Daniels J, Davies H, Chiano M, MacGregor AJ, Gewert D, Spector TD 1998 A novel TGF-ß1 gene polymorphism is linked and associated with hip BMD in female twins. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S161
226. Kurland ES, Rosen CJ, Cosman F, McMahon D, Chan F, Shane E, Lindsay R, Dempster D, Bilezikian JP 1997 Insulin-like growth factor-I in men with idiopathic osteoporosis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 82:2799–2805[Abstract/Free Full Text]
227. Rosen CJ, Donahue LR 1998 Insulin-like growth factors and bone: the osteoporosis connection revisited. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 219:1–7[CrossRef][Medline]
228. Rosen CJ, Dimai HP, Vereault D, Donahue LR, Beamer WG, Farley J, Linkhart S, Linkhart T, Mohan S, Baylink DJ 1997 Circulating and skeletal insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) concentrations in two inbred strains of mice with different bone mineral densities. Bone 21:217–223[Medline]
229. Rosen CJ, Kurland ES, Vereault D, Adler RA, Rackoff PJ, Craig WY, Witte S, Rogers J, Bilezikian JP 1998 Association between serum insulin growth factor-I (IGF-I) and a simple sequence repeat in IGF-I gene: implications for genetic studies of bone mineral density. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:2286–2290[Abstract/Free Full Text]
230. Rosen C, Beamer W, Donahue L 1998 Assessing IGF-I dependent and independent loci that regulate femoral bone density by development of congenic little mice. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S162
231. Masi L, Becherini L, Colli E, Gennari L, Mansani R, Falchetti A, Becorpi AM, Cepollaro C, Gonnelli S, Tanini A, Brandi ML 1998 Polymorphisms of the calcitonin receptor gene are associated with bone mineral density in postmenopausal Italian women. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 248:190–195[CrossRef][Medline]
232. Kiel DP, Cupples LA, Myers RH, Hannan MT, Tucker KL, Booth SL, Ordovas J, Gagnon DR, Wilson PWF 1998 Bone mineral density (BMD), hip fracture and apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S278
233. Tsuji S, Munkhbat B, Hagihara M, Tsuritani I, Abe H, Tsuji K 1998 HLA-A*24-B*07-DRB1*01 haplotype implicated with genetic disposition of peak bone mass in healthy young Japanese women. Hum Immunol 59:243–249[CrossRef][Medline]
234. Johnson ML, Gong G, Kimberling W, Recker SM, Kimmel DB, Recker RB 1997 Linkage of a gene causing high bone mass to human chromosome 11 (11q12–13). Am J Hum Genet 60:1326–1332[Medline]
235. Johnson ML, Lappe M, Gong G, Recker RB, Little R, Del Mastro R, Osborne M, Tulig C, Carulli J 1998 Physical mapping and characterization of the high bone mass (HBM) gene region. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S161
236. Devoto M, Shimoya K, Caminis J, Ott J, Tenenhouse A, Whyte MP, Sereda L, Hall S, Considine E, Williams CJ, Tromp G, Kuivaniemi H, Ala-Kokko L, Prockop DJ, Spotila LD 1998 First-stage autosomal genome screen in extended pedigrees suggests genes predisposing to low bone mineral density on chromosomes 1p, 2p and 4q. Eur J Hum Genet 6:151–157[CrossRef][Medline]
237. Niu T, Chen C, Cordell H, Yang J, Wang B, Wang Z, Fang Z, Schork NJ, Rosen CJ, Xu X 1999 A genome-wide scan for loci linked to forearm bone mineral density. Hum Genet 104:226–233[CrossRef][Medline]
238. Zmuda J, Cauley J, Ferrell R 1999 Recent progress in understanding the genetic susceptibility to osteoporosis. Genet Epidemiol 16:356–367[CrossRef][Medline]
239. Beamer WG, Rosen CJ, Donahue LR, Frankel WN, Churchill GA, Shultz KL, Baylink DJ, Pettis JL 1998 Location of genes regulating volumetric bone density in C57BL/6J (low) and C³H/HeJ (high) inbred strains of mice. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S162
240. Orwoll E, Belknap J, Phillips T, Kelin R 1998 Gender differences in bone mass are genetically determined: quantitative trait loci analyses. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S275
241. Young T, Villagomez S, Yershov Y, Gupta R, Martin ML, Paschalis EP, Demant P, Bockman RS, Blank RD 1998 Bone strength segregates in HcB/Dem recombinant congenic mouse strains. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S277
242. Jilka RL, Weinstein RS, Takahashi K, Parfitt AM, Manolagas SC 1996 Linkage of decreased bone mass with impaired osteoblastogenesis in a murine model of accelerated senescence. J Clin Invest 97:1732–1740[Medline]
243. Benes H, Dennis R, Zheng W, Kang P, Weinstein RS, Shelton R, Robertson P, Jilka RL, Manolagas SC, Shmookler RJ 1998 Detection and confirmation of osteopenia-associated loci in two independent crosses between closely related mouse strains with differing bone densities. Bone 23[Suppl 5]:S274
244. Matsuyama T, Ishii S, Tokita A, Yabuta K, Yamamori S, Morrison NA, Eisman JA 1995 Vitamin D receptor genotypes and bone mineral density [letter; comment]. Lancet 345:1238–1239[CrossRef]
245. Torres A, Machado M, Concepcion MT, Martin N, Lorenzo V, Hernandez D, Rodriguez AP, Rodriguez A, de Bonis E, Gonzalez-Posada JM, Hernandez A, Salido E 1996 Influence of vitamin D receptor genotype on bone mass changes after renal transplantation. Kidney Int 50:1726–1733[Medline]
246. Gennari L, Becherini L, Masi L, Gonnelli S, Cepollaro C, Martini S, Mansani R, Brandi ML 1997 Vitamin D receptor genotypes and intestinal calcium absorption in postmenopausal women. Calcif Tissue Int 61:460–463[CrossRef][Medline]
247. Ferrari SL, Rizzoli R, Slosman DO, Bonjour JP 1998 Do dietary calcium and age explain the controversy surrounding the relationship between bone mineral density and vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms? J Bone Miner Res 13:363–370[CrossRef][Medline]
248. Jorgensen HL, Scholler J, Sand JC, Bjuring M, Hassager C, Christiansen C 1996 Relation of common allelic variation at vitamin D receptor locus to bone mineral density and postmenopausal bone loss: cross sectional and longitudinal population study. Br Med J 313:586–590[Abstract/Free Full Text]
249. Bellamy R, Ruwende C, Corrah T, McAdam KP, Thursz M, Whittle HC, Hill AV 1999 Tuberculosis and chronic hepatitis B virus infection in Africans and variation in the vitamin D receptor gene. J Infect Dis 179:721–724[CrossRef][Medline]
250. Gough A, Sambrook P, Devlin J, Lilley J, Huisoon A, Betteridge J, Franklyn J, Nguyen T, Morrison N, Eisman J, Emery P 1998 Effect of vitamin D receptor gene allelels on bone loss in early rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 25:864–868[Medline]
251. Jones G, White C, Sambrook P, Eisman J 1998 Allelic variation in the vitamin D receptor, lifestyle factors and lumbar spinal degenerative disease. Ann Rheum Dis 57:94–99[Abstract/Free Full Text]
252. Uitterlinden AG, Burger H, Huang Q, Odding E, Duijn CM, Hofman A, Birkenhager JC, van Leeuwen JP, Pols HA 1997 Vitamin D receptor genotype is associated with radiographic osteoarthritis at the knee. J Clin Invest 100:259–263[Medline]
253. Keen RW, Hart DJ, Lanchbury JS, Spector TD 1997 Association of early osteoarthritis of the knee with a TaqI polymorphism of the vitamin D receptor gene. Arthritis Rheum 40:1444–1449[Medline]
254. Aerssens J, Dequeker J, Peeters J, Breemans S, Boonen S 1998 Lack of association between osteoarthritis of the hip and gene polymorphisms of VDR, COL1A1, and COL2A1 in postmenopausal women. Arthritis Rheum 41:1946–1950[CrossRef][Medline]
255. Looney JE, Yoon HK, Fischer M, Farley SM, Farley JR, Wergedal JE, Baylink DJ 1995 Lack of a high prevalence of the BB vitamin D receptor genotype in severely osteoporotic women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:2158–2162[Abstract]
255. Ensrud KE, Stone K, Cauley J, White C, Zmuda JM, Nguyen TV, Eisman J, Cummings S 1999 Vitamin-D receptor gene polymorphisms and the risk of fractures in older women. J Bone Miner Res 14:1637–1645[CrossRef][Medline]
256. Feskanich D, Hunter DJ, Willett WC, Hankinson SE, Hollis BW, Hough HL, Kelsey KT, Colditz GA 1998 Vitamin D receptor genotype and the risk of bone fractures in women. Epidemiology 9:535–539[Medline]
257. Nguyen TV, Kelly PJ, Morrison NA, Sambrook PN, Eisman JA 1994 Vitamin D receptor genotypes in osteoporosis [letter]. Lancet 344:1580–1581[Medline]
258. Nguyen TV, Morrison NA, Sambrook PN, Kelly PJ, Eisman JA 1996 Vitamin D receptor gene and osteoporosis [letter]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 81:1674–1675[CrossRef][Medline]
258. Heaney RP, Barger-Lux MJ, Davies KM, Ryan RA, Johnson ML, Gong G 1997 Bone dimensional change with age: interactions of genetic, hormonal, and body size variables. Osteoporosis Int 7:426–431[CrossRef][Medline]
259. Kobayashi T, Sugimoto T, Kobayashi A, Chihara K 1998 Vitamin D receptor genotype is associated with cortical bone loss in Japanese patients with primary hyperparathyroidism. Endocr J 45:123–125[Medline]
260. Karkoszka H, Chudek J, Strzelczyk P, Wiecek A, Schmidt-Gayk H, Ritz E, Kokot F 1998 Does the vitamin D receptor genotype predict bone mineral loss in haemodialysed patients? Nephrol Dial Transplant 13:2077–2080[Abstract/Free Full Text]
261. Carling T, Rastad J, Akerstrom G, Westin G 1998 Vitamin D receptor (VDR) and parathyroid hormone messenger ribonucleic acid levels correspond to polymorphic VDR alleles in human parathyroid tumors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:2255–2259[Abstract/Free Full Text]
262. Carling T, Ridefelt P, Hellman P, Juhlin C, Lundgren E, Akerstrom G, Rastad J 1998 Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphism and parathyroid calcium sensor protein (CAS/gp330) expression in primary hyperparathyroidism. World J Surg 22:700–706; discussion 706–707[CrossRef][Medline]
263. Correa P, Rastad J, Schwarz P, Westin G, Kindmark A, Lundgren E, Akerstrom G, Carling T 1999 The vitamin D receptor (VDR) start codon polymorphism in primary hyperparathyroidism and parathyroid VDR messenger ribonucleic acid levels. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84:1690–1694[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C.-L. Cheung, B. Y.Y. Chan, V. Chan, S. Ikegawa, I. Kou, H. Ngai, D. Smith, K. D.K. Luk, Q.-Y. Huang, S. Mori, et al. Pre-B-cell leukemia homeobox 1 (PBX1) shows functional and possible genetic association with bone mineral density variation Hum. Mol. Genet., February 15, 2009; 18(4): 679 - 687. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Li, K. L. Svenson, L. R. B. Donahue, L. L. Peters, and G. A. Churchill Relationships of dietary fat, body composition, and bone mineral density in inbred mouse strain panels Physiol Genomics, October 8, 2008; 33(1): 26 - 32. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. M. Middleton, S. A. Kelly, and T. Garland Jr Selective breeding as a tool to probe skeletal response to high voluntary locomotor activity in mice Integr. Comp. Biol., September 1, 2008; 48(3): 394 - 410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. P. Simopoulos The Importance of the Omega-6/Omega-3 Fatty Acid Ratio in Cardiovascular Disease and Other Chronic Diseases Experimental Biology and Medicine, June 1, 2008; 233(6): 674 - 688. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. F. Bezerra, G. M. K. Cabello, L. M. C. Mendonca, and C. M. Donangelo Bone Mass and Breast Milk Calcium Concentration Are Associated with Vitamin D Receptor Gene Polymorphisms in Adolescent Mothers J. Nutr., February 1, 2008; 138(2): 277 - 281. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Edderkaoui, D. J. Baylink, W. G. Beamer, J. E. Wergedal, R. Porte, A. Chaudhuri, and S. Mohan Identification of mouse Duffy Antigen Receptor for Chemokines (Darc) as a BMD QTL gene Genome Res., May 1, 2007; 17(5): 577 - 585. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Hogstrom, P. Nordstrom, and A. Nordstrom n 3 Fatty acids are positively associated with peak bone mineral density and bone accrual in healthy men: the NO2 Study Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, March 1, 2007; 85(3): 803 - 807. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-P. Bonjour and T. Chevalley Pubertal Timing, Peak Bone Mass and Fragility Fracture Risk IBMS BoneKEy, February 1, 2007; 4(2): 30 - 48. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Oh, S.-Y. Kim, D. J. Kim, J. Y. Lee, J.-K. Lee, K. Kimm, B. L. Park, H. D. Shin, T.-H. Kim, E. K. Park, et al. Associations of catalase gene polymorphisms with bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in postmenopausal women J. Med. Genet., January 1, 2007; 44(1): e62 - e62. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Wang, T. Sakata, H. Z Elalieh, S. J Munson, A. Burghardt, S. Majumdar, B. P Halloran, and D. D Bikle Gender differences in the response of CD-1 mouse bone to parathyroid hormone: potential role of IGF-I. J. Endocrinol., May 1, 2006; 189(2): 279 - 287. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Summers, B. Coupes, C. Short, and P. E. C. Brenchley Reply Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 1125 - 1125. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y.-T. Sheu, J. M. Zmuda, J. A. Cauley, S. P. Moffett, C. J. Rosen, C. Ishwad, and R. E. Ferrell Nuclear Receptor Coactivator-3 Alleles Are Associated with Serum Bioavailable Testosterone, Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1, and Vertebral Bone Mass in Men J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., January 1, 2006; 91(1): 307 - 312. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. S. Dusso, A. J. Brown, and E. Slatopolsky Vitamin D Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, July 1, 2005; 289(1): F8 - F28. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Gennari, D. Merlotti, V. De Paola, A. Calabro, L. Becherini, G. Martini, and R. Nuti Estrogen Receptor Gene Polymorphisms and the Genetics of Osteoporosis: A HuGE Review Am. J. Epidemiol., February 15, 2005; 161(4): 307 - 320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Grundberg, T. Carling, H. Brandstrom, S. Huang, E. L. Ribom, O. Ljunggren, H. Mallmin, and A. Kindmark A Deletion Polymorphism in the RIZ Gene, a Female Sex Steroid Hormone Receptor Coactivator, Exhibits Decreased Response to Estrogen in Vitro and Associates with Low Bone Mineral Density in Young Swedish Women J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., December 1, 2004; 89(12): 6173 - 6178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Gennari, L. Masi, D. Merlotti, L. Picariello, A. Falchetti, A. Tanini, C. Mavilia, F. Del Monte, S. Gonnelli, B. Lucani, et al. A Polymorphic CYP19 TTTA Repeat Influences Aromatase Activity and Estrogen Levels in Elderly Men: Effects on Bone Metabolism J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., June 1, 2004; 89(6): 2803 - 2810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Kasukawa, D. J. Baylink, J. E. Wergedal, Y. Amaar, A. K. Srivastava, R. Guo, and S. Mohan Lack of Insulin-Like Growth Factor I Exaggerates the Effect of Calcium Deficiency on Bone Accretion in Mice Endocrinology, November 1, 2003; 144(11): 4682 - 4689. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Kasukawa, D. J. Baylink, R. Guo, and S. Mohan Evidence that Sensitivity to Growth Hormone (GH) Is Growth Period and Tissue Type Dependent: Studies in GH-Deficient lit/lit Mice Endocrinology, September 1, 2003; 144(9): 3950 - 3957. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Mohan, C. Richman, R. Guo, Y. Amaar, L. R. Donahue, J. Wergedal, and D. J. Baylink Insulin-Like Growth Factor Regulates Peak Bone Mineral Density in Mice by Both Growth Hormone-Dependent and -Independent Mechanisms Endocrinology, March 1, 2003; 144(3): 929 - 936. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Young, F. Wu, N. Van de Water, R. Ames, G. Gamble, and I. R. Reid Calcium Sensing Receptor Gene A986S Polymorphism and Responsiveness to Calcium Supplementation in Postmenopausal Women J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., February 1, 2003; 88(2): 697 - 700. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Palomba, F. G. Numis, G. Mossetti, D. Rendina, P. Vuotto, T. Russo, F. Zullo, C. Nappi, and V. Nunziata Raloxifene administration in post-menopausal women with osteoporosis: effect of different BsmI vitamin D receptor genotypes Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2003; 18(1): 192 - 198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. C. Hofbauer and M. Schoppet Osteoprotegerin Gene Polymorphism and the Risk of Osteoporosis and Vascular Disease J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., September 1, 2002; 87(9): 4078 - 4079. [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. A. Hawker, S. Forsmo, S. M. Cadarette, B. Schei, S. B. Jaglal, L. Forsen, and A. Langhammer Correlates of Forearm Bone Mineral Density in Young Norwegian Women: The Nord-Trondelag Health Study Am. J. Epidemiol., September 1, 2002; 156(5): 418 - 427. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C.-H. Wu, Y.-C. Yang, W.-J. Yao, F.-H. Lu, J.-S. Wu, and C.-J. Chang Epidemiological Evidence of Increased Bone Mineral Density in Habitual Tea Drinkers Arch Intern Med, May 13, 2002; 162(9): 1001 - 1006. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Zipfel, M. J. Seibel, B. Lowe, P. J. Beumont, C. Kasperk, and W. Herzog Osteoporosis in Eating Disorders: A Follow-Up Study of Patients with Anorexia and Bulimia Nervosa J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., November 1, 2001; 86(11): 5227 - 5233. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Chiodini, M. Torlontano, V. Carnevale, G. Guglielmi, M. Cammisa, V. Trischitta, and A. Scillitani Bone Loss Rate in Adrenal Incidentalomas: A Longitudinal Study J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., November 1, 2001; 86(11): 5337 - 5341. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Devoto, C. Specchia, H.-H. Li, J. Caminis, A. Tenenhouse, H. Rodriguez, and L. D. Spotila Variance component linkage analysis indicates a QTL for femoral neck bone mineral density on chromosome 1p36 Hum. Mol. Genet., October 1, 2001; 10(21): 2447 - 2452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Masi, L. Becherini, L. Gennari, A. Amedei, E. Colli, A. Falchetti, M. Farci, S. Silvestri, S. Gonnelli, and M. L. Brandi Polymorphism of the Aromatase Gene in Postmenopausal Italian Women: Distribution and Correlation with Bone Mass and Fracture Risk J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., May 1, 2001; 86(5): 2263 - 2269. [Abstract] [Full Text]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Copyright Permission Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Eisman, J. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Eisman, J. A.