Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Insulin resistance in adolescents with Down syndrome: a cross-sectional study

  • Cristina T Fonseca1Email author,
  • Daniela M Amaral1,
  • Márcia G Ribeiro2,
  • Izabel CR Beserra3 and
  • Marília M Guimarães3, 4
Contributed equally
BMC Endocrine Disorders20055:6

DOI: 10.1186/1472-6823-5-6

Received: 03 February 2005

Accepted: 17 June 2005

Published: 17 June 2005

Abstract

Background

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus is higher in individuals with Down syndrome (DS) than in the general population; it may be due to the high prevalence of obesity presented by many of them. The aim of this study was to evaluate the insulin resistance (IR) using the HOMA (Homeostasis Model Assessment) method, in DS adolescents, describing it according to the sex, body mass index (BMI) and pubertal development.

Methods

15 adolescents with DS (8 males and 7 females) were studied, aged 10 to 18 years, without history of disease or use of medication that could change the suggested laboratory evaluation. On physical examination, the pubertal signs, acanthosis nigricans (AN), weight and height were evaluated. Fasting plasma glucose and insulin were analysed by the colorimetric method and RIA-kit LINCO, respectively. IR was calculated using the HOMA method. The patients were grouped into obese, overweight and normal, according to their BMI percentiles. The EPIINFO 2004 software was used to calculate the BMI, its percentile and Z score.

Results

Five patients were adults (Tanner V or presence of menarche), 9 pubertal (Tanner II – IV) and 1 prepubertal (Tanner I). No one had AN. Two were obese, 4 overweight and 9 normal. Considering the total number of patients, HOMA was 1.7 ± 1.0, insulin 9.3 ± 4.8 μU/ml and glucose 74.4 ± 14.8 mg/dl. The HOMA values were 2.0 ± 1.0 in females and 1.5 ± 1.0 in males. Considering the nutritional classification, the values of HOMA and insulin were: HOMA: 3.3 ± 0.6, 2.0 ± 1.1 and 1.3 ± 0.6, and insulin: 18.15 ± 1.6 μU/ml, 10.3 ± 3.5 μU/ml and 6.8 ± 2.8 μU/ml, in the obese, overweight and normal groups respectively. Considering puberty, the values of HOMA and insulin were: HOMA: 2.5 ± 1.3, 1.4 ± 0.6 and 0.8 ± 0.0, and insulin: 13.0 ± 5.8 μU/ml, 7.8 ± 2.9 μU/ml and 4.0 ± 0.0 μU/ml, in the adult, pubertal and prepubertal groups respectively.

Conclusion

The obese and overweight, female and adult patients showed the highest values of HOMA and insulin.

Background

Down syndrome (DS) is a common chromosomal disorder, affecting 1 per 700 live births [1]. Life expectancy has increased in the last decades, due to the improvement of the scientific knowledge about the syndrome and its acquired complications, and also, due to the easier access and the more recent diagnostic and therapeutic means for the patients, their families and the multiprofessional health team that accompany them [2, 3].

Early hypotonicity and typical dimorphisms are among the clinical characteristics of the syndrome. There is a higher incidence of diseases in various organic systems, including the endocrinologic system, such as diabetes mellitus among others [4].

Diabetes mellitus has a higher prevalence in DS than in the general population [4, 5]. It can appear as an autoimmune disorder (type 1 diabetes mellitus) or as a disorder in which the insulin resistance is the predominant physiopathological factor (type 2 diabetes mellitus) [68].

Insulin resistance may present without any clinical manifestation, often, many years before the appearance of frank diabetes mellitus, which would occur when the pancreas failed to secrete enough insulin to compensate such resistance and keep the person euglycemic [6]. Therefore, it would be interesting to know the level of insulin resistance in this syndrome, since adolescence, as diabetes mellitus evolve with several complications which would further increase the morbidity and mortality of this population. This way, preventive measures could be applied, such as giving the patient adequate dietetic orientations and leading him to an early consultation with a nutrition service, stimulating and developing special programs of physical activity, treating those who have insulin resistance with medications, which may be a therapeutic option in the future.

The aim of this study was to estimate the insulin resistance (IR) through the HOMA (Homeostasis Model Assessment) method, in adolescents with DS, and to describe it according to the sex, body mass index (BMI) and presence of puberty.

Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional study was designed with 15 out patient adolescents (8 males and 7 females) with Down syndrome, aged 10 to 18 years.

Adolescents with previously known diabetes mellitus or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or impaired fasting glucose (IFG) were excluded from this study. Furthermore, the studied patients did not have any comorbidity and did not use any medication that could compromise the suggested laboratory evaluation, such as anti-hyperlipidemia drugs, topic or systemic glucocorticoids, anti-hypertensive drugs, sexual steroids and GnRH analogues.

The local Institutional Ethical Committee approved the study and the informed consent was obtained from all patients' parents or tutors.

The adolescents were measured and weighed; the stature was annotated in meters and the weight in kilograms. They were also submitted to physical examination, including the evaluation of the presence of acanthosis nigricans and the pubertal developmental degree according to Tanner's stage [9]. Considering puberty, they were grouped, as follows:

• Prepubertal – absence of sexual development;

• Pubertal – pubertal development according to Tanner's stage II to IV;

• Adult – pubertal development according to Tanner's stage V or menarche in girls.

Blood samples were collected after a 12-hour overnight fasting period, for the analysis of plasma glucose and insulin. The glucose levels were analysed by the colorimetric method, considering the normal range from 70 to 100 mg/dl, according to the American Diabetes Association, 2003. Insulin levels were analysed by a radioimmunoassay kit (Linco Research Incorporation). This kit is specific for human insulin and does not cross react with pro-insulin (<0.2%). The normal fasting range, for adults, after an 18-hour fasting period, varies from 5 to 15 μU/ml. The method's sensitivity is <2 μU/ml, specificity is 100% and the range value within and between assay variations are 3.1% and 6.0% respectively.

Insulin resistance was calculated according to the HOMA method, through the formula: {[glucose(mg/dl)/18] X insulin(μU/mL)}/ 22.5 [10].

The EPIINFO software version 2004, provided the BMI and its percentile and Z score.

The adolescents were grouped by the nutritional status according to the National Center for Health Statistics 2000 – Center for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC – NCHS) as follows [11]:

• Undernourished – BMI percentile below 5;

• Normal -BMI percentiles 5 to 85;

• Overweight -BMI percentiles 85 to 95;

• Obese – BMI percentile above 95.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 12.9 ± 2.6 years (varying from 10 to 18 years); none had acanthosis nigricans. Considering puberty, 5 were adults,9 pubertal and 1 prepubertal, and regarding the nutritional status, 2 (13.3%) were obese, 4 (26.7%) overweight and 9 (60%) normal (Table 1). The mean BMI was 20.9 ± 4.3 (from 15.5 to 29.6) and the mean BMI Z score was +0.55 ± 0.9.
Table 1

Distribution of patients' data.

CA

Sex

BMI

BMIp

BMI Z

Puberty

Glucose (mg/dl)

Insulin (μU/ml)

HOMA

10y

F

15.7

29.01

-0.55

Pubertal

52

4.4

0.6

10y5m

M

17.8

64.79

0.38

Pubertal

71

5.4

0.9

10y7m

F

20.7

86.11

1.09

Pubertal

74

10.9

2.0

10y9m

F

19.9

80.09

0.84

Pubertal

74

13.7

2.5

10y9m

M

15.5

20.5

-0.82

Prepubertal

85

4.0

0.8

11y4m

F

26.1

96.81

1.85

Adult

60

19.3

2.9

11y11m

M

17.2

39.23

-0.27

Pubertal

72

6.0

1.1

12y4m

M

19.4

69.16

0.5

Pubertal

98

7.6

1.8

12y4m

F

16

15.17

-1.03

Pubertal

81

6.9

1.4

13y1m

M

22.6

88.02

1.18

Pubertal

53

7.4

1.0

13y1m

M

23.7

91.93

1.4

Pubertal

69

8.0

1.4

15y6m

F

19.8

44.94

-0.13

Adult

82

6.3

1.3

16y4m

F

26.3

89.93

1.28

Adult

97

15

3.6

16y10m

M

23.7

78

0.77

Adult

57

7.4

1.0

18y

M

29.6

95.93

1.74

Adult

91

17

3.8

CA = chronological age; M = male; F = female; BMIp = BMI percentile; BMI Z = BMI Z score.

Considering the total number of patients, the mean values were: HOMA = 1.7 ± 1.0 (from 0.6 to 3.8), insulin = 9.3 ± 4.8 μU/ml (from 4.0 to 19.3 μU/ml) and glucose = 74.4 ± 14.8 mg/dl (from 52 to 98 mg/dl). Considering sex, the mean values of HOMA were 2.0 ± 1.0 in females and 1.5 ± 1.0 in males.

Considering the subgroups, divided by the nutritional status, the mean values were: HOMA: 3.3 ± 0.6, 2.0 ± 1.1 and 1.3 ± 0.6, and insulin: 18.15 ± 1.6 μU/ml, 10.3 ± 3.5 μU/ml and 6.8 ± 2.8 μU/ml, in the obese, overweight and normal, respectively (Figure 1).
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6823-5-6/MediaObjects/12902_2005_Article_19_Fig1_HTML.jpg
Figure 1

Mean values of HOMA and insulin according to the nutritional classification. The highest values of HOMA and insulin were found in the obese, followed by the overweight, and lastly, by the normal-weighed patients.

Considering puberty, the mean values were: HOMA: 2.5 ± 1.3, 1.4 ± 0.6 and 0.8 ± 0.0, and insulin: 13.0 ± 5.8 μU/ml, 7.8 ± 2.9 μU/ml and 4.0 ± 0.0 μU/ml, in the adult, pubertal and prepubertal groups, respectively (Figure 2).
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1472-6823-5-6/MediaObjects/12902_2005_Article_19_Fig2_HTML.jpg
Figure 2

Mean values of HOMA and insulin according to the pubertal classification. The highest values of HOMA and insulin were found in the adult, followed by the pubertal, and lastly, by the prepubertal patients.

Discussion

Insulin resistance may be defined as a diminished response to the biological actions of insulin; it may involve not only the carbohydrate metabolism, but also the lipid metabolism [12]. In pharmacological terms, it represents a state in which normal amounts of insulin produce a subnormal biological response. It is characterized by hyperinsulinemia and can be associated with normoglycemia or hyperglycemia [13].

The hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp has been regarded as the standard method to evaluate insulin resistance. Considering that it is a difficult and relatively invasive technique that requires a specialized team and, in general, it is not available to the clinical practice [14], researchers have been studying other more practical methods that would be able to measure insulin resistance. One of these studied methods is the HOMA method, a mathematic model based on measurement of fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels, which is especially useful for DS patients in whom the use of other methods based on the results of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), for example, would be extremely difficult to perform. Although it is not as sensitive or reproducible a measure of IR as the clamp technique, it has been validated both in adults [10, 14] and in children and adolescents without DS [15, 16] and, for this reason, it has been extensively used, not only in epidemiological studies, but also in clinical practice [10].

In Down syndrome there is a high prevalence of overweight and obesity [1719] and one study suggests that there may be a different distribution of body fat, more truncal than peripheral, in such children, which may represent only one more trait of the syndrome or be the result of the muscle hypotonicity that is well known to be part of the syndrome's characteristics, and this may reduce the activity level and energy needs of these patients [17]. Therefore, the higher frequency of type 2 diabetes mellitus in DS may be associated not only with the higher propensity for obesity, but also with large abdominal fat stores, reflecting larger amounts of visceral adiposity, which may contribute to insulin resistance [20, 21] and consequently, to the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in a variable period of time. Such correlation between type 2 diabetes mellitus and the higher proportion of body fat mass, mainly concentrated in the abdominal region, has also been demonstrated by some studies involving type 2 diabetic, non-obese [21] or obese individuals, without DS [13].

Android obesity, that is, the obesity in which there is accumulation of fat in the central region of the body, especially in the abdomen, is more associated with insulin resistance than the gynecoid obesity [20]. It is also known that the visceral adipocytes, when compared to the subcutaneous, have a higher basal lipolysis, are poorly sensitive to insulin and that such characteristics are amplified when they show hypertrophy [22]. Consequently, this increase in lipolysis offers more free fatty acids to the liver, which stimulates, this way, the liver production of glucose and the inhibition of glucose uptake and its oxidation in muscle tissue [23]. In an attempt to keep euglycemia, insulin secretion increases and the resultant compensatory hyperinsulinemia, in obese patients, reduces the expression of the membrane insulin receptor (down regulation), which generates more resistance to the insulin action [24].

In the present study, the highest values of HOMA were found in the obese and overweight patients, but we can not affirm if such patients really have insulin resistance, as there is no consensus for ideal HOMA values for children and adolescents and much less for patients with DS. No references about insulin resistance indexes in DS were found in literature. Nevertheless, comparing our results to those showed in some studies involving youth without DS, such as the study of Yeckel et al [25], we could say that none of our patients had IR because such authors found mean values of HOMA of about 7.00 for normal glucose tolerant children and adolescents without DS, based on clamp and OGTT studies, while our highest HOMA value was 3.8. Nevertheless, such study involved exclusively moderate to severe obese patients whose BMI was much higher than that of our obese patients (38.1 × 27.8 respectively), fact that may have contributed to the highest values of HOMA presented by them, confirming the direct relation between obesity and HOMA values, which is in accordance with our results. Moreover, our sample involved just 2 obese patients; most of them had normal weight. On the other hand, Allard et al showed lower mean values of HOMA, ranging from 0.83 to 1.62 in a representative sample of 2244 children and adolescents without DS [26]. A study performed in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, with normal-weighed healthy students, also without DS, suggested a mean value of HOMA of 2.36 for girls and 2.66 for boys, using the same method of insulin dosage as the one used in our study [27]. Based on such reference values of Brazilian children and adolescents, we found 4 (26.7%) patients (3 females and 1 male) in our study with insulin resistance when assessed through the HOMA method. Among them, 2 had obesity, 1 overweight and the other, normal weight, that is, 100% (2/2) of the obese, 25% (1/4) of the overweight and 11.1% (1/9) of the normal weight groups had insulin resistance. Unfortunately, our small sample did not permit us to confirm these data with statistical analysis as referred in previous reports that correlated obesity and insulin resistance, in obese patients, without DS [28, 29].

We also found higher HOMA values in adolescents with complete pubertal development than in the pubertal ones, which was similar to literature data; this fact demonstrates that puberty represents a period marked by higher levels of insulin resistance not only in healthy adolescents, but also in those with DS [13, 30]. Nevertheless, healthy adolescents have physiological compensatory mechanisms that avoid the appearance of deleterious effects in the future that could result from this reduction in insulin action, whereas in DS, it may be that mechanisms fail in the adolescent years, resulting in higher insulin resistance levels than in the healthy population of the same age. The detection of higher HOMA values in females than in males has been previously described in literature, but only in adults and in clinically healthy patients [13].

Conclusion

We conclude that the obese and overweight, female and adult patients showed the highest values of HOMA and insulin. Nevertheless, additional studies are necessary, including larger samples and longitudinal follow-up in order to confirm the high prevalence of insulin resistance in Down syndrome, especially in the obese patients, and to verify if the patients with the highest values of HOMA may develop any glucose metabolism disturbance in the future.

Notes

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We especially thank to Sérgio Franco Laboratory, on the person of Dalva Margareth Boelter dos Santos, for the insulin analysis.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Post-Graduate Program of Endocrinology, Medicine School, Hospital Universitário Clementino Fraga Filho (HUCFF), Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) - Av. Brigadeiro Trompowski
(2)
Genetics Department, Instituto de Puericultura e Pediatria Martagão Gesteira (IPPMG), UFRJ - Av. Brigadeiro Trompowski
(3)
Pediatrics Department, IPPMG, UFRJ - Av. Brigadeiro Trompowski
(4)
Endocrinology Department - HUCFF, UFRJ - Av. Brigadeiro Trompowski

References

  1. Sugayama SMM, Kim CA: Anormalidades Cromossômicas. Endocrinologia Pediátrica – Aspectos físicos e metabólicos do recém-nascido ao adolescente. Edited by: Setian N. 2002, Sĕo Paulo, Brazil, Sarvier, 638-639.Google Scholar
  2. Cooley WC, Graham JM: Down syndrome – an update and review for the primary pediatrician. Clin Pediatr. 1991, 30 (4): 233-242.Google Scholar
  3. Baird PA, Sadovnick AD: Life expectancy in Down syndrome. J Pediatr. 1987, 110: 849-854.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Smith DS: Health care management of adults with Down syndrome. Am Fam Physician. 2001, 64 (6): 1031-1038.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Milunsky A, Neurath PW: Diabetes mellitus in Down's syndrome. Arch Environ Health. 1968, 17: 372-376. Quoted from: Ohyama Y, Utsugi T, Uchiyama T, Hanaoka T, Tomono S, Kurabayashi M: Prevalence of diabetes in adult patients with Down's syndrome living in a residential home. Diabetes Care 2000, 23 (5): 705–706.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Amiel SA, Buchanan CR: Diabetes mellitus. Clinical Pediatric Endocrinology. Edited by: Brook CGD, Hindmarsh PC. 2001, England, Blackwell Science Ltd, 411-439.Google Scholar
  7. Sperling MA: Diabetes mellitus. Pediatric Endocrinology. Edited by: Sperling MA. 2002, United States of America, Saunders, 323-366.Google Scholar
  8. Chen H: Down syndrome. Access on: June 2003, [http://www.emedicine.com]
  9. Marshall WA, Tanner JM: Variations in the pattern of pubertal changes in girls. Arch Dis Child. 1969, 44: 291-303. Quoted from: Rosenfield RL: Puberty in the female and its disorders. In: Pediatric Endocrinology. Edited by Sperling MA. United States of America, Saunders 2002, 455-518.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Matthews DR, Hosker JP, Rudenski AS, Naylor BA, Treacher DF, Turner RC: Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and β-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia. 1985, 28 (7): 412-419. 10.1007/BF00280883.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. National Center for Health Statistics. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion and Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Access on: July 2003, [http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/]
  12. Wallace TM, Matthews DR: The assessment of insulin resistance in man. Diabetic Medicine. 2002, 19: 527-534. 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2002.00745.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Krentz AJ: Fortnightly review: insulin resistance. BMJ. 1996, 313: 1385-1389.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Bonora E, Targher G, Alberiche M, Bonadonna RC, Saggiani F, Zenere MB, Monauni T, Muggeo M: Homeostasis model assessment closely mirrors the glucose clamp technique in the assessment of insulin sensitivity. Diabetes Care. 2000, 23 (1): 57-63.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gungor N, Saad R, Janosky J, Arslanian S: Validation of surrogate estimates of insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion in children and adolescents. J Pediatr. 2004, 144 (1): 47-55. 10.1016/j.jpeds.2003.09.045.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Uwaifo GI, Fallon EM, Chin J, Elberg J, Parikh SJ, Yanovski JA: Indices of insulin action, disposal, and secretion derived from fasting samples and clamps in normal glucose-tolerant black and white children. Diabetes Care. 2002, 25 (11): 2081-2087.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Baer MT, Waldron J, Gumm H, van Dyke DC, Chang H: Nutrition assessment of the child with Down syndrome. Clinical perspectives in the management of Down syndrome. Edited by: van Dyke DC, Lang DJ, Heide F, van Duyne S, Soucek MJ. 1990, United States of America, Springer-Verlag New York Inc, 107-125.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Cronk CE, Chumlea WC, Roche AF: Assessment of overweight children with trisomy 21. Am J Ment Defic. 1985, 89 (4): 433-436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Al Husain M: Body mass index for Saudi children with Down's syndrome. Acta Paediatr. 2003, 92 (12): 1482-1485. 10.1080/08035250310006656.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Bjorntorp P: Metabolic implications of body fat distribution. Diabetes Care. 1991, 14: 1132-1143.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Banerji MA, Chaiken RL, Gordon D, Kral JG, Lebovitz HE: Does intra-abdominal adipose tissue in black men determine whether NIDDM is insulin-resistant or insulin-sensitive?. Diabetes. 1995, 44: 141-146.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. McCarty MF: Modulation of adipocyte lipoprotein lipase expression as a strategy for preventing or treating visceral obesity. Med Hypotheses. 2001, 57 (2): 192-200. 10.1054/mehy.2001.1317.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Boden G, Chen X, Ruiz J, White JV, Rossetti L: Mechanisms of fatty-acid induced inhibition of glucose uptake. J Clin Invest. 1994, 93 (6): 2438-2446.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Seely BL, Olefsky JM: Potential celular and genetic mechanisms for insulin resistance in the common disorders of diabetes and obesity. Insulin resistance. Edited by: Moller D. 1993, Chichester, Wiley, 187-252.Google Scholar
  25. Yeckel CW, Weiss R, Dziura J, Taksali SE, Dufour S, Burgert TS, Tamborlane WV, Caprio S: Validation of insulin sensitivity indices from oral glucose tolerance test parameters in obese children and adolescents. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004, 89 (3): 1096-1101. 10.1210/jc.2003-031503.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Allard P, Delvin EE, Paradis G, Hanley JA, O'Loughlin J, Lavallée C, Levy E, Lambert M: Distribution of fasting plasma insulin, free fatty acids, and glucose concentrations and of Homeostasis Model Assessment of insulin resistance in a representative sample of Quebec children and adolescents. Clin Chem. 2003, 49 (4): 644-649. 10.1373/49.4.644.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Pessoa CHCN, Pessoa MBHCN, Amaral DM, Teixeira AM, Cunha EF, Guimarães MM, Cordeiro JGH: Estudo do Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA) em grupo de escolares saudáveis. Arq Bras Endocrinol Metab. 2003, 47 (2 supp 1): 101-Google Scholar
  28. Guzzaloni G, Grugni G, Mazzilli G, Moro D, Morabito F: Comparison Between β-cell Function and Insulin Resistance Indexes in Prepubertal and Pubertal Obese Children. Metabolism. 2002, 51 (8): 1011-1016. 10.1053/meta.2002.34029.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Barja S, Arteaga A, Acosta AM, Hodgson MI: Resistencia Insulínica y otras expresiones del síndrome metabólico em niños obesos chilenos. Rev Méd Chile. 2003, 131 (3): 259-268.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Amiel SA, Sherwin RS, Simonson DC, Luaritano AA, Tamborlane WV: Impaired insulin action in puberty: a contributing factor to poor glycemic control during adolescence. N Engl J Med. 1986, 315: 215-219.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Pre-publication history

    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6823/5/6/prepub

Copyright

© da Fonseca et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2005

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement