Advertisement

Genes & Nutrition

, 14:31 | Cite as

The role of PPARγ in childhood obesity-induced fractures

  • Matthew R. McCannEmail author
  • Anusha Ratneswaran
Open Access
Review

Abstract

Globally, obesity is on the rise with ~ 30% of the world’s population now obese, and childhood obesity is following similar trends. Childhood obesity has been associated with numerous chronic conditions, including musculoskeletal disorders. This review highlights the effects of childhood adiposity on bone density by way of analyzing clinical studies and further describing two severe skeletal conditions, slipped capital femoral epiphysis and Blount’s disease. The latter half of this review discusses bone remodeling and cell types that mediate bone growth and strength, including key growth factors and transcription factors that help orchestrate this complex pathology. In particular, the transcriptional factor peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) is examined as it is a master regulator of adipocyte differentiation in mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) that can also influence osteoblast populations. Obese individuals are known to have higher levels of PPARγ expression which contributes to their increased adipocyte numbers and decreased bone density. Modulating PPAR*gamma* signaling can have significant effects on adipogenesis, thereby directing MSCs down the osteoblastogenesis pathway and in turn increasing bone mineral density. Lastly, we explore the potential of PPARγ as a druggable target to decrease adiposity, increase bone density, and be a treatment for children with obesity-induced bone fractures.

Keywords

Bone Bone mineral density Childhood obesity Osteoporosis Bone fractures Slipped capital femoral epiphysis Blount’s disease PPARγ Osteoblast Osteoclast 

Abbreviations

ADOPT

A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial

BMD

Bone mineral density

BMI

Body mass index

C/EBPs

CCAAT-enhancer-binding proteins

DXA

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

HRpQCT

High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography

MSCs

Mesenchymal stem cell

PPARγ

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma

pQCT

Peripheral quantitative computed tomography

SCFE

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis

SFT

Skinfold thickness

TODAY

Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth

Background

Childhood obesity and bone density

Obesity has become an international health risk, with reports indicating its status has been elevated to that of a global pandemic [1]. Assessment of the 2013 Global Burden of Disease showed that the percentage of individuals with a body mass index (BMI; weight in kg/height in m2) greater than 25 has increased from 28.8 to 36.9% in men and from 29.8 to 38.0% in women between 1980 and 2013 [2]. Rates of childhood and adolescent obesity are also increasing in both developed and developing countries, with no national initiatives successfully decreasing obesity rated in the past 30 years [2]. The cost of obesity and its associated comorbidities are staggering, and in 2014, it was estimated that the total global cost of obesity was $4 trillion (USD) [3].

In adults, being overweight is defined as having a BMI greater than 25 and obesity is defined as a BMI greater than 30 [4]. BMI is still an accurate and valid method of determining adiposity in children and adolescents [5]. However, unlike adults, there are no set numerical values, because as children grow, their body composition and bone structure are altered rapidly. As such, obesity is defined as having a BMI greater than the 95th percentile for age and sex. Childhood obesity has been associated with numerous chronic diseases including type 2 diabetes mellitus, cancer, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and cardiovascular and liver diseases [6]. However, the effect obesity has on the musculoskeletal system is less established [7].

Main text

Bone remodeling and adaptation

Bone is highly responsive to its environment. Wolff’s law demonstrates that bone is able to adapt and provide adequate strength and rigidity to sustain the mechanical and physiologic functions of the body. Bone is able to achieve these properties by sensing repeated loading or nutrient availability, which in turn leads to regulation of the balance between bone deposition and resorption [8]. This active process of bone turnover in children is termed modeling, and in adults, it is called remodeling. In healthy individuals, the balance shifts throughout life, with early years favoring selective deposition, while in the middle of life, resorption and deposition are balanced and stable. Lastly, in the fifth decade of life, there is a shift to increased bone resorption and decreased bone density. Bone is able to regulate this turnover process through two major cell types: the mesenchymal-derived osteoblasts that deposit new bone and osteoclasts from the hematopoietic lineage that resorb bone.

In early life, bone modeling is critical because bone mineral density (BMD) is mostly accrued during adolescence and peak bone density is thought to occur between the ages of 20 and 30 [9]. It is critical to achieve a high peak bone mass for proper skeletal function but also to avoid potential issues with low BMD later in life [10]. Osteoporosis is characterized by decreased BMD and marked destruction of the trabecular bone struts in spongy bone. This often results in increased bone frailty and greater likelihood of fracture. While postmenopausal osteoporosis is a leading cause of fracture in women, men also have decreases in BMD as they age but this is thought to be due to decreases in circulating testosterone levels, higher fat mass, and decreased muscle mass [11]. The clinical definition for adult osteoporosis is a BMD that is 2.5 standard deviations or more below the population mean of a healthy 30-year-old adult [12].

While age- and drug-induced osteoporoses are well known, juvenile osteoporosis is rare and less defined, and its etiology is not completely known [13]. Juvenile osteoporosis develops prepubertally and often leads to compression fractures in the vertebrae and the metaphyses of long bones [14]. The specific location of these fractures indicates that it affects the trabecular bone in a similar manner to adult osteoporosis. These children have BMD that is less than 2.5 standard deviations from aged-matched healthy controls; however, a diagnosis of juvenile osteoporosis cannot be made on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results alone, and multiple criteria including past fracture history and frequency, diet, ethnicity, and height and weight must be assessed [15].

Clinical studies of adiposity-induced low BMD

Adults with a high BMI are at a lower risk for osteoporosis, as increased weight positively correlates with increased BMD and lower risk of fractures [16]. While there have been are conflicting reports [17], the consensus is that children with obesity have lower BMD and increased fracture rates when compared to normal weight children [18].

Compelling evidence was the large-scale chart review cross-sectional study that evaluated 913,178 patients between the ages of 2 to 19 years [19]. In this study, BMI was stratified into five weight classes (underweight, normal weight, overweight, moderate obesity, and extreme obesity), and records were screened for lower extremity fractures. The overweight, moderate, and severely obese all had increased odds of fracture in the foot, ankle, knee, and tibia/fibula when compared to normal weight controls after adjustment for sex, race, age, neighborhood education, and medical care benefit use. Notably, the increased fracture risk was higher in those patients who had a higher BMI. A more recent cross-sectional study of 2213 children found that only overweight children had a higher risk lower limb fractures, and there was no association between obese patients and normal controls [20]. Further assessment of upper limb fractures demonstrated that children with forearm fractures were more likely to be higher BMIs when compared to the age and region reference population [21]. Interestingly, obesity only appears to affect incidences of fractures in children and does not appear to affect the severity of fractures [17].

There are many potential explanations why children with obesity are at a higher risk for fractures, including altered gait and poor balance, which results in increased susceptibility to falls [22]. Finite element modeling of the pelvic bone showed that increased weight and therefore higher impact forces in children with obesity further exacerbated fracture risk in this population [23]. Lifestyle factors also contribute heavily to obesity in children, including increased sedentary behavior, poor diet [24], and poor sleeping habits which can lead to weight gain [25]. Lastly, excessive adipose tissue itself can have direct molecular and hormonal effects on bone density during this critical period of rapid skeletal growth [26].

The importance of adiposity in bone development and modeling cannot be understated, as children with inadequate levels of fat deposits fail to begin skeletal maturation during puberty [27]. Conversely, excess adiposity has shown to increase bone diameter, yet these bones are less structurally sound and have a higher incidence of fracture. There is current debate and conflicting studies as to whether increased adiposity leads to larger bones, increased or decreased density, or increased fractures rates (Table 1). Not only are obese children more likely to have fractures but once they do, these children have a higher rate of improper bone reductions and require more subsequent manipulations to correct the misaligned bones [49]. Additionally, children with higher BMIs have a greater prevalence of open reduction surgery to repair their factures [49], which leads to increased surgery complications [50] and more cosmetic scarring compared to closed reductions. Fueling further complexity, it has also been shown that where the deposition of adiposity is localized also has an impact on bone strength. When adiposity is deposited as visceral fat, it leads to decreased bone density in the vertebral bones [42] or femur [39]. Yet, adiposity deposition in the subcutaneous fat has positive associations with bone structure and strength [39]. In healthy adult women, lean mass was shown to have a positive correlation to BMD, while fat mass demonstrated a negative correlation, with the threshold for fat mass being in the 30 to 38% body fat range [51]. The threshold for where body fat percentage becomes detrimental in the pediatric population is not known and warrants further study.
Table 1

Summary of pediatric studies evaluating adiposity and bone mineral density and fractures

Study

Study design

Population

Age (years)

Gender

Geographical location

Obesity assessment

Bone/fracture assessment

Results

Goulding et al. [28]

Case-control

206 (3 with distal forearm fracture)

3–15

Female

Dunedin, New Zealand

BMI

Total fat mass

DXA: radius

DXA: lumbar

DXA: whole body

Past medical records

Girls with forearm fractures have lower BMD and higher adiposity than non-fracture controls

Goulding et al. [29]

Cohort study

200 (100 forearm fracture)

10 ± 2.9

Female

Dunedin, New Zealand

BMI

DXA: radius

DXA: lumbar

DXA: whole body

Past medical records

Girls with higher BMI and lower bone density were at greater risk for fracture

Goulding et al. [30]

Case-control

200 (100 forearm fracture)

3–19

Male

Dunedin, New Zealand

BMI

Total fat mass

DXA: radius

DXA: hip

DXA: lumbar

DXA: whole body

Past medical records

Boys with forearm fracture were more overweight and had lower radial BMD

Skaggs et al. [31]

Case-control

100 (50 with forearm fracture

4–15

Female

Los Angeles, California, USA

BMI

CT: radius

Past fracture history

Girls with forearm fractures had a smaller radius and higher weight compared to non-fracture controls

Davidson et al. [32]

Case-control

50 (25 obese)

4–17

Male

Dunedin, New Zealand

BMI

DXA: radius

DXA: whole body

Obese children were at greater risk of forearm fracture

Goulding et al. [33]

Cross-sectional

90 children with forearm fracture

5–19

Male and female

Dunedin, New Zealand

BMI

DXA: lumbar

DXA: hip

DXA: forearm

DXA: whole body

Past fracture history

Children with repeated forearm fractures had lower radial BMD and higher BMI

Taylor et al. [34]

Retrospective cross-sectional

355 (227 overweight)

12.2 ± 2.8

Male and female

Washington, DC, USA

BMI

DXA: lower extremities

Past fracture history

Overweight children had a greater prevalence of fracture

Janicka et al. [35]

Cross-sectional

300 healthy cases

13–21

Male and female

Los Angles, California, USA

BMI

CT: femur

CT: lumbar

DXA: lumbar

Total body fat mass was not associated with BMD or cortical bone structure in males. Females had a negative association between DXA leg BMD and fat mass

Pollack et al. [36]

Cross-sectional

115

18.2 ± 0.4

Male and female

Athens, Georgia, USA

BMI

DXA: whole body

pQCT: radius

pQCT: tibia

Body fat percentage was inversely correlated with cortical bone size and strength indices

Wetzsteon et al. [37]

Longitudinal

445 (143 obese)

9–11

Male and female

British Columbia, Canada

BMI

DXA: whole body

pQCT: tibia

In overweight children, bone strength adapted to greater lean mass but did not respond to excess fat mass

Dimitri et al. [38]

Cross-sectional

103 children (52 obese)

11.7 ± 2.8

Male and female

Sheffield, UK

BMI

Total fat mass

DXA: lumbar

DXA: radius

DXA: whole body

Past fracture history

Obese children with prior fracture had reduced BMD

Gilsanz et al. [39]

Cross-sectional

100 healthy adolescents and young adults

15–25

Female

Los Angeles, California, USA

BMI

Waist circumference

CT: waist

CT: femur

High levels of visceral fat were associated with decreased femoral cortical and cross-sectional area. Subcutaneous fat had beneficial effects in these measurements.

Farr et al. [40]

Cross-sectional

198 healthy children

8–15

Male and female

Minnesota, USA

Total body fat mass

DXA: whole body

HRpQCT: radius

HRpQCT: tibia

Total body fat mass affected the distal tibial failure and no effect on radius.

Sayers et al. [41]

Longitudinal cohort

3914

Avg.: 13.8

Male and female

Southwest England

Total body fat and lean mass

DXA: total hip

DXA: femoral neck

In females there was a positive relationship between adiposity and femoral neck buckling

Russell et al. [42]

Cross-sectional

30 (15 obese, 15 normal weight)

12–18

Female

Boston, Massachusetts, USA

BMI

MRI: lumbar

DXA: lumbar

DXA: hip

DXA: whole body

Visceral adipose levels inversely correlated with vertebral bone density in females

Wey et al. [43]

Cross-sectional and longitudinal

370

8–18

Male and female

South Dakota, USA

 

DXA: whole body

pQCT: radius

Higher fat mass was associated with reduced bone size. Longitudinal gain of fat negatively impacted cortical area.

Kessler et al. [19]

Cross-sectional

913,718

2–19

Male and female

California, USA

BMI

Past fracture history

Higher BMI was associated with increased risk of lower extremity fractures

Fornari et al. [44]

Retrospective cross-sectional

922 fracture cases

5.0 ± 2.5

Male and female

California, USA

BMI

Past fracture history

Children with obesity were at a greater risk of and severity for lateral condyle factures.

Laddu et al. [45]

Longitudinal

260 healthy children

8–13

Female

Arizona, USA

BMI

DXA: whole body

pQCT: femur

pQCT: tibia

At baseline, visceral fat mass was a positive predictor of bone strength. Longitudinally, central fat mass may hinder cortical bone strength.

Sabhaney et al. [20]

Cross-sectional

2213 (1078 had fracture, 316 obese)

9.5 ± 4.2

Male and female

British Columbia and Ontario, Canada

BMI

Past fracture history

Obese children had a minor decreased odds of fracture relative to normal weight children

Kwan et al. [17]

Retrospective cross-sectional

1340 patients with extremity factures

2–17

Male and female

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Weight-for-age > 95th percentage

Past fracture history

Obese children were not at an increased risk of sustaining more severe extremity fractures or subsequent complications then non-obese children.

Gilbert et al. [46]

Retrospective chart review

331 femur and tibia factures

2–14

Male and female

Alabama and Tennessee, USA

BMI

Past fracture history

Obese patients were twice as likely to have fractures involving the physis.

Moon et al. [21]

Cross-sectional

401 acute upper limb fracture

3–18

Male and female

Southhampton, UK

BMI

SFT: triceps

SFT: subscapular

Upper limb fractures in the previous 60 days

Overweight and obese prevalence was higher in children with forearm and upper arm fractures. More pronounced in boys upper limb fractures

Manning et al. [47]

Retrospective case-control

929 forearm fractures

0–17 years

Male and female

Washington, DC, USA

Weight-for-age/sex > 95th percentage

Past radial bone fractures

Children with weight greater than the 95th percentile of age/sex had higher odds of ground-level fractures.

Khadilkar et al. [48]

Cross-sectional

245

6–17

Male and female

Pune, India

BMI

DXA: whole body

Total BMC, BMC, and bone area are lower in increasing BMI

The reason underlying differential effects on BMD from adiposity location is unknown. It is believed that weight gain in adolescence may limit the periosteum (outer layer of bone) that normally expands during this period of rapid growth, thereby decreasing the bones structure and strength relative to the increasing body weight [52]. Further, there is little evidence exploring if the rate of weight gain affects BMD both acutely and chronically. The rate could have varying effects depending on which stage of puberty it occurs or if it transcends the years of puberty.

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis

One of the most well-known effects of obesity on bone is the increased prevalence of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) [7]. This condition is the result of a non-traumatic fracture between the proximal femoral epiphysis and metaphysis that typically occurs during adolescent growth. The exact cause of SCFE is unknown, but it is multifactorial disease in which obesity is thought to be a key contributor, and that increased weight bearing alters loading to the hip joint [7]. A Scottish study reported that the incidence of SCFE rose from 2.78 per 100,000 children in 1981 to 9.66 per 100,000 in 2000 [53]. This was a 2.5-fold increase in two decades, which parallels childhood obesity rates. A similar trend was also noted in New Mexico, USA, with a 3.4-fold increase in 2006 compared to the 1960s [54]. It is estimated that 30–50% of children with SCFE are overweight [55]. The first correlation between high BMI and increased rate of SCFE was in 2003 by Poussa et al. [56]. Since then, there have been other studies showing similar results [57, 58] and that the severity of SCFE increases as BMI increases [59], while the incidence of bilaterally SCFE also increases [60]. There are conflicting reports if SCFE is related to vitamin D intake [61], and yet, a new study shows an association between elevated serum leptin levels and SCFE, regardless of BMI [62]. This further demonstrates that SCFE is multifactorial disease that may not be strictly dependent on the altered biomechanics hypothesis. SCFE patients with an increased BMI had a worse 20-year follow-up [63], but reduction of BMI to lower than the 95th percentile post-surgery decreased the odds of bilateral SCFE development by 84% [64].

Blount’s disease

Another bone deformity associated with childhood obesity is Blount’s disease, also known as tibia vara. This is a progressive disorder that results from altered growth of the proximal tibia physis and results in varus deformation of the tibia including tibial rotation and procurvatum (backwards bending) [65]. While this disease is relatively rare, two thirds of children with this condition are obese [66], and the rates of Blount’s disease are rising in parallel to the increasing prevalence of obesity in children [67]. An 8-year longitudinal study showed that patients with early-onset Blount’s disease (< 4 years of age) have a greater severity of the disease [68], which can also lead to early degenerative osteoarthritis in early adulthood [69].

The current etiology of Blount’s disease is unknown. In addition to obesity, there appear to be differences between age, sex, and race [65] and minerals such as zinc and copper [70], and there are mixed results regarding association with vitamin D levels [71, 72]. In these early-onset cases, excess weight causes bowing of the tibia, leading to altered pressure on the epiphysis, improper ossification of the cartilage in the medial metaphysis, and insufficient growth of the medial physis [73]. The longitudinal growth of the tibia via the physis is disrupted by these compressive forces in a process called the Hueter-Volkmann’s law [74]. While weight may be a contributing factor to alterations in the growth plate, it is unlikely that this is the sole cause for the development of Blount’s disease [75]. Histopathological evaluation of the growth plate in these patients demonstrated cellular disorganization of the growth plate and impaired differentiation of chondrocytes into hypertrophic cells (a similar cellular disorganization is seen in SCFE) [76]. It is thought that PPARγ initially causes delayed maturation in the growth plate and the added mechanical stress from the increased body weight results in impaired terminal differentiation and malalignment [77].

Upon clinical diagnosis of Blount’s disease, surgical intervention is usually recommended in conjuncture with a pediatric obesity specialist to implement a weight loss program to prevent reoccurrence [78]. However, after successful surgical intervention, correction of the misalignment, and post-surgical nutritional counseling, 78% of these patients still continued to gain weight after 48 months of follow-up [79].

In summary, it is apparent obesity can have devastating effects on the skeletal system, and these conditions cannot be attributed to the effects of the increased weight bearing alone. Therefore, there are potential other mediators that may be driving decreased BMD in children with obesity. Some of these mediators may stem from factors involved in bone development, such as the opposing lineage differentiation pathways between adipose tissue and bone tissue. To further understand the complex relationship between childhood obesity, decreased BMD, and conditions like SCFE and Blount’s disease, it is critical to examine which molecular regulators are responsible for the regulation of bone turnover and adiposity and how they change in the associated pathologies.

Cellular and molecular regulators of bone remodeling

Bone is under strict control of its remodeling, through a delicate and complicated mechanism known as bone coupling which regulates bone turnover of the whole skeleton to approximately 10% per year [80]. In this process, both trabecular and cortical bone are degraded and rebuilt, yet at different rates. The initiation step is the recruitment of hematopoietic precursor cells through capillary blood vessels that supply the cortical bone or precursors that are already present in the marrow cavity for trabecular bone. Homing of these precursor cells is directed by endocrine and paracrine factors released from endothelial cells, such as nitric oxide, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF), and a receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL) [73]. The latter two factors are secreted from osteoblasts and their mesenchymal precursors to regulate osteoclast recruitment and therefore bone resorption. Additionally, osteoblasts have the ability to secrete osteoprotegerin, which can bind and sequester RANKL, thereby inhibiting its ability to bind to RANK and thus limiting osteoclast differentiation [81].

Importantly, osteoblasts have their origins from a separate lineage than the osteoclast, as they are derived from MSCs that are situated in the bone marrow itself. These MSCs are multipotent and are able to differentiate into multiple cell types including, cartilage, tendons, myocytes, and notably osteoblasts and adipocytes [82]. Each of these committed differentiation pathways has their own lineage commitment and maturation factors. These factors can be either exogenous to the cell such as hormones, growth factors, and physical environment (stiffness of the extracellular matrix) or endogenous mechanisms such as age and metabolism. The differentiation of MSCs into adipocytes is regulated by PPARγ and CCAAT-enhancer-binding proteins (C/EBPs) [83] and osteoblast differentiation is governed by Runx2 and Osterix [84] (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1

Effects of PPARγ activation on adipocyte and osteoblasts differentiation. A simplified schematic diagram that shows the effects of PPARγ on mesenchymal stem cell differentiation. PPARγ activation, in conjunction with C/EBPs, is able to cause differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells down the adipogenesis pathway and thereby inhibiting differentiation of osteoblasts. PPARγ activation results in a positive feedback loop that increases adipogenesis. As a result, more adipose tissue is accumulated at the expense of osteoblastogenesis and matrix deposition. This switch inhibits bone mineral density and bone functional loading capacity and therefore leads to an overall increased risk of fracture in the childhood population

Role of PPARγ in osteoblastogenesis and bone density

PPARγ is a nuclear receptor that is primarily expressed in adipose tissue and in MSCs residing in the bone marrow [85]. PPARγ is a master regulator of adipogenesis [86], indicating that it is at the top of the regulatory network hierarchy and is able to govern lineage specification. It has been described as a “metabolic switch” for stem cell fate in the mesenchymal and hematopoietic lineages [87].

PPARγ’s role as a master regulator was shown in a well-designed study by Akune et al., where genetically modified embryonic stem cells lacking PPARγ spontaneously differentiated into osteoblasts and failed to produce adipocytes [85]. They further conducted an in vivo mouse model experiment which showed that PPARγ haploinsufficient mice had increased bone mass and osteoblastogenesis from bone marrow progenitors, indicating that PPARγ is indeed a suppressor of MSC to osteoblast lineage differentiation. However, it was unknown if these effects were acting directly on osteoblasts or indirectly through osteoclasts. Follow-up studies were conducted using selective deletion of PPARγ from the hematopoietic lineages and thus subsequent inactivation in osteoclasts while maintaining expression in osteoblasts [88]. In these conditions, the increased bone mass and reduced marrow cavity space are a consequence of impaired osteoclast differentiation and thus impaired bone resorption. Therefore, PPARγ can elicit its response through both promoting osteoclast-driven bone resorption and/or by decreasing osteogenesis by inhibiting MSC to osteoblast differentiation. Compelling in vivo data has shown that mutating a phosphorylation site of PPARγ and thus rendering its inhibition properties inactive results in unregulated PPARγ activity that decreased bone volume in trabecular bone compared to wild-type littermates. This study also demonstrated that in these mutant mice, adipocytes markers were elevated and isolated bone marrow stem cells had increased levels PPARγ and preferentially differentiated to adipocytes rather than osteoblasts [89]. It was also observed that phosphorylated Runx2 (a driver of osteoblastogenesis) and osteoblastogenesis were inhibited. Overall, this indicates that in the bone marrow, Runx2 and PPARγ are reciprocally controlled and are important regulators of bone formation and turnover.

Clinically, screening obese patients for PPARγ expression indicated that levels of PPARγ increased in proportion to increased BMI [90]. Additionally, adipocyte differentiation was found to perpetuate through multiple positive feedback loops, which seek to drive adipogenesis [91], making it difficult to break the cycle of adipogenesis once it has begun. Pharmacological activation of PPARγ can be achieved by the administration of antidiabetic drugs, the thiazolidinediones, in which rosiglitazone is prime example. These drugs regulate adipocytes to produce endocrine factors that make peripheral tissue more sensitive to insulin, yet they also increase fat storage [92]. In a 14-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled administration of the rosiglitazone on post-menopausal women inhibited bone formation and decreased BMD as early as 4 weeks into the treatment and was sustained for the rest of the trial [93]. This suggests that promotion of PPARγ activity through pharmacological agonist rosiglitazone has opposite effects to genetic inhibition of PPARγ, and they may act through the same mechanisms, as expected.

PPARγ’s effects on bone homeostasis are known to be context specific [87]. In an animal model, rosiglitazone was shown to have age-dependent effects; in young mice, rosiglitazone decreased the rate bone formation, while in old mice, there was increased bone loss [94]. This has been shown to be due to downregulating expression of Runx2, Osterix, and Opg [95, 96]. This distinction indicates that there must be endogenous changes present within the bone marrow milieu. Aging has been shown to increase the expression of PPARγ [97] and decreases its interaction with its coactivator SRC-1, leaving it primed for adipogenesis later in life [98]. These age-specific changes in PPARγ resemble how adiposity affects bone density and fracture risk differently in children and adults. This is further demonstrated between two randomized clinical trials testing the effect of rosiglitazone on maintaining long-term glycemic control. The adult-based ADOPT (A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial) found that women receiving rosiglitazone alone had a greater propensity of upper and lower limb fractures then either metformin or glyburide alone [99]. Conversely, the child Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes on Adolescent and Youth (TODAY) found no differences in bone mineral content or fracture rate between metformin alone, metformin plus rosiglitazone, or metformin plus lifestyle intervention [100]. Although, these results should be taken with caution as the TODAY trial had low sample size. A follow-up report on the TODAY trial showed that patients who were given metformin and rosiglitazone had a lower BMD compared to patients of in metformin and lifestyle moderation (200–300 min/week of physical activity and improved diet) arm, after 24 months [101]. Direct comparison is complicated as there was no rosiglitazone alone treatment in the TODAY trial and that the lifestyle intervention could affect bone accrual.

Conclusion

Childhood obesity has significant effects on the musculoskeletal system and in particular bone density and fracture rate. Therefore, it is important to know how obesity affects the skeleton during adolescence, as this is a critical window of bone growth and structural support. A key mediator in this process is PPARγ as it directly effects adipogenesis and indirectly alters osteoblastogenesis. SCFE and Blount’s disease are two serious bone conditions associated with childhood obesity. To our knowledge, there are no preclinical models of SCFE or Blount’s disease, but evidence from adult trials of PPARγ agonist rosiglitazone indirectly suggest that agonism of the PPARγ pathway results in decreased BMD and increased fracture risk. However, preclinical evidence suggests that this effect may not be as severe before adulthood. Future studies should determine if PPARγ is a suitable candidate for pharmacological intervention to treat both obesity and childhood low bone density which may influence the incidence of SCFE and Blount’s disease.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like the thank the faculty of Institute of Human Nutrition at Columbia Universtiy for their help and guidance in this work.

Authors’ contributions

MRM performed the literature search. The draft of the manuscript was written by MRM and revised by AR. Both MRM and AR approved the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

No financial support was obtained for this work.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Swinburn BA, Sacks G, Hall KD, McPherson K, Finegood DT, Moodie ML, et al. The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet. 2011;378(9793):804–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M, Thomson B, Graetz N, Margono C, et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2014;384(9945):766–81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dobbs R, Sawers C, Thompson F, Manyika J, Woetzel JR, Child P, et al. Overcoming obesity: an initial economic analysis: McKinsey Global Institute; 2014.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daniels SR. The use of BMI in the clinical setting. Pediatrics. 2009;124(Suppl 1):S35–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mei Z, Grummer-Strawn LM, Pietrobelli A, Goulding A, Goran MI, Dietz WH. Validity of body mass index compared with other body-composition screening indexes for the assessment of body fatness in children and adolescents. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;75(6):978–85.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clark JM, Brancati FL. The challenge of obesity-related chronic diseases. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15(11):828–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chan G, Chen CT. Musculoskeletal effects of obesity. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2009;21(1):65–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Office of the Surgeon General US. “Bone health and osteoporosis: a report of the Surgeon General.” 2004. PMID:20945569.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hendrickx G, Boudin E, Van Hul W. A look behind the scenes: the risk and pathogenesis of primary osteoporosis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2015;11(8):462–74.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bonjour JP, Chevalley T, Ferrari S, Rizzoli R. The importance and relevance of peak bone mass in the prevalence of osteoporosis. Salud Publica Mex. 2009;51(Suppl 1):S5–17.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kleerekoper M. Osteoporosis overview. Primer on the metabolic bone diseases and disorders of mineral metabolism. 8th ed; 2013. p. 343–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Prevention and management of osteoporosis. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2003;921:1–164, back cover. PMID:15293701.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bacchetta J, Wesseling-Perry K, Gilsanz V, Gales B, Pereira RC, Salusky IB. Idiopathic juvenile osteoporosis: a cross-sectional single-centre experience with bone histomorphometry and quantitative computed tomography. Pediatr Rheumatol Online J. 2013;11:6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Makitie O. Causes, mechanisms and management of paediatric osteoporosis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2013;9(8):465–75.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wildman SS, Henwood-Finley MJ. Pediatric DXA: a review of proper technique and correct interpretation. J Am Osteopath Coll Radiol. 2012;1:17–26.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Felson DT, Zhang Y, Hannan MT, Anderson JJ. Effects of weight and body mass index on bone mineral density in men and women: the Framingham study. J Bone Miner Res. 1993;8(5):567–73.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kwan C, Doan Q, Oliveria JP, Ouyang M, Howard A, Boutis K. Do obese children experience more severe fractures than nonobese children? A cross-sectional study from a paediatric emergency department. Paediatr Child Health. 2014;19(5):251–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Leeuwen J, Koes BW, Paulis WD, van Middelkoop M. Differences in bone mineral density between normal-weight children and children with overweight and obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2017;18(5):526–46.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kessler J, Koebnick C, Smith N, Adams A. Childhood obesity is associated with increased risk of most lower extremity fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(4):1199–207.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sabhaney V, Boutis K, Yang G, Barra L, Tripathi R, Tran TT, et al. Bone fractures in children: is there an association with obesity? J Pediatr. 2014;165(2):313–8 e1.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moon RJ, Lim A, Farmer M, Segaran A, Clarke NM, Dennison EM, et al. Differences in childhood adiposity influence upper limb fracture site. Bone. 2015;79:88–93.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Goulding A, Jones IE, Taylor RW, Piggot JM, Taylor D. Dynamic and static tests of balance and postural sway in boys: effects of previous wrist bone fractures and high adiposity. Gait Posture. 2003;17(2):136–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim JE, Hsieh MH, Soni BK, Zayzafoon M, Allison DB. Childhood obesity as a risk factor for bone fracture: a mechanistic study. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2013;21(7):1459–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lowry R, Wechsler H, Galuska DA, Fulton JE, Kann L. Television viewing and its associations with overweight, sedentary lifestyle, and insufficient consumption of fruits and vegetables among US high school students: differences by race, ethnicity, and gender. J Sch Health. 2002;72(10):413–21.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sekine M, Yamagami T, Handa K, Saito T, Nanri S, Kawaminami K, et al. A dose-response relationship between short sleeping hours and childhood obesity: results of the Toyama Birth Cohort Study. Child Care Health Dev. 2002;28(2):163–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Farr JN, Dimitri P. The impact of fat and obesity on bone microarchitecture and strength in children. Calcif Tissue Int. 2017;100(5):500–13.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Warren MP. Effects of undernutrition on reproductive function in the human. Endocr Rev. 1983;4(4):363–77.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goulding A, Cannan R, Williams SM, Gold EJ, Taylor RW, Lewis-Barned NJ. Bone mineral density in girls with forearm fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 1998;13(1):143–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goulding A, Jones IE, Taylor RW, Manning PJ, Williams SM. More broken bones: a 4-year double cohort study of young girls with and without distal forearm fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 2000;15(10):2011–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goulding A, Jones IE, Taylor RW, Williams SM, Manning PJ. Bone mineral density and body composition in boys with distal forearm fractures: a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry study. J Pediatr. 2001;139(4):509–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Skaggs DL, Loro ML, Pitukcheewanont P, Tolo V, Gilsanz V. Increased body weight and decreased radial cross-sectional dimensions in girls with forearm fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 2001;16(7):1337–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Davidson PL, Goulding A, Chalmers DJ. Biomechanical analysis of arm fracture in obese boys. J Paediatr Child Health. 2003;39(9):657–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goulding A, Grant AM, Williams SM. Bone and body composition of children and adolescents with repeated forearm fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 2005;20(12):2090–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Taylor ED, Theim KR, Mirch MC, Ghorbani S, Tanofsky-Kraff M, Adler-Wailes DC, et al. Orthopedic complications of overweight in children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2006;117(6):2167–74.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Janicka A, Wren TA, Sanchez MM, Dorey F, Kim PS, Mittelman SD, et al. Fat mass is not beneficial to bone in adolescents and young adults. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92(1):143–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pollock NK, Laing EM, Baile CA, Hamrick MW, Hall DB, Lewis RD. Is adiposity advantageous for bone strength? A peripheral quantitative computed tomography study in late adolescent females. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007;86(5):1530–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wetzsteon RJ, Petit MA, Macdonald HM, Hughes JM, Beck TJ, McKay HA. Bone structure and volumetric BMD in overweight children: a longitudinal study. J Bone Miner Res. 2008;23(12):1946–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dimitri P, Wales JK, Bishop N. Fat and bone in children: differential effects of obesity on bone size and mass according to fracture history. J Bone Miner Res. 2010;25(3):527–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gilsanz V, Chalfant J, Mo AO, Lee DC, Dorey FJ, Mittelman SD. Reciprocal relations of subcutaneous and visceral fat to bone structure and strength. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(9):3387–93.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Farr JN, Amin S, LeBrasseur NK, Atkinson EJ, Achenbach SJ, McCready LK, et al. Body composition during childhood and adolescence: relations to bone strength and microstructure. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(12):4641–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sayers A, Marcus M, Rubin C, McGeehin MA, Tobias JH. Investigation of sex differences in hip structure in peripubertal children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(8):3876–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Russell M, Mendes N, Miller KK, Rosen CJ, Lee H, Klibanski A, et al. Visceral fat is a negative predictor of bone density measures in obese adolescent girls. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(3):1247–55.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wey HE, Binkley TL, Beare TM, Wey CL, Specker BL. Cross-sectional versus longitudinal associations of lean and fat mass with pQCT bone outcomes in children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(1):106–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fornari ED, Suszter M, Roocroft J, Bastrom T, Edmonds EW, Schlechter J. Childhood obesity as a risk factor for lateral condyle fractures over supracondylar humerus fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(4):1193–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Laddu DR, Farr JN, Laudermilk MJ, Lee VR, Blew RM, Stump C, et al. Longitudinal relationships between whole body and central adiposity on weight-bearing bone geometry, density, and bone strength: a pQCT study in young girls. Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:156.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gilbert SR, MacLennan PA, Backstrom I, Creek A, Sawyer J. Altered lower extremity fracture characteristics in obese pediatric trauma patients. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(1):e12–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Manning Ryan L, Teach SJ, Searcy K, Singer SA, Wood R, Wright JL, et al. The association between weight status and pediatric forearm fractures resulting from ground-level falls. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2015;31(12):835–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Khadilkar A, Chiplonkar S, Agrawal DP, Sanwalka N, Khadilkar V. Bone health status in Indian overweight/obese children. Indian J Pediatr. 2016;83(12–13):1473–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Auer RT, Mazzone P, Robinson L, Nyland J, Chan G. Childhood obesity increases the risk of failure in the treatment of distal forearm fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 2016;36(8):e86–e8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Leet AI, Pichard CP, Ain MC. Surgical treatment of femoral fractures in obese children: does excessive body weight increase the rate of complications? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(12):2609–13.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Liu PY, Ilich JZ, Brummel-Smith K, Ghosh S. New insight into fat, muscle and bone relationship in women: determining the threshold at which body fat assumes negative relationship with bone mineral density. Int J Prev Med. 2014;5(11):1452–63.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Petit MA, Beck TJ, Hughes JM, Lin HM, Bentley C, Lloyd T. Proximal femur mechanical adaptation to weight gain in late adolescence: a six-year longitudinal study. J Bone Miner Res. 2008;23(2):180–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Murray AW, Wilson NI. Changing incidence of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a relationship with obesity? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(1):92–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Benson EC, Miller M, Bosch P, Szalay EA. A new look at the incidence of slipped capital femoral epiphysis in new Mexico. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008;28(5):529–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sorensen KH. Slipped upper femoral epiphysis. Clinical study on aetiology. Acta Orthop Scand. 1968;39(4):499–517.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Poussa M, Schlenzka D, Yrjonen T. Body mass index and slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2003;12(6):369–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Loder RT, Skopelja EN. The epidemiology and demographics of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. ISRN Orthop. 2011;2011:486512.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Manoff EM, Banffy MB, Winell JJ. Relationship between body mass index and slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2005;25(6):744–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Loder RT. Correlation of radiographic changes with disease severity and demographic variables in children with stable slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008;28(3):284–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bhatia NN, Pirpiris M, Otsuka NY. Body mass index in patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006;26(2):197–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Madhuri V, Arora SK, Dutt V. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis associated with vitamin D deficiency: a series of 15 cases. Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(6):851–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Halverson SJ, Warhoover T, Mencio GA, Lovejoy SA, Martus JE, Schoenecker JG. Leptin elevation as a risk factor for slipped capital femoral epiphysis independent of obesity status. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(10):865–72.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Escott BG, De La Rocha A, Jo CH, Sucato DJ, Karol LA. Patient-reported health outcomes after in situ percutaneous fixation for slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an average twenty-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(23):1929–34.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Nasreddine AY, Heyworth BE, Zurakowski D, Kocher MS. A reduction in body mass index lowers risk for bilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(7):2137–44.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Birch JG. Blount disease. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013;21(7):408–18.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Dietz WH Jr, Gross WL, Kirkpatrick JA Jr. Blount disease (tibia vara): another skeletal disorder associated with childhood obesity. J Pediatr. 1982;101(5):735–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Guven A, Hancili S, Kuru LI. Obesity and increasing rate of infantile Blount disease. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2014;53(6):539–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sabharwal S, Lee J Jr, Zhao C. Multiplanar deformity analysis of untreated Blount disease. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27(3):260–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Hofmann A, Jones RE, Herring JA. Blount’s disease after skeletal maturity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64(7):1004–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Giwa OG, Anetor JI, Alonge TO, Agbedana EO. Biochemical observations in Blount's disease (infantile tibia vara). J Natl Med Assoc. 2004;96(9):1203–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Montgomery CO, Young KL, Austen M, Jo CH, Blasier RD, Ilyas M. Increased risk of Blount disease in obese children and adolescents with vitamin D deficiency. J Pediatr Orthop. 2010;30(8):879–82.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lisenda L, Simmons D, Firth GB, Ramguthy Y, Kebashni T, Robertson AJ. Vitamin D status in Blount disease. J Pediatr Orthop. 2016;36(5):e59–62.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Gkiokas A, Brilakis E. Management of neglected Blount disease using double corrective tibia osteotomy and medial plateau elevation. J Child Orthop. 2012;6(5):411–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Stokes IA. Mechanical effects on skeletal growth. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2002;2(3):277–80.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sabharwal S. Blount disease: an update. Orthop Clin North Am. 2015;46(1):37–47.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Carter JR, Leeson MC, Thompson GH, Kalamchi A, Kelly CM, Makley JT. Late-onset tibia vara: a histopathologic analysis. A comparative evaluation with infantile tibia vara and slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1988;8(2):187–95.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Wang L, Shao YY, Ballock RT. Peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-gamma (PPARgamma) represses thyroid hormone signaling in growth plate chondrocytes. Bone. 2005;37(3):305–12.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Barlow SE, Dietz WH. Obesity evaluation and treatment: expert committee recommendations. The Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Health Resources and Services Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services. Pediatrics. 1998;102(3):E29.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sabharwal S, Zhao C, Sakamoto SM, McClemens E. Do children with Blount disease have lower body mass index after lower limb realignment? J Pediatr Orthop. 2014;34(2):213–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Manolagas SC. Birth and death of bone cells: basic regulatory mechanisms and implications for the pathogenesis and treatment of osteoporosis. Endocr Rev. 2000;21(2):115–37.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Simonet WS, Lacey DL, Dunstan CR, Kelley M, Chang MS, Luthy R, et al. Osteoprotegerin: a novel secreted protein involved in the regulation of bone density. Cell. 1997;89(2):309–19.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Pittenger MF, Mackay AM, Beck SC, Jaiswal RK, Douglas R, Mosca JD, et al. Multilineage potential of adult human mesenchymal stem cells. Science. 1999;284(5411):143–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Lefterova MI, Zhang Y, Steger DJ, Schupp M, Schug J, Cristancho A, et al. PPARgamma and C/EBP factors orchestrate adipocyte biology via adjacent binding on a genome-wide scale. Genes Dev. 2008;22(21):2941–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Nakashima K, Zhou X, Kunkel G, Zhang Z, Deng JM, Behringer RR, et al. The novel zinc finger-containing transcription factor osterix is required for osteoblast differentiation and bone formation. Cell. 2002;108(1):17–29.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Akune T, Ohba S, Kamekura S, Yamaguchi M, Chung UI, Kubota N, et al. PPARgamma insufficiency enhances osteogenesis through osteoblast formation from bone marrow progenitors. J Clin Invest. 2004;113(6):846–55.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Shao X, Wang M, Wei X, Deng S, Fu N, Peng Q, et al. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma: master regulator of adipogenesis and obesity. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther. 2016;11(3):282–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Wan Y. PPARgamma in bone homeostasis. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2010;21(12):722–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Wan Y, Chong LW, Evans RM. PPAR-gamma regulates osteoclastogenesis in mice. Nat Med. 2007;13(12):1496–503.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ge C, Zhao G, Li B, Li Y, Cawthorn WP, MacDougald OA, et al. Genetic inhibition of PPARgamma S112 phosphorylation reduces bone formation and stimulates marrow adipogenesis. Bone. 2018;107:1–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Vidal-Puig AJ, Considine RV, Jimenez-Linan M, Werman A, Pories WJ, Caro JF, et al. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gene expression in human tissues. Effects of obesity, weight loss, and regulation by insulin and glucocorticoids. J Clin Invest. 1997;99(10):2416–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Park BO, Ahrends R, Teruel MN. Consecutive positive feedback loops create a bistable switch that controls preadipocyte-to-adipocyte conversion. Cell Rep. 2012;2(4):976–90.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Lecka-Czernik B. PPAR [gamma], an essential regulator of bone mass: metabolic and molecular cues. IBMS BoneKEy. 2010;7(5):171–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Grey A, Bolland M, Gamble G, Wattie D, Horne A, Davidson J, et al. The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonist rosiglitazone decreases bone formation and bone mineral density in healthy postmenopausal women: a randomized, controlled trial. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92(4):1305–10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Lazarenko OP, Rzonca SO, Hogue WR, Swain FL, Suva LJ, Lecka-Czernik B. Rosiglitazone induces decreases in bone mass and strength that are reminiscent of aged bone. Endocrinology. 2007;148(6):2669–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Ali AA, Weinstein RS, Stewart SA, Parfitt AM, Manolagas SC, Jilka RL. Rosiglitazone causes bone loss in mice by suppressing osteoblast differentiation and bone formation. Endocrinology. 2005;146(3):1226–35.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Shockley KR, Lazarenko OP, Czernik PJ, Rosen CJ, Churchill GA, Lecka-Czernik B. PPARgamma2 nuclear receptor controls multiple regulatory pathways of osteoblast differentiation from marrow mesenchymal stem cells. J Cell Biochem. 2009;106(2):232–46.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Ye P, Zhang XJ, Wang ZJ, Zhang C. Effect of aging on the expression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma and the possible relation to insulin resistance. Gerontology. 2006;52(2):69–75.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Miard S, Dombrowski L, Carter S, Boivin L, Picard F. Aging alters PPARgamma in rodent and human adipose tissue by modulating the balance in steroid receptor coactivator-1. Aging Cell. 2009;8(4):449–59.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, Herman WH, Holman RR, Jones NP, et al. Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(23):2427–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Group TS, Zeitler P, Hirst K, Pyle L, Linder B, Copeland K, et al. A clinical trial to maintain glycemic control in youth with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(24):2247–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Group TS. Treatment effects on measures of body composition in the TODAY clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(6):1742–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sydney Medical SchoolUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Western Bone & Joint InstituteUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  3. 3.Department of Physiology and PharmacologyUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  4. 4.Department of Genetics and Development, Krembil Research InstituteUniversity Health NetworkTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations