Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T05:26:29.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Role of Gene–Environment Interaction in Determining Bone Mineral Density in a Twin Population

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2012

Vasi Naganathan*
Affiliation:
Institute of Bone and Joint Research, Royal North Shore Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia; Centre for Education and Research on Ageing, Concord Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia. [email protected]
Alexander J. MacGregor
Affiliation:
The Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology Unit, St Thomas' Hospital, London and University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Philip N. Sambrook
Affiliation:
Institute of Bone and Joint Research, Royal North Shore Hospital, University of Sydney, Australia.
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr Vasi Naganathan, CERA, Concord Hospital, Concord NSW 2139, Australia.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The possibility that specific environmental factors such as smoking and estrogen use modify the genetic influences (gene–environment interaction) on bone mineral density (BMD) has not been explored in genetic epidemiological studies such as twin studies. The aim of this study was to look for evidence of gene–environment interaction in BMD determination by analyzing data collected on a large number of healthy female twins. BMD of the hip, distal forearm and lumbar spine were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry on 287 identical and 265 nonidentical volunteer female twin pairs. The environmental factors examined were hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and smoking. In genetic modeling analysis using path analysis, there was evidence of ‘HRT-specific’ genetic component of BMD variance at the forearm (50% of total variance) but not at the hip. At the lumbar spine the magnitude of the genetic component of variance in HRT users (> 60-month HRT use) was less than the genetic component of variance for little or no exposure to HRT (48% vs. 84%). There was no evidence of gene–environment interaction for smoking. The main evidence for gene–environment interaction was the finding that forearm BMD variance was influenced by a significant HRT-specific genetic component. There was also evidence that in HRT users, the genetic component of total variance for lumbar BMD was lower.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007