Diagnosis Of Osteoporosis In Men Research Articles

Spontaneous osteoclastogenesis: Hypothesis for gender-unrelated osteoporosis screening and diagnosis

Women are at greater risk of developing osteoporosis (OP). However, in the past few years it has become more widely recognized that OP is a significant problem also in men although OP is frequently under-diagnosed and, consequently, under treated in men. Most guidelines, screening and fracture risk evaluation methods as well as pharmacologic agents have been developed for women and then adapted to men. Bone Mineral Density (BMD) measurement by Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) is reported as T score and the capability of DEXA to diagnose OP and predict fracture risk is still debated. In addition, the use of female T score references for the diagnosis of OP in men is incorrect for the following reasons: 1) DXA definition was developed just for Caucasian women, 2) men and women display structural differences in terms of bone growth, catabolism and size; 3) aging men have more periosteal apposition, less cortical porosity and endocortical resorption than aging women; and 4) T scores results, both in man and in women, can be affected by the presence of co-morbidities and it is known that in men OP is often secondary.From a biological point of view, OP is mainly due to increased osteoclastic activity leading to an imbalance in bone remodeling that favors resorption. However, some evidence suggests a more complex identity for osteoclasts (OCs) over and above their simple role of ‘bone eaters’. In our laboratory, we observed spontaneous OCs formation in vitro in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from OP patients (n.12 female patients and n.6 male patients; DXA T score-2.5 or less). Some researchers demonstrated OCs gender differences in bone resorption activity of female-derived versus male-derived OCs. Indeed, further data from our laboratory also showed gender differences in number of spontaneously differentiated OCs and differentiation time. Therefore, we hypothesized that it would be possible to perform OP screening and diagnosis observing and measuring PBMCs different ability to differentiate spontaneously into OCs in male and female patients. If this hypothesis will be confirmed, it will result in an effective and efficient strategy for OP screening, diagnosis, monitoring and fracture prevention, targeting health service resources on selected patients. However, our hypothesis must be tested in a properly designed clinical trial and several key issues still need to be addressed.

Evaluation of Concordance between Hip and Spine T Scores in the Diagnosis of Osteoporosis in Men Over Age of Fifty

Evaluation of Concordance between Hip and Spine T Scores in the Diagnosis of Osteoporosis in Men Over Age of Fifty

DXA bone mineral density in males: retrospective study in real life.

The diagnosis of osteoporosis in men remains controversial. Aims of this study were to evaluate the major anthropometric determinants of BMD in a large cohort of male Italian subjects and asses the prevalence of subjects with T-score ≤-2.5 by making use of young male or female BMD reference data. 1,442 Caucasian men aged over 49years performing a contemporary spine and hip DXA from January 2012 to June 2013 in an out-patient clinics of northern Italy were analyzed. Single and multiple regression analysis was used for correlating BMD to weight and age. The WHO cut-off value (T-score ≤-2.5) was used for the definition of osteoporosis. To compare the prevalence of osteoporosis by adopting male or female BMD reference values the Fisher's exact test was applied. Age was significantly correlated with spine and neck BMD. The age-BMD correlation was negative for femoral neck while it was positive for the spine. When BMD values were adjusted for body weight the correlation with femoral neck BMD decreased while the positive regression coefficient between spine BMD and age increased. Spine and femoral BMD (both total hip and neck) were positively correlated with body weight. Using BMD male reference values, only 31.2% of subjects were identified as osteoporotic at least at one site and this proportion was further reduced using female reference data. Spine was able to identify the greatest number of patients with T-score ≤-2.5 (88.7%) while at femoral sites the proportion was considerably lower (33.6 and 13.8% for femoral neck and total hip respectively). In our population, the proportion of male subjects with spine T-score ≤-2.5 is about 25% of those who were referred for DXA evaluation and this proportion decreases if the female reference data for T-score calculation are chosen. Both spine and femoral neck BMD are strongly and positively related with weight but spine BMD increases with advancing age possibly as a consequence of mechanical and hormonal factors. The capability of spine DXA in identifying men with T-score ≤-2.5 is at its maximum around the fifth decade of life and it decreases later.

Osteoporosis epidemiology 2013: implications for diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.

To summarize the recently published studies that provide insights into the changing epidemiology of osteoporosis and fractures. The main themes reviewed are fracture outcomes; trends in fractures rates; fracture risk assessment and monitoring; atypical femoral fractures; male osteoporosis; falls and physical activity; and sarcopenia, obesity, and metabolic syndrome. Osteoporotic fractures were found to have long-term consequences on excess mortality (10 years) and economic costs (5 years). The large burden of nonhip nonvertebral fractures has been underestimated. Divergent (but mostly declining) trends in fracture rates were confirmed in several cohorts from around the world. This has significant implications for healthcare planners and clinicians responsible for the care of individuals with osteoporosis, and also impacts on the calibration of fracture prediction tools. Although fracture prediction tools differ in their complexity, performance characteristics are similar when applied to the general population. Large, high-quality comparative studies with different case mixes are needed. Fracture probability does not appear to be responsive enough to support goal-directed treatment at this time. A consensus on the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men has emerged, based upon the same absolute bone density cutoff for both men and women. Finally, a plethora of new data highlight the importance of falls, physical activity, and body composition as contributors to skeletal health.

Choice of Lumbar Spine Bone Density Reference Database for Fracture Prediction in Men and Women: A Population-Based Analysis

The diagnosis of osteoporosis in men is controversial, although most studies demonstrate similar fracture rates for men and women with the same level of hip bone mineral density (BMD). Whether this applies to the lumbar spine is currently uncertain and has important implications with respect to choice of reference population for T-score calculation and osteoporosis diagnosis. This question was specifically addressed in the population-based Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study cohort of 4745 women and 1887 men ages 50+ yr at the time of baseline lumbar spine dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. In up to 10 yr of observation, incident clinical major osteoporotic fractures occurred in 110 men (5.8%) vs 543 women (11.4%) (p < 0.001). Mean lumbar spine BMD in men was greater than in women, both among those with and those without incident major osteoporotic fracture (p < 0.001). Men were at slightly lower risk for incident major osteoporotic fracture than women for an equivalent lumbar spine BMD (age- and BMD-adjusted rate ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.60–0.93, p = 0.008) with similar findings after adjustment for the World Health Organization fracture risk assessment clinical risk factors or competing mortality. No significant sex difference in the BMD relationship was seen for vertebral fractures (clinical or radiographic) or for all fractures. In summary, this large population-based longitudinal cohort study found similar or lower fracture risk for men vs women after adjustment for absolute lumbar spine BMD and additional covariates. The least complicated model for describing fracture risk is therefore to use the same reference lumbar spine data for generating T-scores in men and women.

Vertebral Fractures and the Misclassification of Osteoporosis in Men With Prostate Cancer

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the cornerstone of treatment for both advanced and nonmetastatic prostate cancer. The presence of a nontraumatic vertebral fracture (VF) identifies a patient who has clinical osteoporosis. Vertebral fracture analysis (VFA), a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-based technology identifies VFs in conjunction with a standard bone mineral density (BMD) examination. The objective of this study was to determine if VFA would increase the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer on ADT. One hundred sixteen men aged ≥60 yrs with nonmetastatic prostate cancer receiving ADT for ≥6 mos underwent DXA of the spine, hip, and 1/3 distal radius, VFA, and conventional vertebral X-rays. Approximately 40% of the men had clinically defined osteoporosis. The use of conventional DXA criteria (spine and hip) alone resulted in the misdiagnosis of approx 75% of patients. VFA and addition of the 1/3 distal radius site performed by DXA both increased the rate of diagnosis and reduced the misclassification of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer, compared with conventional DXA criteria alone. Analysis indicated that VFA assessment of mild, moderate, and severe fractures from all readable vertebrae (T5–L4) had a kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.92, 100%, and 95%, respectively, with semiquantitative radiography. Men with prostate cancer on ADT should be screened for osteoporosis at the initiation of therapy, and evaluation should include DXA of the 1/3 distal radius in addition to the spine and hip, as well as evaluation for VFs.

Osteoporosis in Men

With the aging of the population, there is a growing recognition that osteoporosis and fractures in men are a significant public health problem, and both hip and vertebral fractures are associated with increased morbidity and mortality in men. Osteoporosis in men is a heterogeneous clinical entity: whereas most men experience bone loss with aging, some men develop osteoporosis at a relatively young age, often for unexplained reasons (idiopathic osteoporosis). Declining sex steroid levels and other hormonal changes likely contribute to age-related bone loss, as do impairments in osteoblast number and/or activity. Secondary causes of osteoporosis also play a significant role in pathogenesis. Although there is ongoing controversy regarding whether osteoporosis in men should be diagnosed based on female- or male-specific reference ranges (because some evidence indicates that the risk of fracture is similar in women and men for a given level of bone mineral density), a diagnosis of osteoporosis in men is generally made based on male-specific reference ranges. Treatment consists both of nonpharmacological (lifestyle factors, calcium and vitamin D supplementation) and pharmacological (most commonly bisphosphonates or PTH) approaches, with efficacy similar to that seen in women. Increasing awareness of osteoporosis in men among physicians and the lay public is critical for the prevention of fractures in our aging male population.

A comparison of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of the hip and accuDEXA of the finger for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men on androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) of the hip or spine has been shown to be an effective screening tool for osteoporosis in men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for advanced carcinoma of the prostate. A less expensive alternative to DEXA is the use of peripheral scanners, such as accuDEXA, which measures bone mineral density (BMD) the finger. In this paper, we reviewed 59 patients on ADT who underwent both accuDEXA scan of the non-dominant hand and DEXA scan of the hip. The mean T-scores calculated by the two techniques were similar; however, the individual T-scores correlated poorly with each other. We conclude that men who require ADT for prostate cancer should undergo standard DEXA of the hip for osteoporosis screening.

Bone Mineral Density Changes in Patients With Prostate Cancer During the First 2 Years of Androgen Suppression

We characterized bone mineral density changes in patients with prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy during the first 2 years of uninterrupted therapy, and identified which location most reflects bone mass loss. Using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, bone mineral density was prospectively assessed in patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer at the lumbar spine and femoral neck, Ward's triangle, trochanter and total hip. Measurements were performed at baseline and yearly thereafter in patients on ADT, and at baseline and 1 year in controls (age matched patients with prostate cancer, free of biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy). A total of 62 patients were included in the study, 31 in each group. Median age (70 and 69 years, respectively), mean Gleason score and mean baseline serum testosterone did not significantly differ. Patients receiving ADT experienced a significant bone mass loss at 12 months in all locations, ranging from 2.29% to 5.55% (p <0.001). In contrast, bone mineral density did not change significantly (0.64% to 1.68%) in patients not receiving ADT. In the 20 patients on ADT after 24 months, the second year decrease was not as severe, nor was it significant compared to first year values. The major bone mass loss occurred in Ward's triangle, with decreases of 5.55% at 12 months and 7.05% at 24 months. Bone mineral density decreases during the first 24 months of androgen suppression with the most relevant effect occurring in the first year. Ward's triangle is the axial skeletal site that reflects the major bone mass loss. Because the deleterious impact of long-term androgen suppression on bone mineral density is inversely related to fracture risk and indirectly related to survival in patients with prostate cancer, early diagnosis and prevention of bone mass loss are warranted in these patients.

Practice patterns in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis after a fragility fracture: a systematic review.

Fragility fractures are a strong indicator of underlying osteoporosis (OP). With the risk of future fracture being increased 1.5- to 9.5-fold following a fragility fracture, the diagnosis and treatment of OP in men and women with fragility fractures provides the opportunity to prevent future fragility fractures. This review describes the current status of practice in investigation and diagnosis of OP in men and women with fragility fractures, the rates and types of postfracture treatment in patients with fragility fractures and OP, interventions undertaken in this population, and the barriers to OP identification and treatment. A literature search performed in Medline, Healthstar, CINAHL, EMBASE, PreMedline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews identified 37 studies on OP diagnosis, treatment, and interventions. The studies varied in design methodology, study facilities, types of fractures, and pharmacological treatments. Some studies revealed that no patients with fragility fractures received investigation or treatment for underlying OP. Investigation of OP by bone mineral density was low: 14 of 16 studies reported investigation of less than 32% of patients. Investigation by bone mineral density resulted in high rates of OP diagnosis (35-100%), but only moderate use of calcium and vitamin D (8-62%, median 18%) and bisphosphates (0.5-38%) in patients investigated postfracture. Studies on barriers to OP identification and treatment focused on various groups of health practitioners. Barriers included the cost of therapies, time and cost of resources for diagnosis, concerns about medications, and the lack of clarity regarding the responsibility to undertake this care.

Introduction, Methods, and Participants

Abstract Following publication of the proceedings from the first Position Development Conference (PDC) of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD), members of the ISCD Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) addressed additional topics of interest in the field of bone densitometry. These topics were addressed at a subsequent PDC, which was held in Cincinnati, Ohio, July 25–27, 2003. Five topics were chosen for discussion: (1) the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men, premenopausal women, and children; (2) technical standardization for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA); (3) indications for bone densitometry; (4) reporting of bone density results; and (5) nomenclature and decimal places for bone densitometry. This report describes the methodology used for the development, presentation, and finalization of PDC positions. These positions are discussed in the following papers.

Diagnosis of Osteoporosis in Men, Premenopausal Women, and Children

Abstract The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of bone mineral density is based on population studies in postmenopausal women. However, the increased use of bone densitometry has raised questions regarding the applicability of this classification to men, premenopausal women, and children. These questions were addressed at the International Society for Clinical Densitometry 2003 Position Development Conference. T-scores can be used and a diagnosis of osteoporosis made for T-scores of –2.5 or less (male reference database) in men age 65 yr and older and in men from 50 to 64 yr of age if other risk factors for fracture are present. The WHO classification should not be applied to premenopausal women. Men and premenopausal women with secondary causes of low bone density or bone loss may be clinically diagnosed with osteoporosis, taking bone density into consideration. In children and adolescents (males and females less than 20 yr of age), there are no densitometric criteria for diagnosing osteoporosis. If Z-scores are –2.0 or less (using pediatric databases of age-matched controls), then a characterization such as “low bone density for chronologic age” is appropriate. In men under 50 yr of age, premenopausal women, and children, Z-scores, not T-scores, should be used when reporting bone density results.

Analysis of bone alkaline phosphatase as a marker for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men under androgen ablation.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of serum determination of bone alkaline phosphatase (BAP) in the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer under androgen ablation. Serum levels of BAP and bone mineral density (BMD) were assessed in 110 patients with non-metastatic, treated prostate cancer. Fifty-eight patients were under androgen deprivation during a period between two and 96 months and 52 had been submitted only to radical prostatectomy. Mean serum BAP was 11.8 ng/mL in patients with normal BMD, 16.7 ng/mL in patients with osteopenia (p. 0.058), and 19.3 ng/mL in patients with osteoporosis (p = 0.044). The correlation between serum BAP and BMD was significant (p. 0.006) but with an index of only 0.26. Receiver operating characteristic analysis for the diagnosis of osteoporosis showed an area under the curve of 0.608. None of the cutoff points that provided specificities of 75%, 90% and 95% gave significant distributions. The positive and negative predictive values as well as the odds ratios were not of any clinical usefulness. We conclude that serum BAP should not be considered a good marker for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer. Therefore, BAP serum determination cannot replace bone densitometry as a diagnostic tool.

Analysis of bone alkaline phosphatase as a marker for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men under androgen ablation

The objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of serum determination of bone alkaline phosphatase (BAP) in the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer under androgen ablation. Serum levels of BAP and bone mineral density (BMD) were assessed in 110 patients with non-metastatic, treated prostate cancer. Fifty-eight patients were under androgen deprivation during a period between two and 96 months and 52 had been submitted only to radical prostatectomy. Mean serum BAP was 11.8 ng/mL in patients with normal BMD, 16.7 ng/mL in patients with osteopenia (p. 0.058), and 19.3 ng/mL in patients with osteoporosis (p = 0.044). The correlation between serum BAP and BMD was significant (p. 0.006) but with an index of only 0.26. Receiver operating characteristic analysis for the diagnosis of osteoporosis showed an area under the curve of 0.608. None of the cutoff points that provided specificities of 75%, 90% and 95% gave significant distributions. The positive and negative predictive values as well as the odds ratios were not of any clinical usefulness. We conclude that serum BAP should not be considered a good marker for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer. Therefore, BAP serum determination cannot replace bone densitometry as a diagnostic tool.

Densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in men: effect of measurement site and normative database.

Controversy exists regarding which sites to measure, and the appropriate reference database to use, for densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in men. While hip and spine bone mineral density (BMD) measurement is routine, spinal osteoarthritis often elevates measured BMD in older men. Additionally, the use of male reference data is standard practice; however, recent reports suggest that a female database may be more appropriate. This study evaluated the effect of sites measured, and normative database utilized, on the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in men. Spine, femur, and ultradistal radial BMD T-scores were determined in 595 male veterans using the GE Lunar male normative database. Subsequently, World Health Organization diagnostic criteria were applied, identifying 282 men with osteoporosis (T-score </= 2.5). The combination of femoral (lowest of neck or total) with the ultradistal radius site was more sensitive (p < 0.0001) for diagnosing osteoporosis than femur plus lumbar spine. When scans from 129 subjects with documented fractures were analyzed using female normative data, fewer (p < 0.0001) met an arbitrary threshold for receiving pharmacologic osteoporosis therapy. In conclusion, BMD measurement at only the spine and hip leads to underdiagnosis of osteoporosis in men. This situation will be exacerbated by utilization of a female normative database; more men with prior fracture may be categorized as not meeting a pharmaceutical intervention threshold.

Implications in the use of T-scores for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men.

Osteoporosis is recognized as a disorder of both men and women. However, the World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of osteoporosis (a bone mineral density [BMD] T-score of -2.5 or less) was formulated for use with postmenopausal women only. In the absence of a BMD-based definition for male osteoporosis, the WHO definition is often applied to men as well. Several important questions exist when considering the use of T-scores in men. First, is the WHO definition appropriate for men? What is the impact of using a -2.5 criteria, in terms of the number of men that would be identified as osteoporotic? When calculating T-scores in men, should male or female young normal values be used? Can the same T-score criteria be used for all skeletal sites and technologies? To address these questions, osteoporosis prevalence estimates for men aged 50 yr and over were generated using WHO methods and manufacturer normative data from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), quantitative computed tomography (QCT), and ultrasound. Estimates were determined for several skeletal sites and technologies using both male and female young normal values. Prevalence estimates were compared to published fracture risk estimates. Mean T-scores declined with age at all measurement sites. Discrepancies were found between the different skeletal sites and techniques, similar to the previously reported differences in women. A -2.5 criterion (based on young normal males or females) appeared to underestimate the prevalence of osteoporosis, except for QCT, which seemed to overestimate risk. Depending on the technique used, 0 to 12.5 million US men 50 yr of age and older would be classified as osteoporotic using the WHO definition. T-Scores based on male norms were less discordant across skeletal sites than female-based T-scores. Male-based T-scores between -1.8 and -2.3 using DXA and ultrasound and -3.1 for QCT provided osteoporosis prevalence estimates that approximated the likelihood of common fractures in men 50 and over. We conclude that the use of single T-score-based criterion for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men has many potential difficulties. BMD measurement techniques provide discrepant estimates of prevalence and may underestimate the size of the male population at risk for fracture. Based on available normative data, a -2.5 criterion underestimates osteoporosis prevalence in men, whether based on male or female norms. Prospective studies are needed to further refinement to the BMD definition of osteoporosis in men.

Osteoporosis in men.

Osteoporosis is one of the most common metabolic bone diseases, and its prevalence will rise as our population grows older. Although osteoporosis is less common in men than in women its morbidity and mortality seem to be even greater. Furthermore the incidence of osteoporosis in men may well be underestimated, since men are far less likely than women to have a bone density scan. Epidemiological studies suggest that, in the USA, about 1.5 million men over 65 years of age have osteoporosis and another 8-13 million have osteopenia1. The calculated lifetime risk of fracture for men is 13.5% at the age of 50 years and 25.6% at the age of 601. The prevalence in men of fractures of the spine or hip is about one-third that in women2. There seems to be a lag period such that an exponential increase in fracture incidence begins 10 years later in men than in women3, coinciding with the phase of accelerated bone loss after the age of 704. Although women have a higher overall prevalence of fracture, the increase in fracture risk for each standard deviation decrease in bone mineral density (BMD) seems to be higher in men. Moreover, mortality associated with hip fracture is two to three times higher in men than in women5,6,7,8. Strict criteria for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men are still lacking: the World Health Organization definition, based on a T score greater than -2.5, relates to Caucasian women. The underlying mechanisms, risk factors and natural history of osteoporosis in men are now attracting much research attention.

Osteoporosis in the aging population: the male perspective

The importance of senile osteoporosis in men as a public health problem has long been underestimated. Elderly men are at substantial risk for fracture, and morbidity after osteoporotic fractures appears to be more serious and mortality more common in men than in women. Risk factors for osteoporotic fractures in men appear to be qualitatively similar to those in women, but there are quantitative differences. Low bone mineral density (BMD) is an important risk factor for fracture in men; however, further clarification of the relationship between BMD, bone geometry and fracture risk is needed before formulating definitive proposals on operational densitometric criteria for diagnosis of osteoporosis in men and the identification of men at high risk for fracture. Understanding of the mechanisms underlying senile bone loss and the pathogenesis of senile osteoporosis in men remains fragmentary with, in particular, the need for further clarification regarding the precise impact of hormonal status in elderly men on skeletal homeostasis. Recommendations on prevention and treatment of senile osteoporosis in men should focus on the minimization of known risk factors for bone loss and falls. Testosterone treatment may be useful in those men with initially low serum testosterone. As to other pharmacological treatment modalities, prospective trials specifically in elderly men, and preferably with fracture incidence as the primary clinical endpoint, are required.

Osteoporosis in the aging population: the male perspective

The importance of senile osteoporosis in men as a public health problem has long been underestimated. Elderly men are at substantial risk for fracture, and morbidity after osteoporotic fractures appearsto be more serious and mortality more common in men than in women. Risk factors for osteoporotic fractures in men appear to be qualitatively similar to those in women, but there are quantitative differences.Low bone mineral density (BMD) is an important risk factor for fracture in men; however, further clarification of the relationship between BMD, bone geometry and fracture risk is needed before formulatingdefinitive proposals on operational densitometric criteria for diagnosis of osteoporosis in men and the identification of men at high risk for fracture. Understanding of the mechanisms underlying senilebone loss and the pathogenesis of senile osteoporosis in men remains fragmentary with, in particular, the need for further clarification regarding the precise impact of hormonal status in elderly men onskeletal homeostasis. Recommendations on prevention and treatment of senile osteoporosis in men should focus on the minimization of known risk factors for bone loss and falls. Testosterone treatment maybe useful in those men with initially low serum testosterone. As to other pharmacological treatment modalities, prospective trials specifically in elderly men, and preferably with fracture incidence asthe primary clinical endpoint, are required.

Osteoporosis in Men

With the aging of the population, there is a growing recognition that osteoporosis and fractures in men are a significant public health problem, and both hip and vertebral fractures are associated with increased morbidity and mortality in men. Osteoporosis in men is a heterogeneous clinical entity: whereas most men experience bone loss with aging, some men develop osteoporosis at a relatively young age, often for unexplained reasons (idiopathic osteoporosis). Declining sex steroid levels and other hormonal changes likely contribute to age-related bone loss, as do impairments in osteoblast number and/or activity. Secondary causes of osteoporosis also play a significant role in pathogenesis. Although there is ongoing controversy regarding whether osteoporosis in men should be diagnosed based on female- or male-specific reference ranges (because some evidence indicates that the risk of fracture is similar in women and men for a given level of bone mineral density), a diagnosis of osteoporosis in men is generally made based on male-specific reference ranges. Treatment consists both of nonpharmacological (lifestyle factors, calcium and vitamin D supplementation) and pharmacological (most commonly bisphosphonates or PTH) approaches, with efficacy similar to that seen in women. Increasing awareness of osteoporosis in men among physicians and the lay public is critical for the prevention of fractures in our aging male population.