Areal and volumetric bone mineral density and geometry at two levels of protein intake during caloric restriction: A randomized, controlled trial

105Citations
Citations of this article
115Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Weight reduction induces bone loss by several factors, and the effect of higher protein (HP) intake during caloric restriction on bone mineral density (BMD) is not known. Previous study designs examining the longer-term effects of HP diets have not controlled for total calcium intake between groups and have not examined the relationship between bone and endocrine changes. In this randomized, controlled study, we examined how BMD (areal and volumetric), turnover markers, and hormones [insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), IGF-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), 25-hydroxyvitamin D, parathyroid hormone (PTH), and estradiol] respond to caloric restriction during a 1-year trial using two levels of protein intake. Forty-seven postmenopausal women (58.0±4.4 years; body mass index of 32.1±4.6 kg/m2) completed the 1-year weight-loss trial and were on a higher (HP, 24%, na=26) or normal protein (NP, 18%, na=21) and fat intake (28%) with controlled calcium intake of 1.2 g/d. After 1 year, subjects lost 7.0%±4.5% of body weight, and protein intake was 86 and 60 g/d in the HP and NP groups, respectively. HP compared with NP diet attenuated loss of BMD at the ultradistal radius, lumbar spine, and total hip and trabecular volumetric BMD and bone mineral content of the tibia. This is consistent with the higher final values of IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 and lower bone-resorption marker (deoxypyridinoline) in the HP group than in the NP group (pa

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sukumar, D., Ambia-Sobhan, H., Zurfluh, R., Schlussel, Y., Stahl, T. J., Gordon, C. L., & Shapses, S. A. (2011). Areal and volumetric bone mineral density and geometry at two levels of protein intake during caloric restriction: A randomized, controlled trial. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 26(6), 1339–1348. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.318

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free