Evidence Hub

Amino Acid Intakes Are Associated With Bone Mineral Density and Prevalence of Low Bone Mass in Women: Evidence From Discordant Monozygotic Twins

A. Jennings, A. MacGregor, T. Spector, A. Cassidy

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2015

135 participants · 98 citations

Abstract

Although a higher protein intake, particularly from vegetable sources, has been shown to be associated with higher bone mineral density (BMD) the relative impact of specific amino acids on BMD and risk of osteoporosis remains to be determined. Mechanistic research suggests that a number of specific amino acids, including five nonessential amino acids—alanine, arginine, glutamic acid, glycine, and proline—may play a role in bone health, principally through improved production of insulin and insulin‐like growth factor 1 and the synthesis of collagen and muscle protein. However to date, no previous studies have examined the associations between habitual intake of amino acids and direct measures of BMD and prevalence of osteoporosis or osteopenia, and no studies have examined this relationship in discordant identical twin‐pairs. In these analyses of female monozygotic twin‐pairs discordant for amino acid intake (n = 135), twins with higher intakes of alanine and glycine had significantly higher BMD at the spine than their co‐twins with within‐pair differences in spine‐BMD of 0.012 g/cm2 (SE 0.01; p = 0.039) and 0.014 g/cm2 (SE 0.01; p = 0.026), respectively. Furthermore, in cross‐sectional multivariable analyses of 3160 females aged 18 to 79 years, a higher intake of total protein was significantly associated with higher DXA‐measured BMD at the spine (quartile Q4 to quartile Q1: 0.017 g/cm2, SE 0.01, p = 0.035) and forearm (Q4 to Q1: 0.010 g/cm2, SE 0.003, p = 0.002). Intake of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 135 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free