透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.16.47.14
  • 學位論文

停經年數對大豆異黃酮於停經婦女骨代謝的影響

Influence of time since menopause on the effects of soy isoflavones on bone metabolism in postmenopausal women

指導教授 : 謝淑貞
本文將於2026/01/01開放下載。若您希望在開放下載時收到通知,可將文章加入收藏

摘要


大豆異黃酮的攝取普遍被認為有益於骨質保健。由於其結構類似人體雌激素,因此異黃酮又被稱作植物性雌激素,且不乏許多異黃酮作為雌激素替代藥物的研究。然而,大豆異黃酮對於骨密度的影響研究甚多,結果卻不一致。因此本研究欲從女性停經狀態的角度,來探討大豆異黃酮於停經後婦女的骨密度與骨質疏鬆發生率的影響,並預期異黃酮保護骨質的效果在停經晚期女性較停經早期女性差。首先,以卵巢摘除後誘導骨質流失九十天的大鼠模擬停經晚期骨代謝模式,再介入大豆異黃酮中的金雀異黃酮並觀察其骨密度、骨小樑指摽,與血清生化數值評估晚介入模式的影響。接著以系統性文獻綜述的方式,設定條件篩選出合適的文獻,綜觀探討多個會影響骨密度及罹患骨質疏鬆的因子,如劑量、劑型、介入時間、骨頭測量部位、種族及停經狀態等。同時比較試驗設計相似但目標族群為停經早期或晚期兩種族群的結果,並比較同試驗中分析停經期早晚族群的研究。最後,以台灣營養健康狀況變遷調查(Nutrition and Health Survey in Taiwan, NAHSIT)中,24小時飲食回顧及食物頻率問卷中豆類製品的攝取量,換算成大豆異黃酮的攝取量,與受試者骨密度值及以臨床診斷標準T-score≤-2.5區分骨鬆與否做迴歸相關性分析。動物結果顯示較晚介入金雀異黃酮無法有保護骨質流失的功效;所有檢測指標均與卵巢摘除控制組大鼠無顯著差異,暗示在骨鬆發生一段時間後,金雀異黃酮已無抑制骨鬆的能力。系統性文獻綜述的比較中顯示,停經狀態會調控大豆異黃酮攝取或介入對於延緩骨質流失有效或無效,但在晚期或早期介入較有效應的結論是分歧的。NAHSIT資料分析的結果顯示大豆異黃酮攝取與全部受試者及全部女性的骨密度有正相關,且與全部女性的骨鬆發生率有負相關。然而,此相關性在校正其他干擾因子後無顯著性,且在分層分析中也無顯著影響。雖然如此,年齡與停經年數兩個於女性骨質健康最重要的決定因子,會因停經狀態而有不同影響。停經年數顯著影響停經早期女性的骨密度但不影響停經晚期女性;相反的,年齡顯著影響停經晚期女性的骨密度但不影響停經早期女性。以停經早期或晚期區分介入時間點可能是大豆異黃酮影響骨質健康的重要因子之一。

並列摘要


Soy isoflavones, due to structural similarity to human estrogen, have been the candidate in numerous studies as a potential natural alternative to estrogen with fewer side effects. However, dietary intake and the use of soy isoflavones as supplement have received both merits and flaws due to inconsistent results reported across different studies on the improvement of many chronic diseases. This study aims to assess the contribution of menopausal status of women on the effects of soy isoflavones on postmenopausal osteoporosis. An animal model mimicking late menopausal stage and treated with the soy isoflavone genistein was used to inspect the timing of intervention on reducing bone loss compared to an early menopausal rat model. Then, a systematic search and review were conducted on prior publications that addressed the action of soy isoflavones on post menopause-related bone loss. Several factors, including dose, formulation, intervention time point, bone sites measured, ethnic background, and menopausal status, that may have influenced the study results, were discussed. Analysis on this regard was also pursued using the Nutrition and Health Survey in Taiwan (NAHSIT) database to examine the association of soy isoflavones with bone mineral density (BMD) in the local Taiwanese adult population. Two sets of isoflavone intakes were calculated based on the consumption of soybean and legume foods from the 24-hour dietary recall and food frequency questionnaire in NAHSIT. The associations between soy isoflavone intakes and BMD or odds of osteoporosis were examined by linear and logistic regression analyses in all subjects and women stratified by menopausal statuses. In animals, both genistein and estrogen in late initiation of treatment following ovariectomy could not rescue bone loss compared to early initiation, which attenuated loss of bone density and volume in the ovariectomized rats. In studies that analyzed sub-groups by time since menopause as the variable, more studies reported positive effects of soy isoflavones in late postmenopausal rather than early postmenopausal women, than studies that reported the opposite finding, yet two studies showed benefits in both women groups. Regression analyses from NAHSIT found significant positive association of soy isoflavone intake with BMD and significant inverse association with osteoporosis risk, but the effects were neutralized after adjustment for covariates. In addition, the timing of isoflavone intervention in terms of menopausal status was critical, in that age was a significant contributing factor for osteoporosis risk in late but not early postmenopausal women, and years since menopause was a significant contributing factor for osteoporosis risk in early but not late postmenopausal women. Combined with previous results, suggests the importance of menopausal status in harvesting the benefit of soy isoflavones on osteoporotic bone loss.

參考文獻


(1) Copenhagen Consensus Conference. Consensus Development Conference: Prophylaxis and Treatment of Osteoporosis; Elsevier, 1991; Vol. 90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(91)90512-V.
(2) World Health Organization. Guidelines for Preclinical Evaluation and Clinical Trials in Osteoporosis World Health Organization; World Health Organization: Geneva, 1998.
(3) Tsai, K.-S.; Yang, R.-S.; Wu, C.-H.; Hwang, J.-S.; Cheng, T.-T.; Sun, Z.-J. Taiwanese Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis. Taiwan. Osteoporos. Assoc. 2012, 1–25.
(4) Kanis, J. A. Diagnosis of Osteoporosis and Assessment of Fracture Risk. Lancet 2002, 359 (9321), 1929–1936. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08761-5.
(5) Vasikaran, S.; Glendenning, P.; Morris, H. A. The Role of Biochemical Markers of Bone Turnover in Osteoporosis Management in Clinical Practice. Clin. Biochem. Rev. 2006, 27 (3), 119–121.

延伸閱讀