Fracture risk and zoledronic acid therapy in men with osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Fractures in men are a major health issue, and data on the antifracture efficacy of therapies for osteoporosis in men are limited. We studied the effect of zoledronic acid on fracture risk among men with osteoporosis. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 1199 men with primary or hypogonadism-associated osteoporosis who were 50 to 85 years of age to receive an intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid (5 mg) or placebo at baseline and at 12 months. Participants received daily calcium and vitamin D supplementation. The primary end point was the proportion of participants with one or more new morphometric vertebral fractures over a period of 24 months. RESULTS: The rate of any new morphometric vertebral fracture was 1.6% in the zoledronic acid group and 4.9% in the placebo group over the 24-month period, representing a 67% risk reduction with zoledronic acid (relative risk, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.70; P=0.002). As compared with men who received placebo, men who received zoledronic acid had fewer moderate-to-severe vertebral fractures (P=0.03) and less height loss (P=0.002). Fewer participants who received zoledronic acid had clinical vertebral or nonvertebral fractures, although this difference did not reach significance because of the small number of fractures. Bone mineral density was higher and bone-turnover markers were lower in the men who received zoledronic acid (P<0.05 for both comparisons). Results were similar in men with low serum levels of total testosterone. The zoledronic acid and placebo groups did not differ significantly with respect to the incidence of death (2.6% and 2.9%, respectively) or serious adverse events (25.3% and 25.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Zoledronic acid treatment was associated with a significantly reduced risk of vertebral fracture among men with osteoporosis. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00439647.).

Physical activity is a prognostic factor for bone mineral density in Mexican children

Background. Bone mass is similar in pre-pubertal girls and boys and double in both genders between the onset of puberty and early adult life. Exogenous factors such as nutrition and exercise contribute to the acquisition of bone mass. The objective of this project was to correlate calcium intake and level of physical activity with bone mineral density (BMD) in a sample of Mexican school-age children. Methods. Avalidated questionnaire was applied. The questionnaire included the following dimensions: (a) sociodemographic information, (b) type of sports and games that involved physical activity and hours per week dedicated to them, (c) inactivity measured by hours expended watching TV or playing videogames per day and (d) dietary calcium. After completing the questionnaire, the children were invited to have a BMD and total body composition assessment using a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) (Prodigy LUNAR). Results. In this cross-sectional study, 212 children were included, 48.6% were girls. The average total BMD in boys and girls was 0.8805 ± 0.056 g/cm² and 0.8788 ± 0.056g/cm², respectively, with significant differences in the groups of 10- and 12-year-old girls. An average of 10.9 ± 6.48 h of weekly physical activity was reported in boys and 10.6 ± 7.31 h in girls. Number of glasses of milk consumed was reported (1.7 ± 0.95 and 1.33 ± 0.91) per day in boys and girls, respectively. Differences in BMD in 10- and 12-year-old girls adjusted according to menarche were found. In the linear regression analysis, lean body mass was significantly associated with total, L2-L4, pelvis, and forearm BMD. Physical activity was significantly associated with leg BMD and age was associated with pelvis and forearm BMD. Conclusions. High lean body mass, menarche and regular intense physical activity are predictors for a higher BMD in school-age children in Mexico City.

Effects of pioglitazone and glimepiride on glycemic control and insulin sensitivity in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Pioglitazone and glimepiride improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus by different mechanisms. Pioglitazone is a thiazolidinedione that reduces insulin resistance, and glimepiride is a sulfonylurea insulin secretagogue. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to compare changes in measures of glycemic control and insulin sensitivity in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes who received pioglitazone or glimepiride for 1 year. METHODS: This was a multicenter, 52-week, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Patients were randomized to receive monotherapy with either glimepiride (2 mg QD initially) or pioglitazone (15 mg QD initially). Doses were titrated (maximal doses: pioglitazone 45 mg, glimepiride 8 mg) to achieve glycemic targets (fasting blood glucose < or =7 mmol/L and 1-hour postprandial blood glucose < or =10 mmol/L). Insulin sensitivity (primary end point) was evaluated in terms of the Homeostasis Model Assessment for Insulin Sensitivity (HOMA-S), the Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index (QUICKI), and fasting serum insulin (FSI) concentrations. Glycemic control was evaluated in terms of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) values and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentrations. Patients were encouraged to maintain their individual diet and exercise regimens throughout the study. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four patients (125 women, 119 men; all but 1 Hispanic) were randomized to receive pioglitazone (n = 121) or glimepiride (n = 123). In the intent-to-treat sample, pioglitazone and glimepirede produced comparable reductions in HbA(1c) from baseline to the end of the study (-0.78% and -0.68%, respectively). The pioglitazone group had significantly higher HbA(1c) values compared with the glimepiride group after 12 weeks of therapy (8.66% vs 7.80%; P = 0.007) but had significantly lower values after 52 weeks (7.46% vs 7.77%; P = 0.027). Pioglitazone significantly reduced FPG compared with glimepiride (-0.6 vs 0.6 mmol/L; P = 0.01). Pioglitazone therapy was associated with significant increases in insulin sensitivity (reduced insulin resistance), whereas glimepiride had no effect. HOMA-S values changed 18.0% for pioglitazone and -7.9% for glimepiride (P < 0.001), QUICKI values changed a respective 0.013 and -0.007 (P < 0.001), and FSI values were -21.1 and 15.1 pmol/L (P< 0.001). Both drugs were well tolerated, with pioglitazone associated with more peripheral edema (number of treatment-emergent cases: 35/121[28.9%] vs 17/123 [13.8%]; P = 0.005) and fewer hypoglycemic episodes (19 [15.7%] vs 38 [30.9%]; P = 0.024). The incidence of weight gain was not significantly different between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that long-term treatment with pioglitazone enhances insulin sensitivity relative to glimepiride in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes and that pioglitazone may have a more sustained antihyperglycemic effect.

Remodelacion del sistema de distribucion del campto. central YPFB-Camiri

Contenido: 1.Descripcion y analisis del sistema electrico de la ciudad de Camiri 2.Descripcion del sistema de distribucion existente:Campamento central Y.P.F.B. Camiri 3.Analisis y pronosticos de demanda del sistema de distribucion del campamento. central de Y.P.F.B. Camiri 4.Analisis economico: Alternativas del diseno 5.Ingenieria del proyecto: Remodelacion del sistema de distribucion del Campamento. Central Y.P.F.B.-Camiri 6. Conclusiones.