| Literature DB >> 31794847 |
Monika Frysz1, Jennifer S Gregory2, Richard M Aspden2, Lavinia Paternoster3, Jonathan H Tobias4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between pubertal timing (using measures of height tempo) and proximal femur shape in a large adolescent cohort.Entities:
Keywords: ALSPAC; Joint shape; Proximal femur shape; Pubertal growth; Statistical shape modelling
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31794847 PMCID: PMC6961111 DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2019.115179
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bone ISSN: 1873-2763 Impact factor: 4.398
Descriptive statistics of ALSPAC study participants.
| Age 14 (TF 2) | Age 18 (TF 4) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Mean (SD) | p for sex diff | N | Mean (SD) | p for sex diff | ||
| Age at clinic attendance | M&F | 3827 | 13.8 (0.2) | 0.077 | 3507 | 17.7 (0.4) | 0.612 |
| M | 1797 | 13.8 (0.2) | 1597 | 17.7 (0.4) | |||
| F | 2030 | 13.8 (0.2) | 1910 | 17.7 (0.4) | |||
| Height (cm) | M&F | 3827 | 163.6 (7.5) | <0.001 | 3507 | 171.6 (9.2) | <0.001 |
| M | 1797 | 165.0 (8.5) | 1597 | 178.8 (6.5) | |||
| F | 2030 | 162.0 (6.2) | 1910 | 165.5 (6.1) | |||
| Weight (kg) | M&F | 3827 | 54.6 (10.9) | 0.675 | 3507 | 67.1 (13.4) | <0.001 |
| M | 1797 | 54.8 (11.5) | 1597 | 72.5 (13.3) | |||
| F | 2030 | 54.5 (10.4) | 1910 | 62.5 (11.7) | |||
| Lean mass (kg) | M&F | 3827 | 38.1 (6.4) | <0.001 | 3507 | 45.9 (9.9) | <0.001 |
| M | 1797 | 41.2 (7.1) | 1597 | 55.2 (6.1) | |||
| F | 2030 | 35.3 (4.1) | 1910 | 38.1 (4.0) | |||
| Fat mass (kg) | M&F | 3827 | 13.9 (8.0) | <0.001 | 3507 | 18.0 (10.3) | <0.001 |
| M | 1797 | 11.1 (7.6) | 1597 | 14.1 (10.1) | |||
| F | 2030 | 16.3 (7.5) | 1910 | 21.3 (9.2) | |||
| Tempo (years) | M&F | 3827 | 0.03 (0.8) | 3507 | 0.01 (0.8) | ||
| M | 1797 | 0.02 (0.8) | 1597 | −0.02 (0.8) | |||
| F | 2030 | 0.04 (0.9) | 1910 | 0.03 (0.9) | |||
| aPHV (years) | M&F | 3827 | 12.6 (1.2) | <0.001 | 3507 | 12.6 (1.2) | <0.001 |
| M | 1797 | 13.5 (0.9) | 1597 | 13.5 (0.9) | |||
| F | 2030 | 11.8 (0.8) | 1910 | 11.8 (0.8) | |||
Abbreviations: M (males), F (females), aPHV (age at peak height velocity).
Unpaired t-test to assess the null hypothesis of no difference in distributions between males and females at each time point.
Tempo corresponds to the timing of pubertal growth spurt (and thus aPHV) in each individual compared with the sex-specific means. Geometrically it indicates subject-specific left-right shift or translation in the spline curve. Negative values indicate early puberty, and positive values indicate late puberty. Please note that tempo measure in this sample is not equal to 0 because tempo was generated on a larger sample of individuals compared with the sample used in current analyses.
Associations between tempo and the top ten HSMs in ALSPAC adolescents at age 14 (N = 3827).
| HSM | Model 1 | Model 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β (95% CI) | p | p for sex-int | β (95% CI) | p | p for sex-int | |
| 1 | −0.04 (−0.06, −0.03) | 1.4 × 10−8 | 5.3 × 10−5 | −0.04 (−0.06, −0.03) | 3.8 × 10−8 | 2.6 × 10−5 |
| 2 | 0.15 (0.12, 0.18) | 4.5 × 10−25 | 6.8 × 10−9 | 0.13 (0.10, 0.15) | 2.6 × 10−18 | 9.7 × 10−15 |
| 3 | 0.14 (0.12, 0.17) | 9.2 × 10−28 | 2 × 10−13 | 0.12 (0.10, 0.15) | 7.4 × 10−22 | 5.0 × 10−19 |
| 4 | 0.02 (−0.00, 0.05) | 0.073 | 0.001 | 0.02 (−0.00, 0.05) | 0.093 | 0.001 |
| 5 | 0.14 (0.11, 0.17) | 1.1 × 10−21 | 1.9 × 10−21 | 0.15 (0.12, 0.18) | 4.8 × 10−24 | 3.2 × 10−19 |
| 6 | −0.04 (−0.07, −0.02) | 0.001 | 0.758 | −0.06 (−0.08, −0.03) | 6.4 × 10−6 | 0.385 |
| 7 | −0.06 (−0.08, −0.03) | 2.4 × 10−6 | 1.6 × 10−14 | −0.07 (−0.09, −0.04) | 1.6 × 10−8 | 1.2 × 10−11 |
| 8 | 0.25 (0.21, 0.28) | 7.8 × 10−48 | 8.7 × 10−14 | 0.23 (0.20, 0.27) | 5.3 × 10−43 | 1.1 × 10−16 |
| 9 | 0.12 (0.09, 0.15) | 7.2 × 10−16 | 8.6 × 10−8 | 0.12 (0.09, 0.15) | 2.0 × 10−16 | 2.5 × 10−7 |
| 10 | 0.06 (0.04, 0.08) | 6.4 × 10−8 | 0.038 | 0.05 (0.03, 0.07) | 1.7 × 10−5 | 0.001 |
Abbreviations: HSM (hip shape mode), CI (confidence interval). Table shows results of linear regression analysis between tempo and the top ten HSMs in male and female adolescents. Regression coefficients represent SD change in HSM per one-year increase in height tempo, 95% CIs and p value. Model 1: adjusted for sex; model 2: model 1 + fat mass index.
Associations between tempo and the top ten HSMs in ALSPAC at age 14, stratified by sex.
| HSM | Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β (95% CI) | p | β (95% CI) | p | ||
| Males | 1 | −0.08 (−0.10, −0.06) | 1.2 × 10−10 | −0.08 (−0.10, −0.06) | 1.1 × 10−10 |
| 2 | 0.24 (0.20, 0.28) | 2.8 × 10−29 | 0.24 (0.20, 0.28) | 9.8 × 10−31 | |
| 3 | 0.24 (0.21, 0.28) | 1.6 × 10−36 | 0.25 (0.21, 0.28) | 9.2 × 10−38 | |
| 4 | 0.07 (0.03, 0.11) | 4.2 × 10−4 | 0.07 (0.03, 0.11) | 4.4 × 10−4 | |
| 5 | 0.30 (0.26, 0.34) | 3.0 × 10−41 | 0.30 (0.26, 0.34) | 3.4 × 10−41 | |
| 6 | −0.05 (−0.09, −0.01) | 0.02 | −0.05 (−0.09, −0.01) | 0.025 | |
| 7 | −0.16 (−0.19, −0.12) | 3.0 × 10−19 | −0.15 (−0.19, −0.12) | 4.3 × 10−19 | |
| 8 | 0.38 (0.33, 0.43) | 1.6 × 10−49 | 0.38 (0.33, 0.43) | 4.1 × 10−50 | |
| 9 | 0.20 (0.16, 0.24) | 1.2 × 10−21 | 0.20 (0.16, 0.24) | 1.2 × 10−21 | |
| 10 | 0.09 (0.05, 0.12) | 4.4 × 10−7 | 0.09 (0.06, 0.12) | 2.0 × 10−7 | |
| Females | 1 | −0.02 (−0.04, 0.00) | 0.109 | −0.01 (−0.03, 0.01) | 0.196 |
| 2 | 0.07 (0.04, 0.11) | 1.2 × 10−4 | 0.01 (−0.02, 0.05) | 0.476 | |
| 3 | 0.06 (0.02, 0.09) | 0.001 | 0.01 (−0.02, 0.05) | 0.498 | |
| 4 | −0.01 (−0.05, 0.02) | 0.379 | −0.03 (−0.06, 0.01) | 0.126 | |
| 5 | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.06) | 0.416 | 0.04 (−0.00, 0.08) | 0.052 | |
| 6 | −0.04 (−0.07, −0.01) | 0.012 | −0.07 (−0.10, −0.03) | 6.1 × 10−5 | |
| 7 | 0.03 (−0.01, 0.06) | 0.109 | 0.01 (−0.02, 0.04) | 0.498 | |
| 8 | 0.13 (0.09, 0.18) | 1.3 × 10−9 | 0.10 (0.05, 0.14) | 1.6 × 10−5 | |
| 9 | 0.05 (0.01, 0.09) | 0.017 | 0.06 (0.02, 0.10) | 0.006 | |
| 10 | 0.04 (0.01, 0.07) | 0.007 | 0.02 (−0.01, 0.05) | 0.303 | |
Abbreviations: HSM (hip shape mode), CI (confidence interval). Table shows results of linear regression analysis between tempo and the top ten HSMs in male (N = 1797) and female (N = 2030) adolescents. Results are SD change in HSM per one-year increase in height tempo, 95% CIs and p value. Model 1: unadjusted; model 2: adjusted for fat mass index.
Fig. 1The overall difference in proximal femur shape at age 14 between early vs. late matures (changes in proximal femur shape associated with unit change in tempo) based on adjusted (model 2) beta coefficients. Beta coefficients were scaled to reflect changes in early maturers (10th percentile of tempo) vs. late maturers (90th percentile of tempo).
Associations between tempo and the top ten HSMs in ALSPAC adolescents at age 18 (N = 3507).
| HSM | Model 1 | Model 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β (95% CI) | p | p for sex-int | β (95% CI) | p | p for sex-int | |
| 1 | 0.02 (0.00, 0.03) | 0.031 | 0.756 | 0.02 (0.00, 0.04) | 0.014 | 0.762 |
| 2 | 0.05 (0.02, 0.08) | 0.003 | 0.186 | 0.00 (−0.03, 0.04) | 0.789 | 0.197 |
| 3 | 0.00 (−0.02, 0.03) | 0.823 | 0.178 | −0.02 (−0.05, 0.00) | 0.092 | 0.159 |
| 4 | −0.00 (−0.03, 0.03) | 0.889 | 0.172 | −0.01 (−0.04, 0.02) | 0.523 | 0.168 |
| 5 | −0.06 (−0.09, −0.03) | 2.6 × 10−4 | 0.149 | −0.06 (−0.09, −0.03) | 2.7 × 10−4 | 0.148 |
| 6 | −0.01 (−0.04, 0.02) | 0.488 | 0.670 | −0.02 (−0.05, 0.01) | 0.235 | 0.679 |
| 7 | 0.01 (−0.01, 0.04) | 0.306 | 0.880 | −0.01 (−0.04, 0.02) | 0.490 | 0.847 |
| 8 | −0.01 (−0.04, 0.03) | 0.650 | 0.079 | −0.04 (−0.08, −0.01) | 0.021 | 0.068 |
| 9 | −0.08 (−0.11, −0.05) | 3.9 × 10−6 | 0.766 | −0.07 (−0.11, −0.04) | 2.4 × 10−5 | 0.761 |
| 10 | 0.07 (0.04, 0.10) | 5.3 × 10−6 | 0.677 | 0.03 (0.00, 0.06) | 0.038 | 0.627 |
Abbreviations: HSM (hip shape mode), CI (confidence interval). Table shows results of linear regression analysis between tempo and the top ten HSMs in male and female adolescents. Regression coefficients represent unit change in HSM per one-year increase in height tempo, 95% CIs and p value. Model 1: adjusted for sex; model 2: model 1 + fat mass index.
Associations between tempo and the top ten HSMs in ALSPAC at age 18, stratified by sex.
| Males | HSM | Model 1 | Model 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β (95% CI) | p | β (95% CI) | p | ||
| 1 | 0.02 (−0.01, 0.05) | 0.119 | 0.02 (−0.00, 0.05) | 0.08 | |
| 2 | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.07) | 0.333 | −0.01 (−0.06, 0.03) | 0.613 | |
| 3 | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.06) | 0.235 | 0.00 (−0.03, 0.04) | 0.831 | |
| 4 | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.06) | 0.342 | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.06) | 0.352 | |
| 5 | −0.03 (−0.08, 0.01) | 0.163 | −0.03 (−0.08, 0.01) | 0.167 | |
| 6 | −0.02 (−0.07, 0.03) | 0.455 | −0.03 (−0.08, 0.02) | 0.303 | |
| 7 | 0.02 (−0.02, 0.05) | 0.396 | −0.00 (−0.04, 0.03) | 0.841 | |
| 8 | 0.03 (−0.03, 0.08) | 0.314 | −0.01 (−0.06, 0.05) | 0.77 | |
| 9 | −0.09 (−0.13, −0.04) | 2.4 × 10−4 | −0.08 (−0.13, −0.03) | 7.7 × 10−4 | |
| 10 | 0.08 (0.03, 0.12) | 8.8 × 10−4 | 0.04 (−0.01, 0.08) | 0.118 | |
| Females | 1 | 0.02 (−0.00, 0.04) | 0.131 | 0.02 (−0.00, 0.04) | 0.087 |
| 2 | 0.07 (0.02, 0.11) | 0.002 | 0.01 (−0.03, 0.06) | 0.513 | |
| 3 | −0.01 (−0.05, 0.02) | 0.482 | −0.04 (−0.08, −0.01) | 0.013 | |
| 4 | −0.02 (−0.06, 0.02) | 0.32 | −0.03 (−0.07, 0.00) | 0.08 | |
| 5 | −0.08 (−0.12, −0.04) | 4.2 × 10−4 | −0.08 (−0.13, −0.04) | 4.2 × 10−4 | |
| 6 | −0.01 (−0.05, 0.04) | 0.801 | −0.01 (−0.06, 0.03) | 0.501 | |
| 7 | 0.01 (−0.03, 0.05) | 0.524 | −0.01 (−0.05, 0.02) | 0.45 | |
| 8 | −0.04 (−0.08, 0.01) | 0.128 | −0.07 (−0.11, −0.02) | 0.005 | |
| 9 | −0.08 (−0.12, −0.03) | 0.002 | −0.07 (−0.12, −0.02) | 0.006 | |
| 10 | 0.07 (0.02, 0.11) | 0.002 | 0.03 (−0.01, 0.07) | 0.144 | |
Abbreviations: HSM (hip shape mode), CI (confidence interval). Table shows results of linear regression analysis between tempo and the top ten HSMs in male (N = N = 1597) and female (N = 1910) adolescents. Results are SD change in HSM per one-year increase in height tempo, 95% CIs and p value. Model 1: unadjusted; model 2: adjusted for fat mass index.
Fig. 2The overall difference in proximal femur shape at age 18 between early vs. late matures (changes in proximal femur shape associated with unit change in tempo) based on adjusted (model 2) beta coefficients. Beta coefficients were scaled to reflect changes in early maturers (10th percentile of tempo) vs. late maturers (90th percentile of tempo).