ARTICLE
mrh.2011.0292
Auteur(s) : Michał Witkowski, Jane Hubert, Andrzej Mazur
andre.mazur@clermont.inra.fr
INRA, UMR 1019, UNH, CRNH Auvergne, and Clermont Université,
Université d’Auvergne, Unité de Nutrition Humaine, BP 10448,
Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, France
Correspondence. Dr A. Mazur, Unité de Nutrition
Humaine, INRA, Theix, 63122 St Genès Champanelle, France
Magnesium (Mg2+) is the second most abundant cation
within the cell. Magnesium plays an essential role in a wide range
of fundamental biochemical reactions and cellular functions,
including cell cycle, channel regulation, membrane and nucleic acid
stability and is a cofactor for hundreds of enzymes [1]. Therefore,
it is not surprising that many clinical disorders are associated
with magnesium deficiency [2, 3]. Recommendations for
magnesium intake are provided in the “Dietary Reference Intakes
(DRIs)” [4] and in the “Apports nutritionnels conseillés pour la
population française (ANC)” [5]. The magnesium content of food in
the Western countries is consistently decreasing; currently,
dietary magnesium in many adults does not meet the recommended
intake [6-11]. This low magnesium intake leads to an increased risk
of latent magnesium deficiency, which is difficult to diagnose. It
is generally accepted that assessments of magnesium status are
problematic [12, 13]. The assessment difficulty results from
the distribution of magnesium in the body. About half of the total
body magnesium is in the bone and the other half is in the soft
tissues. Extracellular magnesium accounts for only about
1 percent of total body magnesium. Therefore, the measurement
of blood plasma/serum magnesium does not exactly reflect its
intracellular level. In healthy subjects, there is a balance
between intestinal magnesium absorption and urinary excretion with
the latter being of greater importance. Urinary excretion increases
when magnesium intake is in excess, whereas the increased kidney
re-absorption conserves magnesium in the case of magnesium
deprivation. Therefore, urine magnesium reflects magnesium intake
and can provide information on an individual's magnesium status.
However, factors affecting kidney filtration, such as diabetes,
diuretics, and renal dialysis, strongly influence urinary
magnesium, limiting its value in several pathophysiological
conditions. Homeostasis of magnesium is mainly maintained via bone
stores. Approximately one third of magnesium in bone is freely
exchangeable and acts as a reserve for maintaining extracellular
magnesium concentrations [13]. For these magnesium
metabolism-related evidences, extensive research has been conducted
on the evaluation of magnesium in a variety of blood cells and on
techniques measuring magnesium concentrations in tissues. Recently
published reviews [12, 13] provide an extensive update on the
assessment of magnesium status.
The aim of this systematic review is to assess the usefulness of
magnesium status biomarkers in healthy humans to determine which
biomarkers appropriately reflect changes in magnesium status in
response to supplementation or depletion. The methodology of this
review is based on the standard methodology developed for the set
of reviews within the Eurreca project (EURopean micronutrient
RECommendations Aligned) (14) and also related to other minerals
[15-18].
Methods
An abbreviated version of the methodology used in this review is
provided below with differences from the main methodology noted
[14].
Study selection
To be included, a study needed to meet all of the following
criteria: 1) an intervention study in humans (including
supplementation and/or depletion studies) with no restrictions in
study design, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs),
controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and before-and-after studies
(B/A); 2) report the magnesium status in humans at baseline and
after supplementation or depletion; 3) report the daily dose of the
supplement and involve magnesium supplementation with magnesium
salts that are considered bioavailable; and 4) involve healthy
participants who had not recently used mineral or vitamin
supplements.
Study inclusion was not limited by the age of the participants
and included studies of infants through the elderly. Studies were
excluded if they included subjects receiving concomitant therapy
for chronic illnesses, nutritional deficiencies other than
magnesium, or if the studies’ subjects had a condition known to
affect magnesium metabolism, such as diabetes, severe kidney
diseases, renal dialysis, or alcoholism. Studies were excluded if
suitable baseline data were unavailable, if information on the
statistical variance of the data was not accessible, and if methods
for the status assessment were not found.
Data collection
We searched Ovid MEDLINE (www.ovid.com), EMBASE (Ovid;
www.ovid.com), and the Cochrane Library CENTRAL
(www.thecochranelibrary.com) databases from inception to September
2008 for magnesium intervention studies using text terms with
appropriate truncation and relevant indexing terms. The general
structure of the search was “magnesium” and “intervention OR
supplementation OR depletion” and “humans.”
Titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion by a single
reviewer. The full text of all articles collected was screened for
inclusion by using an inclusion and exclusion form by two
independent reviewers. Data for each included study were extracted
into an Access (Microsoft Corp, Redmond, WA) database file by a
single reviewer. In unclear cases, studies were discussed with the
review team before beginning full data extraction, and, in some
cases, study authors were contacted for clarification. When
necessary, units of measurement were converted to a standard form
to facilitate comparison across studies. Data extraction and
synthesis for primary and secondary measures of interest were
undertaken as discussed in the methodology article [14]. To claim
whether a biomarker was useful, the following terms indicate the
conditions needed to be met: “yes”, forest plot showed a
significant effect (p<0.05) based on ≥3 studies and
≥50 participants between the intervention and control arms;
“unclear but likely to be useful” forest plot showed a significant
effect (p<0.05), but the result was based on two studies;
“unclear”, insufficient data were available.
Results
The flow diagram for this review is shown in figure 1. Of the
1,298 titles and abstracts screened after electronic and
bibliographic searches, 66 appeared potentially relevant and were
collected as full-text articles to be assessed for inclusion. At
this stage, studies were excluded for a variety of reasons,
including unsuitable study designs, such as nonhuman studies,
single-case studies, studies not involving magnesium
supplementation or depletion, studies without magnesium status
measurements, studies on patients with pathologies known to affect
magnesium status, and/or studies on patients receiving medication
likely to affect magnesium status.
After analysis of the 66 potentially relevant full-text
articles, twenty-seven studies (reported in 21 publications)
fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria, and details of the
included study characteristics are shown in table 1. Studies were excluded if the type of
magnesium supplement was not stated, the study design involved
multinutrient supplementation, the study did not report baseline
and/or subsequent magnesium status, no minimal dose was provided,
no control group was studied, a short-term study was performed
(e.g., only 24 h supplementation), or different population
groups were used as supplemented and controls. Studies with altered
data also resulted in exclusion. However, the majority of exclusion
was due to imprecise data (results presentation or no methodology
of status assessment) and for lack of magnesium status assessment
(figure
1). A total of 20 potential biomarkers of
magnesium status were assessed within the 27 included studies from
21 articles. The characteristics of the studies included in
the analysis are presented in table 1.
The quality of the included studies varied; 12 RCTs were
included in the review, but the method of randomisation was only
stated in three studies. The remaining studies included CCT and B/A
studies. Methods for checking compliance were reported in only
11 studies. The numbers and reasons for dropouts were reported
in eight studies. Full information pertaining to the quality
assessment of each study is shown in table
2.
Table 1 Characteristics of included studies.
| Study |
Population: country(s); age; sex; no. included
(treated/control); description |
Description of intervention; latest time point;
no. in intervention in control at latest time |
Micronutrient type |
Study design |
Biomarker reported |
| Carpenter et al. 2006 [19] |
USA; 8-14; F; 50 (23/27); healthy girls, selected
for low Mg intake |
300 mg Mg; 12 months; 23/27 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Urine (Fractional Excretion) FEMg |
| Dahle et al. 1995 [20] |
Sweden; N/A; F; 33 (18/15); pregnancy-induced leg
cramps |
360 mg Mg; 3 weeks; 18/15 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg |
| Dimai et al. 1998 (21] |
USA; 27-36; M; 24 (12/12); healthy subjects |
365 mg Mg; 30 days; 12/12 |
Magnesium carbonate and magnesium oxide |
CCT |
Blood ionized Mg; Serum Mg; Urine Mg
[Mg/Creatinine] |
| Fatemi et al. 1991 [22] |
USA; 18-48; X; 26; normal volunteers |
Residential dietary intervention. Mg depletion
achieved via low-Mg diet |
depletion study |
Before/After |
Serum Mg; Mg urine retention |
| Feillet-Coudray et al. 2002 [23] |
France; 24-34; F; 10 (10); healthy woman, selected
for low Mg intake |
366 mg Mg; 8 weeks; 10 |
Magnesium pidolate |
Before/After |
Plasma Mg; Plasma ionized Mg; RBC Mg; Urine Mg,
Exchangeable Mg pool masses |
| Golf et al. 1990 [24] |
Germany; 30-60; M; 14 (14); male persons with
hyperlipidaemia |
360 mg Mg; 8 weeks; 14 |
Magnesium aspartate hydrochloride |
Before/After |
Plasma Mg; RBC Mg |
| Itoh et al. 1997 [25] |
Japan; 48-84; X; 41 (23/10); healthy subjects |
548 mg Mg (male)/411 mg Mg (female); 4 weeks;
23/10 |
Magnesium hydroxide |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg |
| Kisters et al. 1993 [26] |
Germany; 38-60; X; 64 (32/32); patients with
normal renal function |
500 mg Mg; 4 weeks; 32/32 |
Magnesium hydrogen aspartate |
CCT |
Plasma Mg; RBC Mg |
| Lukaski et al. 2002 [27] |
USA; 44,9-71; F; 10; postmenopausal women |
200 mg Mg; 49 days; 10 |
Magnesium gluconate |
Before/After |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg; Muscle Mg; RBC Mg |
| Lukaski et al. 2002 [27] |
USA; 44,9-71; F; 10; postmenopausal women |
112 mg Mg; 93 days; 10 |
By diet |
Before/After |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg; Muscle Mg; RBC Mg |
| Mooren et al. 2003 [28] |
Germany; 21-30; M; 20 (10/10); healthy volunteers
recruited from the sport student population |
360 mg Mg; 2 months; 10/10 |
N/A |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Blood ionised Mg; RBC Mg; RBC ionised
Mg |
| Nielsen 2004 [29] |
USA; 50-78; F; 13; postmenopausal women |
200 mg Mg; 6 weeks; 13 |
Magnesium gluconate |
Before/After |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg |
| Nielsen et al. 2003 [30] |
USA; 47-78; F; 9; postmenopausal women |
300 mg Mg; 11 weeks; 9 |
Magnesium gluconate |
RCT |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg; Plasma ionised Mg; RBC Hb; RBC
packed Mg; RBC, cell; RBCM (membrane) protein |
| Nielsen et al. 2007 [31] |
USA; 49-71; F; 11; postmenopausal women |
314 to 343 mg; 12 weeks; 11 |
Magnesium gluconate |
RCT |
Serum Mg; RBC membrane Mg; Urine Mg |
| Nielsen et al. 2007 [32] |
USA; 47-75; F; 13; postmenopausal women |
200 mg Mg; 11 weeks; 13
After low Mg diet |
Magnesium gluconate |
Before/After |
Serum Mg; Ultrafiltrable Mg Albumin-bound Mg; RBC
Mg; Macroglobulin-bound Mg; |
| Paolisso et al. 1992 [33] |
Italy; 67-89; X; 12 (12); ederly subjects |
390 mg Mg; 4 weeks; 12 |
Magnesium pidolate |
Before/After |
Plasma Mg; RBC Mg |
| Sacks et al. 1998 [34] |
USA; 34-44; F; 150 (50/102); healthy nurses,
selected for low Mg intake |
336 mg Mg; 16 weeks; 48/102 |
Magnesium lactate |
RCT parallel |
Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 2002 [35] |
United Kingdom; 24-29; F; 81 (40/41); woman
suffering premenstrual symptoms |
200 mg Mg; 1 day; 40/41 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT crossover |
Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 2002 [35] |
United Kingdom; 24-29; F; 81 (47/41); woman
suffering premenstrual symptoms |
350 mg Mg; 1 day; 47/41 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT crossover |
Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 2002 [35] |
United Kingdom; 24-29; F; 81 (33/41); woman
suffering premenstrual symptoms |
500 mg Mg; 1 day; 33/41 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT crossover |
Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 1998 [36] |
United Kingdom; N/A; F; 74 (37/37); woman
suffering from premenstrual symptoms |
200 mg Mg; 1 day; 37/37 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT crossover |
Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 2003 [37] |
United Kingdom; 23-28; X; 21 (12/9); healthy
volunteers |
300 mg Mg; 8.5 weeks; 12/9 |
Magnesium amino acid chelate |
RCT parallel |
Plasma Mg; Saliva Mg; Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 2003 [37] |
United Kingdom; 23-28; X; 21 (10/9); healthy
volunteers |
300 mg Mg; 8.5 weeks; 10/9 |
Magnesium citrate |
RCT parallel |
Plasma Mg; Saliva Mg; Urine Mg |
| Walker et al. 2003 [37] |
United Kingdom; 23-28; X; 21 (12/9); healthy
volunteers |
300 mg Mg; 8.5 weeks; 12/9 |
Magnesium oxide |
RCT parallel |
Plasma Mg; Saliva Mg; Urine Mg |
| Zavaczki et al. 2003 [38] |
Hungary; N/A; M; 20 (10/10); male with infertily
problems |
196.8 mg Mg; 90 days; 10/10 |
Magnesium orotate |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Serum ionized Mg |
| Zorbas et al. 1999 control [39] |
Greece; 22-26; M; 20 (10/10); male athlets |
23 mg/kg bw; 52 weeks; 10/10 |
Magnesium lactate |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg |
| Zorbas et al. 1999 hypokinesia [39] |
Greece; 22-26; M; 20 (10/10); male athlets |
585 mg-665 mg Mg; 52 weeks; 10/10 |
Magnesium lactate |
RCT parallel |
Serum Mg; Urine Mg |
Table 2 Validity of included studies.
| Studies |
Randomization; Method |
Dropouts; reasons |
Method of checking; results of compliance
check |
Data problems |
| Carpenter et al. 2006 [19] |
Yes; Random Number Table |
4/27 for placebo; 2/23 for supplemented group;
moving away, excessive time commitment, difficulty with compliance
with treatment |
Compliance with treatment was approximately 71%
for the placebo group and 74% for the Mg-supplemented group and was
confirmed by greater FEMg in the Mg-supplemented subjects at all
treatment points |
NR |
| Dahle et al. 1995 [20] |
Yes; N/A |
5/73; acid spillage from urine bottle, hospital
admission, failure of attend second visit, admission for premature
labor, some data lost for one patient |
N/A; N/A |
No data on age |
| Dimai et al. 1998 [21] |
Yes; N/A |
NR |
Post study interview - finding of a significant
increase in urinary Mg excretion in the test subjects compared to
the control group/Full compliance |
NR |
| Fatemi et al. 1991 [22] |
No; N/A |
NR |
Twenty-four-hour urine collections for Mg and
creatinine determinations were obtained daily to ensure
compliance.; N/A |
NR |
| Feillet-Coudray et al. 2002 [23] |
No; N/A |
NR |
Unused ampoules were collected periodically |
NR |
| Golf et al. 1990 [24] |
No; N/A |
N/A |
Dietician control during study |
NR |
| Itoh et al. 1997 [25] |
Yes; N/A |
8/18 for placebo; study protocol not
fulfilled |
N/A; N/A |
NR |
| Kisters et al. 1993 [26] |
No; N/A |
NR |
N/A; N/A |
Data from graphs |
| Lukaski et al. 2002 [27] |
No; N/A |
NR |
N/A; N/A |
Data from graphs |
| Mooren et al. 2003 [28] |
Yes; N/A |
NR |
To enhance compliance, individual sessions with
skilled counselors were conducted at randomization and at follow-up
visits (6 weeks, 3 and 6 months). Phone and mail contacts
between counseling sessions were done at the discretion of the
individual clinical |
NR |
| Nielsen 2004 [29] |
Yes; Latin-square design |
2 - not postmenopausal, physician
recommendation |
Subjects consumed only food and beverages provided
by the dietary staff and were chaperoned on all outings from the
metabolic unit to ensure compliance with the study protocol.;
N/A |
NR |
| Nielsen et al. 2003 [30] |
Yes; N/A |
3/3; personal reasons/medical reasons |
The magnesium and copper content of 6-d composites
of diets and feces were determined by inductively coupled argon
plasma emission spectroscopy |
NR |
| Nielsen et al. 2007 [31] |
Yes; N/A |
1 - not tolerated the amount of food; 2 - personal
reasons; 1 - illness |
Subjects consumed only food and beverages provided
by the dietary staff and were chaperoned on all outings from the
metabolic unit to ensure compliance with the study protocol. /
N/A |
NR |
| Nielsen et al. 2007 [32] |
No; N/A |
NR |
Subjects consumed only food and beverages provided
by the dietary staff and were chaperoned on all outings from the
metabolic unit to ensure compliance with the study protocol. /
N/A |
NR |
| Paolisso et al. 1992 [33] |
Yes; N/A |
N/A |
N/A; N/A |
RCT study but considered as Before/After due to
lack of placebo group measurement values |
| Sacks et al. 1998 [34] |
Yes; N/A |
N/A |
Pill count; Good compliance |
NR |
| Walker et al. 2002 [35] |
Yes; N/A |
NR |
N/A; N/A |
incomplete crossover |
| Walker et al. 1998 [36] |
Yes; N/A |
NR |
N/A; N/A |
NR |
| Walker et al. 2003 [37] |
Yes; Each participant was issued a unique number
after successful screening. To ensure the double-blind nature of
the study, the project leader (AFW), who had no direct contact with
the volunteers nor with the analysis of the data, undertook the
randomization |
6; One volunteer dropped out within 24 h of the
commencement of the study and 5 others before the end of the study.
All withdrawals were for personal reasons associated with the
inconveniences of the protocol routine – no withdrawals were due to
adverse effects |
N/A; N/A |
NR |
N/A: not available; NR: not reported.
Among the identified biomarkers, only serum magnesium, plasma
magnesium, RBC magnesium, and urinary magnesium excretion/24 h were
reported in more than three studies with a total of more than
50 studied subjects; therefore, it was reliable to evaluate
the effectiveness of these biomarkers. Ionised magnesium in serum,
plasma or blood was reported in two, one and two studies,
respectively. When combined, there were five studies on
plasma/serum/blood ionised magnesium with 51 subjects
(figure
1, table 3). Saliva
magnesium was evaluated in a three-arm supplementation study with
36 included subjects from one publication (table 3). Studies of other markers were
limited to one or two studies and, therefore, were not eligible to
allow us to decide whether they were effective markers of magnesium
status (table 3).
Table 3 Primary outcome data for all biomarkers.
Analysis (study type) and
included studies |
No. of studies
(no. of included
participants) |
Pooled effect size,
WMD (95% CI) |
I2 |
Appears
effective as
a biomarker? |
| Plasma/serum Mg (mmol/L) |
22 (322) |
0.03 [0.01, 0.06] |
96 |
Yes |
| Plasma/serum/blood ionised Mg (mmol/L) |
5 (51) |
0.02 [-0.02, 0.06] |
95 |
No |
| RBC Mg (mmol/L) |
9 (130) |
0.16 [0.09, 0.2] |
85 |
Yes |
| Urinary Mg (mmol/24h) |
18 (363) |
1.82 [1.29, 2.36] |
93 |
Yes |
| Saliva Mg (mmol/L) |
3 (34) |
-0.03 [-0.09, 0.03] |
0 |
Unclear |
| Albumin bound Mg (mmol/L) |
1 (13) |
-0.02 [-0.04, 0.00] |
- |
Unclear |
| FEMg (%) |
1 (23) |
0.50 [-1.55, 2.55] |
- |
Unclear |
| Macroglobulin-bound Mg (mmol/L) |
1 (13) |
-0.03 [-0.05, -0.01] |
- |
Unclear |
| Mg urine retention (%) |
1 (16) |
51 [48.23, 53.77] |
- |
Unclear |
| Muscle Mg (mmol/100 g dw) |
1 (10) |
5.50 [2.70,8.30] |
- |
Unclear |
| RBC cell (μmol/106) |
1 (9) |
0.01 [0.00, 0.02] |
- |
Unclear |
| RBC ionised Mg (mmol/L) |
1 (20) |
0.05 [-0.22, 0.32] |
- |
Unclear |
| RBC Mg (μmol/g Hb) |
2 (19) |
0.50 [0.14, 0.86] |
80 |
Unclear |
| RBC packed Mg (mmol/L) |
1 (9) |
0.11 [0.10, 0.12] |
- |
Unclear |
| RBC membrane protein (μmol/g) |
2 (20) |
0.16 [0.14, 0.18] |
0 |
Unclear |
| Ultrafiltrable Mg (mmol/L) |
1 (13) |
0.00 [-0.02, 0.02] |
- |
Unclear |
| Urinary Mg (mmol/g creatinine) |
1(13) |
0.17 [0.15, 0.19] |
- |
Unclear |
Serum and plasma total magnesium concentration
A large proportion of the studies included in this review
measured serum (15 studies) or plasma (7 studies)
magnesium concentration. All of the supplementation and depletion
studies measuring serum and plasma magnesium were combined for
statistical analyses. Serum/plasma magnesium concentration was
investigated as a marker of magnesium status in
18 supplementation studies involving 275 participants and
four depletion studies involving 47 participants. Combining
data from the depletion and supplementation studies
(322 subjects), primary analysis revealed an overall
significant (p<0.02) response of serum/plasma magnesium
concentration to magnesium intake [weighted mean difference (WMD):
0.03 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.06; I2 96%].
However, the depletion studies did not detect changes in this
parameter (table 3). This
biomarker was affected by magnesium supplementation (figure
2).
A summary of the population subgroup analysis of the effect of
magnesium supplementation and depletion on serum/plasma magnesium
concentration is given in the table 4.
Because of the publications available, the data included in this
analysis were mostly collected from studies in adults.
Table 4 Secondary outcome data for plasma/serum and
urinary biomarkers.
Analysis (study type) and
included studies |
No. of studies
(no. of included
participants) |
Pooled effect size,
WMD (95% CI) |
I2 |
Appears
effective as
a biomarker? |
| Plasma/serum Mg – females (mmol/L) |
8 (107) |
0.01 [-0.02, 0.05] |
95 |
No |
| Plasma/serum Mg – mixed (mmol/L) |
7 (129) |
0.08 [0.04,0.12] |
85 |
Yes |
| Plasma/serum Mg – males (mmol/L) |
6 (76) |
-0.01 [-0.04, 0.03] |
57 |
No |
| Plasma/serum Mg – postmenopausal women
(mmol/L) |
5 (56) |
0.01 [-0.03, 0.05] |
97 |
No |
| Plasma/serum Mg – adults (mmol/L) |
13 (209) |
0.04 [0.00, 0.07] |
86 |
No |
| Urinary Mg – females (mmol/24h) |
14 (310) |
1.65 [1.18, 2.11] |
85 |
Yes |
| Urinary Mg – mixed (mmol/24h) |
4 (57) |
1.54 [0.98, 2.10] |
36 |
Yes |
| Urinary Mg – postmenopausal women (mmol/24h) |
4 (43) |
2.31 [1.76, 2.85] |
85 |
Unclear |
| Urinary Mg – adults (mmol/24h) |
13 (310) |
1.69 [0.84, 2.54] |
94 |
Yes |
Serum, plasma and blood ionised magnesium concentration
Two studies included in this review measured plasma, one
measured serum and two measured plasma ionised magnesium
concentrations. These five studies were combined for statistical
analyses and included 3 RCT, 1 CCT, and 1B/A, with four
studies involving supplementation and one involving depletion. The
retained studies involved 51 subjects. Neither primary
analysis nor any individual study suggested a response of this
biomarker to changes in magnesium intake. The primary analysis did
not reveal a significant response to changes in dietary magnesium
intake (WMD: 0.02 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.06; I2
95%) (table 3).
Other serum and plasma biomarkers
Only one study on a limited number of subjects was available for
each of the other serum and plasma biomarkers: serum ultrafiltrable
magnesium, albumin-bound magnesium, and macroglobulin-bound
magnesium [31, 32] (figure 1, table 3). Consequently, it was not
possible to draw any conclusions regarding the usefulness of these
biomarkers.
RBC magnesium concentration
Combining data from three depletion and six supplementation
studies (on 130 subjects), primary analysis revealed a
significant overall (p<0.0001) response of erythrocyte magnesium
concentration to magnesium intake (WMD: 0.16 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.09,
0.22; I2 85%) (figure
3).
In some of the selected studies, RBC magnesium was expressed by
cell or haemoglobin, and also RBC membrane magnesium or free
intracellular ionised magnesium concentrations were measured
[28, 30, 32]. The results from these isolated studies
were not combined for further analyses with the majority of
available studies that reported RBC magnesium concentrations
expressed by RBC volume.
Urinary magnesium
Combining data from 14 RCT and 5 B/A studies
(table 3), which included
four depletion and 15 supplementation studies, primary
analysis revealed an overall significant (p<0.00001) response of
urinary magnesium excretion to dietary magnesium intake (WMD:
1.82 mmol/24h; 95% CI: 1.29, 2.36; I2 93%)
(figure
4).
Data from one CCT study expressed urinary magnesium as
magnesium/creatinine [21] and from one study calculating urine
fractional excretion of magnesium (FEMg) (a parallel RCT with
magnesium supplemented girls) [19] have not been incorporated into
the statistical analysis because of the difference in the
calculation method used and expression of the results; the majority
of studies evaluating 24-h Mg excretion. However, it was not
possible to draw any firm conclusions about the effectiveness of
these two last parameters, which were considered separately because
of the insufficient number of subjects and available studies
(table 3).
A summary of the population subgroup analysis of the response of
urine magnesium concentration to magnesium supplementation and
depletion is provided in the table 4.
The data included in this analysis were mostly collected from
studies in adults. In adults, urinary magnesium appears to be an
effective biomarker.
Saliva magnesium
One RCT parallel supplementation study with three different
magnesium salts, which included 12 participants per arm,
assessed saliva magnesium [37]. There were not enough studies of
this biomarker to draw any conclusions about its usefulness
(table 3).
Other biomarkers
Urinary magnesium retention was only studied in one B/A study
[22] of 26 subjects.
Muscle magnesium was only evaluated in one B/A study on ten
magnesium-supplemented postmenopausal women [27]. Exchangeable
magnesium pool masses were only evaluated in one B/A study on ten
magnesium-supplemented young women [23]. Consequently, it was not
possible to draw any conclusions about the usefulness of these
biomarkers (table 3).
Discussion
A total of 21 publications with RCTs, CCTs and B/A studies
were included in this review. The majority of studies included were
magnesium supplementation studies. Fewer magnesium depletion
studies were identified with lower total numbers of participants
than supplementation studies. A significant proportion of the
analyses conducted for individual biomarkers did not meet the
minimum criteria for determining their usefulness, i.e.,
they had <3 studies or <50 participants
contributing data to the meta-analysis according to the methodology
used [14]. However, it should be stressed that several of these
parameters arise from the application of different methodologies
for the equivalent parameters, thereby leading to different
expression of the results (e.g., analyses on RBC and urine).
With regard to the limited number of these studies, it was not
possible to conclude on the potential usefulness of several of
these particular assessments. Among the identified biomarkers, only
serum magnesium, plasma magnesium, RBC magnesium, and urinary
magnesium excretion/24 h were reported in more than three studies
with a total of more than 50 studied subjects and thus were
reliable for evaluation of biomarker effectiveness. These data were
combined as serum/plasma because, frequently, total serum and
plasma magnesium were alternatively measured. Finally, we concluded
that serum/plasma magnesium concentration, RBC magnesium
concentration, and urinary magnesium excretion responded to dietary
manipulation. Consequently, these parameters appear to be useful
biomarkers of magnesium status in the general population.
For the other potential biomarkers, special attention was paid
to free extracellular ionised magnesium. This fraction of magnesium
is generally considered as a more specific marker of magnesium
status than total plasma or serum magnesium [12]. Only five studies
of this biomarker were eligible according to the review criteria.
However, the analyses in these studies were performed on serum,
plasma, or blood samples. Also, various equipment (AVL or NOVA8+)
were used in the retained studies. As previously discussed,
significant differences among the ionised magnesium concentration
have been obtained with various analysers [40]. Despite these
limitations, we aggregated all the available results on plasma,
serum and blood because of the low number of relevant studies.
Finally, because of the available data, it was not possible to
conclude if ionised magnesium concentration is likely to be
effective or ineffective as biomarkers of magnesium status.
Unfortunately, the studies included in this review on biomarkers
of potential interest, i.e., exchangeable pools of magnesium and
muscle and saliva magnesium, were only reported by one study, for
each of this parameter, with a low number of included subjects.
These and other biomarkers of potential interest (bone, platelets,
white blood cell magnesium) could also not be analysed because the
available studies did not meet sufficient criteria to be included
to this review.
Due to the low number of available studies and studies with low
number of included subjects, there is not enough information to
make a clear decision about magnesium status biomarkers in specific
subgroups. The majority of studies have been conducted in adults.
After subgrouping, mainly urine magnesium excretion was shown to be
significantly modulated by magnesium intake in adults and females
(table 4). There was no
capacity within the data to conduct subgroup analysis for a range
of population groups, especially vulnerable populations, e.g.
infants, adolescents, pregnant women, or elderly subjects. In fact,
we have identified only one publication for each of following
groups: 10-year-old girls [19], pregnant women [20] and elderly
subjects [33]. Also, few publications provided an extensive
description of the subjects studied. It would be of interest to
evaluate the relationship between magnesium status markers and body
mass index (BMI). Numerous publications point out the relationship
between low magnesium intake and metabolic syndrome, obesity and
type 2 diabetes [8, 10, 41-48]. Several studies have
reported lower magnesium status in these conditions, and this
relationship is currently under debate [49-57]. However, available
data did not allowed us to isolate these specific groups for
further analyses.
The major limitation for conducting this systematic review is
the low number of available studies (preferably RCTs) on healthy
subjects. Papers were carefully selected; however, some of selected
studies have been conducted on subjects presenting commonly
encountered pathophysiological conditions, i.e.,
pregnancy-induced leg cramps [20], untreated hyperlipidemia [24],
premenstrual symptoms [35, 36], male infertility problems
[38], intense sport activity [28, 39], hypokinesia [39]. To
our knowledge, all of these subjects did not receive medications or
supplements other than magnesium. Because only isolated studies are
available for these subjects, it was not possible to relate these
conditions to the magnesium status.
Furthermore, it was not possible to draw conclusions about
potential relations between biomarker responsiveness and type,
dose, or length of supplementation. Various magnesium supplements
were used in the selected studies: oxide, aspartate, hydroxide,
gluconate, pidolate, citrate, lactate, carbonate and amino acid
chelate. The duration of supplementation and the dose used varied
in these studies; however, a majority of the included studies used
200 to 400 mg magnesium/day. The use of organic magnesium salts in
several of the included studies results from the consideration that
these salts are more bioavailable than are nonorganic ones [58].
Because of the diversity of supplements, protocols and subjects, we
did not attempt to compare their efficiency in our analysis. It is
also noteworthy that we have not included studies with
magnesium/vitamin B6 supplementation in our review.
Magnesium/vitamin B6 is a common magnesium supplement, but a
possible interaction exists between these two compounds. Future
analysis of the available data on magnesium/vitamin B6
supplementation should be conducted to evaluate the possible
benefits of their interaction.
The data included in this review are mainly from supplemented
subjects and few data are available from depleted individuals. A
prolonged magnesium depletion study with 101 mg of magnesium/day
exhibited adverse heart rhythm changes after 78 days of
depletion [32]. Consequently, the implementation of depletion
studies should be carefully considered from an ethical point of
view.
The present review reveals that even if magnesium
supplementation is used for a long time, well-designed intervention
RCTs in healthy individuals with respect to their physiological and
nutritional conditions are scarce. Although this systematic review
offers primary outcome data for each biomarker identified, the
limited number of studies included and the limited number of
subjects in the population subgroups render it impossible to draw
conclusions about potential relations between biomarker
responsiveness for a range of population groups. Subsequently,
further studies should be conducted on the best way to evaluate
magnesium status in population groups susceptible to magnesium
deficiency. In particular, the research should be focused on
evaluating intracellular magnesium and body pools of magnesium. It
would be of interest to connect these studies with a magnesium
balance evaluation [59]. Additionally, it is important to stress
that compared to many other minerals, such as selenium, iodine,
zinc and copper [15-18], biomarkers for magnesium status are
limited to the magnesium measurements in biological fluids, cells
and tissues. At present, no indirect biomarkers of magnesium status
are identified. The recent progress in identifying genes modulated
by magnesium concentration opens interesting perspectives for the
research of these biomarkers.
Genetic factors controlling intra- and extracellular Mg levels
should be considered in the future research of biomarkers; however,
these genetic factors are weakly known. Serum magnesium
concentrations have been shown to have a heritable component with
heritability estimates of ∼30% [60]. The pioneer study by Henrotte
et al. in 1990 [61] pointed out the importance of genetics
for plasma and RBC magnesium levels. This finding was confirmed in
a mouse animal model selected for low and high RBC magnesium [62].
Recent advances in the fields of genetics and genomics have allowed
for substantial progress in this area by identifying new players of
magnesium homeostasis regulation [63-65]. Recently published
genome-wide meta-analysis of cohorts identified six genomic regions
that contained common variants associated with serum magnesium
levels [66]. All of the variants were nominally associated with
clinically defined hypomagnesaemia. These data from human genetics
will initiate a new era in understanding the relationship between
genetics, nutrition and diseases in determining magnesium
status.
The selection process of the data included in the present review
highlighted that the quality of published data are often poor for
the purpose of a systematic review on magnesium status. Several
publications did not provide sufficient or clear information on the
magnesium intake, on the clinical protocol, and on the assay
methodology. These issues should be considered when planning
projects and publishing results. Well-designed RCTs of sufficient
size with varying doses and duration of supplementation and with
evaluation of the magnesium intake using a whole-diet profile
(e.g., magnesium/calories ratio) are required in various population
subgroups. With emerging knowledge of genetic factors determining
magnesium status, it will be important in future studies to take
into account the genetic background of studied subjects.
Ultimately, the results of such studies could contribute to the
development of evidence-based dietary recommendations that are
better targeted to specific populations.
Acknowledgments
We want to thank Kate Ashton for her assistance in the
literature searching and Edmond Rock for critically reading the
manuscript.
Disclosure
Supported partially by the Commission of the European
Communities, specific RTD Programme “Quality of Life and Management
of Living Resources,” within the 6th Framework Programme (contract
no. FP6-036196-2).
EURRECA: EURopean micronutrient RECommendations Aligned.
None of the authors has any conflict of interest to
disclose.
References
1. Romani A. Regulation of magnesium homeostasis and
transport in mammalian cells. Arch Biochem Biophys 2007 ;
458 : 90-102.
2. Durlach J. Magnesium in clinical practice. London :
John Libbey, 1988.
3. Rayssiguier A, Mazur A, Durlach J Advances in
magnesium research: nutrition and health. London : John Libbey,
2001 ; (502 p.).
4. Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of
Dietary Reference Intakes Food and Nutrition Board Institute of
Medicine National Academy of Sciences Dietary reference intakes for
calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, vitamin D, and fluoride.
Washington, DC : National Academy Press, 1997.
5. Martin A (coordonnateur). Apports nutritionnels
conseillés pour la population française. 3e ed.
TEC et DOC, Lavoisier, 2001.
6. Galan P, Preziosi P, Durlach V, Valeix P, Ribas L,
Bouzid D, Favier A, Hercberg S. Dietary magnesium intake in a
French adult population. Magnes Res 1997 ; 10 : 321-328.
7. Pennington J.A.T. Bogden JD, Klevey LM Current dietary
intakes of trace elements and minerals. Clinical nutrition of the
essential trace elements and minerals. Totowa, NJ : Humana Press,
2000 ; 49-67.
8. King DE, Mainous AG, 3rd.Geesey ME, Woolson R.F.
Dietary magnesium and C-reactive protein levels. J Am Coll
Nutr 2005 ; 24 : 166-171.
9. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Research Service., Moshfegh A, Goldman JD, Cleveland L.E. What we
eat in America, NHANES 2001-2002: usual nutrient intakes from food
compared to dietary reference intakes. 2005.
10. Bo S, Durazzo M, Guidi S, Carello M, Sacerdote C,
Silli B, Rosato R, Cassader M, Gentile L, Pagano G. Dietary
magnesium and fiber intakes and inflammatory and metabolic
indicators in middle-aged subjects from a population-based cohort.
Am J Clin Nutr 2006 ; 84 : 1062-1069.
11. Rosanoff A. Rising Ca:Mg intake ratio from food in
USA adults: a concern?. Magnes Res 2010 ; 23 :
S181-S193.
12. Arnaud M.J. Update on the assessment of magnesium
status. Br J Nutr 2008 ; 99 (suppl. 3) : S24-S36.
13. Elin R.J. Assessment of magnesium status for
diagnosis and therapy. Magnes Res 2010 ; 23 : 194-198.
14. Hooper L, Ashton K, Harvey LJ, Decsi T,
Fairweather-Tait S.J. Assessing potential biomarkers of
micronutrient status by using a systematic review methodology:
methods. Am J Clin Nutr 2009 ; 89 : 1953S-1959S.
15. Ristic-Medic D, Piskackova Z, Hooper L, Ruprich J,
Casgrain A, Ashton K, Pavlovic M, Glibetic M. Methods of assessment
of iodine status in humans: a systematic review. Am J Clin
Nutr 2009 ; 89 : 2052S-2069S.
16. Ashton K, Hooper L, Harvey LJ, Hurst R, Casgrain A,
Fairweather-Tait S.J. Methods of assessment of selenium status in
humans: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 2009 ; 89 :
2025S-2039S.
17. Harvey LJ, Ashton K, Hooper L, Casgrain A,
Fairweather-Tait S.J. Methods of assessment of copper status in
humans: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 2009 ; 89 :
2009S-2024S.
18. Lowe NM, Fekete K, Decsi T. Methods of assessment of
zinc status in humans: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr
2009 ; 89 : 2040S-2051S.
19. Carpenter TO, DeLucia MC, Zhang JH, Bejnerowicz G,
Tartamella L, Dziura J, Petersen KF, Befroy D, Cohen D. A
randomized controlled study of effects of dietary magnesium oxide
supplementation on bone mineral content in healthy girls. J Clin
Endocrinol Metab 2006 ; 91 : 4866-4872.
20. Dahle LO, Berg G, Hammar M, Hurtig M, Larsson L. The
effect of oral magnesium substitution on pregnancy-induced leg
cramps. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995 ; 173 : 175-180.
21. Dimai HP, Porta S, Wirnsberger G, Lindschinger M,
Pamperl I, Dobnig H, Wilders-Truschnig M, Lau K.H. Daily oral
magnesium supplementation suppresses bone turnover in young adult
males. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998 ; 83 : 2742-2748.
22. Fatemi S, Ryzen E, Flores J, Endres DB, Rude R.K.
Effect of experimental human magnesium depletion on parathyroid
hormone secretion and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D metabolism. J
Clin Endocrinol Metab 1991 ; 73 : 1067-1072.
23. Feillet-Coudray C, Coudray C, Tressol JC, Pépin D,
Mazur A, Abrams SA, Rayssiguier Y. Exchangeable magnesium pool
masses in healthy women: effects of magnesium supplementation.
Am J Clin Nutr 2002 ; 75 : 72-78.
24. Golf SW, Riediger H, Matthes S, Kuhn D. Effects of
magnesium treatment on hyperlipemia. Magnes Bull 1990 ; 12 :
138-143.
25. Itoh K, Kawasaka T, Nakamura M. The effects of high
oral magnesium supplementation on blood pressure, serum lipids and
related variables in apparently healthy Japanese subjects. Br J
Nutr 1997 ; 78 : 737-750.
26. Kisters K, Spieker C, Tepel M, Zidek W. New data
about the effects of oral physiological magnesium supplementation
on several cardiovascular risk factors (lipids and blood pressure).
Magnes Res 1993 ; 6 : 355-360.
27. Lukaski HC, Nielsen F.H. Dietary magnesium depletion
affects metabolic responses during submaximal exercise in
postmenopausal women. J Nutr 2002 ; 132 : 930-935.
28. Mooren FC, Golf SW, Völker K. Effect of magnesium on
granulocyte function and on the exercise induced inflammatory
response. Magnes Res 2003 ; 16 : 49-58.
29. Nielsen F.H. The alteration of magnesium, calcium and
phosphorus metabolism by dietary magnesium deprivation in
postmenopausal women is not affected by dietary boron deprivation.
Magnes Res 2004 ; 17 : 197-210.
30. Nielsen FH, Milne D.B. Some magnesium status
indicators and oxidative metabolism responses to low-dietary
magnesium are affected by dietary copper in postmenopausal women.
Nutrition 2003 ; 19 : 617-626.
31. Nielsen FH, Milne DB, Gallagher S, Johnson L,
Hoverson B. Moderate magnesium deprivation results in calcium
retention and altered potassium and phosphorus excretion by
postmenopausal women. Magnes Res 2007 ; 20 : 19-31.
32. Nielsen FH, Milne DB, Klevay LM, Gallagher S, Johnson
L. Dietary magnesium deficiency induces heart rhythm changes,
impairs glucose tolerance, and decreases serum cholesterol in post
menopausal women. J Am Coll Nutr 2007 ; 26 : 121-132.
33. Paolisso G, Sgambato S, Gambardella A, Pizza G,
Tesauro P, Varricchio M, D’Onofrio F. Daily magnesium supplements
improve glucose handling in elderly subjects. Am J Clin Nutr
1992 ; 55 : 1161-1167.
34. Sacks FM, Willett WC, Smith A, Brown LE, Rosner B,
Moore T.J. Effect on blood pressure of potassium, calcium, and
magnesium in women with low habitual intake. Hypertension
1998 ; 31 : 131-138.
35. Walker AF, De Souza MC, Marakis G, Robinson PA,
Morris AP, Bolland K.M. Unexpected benefit of sorbitol placebo in
Mg intervention study of premenstrual symptoms: implications for
choice of placebo in RCTs. Med Hypotheses 2002 ; 58 :
213-220.
36. Walker AF, De Souza MC, Vickers MF, Abeyasekera S,
Collins ML, Trinca L.A. Magnesium supplementation alleviates
premenstrual symptoms of fluid retention. J Womens Health
1998 ; 7 : 1157-1165.
37. Walker AF, Marakis G, Christie S, Byng M. Mg citrate
found more bioavailable than other Mg preparations in a randomised,
double-blind study. Magnes Res 2003 ; 16 : 183-191.
38. Závaczki Z, Szöllosi J, Kiss SA, Koloszár S, Fejes I,
Kovács L, Pál A. Magnesium-orotate supplementation for idiopathic
infertile male patients: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical
pilot study. Magnes Res 2003 ; 16 : 131-136.
39. Zorbas YG, Kakurin VJ, Afonin VB, Charapakhin KP,
Denogradov S.D. Magnesium supplements’ effect on magnesium balance
in athletes during prolonged restriction of muscular activity.
Kidney Blood Press Res 1999 ; 22 : 146-153.
40. Huijgen HJ, Sanders R, Cecco SA, Rehak NN, Sanders
GT, Elin R.J. Serum ionized magnesium: comparison of results
obtained with three ion-selective analyzers. Clin Chem Lab
Med 1999 ; 37 : 465-470.
41. Song Y, Ridker PM, Manson JE, Cook NR, Buring JE, Liu
S. Magnesium intake, C-reactive protein, and the prevalence of
metabolic syndrome in middle-aged and older U.S. women.
Diabetes Care 2005 ; 28 : 1438-1444.
42. He K, Liu K, Daviglus ML, Morris SJ, Loria CM, Van
Horn L, Jacobs DR, Jr.Savage P.J. Magnesium intake and incidence of
metabolic syndrome among young adults. Circulation 2006 ;
113 : 1675-1682.
43. Ford ES, Li C, McGuire LC, Mokdad AH, Liu S. Intake
of dietary magnesium and the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome
among U.S. adults. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2007 ; 15 :
1139-1146.
44. King DE, Mainous AG, 3rd.Geesey ME, Ellis T.
Magnesium intake and serum C-reactive protein levels in children.
Magnes Res 2007 ; 20 : 32-36.
45. Beydoun MA, Gary TL, Caballero BH, Lawrence RS,
Cheskin LJ, Wang Y. Ethnic differences in dairy and related
nutrient consumption among US adults and their association with
obesity, central obesity, and the metabolic syndrome. Am J Clin
Nutr 2008 ; 87 : 1914-1925.
46. McKeown NM, Jacques PF, Zhang XL, Juan W, Sahyoun
N.R. Dietary magnesium intake is related to metabolic syndrome in
older Americans. Eur J Nutr 2008 ; 47 : 210-216.
47. King D.E. Inflammation and elevation of C-reactive
protein: does magnesium play a key role?. Magnes Res 2009 ;
22 : 57-59.
48. Chacko SA, Song Y, Nathan L, Tinker L, de Boer IH,
Tylavsky F, Wallace R, Liu S. Relations of dietary magnesium intake
to biomarkers of inflammation and endothelial dysfunction in an
ethnically diverse cohort of postmenopausal women. Diabetes
Care 2010 ; 33 : 304-310.
49. Kao WH, Folsom AR, Nieto FJ, Mo JP, Watson RL,
Brancati F.L. Serum and dietary magnesium and the risk for
type 2 diabetes mellitus: the atherosclerosis risk in
communities study. Arch Intern Med 1999 ; 159 :
2151-2159.
50. Corica F, Corsonello A, Ientile R, Cucinotta D, Di
Benedetto A, Perticone F, Dominguez LJ, Barbagallo M. Serum ionized
magnesium levels in relation to metabolic syndrome in type 2
diabetic patients. J Am Coll Nutr 2006 ; 25 : 210-215.
51. Rayssiguier Y, Gueux E, Nowacki W, Rock E, Mazur A.
High fructose consumption combined with low dietary magnesium
intake may increase the incidence of the metabolic syndrome by
inducing inflammation. Magnes Res 2006 ; 19 : 237-243.
52. Belin RJ, He K. Magnesium physiology and pathogenic
mechanisms that contribute to the development of the metabolic
syndrome. Magnes Res 2007 ; 20 : 107-129.
53. Simmons D, Joshi S, Shaw J. Hypomagnesaemia is
associated with diabetes: not pre-diabetes, obesity or the
metabolic syndrome. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2010 ; 87 :
261-266.
54. Lima Mde L, Cruz T, Rodrigues LE, Bomfim O, Melo J,
Correia R, Porto M, Cedro A, Vicente E. Serum and intracellular
magnesium deficiency in patients with metabolic syndrome-evidences
for its relation to insulin resistance. Diabetes Res Clin
Pract 2009 ; 83 : 257-262.
55. Günther T. Biochemical mechanisms of the metabolic
syndrome and the role of magnesium. Magnes Res 2010 ; 23 :
142-145.
56. Rayssiguier Y, Libako P, Nowacki W, Rock E. Magnesium
deficiency and metabolic syndrome: stress and inflammation may
reflect calcium activation. Magnes Res 2010 ; 23 :
73-80.
57. Guerrero-Romero F, Bermudez-Peña C, Rodríguez-Morán
M. Severe hypomagnesemia and low-grade inflammation in metabolic
syndrome. Magnes Res 2011 ; 24 : 45-53.
58. Coudray C, Rambeau M, Feillet-Coudray C, Gueux E,
Tressol JC, Mazur A, Rayssiguier Y. Study of magnesium
bioavailability from ten organic and inorganic Mg salts in
Mg-depleted rats using a stable isotope approach. Magnes Res
2005 ; 18 : 215-223.
59. Hunt CD, Johnson L.K. Magnesium requirements: new
estimations for men and women by cross-sectional statistical
analyses of metabolic magnesium balance data. Am J Clin Nutr
2006 ; 84 : 843-852.
60. Hunter DJ, Lange M, Snieder H, MacGregor AJ,
Swaminathan R, Thakker RV, Spector T.D. Genetic contribution to
renal function and electrolyte balance: a twin study. Clin Sci
(Lond) 2002 ; 103 : 259-265.
61. Henrotte JG, Pla M, Dausset J. HLA- and
H-2-associated variations of intra- and extracellular magnesium
content. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1990 ; 87 : 1894-1898.
62. Feillet-Coudray C, Coudray C, Wolf FI, Henrotte JG,
Rayssiguier Y, Mazur A. Magnesium metabolism in mice selected for
high and low erythrocyte magnesium levels. Metabolism 2004 ;
53 : 660-665.
63. Schmitz C, Deason F, Perraud A.L. Molecular
components of vertebrate Mg2+-homeostasis regulation. Magnes
Res 2007 ; 20 : 6-18.
64. Alexander RT, Hoenderop JG, Bindels R.J. Molecular
determinants of magnesium homeostasis: insights from human disease.
J Am Soc Nephrol 2008 ; 19 : 1451-1458.
65. Quamme G.A. Molecular identification of ancient and
modern mammalian magnesium transporters. Am J Physiol Cell
Physiol 2010 ; 298 : C407-C429.
66. Meyer TE, Verwoert GC, Hwang SJ, Glazer NL, Smith AV,
van Rooij FJ, Ehret GB, Boerwinkle E, Felix JF, Leak TS, Harris TB,
Yang Q, Dehghan A, Aspelund T, Katz R, Homuth G, Kocher T, Rettig
R, Ried JS, Gieger C, Prucha H, Pfeufer A, Meitinger T, Coresh J,
Hofman A, Sarnak MJ, Chen YD, Uitterlinden AG, Chakravarti A, Psaty
BM, van Duijn CM, Kao WH, Witteman JC, Gudnason V, Siscovick DS,
Fox CS, Köttgen A Genetic Factors for Osteoporosis Consortium; Meta
Analysis of Glucose and Insulin Related Traits
ConsortiumGenome-wide association studies of serum magnesium,
potassium, and sodium concentrations identify six loci influencing
serum magnesium levels. PLoS Genet 2010 ; 6 : e1001045.
|