| Literature DB >> 36012916 |
Agnieszka Barańska1, Wiesław Kanadys2, Magdalena Bogdan3, Ewa Stępień4, Bartłomiej Barczyński5, Anna Kłak6, Anna Augustynowicz7, Marta Szajnik8, Urszula Religioni9.
Abstract
The aim of the report was to determine the effects of soy isoflavones on lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip bone mineral density (BMD) in menopausal women. MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published in English during 1995-2019. Studies were identified and reviewed for inclusion and exclusion eligibility. Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for each study and were pooled by using the random effects model. Eighteen randomized controlled trials were selected for meta-analysis. Different types of soy phytoestrogens, i.e., genistein extracts, soy isoflavones extracts, soy protein isolate, and foods containing diverse amounts of isoflavones were used in the studies. The analysis showed that daily intake of 106 (range, 40-300) mg of isoflavones for 6-24 months moderately but statistically significantly positively affects BMD, compared with controls: lumbar spine WMD = 1.63 (95% CI: 0.51 to 2.75)%, p = 0004; femoral neck WMD = 1.87 (95% CI: 0.14 to 3.60)%, p = 0.034; and total hip WMD = 0.39 (95% CI: 0.08 to 0.69)%, p = 0.013. Subgroups analyses indicated that the varying effects of isoflavones on BMD across the trials might be associated with intervention duration, racial diversity (Caucasian, Asian), time after menopause, form of supplements (especially genistein), and dose of isoflavones. Our review and meta-analysis suggest that soy isoflavones are effective in slowing down bone loss after menopause.Entities:
Keywords: bone loss; bone mass; meta-analysis; postmenopausal woman; randomized controlled trials; soy
Year: 2022 PMID: 36012916 PMCID: PMC9409780 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11164676
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.964
Figure 1Literature search and research selection process. Abbreviations: RCT, randomized, controlled clinical trial; DXA, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; QCT, quantitative computer tomography; QUS, quantitative ultrasonography; BMD, bone mineral density.
Of the randomized blinded clinical trials with a control group on the influence of soy isoflavones on bone mineral density (listed chronologically).
| Author (Year) | Participants a
| Test Report | Average Output Values BMD (g/cm2) | Jadad Scale | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Active Group | Control Group | ||||
| Potter [ | 66/66 (–%) | IFa 90 mg isof/d | Con, 40 g casein and non-fat milk powder | LS: IFa 0.892; IFb 0.971; Con 0.940 | 5 |
| Alekel [ | 69/69 (–%) | IF 80.4 mg isof-ag/d | Con, 40 g whey protein | LS: IF 0.981; Con 1.000 | 5 |
| Morabito [ | 90/90 (–%) | IF tabl 54 mg Gen/d | Pla tabl, nd. | LS: IF 0.915; Pla 0.934 | 3 c,e |
| Chen [ | 203/175 (13.8%) | IFa caps, 80 mg isof-ag/d | Pla caps, corn starch | LS: IFa 0.860; IFb 0.874; Pla 0.846 | 5 |
| Kaspers [ | 202/175 (13.4%) | IF 99 mg isof-ag/d | Con, 25.6 g milk protein | LS: IF 0.917; Con 0.895 | 5 |
| Olsen [ | 107/89 (16.8%) | IF 76 mg isof-ag/d, | Con, 17.5 g SP without isof | LS: IF 0.865; Con 0.835 | 4 d |
| Arjmandi [ | 87/62 (28.7%) | IF 60 mg isof/d, | Con, 25 g SP without isof | LS: IF 0.944; Con 0.941 | 4 c |
| Wu [ | 136/128 (5.9%) | IF caps 75 mg isof/d, | Plac caps, dextrin | LS: IF 0.891; Pla 0.907 | 4 c |
| Ye [ | 90/84 (6.7%) | IFa caps, 126 mg isof-ag/d, | Pla caps, starch | LS: IFa 0.892; IFb 0.839; Pla 0.864 | 5 |
| Huang [ | 43/42 (2.3%) | IFa 200 mg isof-ag/d, | Pla tabl, nd. | LS: IFa 1.07; IFb 1.09; Pla 1.06 | 2 c,d,e |
| Evans [ | 61/43 (29.5%) | IF 91.5 mg isof-ag/d, | Con, 25.6 g milk protein | LS: IF 0.915, Con 0.939 | 4 d |
| Marini [ | 389/389 (–%) | IF tabl, 54 mg Gen/d | Pla tabl, calcium carbonate | LS: IF 8.842, Pla 0.837 | 5 |
| Brink [ | 300/237 (21.0%) | IF 110 mg isof-ag/d | Con, biscuits, cereal bars | LS: IF 0.983, Con 0.995 | 4 c |
| Vupadhyayula [ | 203/157 (22.7%) | IF 90 mg isof/d, | Con, 25 g milk protein | LS: IF 1.085, Con 1.104 | 5 |
| Kenny [ | 131/97 (25.9%) | IF tabl, 105 mg isof-ag/d | Pla tabl, | LS: IF 1.140, Pla 1.103 | 5 |
| Levis [ | 248/177 (28.6%) | IF tabl, 200 mg isof/d | Pla tabl, nd. | LS: IF 1.146, Pla 1.132 | 5 |
| Tai [ | 431/399 (7.4%) | IF caps, 300 mg isof-ag/d | Pla caps, microcrystalline cellulose, xylitol | LS: IF 0.863, Pla 0.866 | 5 |
| Chilibeck [ | 351/298 (15,1%) | IF tabl, 165 mg isof/d | Pla tabl, dicalcium phosphate, magnesium stearate, sorbitol | LS: IF 0.951, Pla 0.958 FN: IF 0.746, Pla 0.741 | 5 |
Data are means ± standard deviation. Abbreviations: BMD, bone mineral density (g/cm2); BMI, body mass index (kg/m2); caps, capsule; Con, control group; d, daily/day; Dai, daidzein; FN, femoral neck; Gen, genistein; Gly, glycitein; IF, active group; isof, isoflavones; isof-ag, isoflavones in the form of a glycons; LS, lumbar spine; nd., no data; Pla, placebo; SP, soy proteim; tabl, tablet, TH, total hip; T-score, the BMD of the subject to the average BMD of the young person; ysm, years since menopause (y). a sample size: randomisation/analysis (exclusion indicator), b range, c deduct one point because the method of randomization was described, but was inappropriate, d deduct one point because the method of blinding was described, but was inappropriate, e deduct one point because of no description of withdrawal and dropouts.
Figure 2The effect of soy isoflavones on bone mineral density of the lumbar spine in postmenopausal women, compared with placebo [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42]. M, mean change from baseline (%); SD, standard deviation; n, size of the study group; WMD, weighted average difference (%); CI, confidence interval; horizontal lines correspond to 95% CI (some of them go beyond the limits of the scale).
Analysis in subgroups of the effect of soy isoflavones on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women.
| Lumbar Spine BMD | Femoral Neck BMD | Total Hip BMD | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | n | N | WMD (95% CI), | Q Test, | n | N | WMD (95% CI), | Q Test, | n | N | WMD (95% CI), | Q Test, |
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| 18 | 2350 | 1.63 (0.51; 2.75), 0.004 | 252.34, 0.000 | 11 | 1321 | 1.87 (0.14; 3.60), | 163.98, 0,000 | 10 | 1157 | 0.39 (0.08; 0.69), 0.013 | 2.62, 0.97 | |
| Populations | ||||||||||||
| Asian | 5 | 766 | 0.80 (−0.18; 1.77), 0.111 | 14.1296, 0.0069 | 4 | 367 | 0.32 (−1.08; 1.30), 0.515 | 3.9466, 0.2674 | 4 | 590 | 0.35 (−0.06; 0.76), 0.092 | 1.0289, 0.7943 |
| Western | 13 | 1584 | 1.91 (0.35; 3,47), 0.017 | 14.1296, 0.0069 | 7 | 954 | 2.45 (−0.09; 4.99), 0.059 | 144.1531, 0.0000 | 6 | 567 | 0.44 (−0.02; 0.91), 0.061 | 1.4452, 0.9192 |
| Years since menopause | ||||||||||||
| ≤5 years | 7 | 798 | 0.52 (−0.20; 1.24), 0.161 | 16.0434, 0.0135 | 5 | 516 | 0.64 (−0.29; 1.57), 0.178 | 6.5691, 0.1605 | 4 | 474 | 0.40 (−0.03; 0.83), 0.068 | 2.0062, 0.5711 |
| 5–10 years | 6 | 1109 | 2.93 (0.14; 5.71), 0.039 | 176.8500, 0.0000 | 4 | 648 | 4.00 (−0.38; 8.39), 0.073 | 128.3974, 0.0000 | 4 | 526 | 0.37 (−0.12; 0.85), 0.136 | 0.5698, 0.9033 |
| ≥10 years | 5 | 443 | 0.81 (0.07; 1.56), 0.033 | 3.7921, 0.4349 | 2 | 157 | 0.01 (−1.10; 1.11), 0.993 | 0.1128, 0.7369 | 2 | 157 | 0.39 (−0.61; 1.40), 0.445 | 0.0282, 0.8667 |
| Period of observation | ||||||||||||
| <12 months | 5 | 283 | 0.95 (−0.20; 2.10), 0.106 | 9.2890, 0.0543 | 3 | 172 | 0.91 (−0.39; 2.20), 0.169 | 1.2182, 0.5438 | 3 | 172 | 0.50 (−0.29; 1.29), 0.216 | 0.4841; 0.7850 |
| 12 months | 7 | 799 | 1.04 (0.00; 2.07), 0.049 | 84.5048, 0.0000 | 4 | 325 | 1.40 (−1.43; 4.24), 0.332 | 44.2279, 0.0000 | 3 | 285 | 0.21 (−0.33; 0.75), 0.446 | 0.1145; 0.9444 |
| 24 months | 6 | 1268 | 2.79 (0.24; 5.34), 0.032 | 131.8048, 0.0000 | 4 | 824 | 1.92 (−2.34; 6.19), 0.377 | 146.2043, 0.0000 | 4 | 700 | 0.46 (0.04; 0.88), 0.032 | 1.4181; 0.7013 |
| Type of supplement | ||||||||||||
| genistein | 3 | 491 | 6.63 (1.61; 11.64), 0.010 | 52.3530, 0.0000 | 3 | 491 | 5.67 (0.87; 10.47), 0.021 | 41.1603, 0.0000 | ||||
| Isof extract | 7 | 1098 | 0.37 (−0.19; 0.94), 0.197 | 11.0512, 0.0868 | 6 | 699 | 0.22 (−0.39; 0.82), 0.486 | 6.4699, 0.2631 | 7 | 964 | 0.39 (0.06; 0.72), 0.0216 | 2.4611; 0.8728 |
| Isof food | 8 | 761 | 0.40 (−0.07; 0.87), 0.094 | 6.9289, 0.4363 | 2 | 131 | 0.29 (−0.84; 1.42), 0.615 | 0.5555, 0.4561 | 3 | 193 | 0.39 (−0.48; 1.25), 0.379 | 0.1542; 0.9258 |
| The dose of isof | ||||||||||||
| <90 mg/d | 9 | 966 | 2.69 (0.44; 4.93), 0.019 | 198.2354; 0.0000 | 5 | 748 | 3.07 (−0.59; 6.72), 0.100 | 137.7879; 0.0000 | 4 | 361 | 0.22 (−0.26; 0.70), 0.377 | 0.0646; 0.9957 |
| ≥90 mg/d | 9 | 1384 | 0.58 (0.08; 1.08), 0.022 | 14.4621; 0.1068 | 6 | 573 | 0.53 (−0.18; 1.24), 0.143 | 7.7546; 0.2566 | 6 | 796 | 0.47 (0.07; 0.88), 0.020 | 1.4899; 0.9602 |
Abbreviations: isof, isoflavones; n, number of studies; N, number of women; WMD, weighted mean difference (%); CI, confidence interval.
Figure 3Effect of soy isoflavones on femoral neck bone mineral density in postmenopausal women compared to placebo [27,28,32,33,34,35,36,38,39,40,42]. M, mean change from baseline (%); SD, standard deviation; n, size of the study group; WMD, weighted average difference (%); CI, confidence interval; horizontal lines correspond to 95% CI (some of them go beyond the boundaries of the scale.
Figure 4Effect of soy isoflavones on bone mineral density of proximal femur in postmenopausal women compared to placebo [28,31,32,33,35,38,39,40,41,42]. M, mean change from baseline (%); SD, standard deviation; n, size of the study group; WMD, weighted average difference (%); CI, confidence interval; horizontal lines correspond to 95% CI.