A Cohen1, W Shen2, D W Dempster3, H Zhou3, R R Recker4, J M Lappe4, A Kepley2, M Kamanda-Kosseh2, M Bucovsky2, E M Stein2, T L Nickolas2, E Shane2. 1. Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, PH8-864, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA. ac1044@columbia.edu. 2. Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, PH8-864, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA. 3. Helen Hayes Hospital, West Haverstraw, NY, USA. 4. Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Measurement of marrow fat (MF) is important to the study of bone fragility. We measured MF on iliac biopsies and by spine/hip magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the same subjects. Noninvasively assessed spine MF and histomorphometrically assessed MF correlated well. MF quantity and relationships with bone volume differed by measurement site. INTRODUCTION: Excess marrow fat has been implicated in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis in several populations. In the bone marrow, adipocytes and osteoblasts share a common precursor and are reciprocally regulated. In addition, adipocytes may secrete toxic fatty acids and adipokines that adversely affect osteoblasts. Measurement of marrow fat is important to the study of mechanisms of bone fragility. Marrow fat can be quantified on bone biopsy samples by histomorphometry and noninvasively by proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H-MRS). In this study, we evaluate relationships between marrow fat assessed using both methods in the same subjects for the first time. METHODS: Sixteen premenopausal women, nine with idiopathic osteoporosis and seven normal controls, had marrow fat measured at the iliac crest by bone biopsy and at the lumbar spine (L3) and proximal femur by (1)H-MRS. RESULTS: At L3, fat fraction by (1)H-MRS correlated directly and significantly with marrow fat variables on iliac crest biopsies (r = 0.5-0.8). In contrast, there were no significant correlations between fat fraction at the femur and marrow fat on biopsies. Marrow fat quantity (%) was greater at the femur than at L3 and the iliac crest and correlated inversely with total hip and femoral neck BMD by DXA. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, measurement of marrow fat in transiliac crest biopsies correlates with marrow fat at the spine but not the proximal femur by (1)H-MRS. There were site-specific differences in marrow fat quantity and in the relationships between marrow fat and bone volume.
UNLABELLED: Measurement of marrow fat (MF) is important to the study of bone fragility. We measured MF on iliac biopsies and by spine/hip magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the same subjects. Noninvasively assessed spine MF and histomorphometrically assessed MF correlated well. MF quantity and relationships with bone volume differed by measurement site. INTRODUCTION: Excess marrow fat has been implicated in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis in several populations. In the bone marrow, adipocytes and osteoblasts share a common precursor and are reciprocally regulated. In addition, adipocytes may secrete toxic fatty acids and adipokines that adversely affect osteoblasts. Measurement of marrow fat is important to the study of mechanisms of bone fragility. Marrow fat can be quantified on bone biopsy samples by histomorphometry and noninvasively by proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H-MRS). In this study, we evaluate relationships between marrow fat assessed using both methods in the same subjects for the first time. METHODS: Sixteen premenopausal women, nine with idiopathic osteoporosis and seven normal controls, had marrow fat measured at the iliac crest by bone biopsy and at the lumbar spine (L3) and proximal femur by (1)H-MRS. RESULTS: At L3, fat fraction by (1)H-MRS correlated directly and significantly with marrow fat variables on iliac crest biopsies (r = 0.5-0.8). In contrast, there were no significant correlations between fat fraction at the femur and marrow fat on biopsies. Marrow fat quantity (%) was greater at the femur than at L3 and the iliac crest and correlated inversely with total hip and femoral neck BMD by DXA. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, measurement of marrow fat in transiliac crest biopsies correlates with marrow fat at the spine but not the proximal femur by (1)H-MRS. There were site-specific differences in marrow fat quantity and in the relationships between marrow fat and bone volume.
Entities:
Keywords:
1H-MRS; Bone biopsy; Histomorphometry; Marrow fat
Authors: Juliet E Compston; Nelson B Watts; Roland Chapurlat; Cyrus Cooper; Steven Boonen; Susan Greenspan; Johannes Pfeilschifter; Stuart Silverman; Adolfo Díez-Pérez; Robert Lindsay; Kenneth G Saag; J Coen Netelenbos; Stephen Gehlbach; Frederick H Hooven; Julie Flahive; Jonathan D Adachi; Maurizio Rossini; Andrea Z Lacroix; Christian Roux; Philip N Sambrook; Ethel S Siris Journal: Am J Med Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Yi-Hsiang Hsu; Scott A Venners; Henry A Terwedow; Yan Feng; Tianhua Niu; Zhiping Li; Nan Laird; Joseph D Brain; Steve R Cummings; Mary L Bouxsein; Cliff J Rosen; Xiping Xu Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Beata Lecka-Czernik; Elena J Moerman; David F Grant; Jürgen M Lehmann; Stavros C Manolagas; Robert L Jilka Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: Janina M Patsch; Xiaojuan Li; Thomas Baum; Samuel P Yap; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Ann V Schwartz; Thomas M Link Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: C M Bastos; I M Araújo; M H Nogueira-Barbosa; C E G Salmon; F J A de Paula; L E A Troncon Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2017-04-12 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: T G Goetz; N Nair; S Shiau; R R Recker; J M Lappe; D W Dempster; H Zhou; B Zhao; X Guo; W Shen; T L Nickolas; M Kamanda-Kosseh; M Bucovsky; J Stubby; E Shane; A Cohen Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2021-10-19 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Christian Cordes; Thomas Baum; Michael Dieckmeyer; Stefan Ruschke; Maximilian N Diefenbach; Hans Hauner; Jan S Kirschke; Dimitrios C Karampinos Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2016-06-27 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Dimitrios C Karampinos; Stefan Ruschke; Michael Dieckmeyer; Maximilian Diefenbach; Daniela Franz; Alexandra S Gersing; Roland Krug; Thomas Baum Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Mariel J Hernandez; Luciene M Dos Reis; Igor D Marques; Maria J Araujo; Cesar A M Truyts; Ivone B Oliveira; Fellype C Barreto; Elias David-Neto; Melani R Custodio; Rosa M Moyses; Ezequiel Bellorin-Font; Vanda Jorgetti Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-05-25 Impact factor: 3.240