Male osteoporosis is a still largely underdiagnosed pathological condition. As a consequence, bone fragility in men remains undertreated mainly due to the low screening frequency and to controversies in the bone mineral density (BMD) testing standards. Up to the 40% of overall osteoporotic fractures affect men, in spite of the fact that women have a significant higher prevalence of osteoporosis. In addition, in males, hip fractures are associated with increased morbidity and mortality as compared to women. Importantly, male fractures occur about 10 years later in life than women, and, therefore, due to the advanced age, men may have more comorbidities and, consequently, their mortality is about twice the rate in women. Gender differences, which begin during puberty, lead to wider bones in males as compared with females. In men, follicle-stimulating hormones, testosterone, estrogens, and sex hormone-binding levels, together with genetic factors, interact in determining the peak of bone mass, BMD maintenance, and lifetime decrease. As compared with women, men are more frequently affected by secondary osteoporosis. Therefore, in all osteoporotic men, a complete clinical history should be collected and a careful physical examination should be done, in order to find clues of a possible underlying diseases and, ultimately, to guide laboratory testing. Currently, the pharmacological therapy of male osteoporosis includes aminobisphosphonates, denosumab, and teriparatide. Hypogonadal patients may be treated with testosterone replacement therapy. Given that the fractures related to mortality are higher in men than in women, treating male subjects with osteoporosis is of the utmost importance in clinical practice, as it may impact on mortality even more than in women.

Delayed puberty (DP) defines a retardation of onset/progression of sexual maturation beyond the expected age from either a lack/delay of the hypothalamo-pituitary-gonadal axis activation or a gonadal failure. DP usually gives rise to concern and uncertainty in patients and their families, potentially affecting their immediate psychosocial well-being and also creating longer term psychosexual sequelae. The most frequent form of DP in younger teenagers is self-limiting and may not need any intervention. Conversely, DP from hypogonadism requires prompt and specific treatment that we summarize in this review. Hormone therapy primarily targets genital maturation, development of secondary sexual characteristics, and the achievement of target height in line with genetic potential, but other key standards of care include body composition and bone mass. Finally, pubertal induction should promote psychosexual development and mitigate both short- and long-term impairments comprising low self-esteem, social withdrawal, depression, and psychosexual difficulties. Different therapeutic options for pubertal induction have been described for both males and females, but we lack the necessary larger randomized trials to define the best approaches for both sexes. We provide an in-depth and updated literature review regarding therapeutic options for inducing puberty in males and females, particularly focusing on recent therapeutic refinements that better encompass the heterogeneity of this population, and underlining key differences in therapeutic timing and goals. We also highlight persistent shortcomings in clinical practice, wherein strategies directed at “the child with delayed puberty of uncertain etiology” risk being misapplied to older adolescents likely to have permanent hypogonadism.

Objective: Experimental studies proposed a direct effect of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) on the skeletal metabolism, but results of human studies mainly conducted in females are controversial. The present study aims to investigate the possible role of FSH excess in male bone health, by comparing for the first time primary and central hypogonadism.Design and Methods: 119 men were enrolled in this cross-sectional observational study at the time of the first diagnosis of hypogonadism. All participants had spontaneous pubertal development. Regarding patients with hypergonadotropic hypogonadism (Hyper-H), Klinefelter syndrome (KS) patients were distinguished from the other forms (non-KS-Hyper-H) based on the onset of FSH elevation. Bone mineral density (BMD) at both lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN), as well as the prevalence of morphometric vertebral fractures (VFx), were assessed.Results: Across the whole cohort, higher LS and FN BMD were associated with older age at diagnosis and higher body mass index (BMI), respectively. After adjusting for potential confounders (age at diagnosis, BMI, smoking habits, degree of hypogonadism defined by calculated free testosterone, and 25OH vitamin D levels), non-KS-Hyper-H patients showed significantly lower LS BMD and tended to show lower FN BMD values, as compared to those with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (Hypo-H). In KS men, LS BMD was significantly lower than in those with non-KS-Hyper-H. No significant differences in the prevalence of VFx were found between the groups.Conclusions: These findings suggest a potential negative effect of FSH excess on the male bone mass, especially at spine. The duration of high FSH levels may also contribute to these findings.

Background/Objectives: Lifestyle (in particular, nutrition and exercise) determines present and future youths’ health. The goal of the present study was to identify specific student groups who deserve precise lifestyle improvement interventions, tailored to their characteristics. Methods: An anonymous web-based questionnaire to assess lifestyle was posted on the websites of two main Italian Academic Institutions, and 9423 students voluntarily participated. A personalised immediate report was provided to improve compliance/motivation. We assessed age, sex, affiliation, anthropometrics, lifestyle components (nutrition, exercise, sedentariness, stress perception, smoking, alcohol, sleep), and the desire to be helped with lifestyle improvement. Cluster analysis was performed to identify healthy lifestyle groups among the students. Results: In total, 6976 subjects [age: 21 (20, 23) yrs; 3665 female, 3300 male] completed the questionnaire and were included. Of these students, 73.9% expressed the need for lifestyle improvement help, particularly for becoming physically active (66.7%), managing stress (58.7%), and improving nutrition (52.7%). We unveil three clusters of subjects, each corresponding to a distinct lifestyle pattern. The clusters are differentiated by exercise level and perceptions of stress/fatigue/somatic symptoms (cluster 1: 74.8% meet international exercise guidelines (IEGs), 67.4% have high stress perception, 49.1% drink 1–3 glasses of wine/beer per week, and 63.3% drink 0–1 glass of spirits per week; cluster 2: 75.6% meet IEGs, 75.7% have low/medium levels of stress perception, and 65.8% have low alcohol consumption; cluster 3: 72.5% do not meet IEGs, 77.6% have high stress perception, and 67.5% have low alcohol consumption). More active students present lower stress/somatic symptoms perception. Interestingly, the AHA diet score (nutrition quality) was not in the ideal range in any cluster (nevertheless, obesity was not of concern), being worst in cluster 3, characterized by higher stress perception (59.7% had poor nutrition quality). Those who were physically active but showed a high stress/fatigue perception were used to drinking alcohol. Conclusions: Students desire help to improve their lifestyle, and this approach might help identify specific student groups to whom LIs in Academic Institutions can be tailored to foster well-being and promote health.