| Literature DB >> 21190557 |
Carsten Müller1, Corinna C Winter, Dieter Rosenbaum, Joachim Boos, Georg Gosheger, Jendrik Hardes, Volker Vieth.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bone mineral density (BMD) accrual during childhood and adolescence is important for attaining peak bone mass. BMD decrements have been reported in survivors of childhood bone sarcomas. However, little is known about the onset and development of bone loss during cancer treatment. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate BMD in newly diagnosed Ewing's and osteosarcoma patients by means of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21190557 PMCID: PMC3022904 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-287
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Anthropometric and demographic data of the patient group
| Participants | Mean (95% CI) |
|---|---|
| Female/Male | 19 (41.3%)/27 (58.7%) |
| Age (years) at diagnosis | 13.9 (13.0 to 14.9) |
| Age (years) at measurement | 14.3 (13.3 to 15.2) |
| Caucasian | 46 (100%) |
| Height (m)/Z-score | 1.64 (1.59 to 1.69)/0.07 (-0.04 to 0.19) |
| Weight (kg)/Z-score | 52.2 (47.5 to 56.9)/-0.31 (-0.51 to -0.10) |
| BMI (kg/m2)/Z-score | 18.9 (17.9 to 20.0)/-1.03 (-1.55 to -0.51) * |
| Age (years) at measurement | 14.8 (13.1 to 16.4) |
| BMI (kg/m2)/Z-score | 18.7 (16.5 to 20.9)/-1.67 (-3.04 to -0.30) |
| Weight (kg)/Z-score | 52.2 (43.7 to 60.7)/-0.68 (-1.24 to -0.12) |
| Age (years) at measurement | 14.1 (12.9 to 15.3) |
| BMI (kg/m2)/Z-score | 19.0 (17.7 to 20.4)/-0.44 (-0.89 to 0.0) |
| Weight (kg)/Z-score | 52.2 (46.2 to 58.1)/-0.20 (-0.43 to 0.02) |
| Upper extremity | 4 (8.7%)/6 (13.0%) ∑ 10 (21.7%) |
| Lower extremity | 15 (32.6%)/21 (45.7%) ∑ 36 (78.3%) |
| Femur/Tibia | 12 (26.1%)/17 (37.0) ∑ 29 (63.0%) |
| Pelvis/Fibula | 3 (6.5%)/4 (8.7%) ∑ 7 (15.2%) |
CI = confidence interval, BMI = body mass index, ∑ = sum, * significant difference between patient group and healthy control group, † significant difference between patients with low BMD (Z-score lumbar spine ≤ -1) and patients with normal BMD status (Z-score lumbar spine > -1)
Figure 1Implementation of peripheral calcaneal BMD assessment via DXA.
Effect of tumor location on BMD expressed as Z-scores and percent compared to healthy age and gender matched controls
| Mean (95% CI) | Mean (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Lumbar spine Z-score | Age comparison [%] | ||
| Upper Extremity (n = 10) | -0.44 (-0.94 to 0.06) | 94.5 (88.4 to 100.6) | 0.393 * |
| Lower Extremity (n = 36) | -0.06 (-0.45 to 0.34) | 99.2 (94.4 to 103.9) | |
| Upper Extremity (n = 10) | -0.44 (-0.94 to 0.06) | 94.5 (88.4 to 100.6) | 0.284 † |
| Femur/Tibia (n = 29) | 0.03 (-0.39 to 0.45) | 100.2 (95.3 to 105.2) | |
| Pelvis/Fibula (n = 7) | -0.40 (-1.72 to 0.92) | 94.7 (78.2 to 111.2) | |
CI = confidence interval
* Mann-Whitney U-test, † Kruskal Wallis H-test
Mean BMD and BMC values of the affected and contralateral femoral neck and calcaneus for lower extremity sarcoma patients
| Scan region | Affected | Contralateral | |
|---|---|---|---|
| aBMD (g/cm2) | 0.877 (0.794 to 0.959) | 0.993 (0.922 to 1.064) | p < 0.001 |
| vBMD (g/cm3) | 0.358 (0.328 to 0.388) | 0.402 (0.384 to 0.420) | p < 0.001 |
| BMC (g) | 4.18 (3.66 to 4.69) | 4.75 (4.22 to 5.28) | p < 0.001 |
| aBMD (g/cm2) | 0.457 (0.391 to 0.523) | 0.583 (0.524 to 0.641) | p < 0.001 |
| BMC (g) | 1.47 (1.26 to 1.68) | 1.87 (1.69 to 2.06) | p < 0.001 |
BMD = bone mineral density, aBMD = areal bone mineral density (g/cm, vBMD = volumetric bone mineral density (g/cm, BMC = bone mineral content, CI = confidence interval, FN =femoral neck, Calc = calcaneus
* Mann-Whitney U-test
Figure 2aBMD differences between affected and contralateral sides of the femoral neck and calcaneus. Boxplots represent median, 25th and 75th percentile, 1.5 interquartile range (IQR) and outliers
Mean percent difference in BMD between affected and contralateral side in sarcoma patients
| Mean (95% CI) | Mean (95% CI) | Mean (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location | n= | aBMD (g/cm2) | vBMD (g/cm3) | BMC (g) | |
| UpEx | 10 | -1.3 (-5.8 to 3.3) | -3.2 (-10.2 to 3.9) | 3.3 (-5.6 to 12.1) | |
| Femur/Tibia | 22 | -13.7 (-18.8 to -8.5) | -12.7 (-20.1 to -5.3) | -13.6 (-18.1 to -9.1) | |
| Pelvis/Fibula | 7 | -7.1 (-14.6 to 0.4) | -6.2 (-13.8 to 1.5) | -7.8 (-15.5 to 0.0) | |
| UpEx | 8 | -4.4 (-9.3 to 0.4) | -4.3 (-9.0 to 0.5) | ||
| Femur/Tibia | 19 | -22.5 (-30.1 to -15.0) | -22.6 (-30.1 to -15.1) | ||
| Pelvis/Fibula | 6 | -18.8 (-47.9 to 10.3) | -18.9 (-47.8 to 10.0) | ||
* Lower extremity sarcoma patients subgrouped into sarcomas within the vicinity of primary weight-bearing joints (femur/tibia) and pelvis/fibula.
CI = confidence interval, aBMD = areal bone mineral density (g/cm, vBMD = volumetric bone mineral density (g/cm, BMC = bone mineral content (g), UpEx = Upper Extremity, FN =femoral neck, Calc = calcaneus
Spearman correlation coefficients for BMD of the femoral neck and calcaneus in patients with a primary tumor located in the lower extremity (n = 24)
| Bone Density | ρ = | |
|---|---|---|
| aBMD affected | 0.654 | 0.001 |
| aBMD contralateral | 0.798 | < 0.001 |
| BMC affected | 0.549 | 0.005 |
| BMC contralateral | 0.741 | < 0.001 |
| vBMDfemur - aBMDcalcaneus affected | 0.649 | 0.001 |
| vBMDfemur - aBMDcalcaneus contralateral | 0.694 | < 0.001 |
BMC = bone mineral content, aBMD = areal bone mineral density, vBMD = volumetric bone mineral density