Heliodoro Alemán-Mateo1, Miriam T López Teros2, Fátima A Ramírez2, Humberto Astiazarán-García2. 1. Coordinación de Nutrición, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo A.C., Hermosillo, Sonora, México. helio@ciad.mx. 2. Coordinación de Nutrición, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo A.C., Hermosillo, Sonora, México.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been hypothesized that insulin resistance plays a role in the development of the loss of skeletal muscle; however, no cohort studies on insulin resistance and low relative appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) have been published to date. Thus, we examined whether insulin resistance is associated with low relative ASM after a 4.6-year follow-up period among apparently healthy older men and women participants. METHODS: This is a combined retrospective-prospective cohort study, which includes 147 community-dwelling older men and women participants. ASM was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and follow-up. Participants with a relative change in ASM below the sex-specific 15th value were classified as the low relative ASM group. Homeostatic model assessment was used to quantify insulin resistance. Logistic regression calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for development of low relative ASM, adjusted for covariates. RESULTS: The loss of ASM in the low relative ASM and normal groups was -1.8kg and -0.35kg, respectively (p ≤ .05). The low relative ASM group was older and had higher insulin and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance values at baseline. The risk of developing low relative ASM at 4.6-year follow-up was 2.9 times higher (95% CI, 1.00-7.8; p = .04) among the participants with homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance levels more than 2.3. After adjusting for age, the risk increased to 3.9 times higher (95% CI, 1.3-11.5; p = .03). CONCLUSION: Insulin resistance was associated with low relative ASM at 4.6-year follow-up after accounting for several covariates in a cohort of apparently healthy, well-functioning young older men and women.
BACKGROUND: It has been hypothesized that insulin resistance plays a role in the development of the loss of skeletal muscle; however, no cohort studies on insulin resistance and low relative appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) have been published to date. Thus, we examined whether insulin resistance is associated with low relative ASM after a 4.6-year follow-up period among apparently healthy older men and womenparticipants. METHODS: This is a combined retrospective-prospective cohort study, which includes 147 community-dwelling older men and womenparticipants. ASM was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and follow-up. Participants with a relative change in ASM below the sex-specific 15th value were classified as the low relative ASM group. Homeostatic model assessment was used to quantify insulin resistance. Logistic regression calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for development of low relative ASM, adjusted for covariates. RESULTS: The loss of ASM in the low relative ASM and normal groups was -1.8kg and -0.35kg, respectively (p ≤ .05). The low relative ASM group was older and had higher insulin and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance values at baseline. The risk of developing low relative ASM at 4.6-year follow-up was 2.9 times higher (95% CI, 1.00-7.8; p = .04) among the participants with homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance levels more than 2.3. After adjusting for age, the risk increased to 3.9 times higher (95% CI, 1.3-11.5; p = .03). CONCLUSION:Insulin resistance was associated with low relative ASM at 4.6-year follow-up after accounting for several covariates in a cohort of apparently healthy, well-functioning young older men and women.
Authors: Nicola Napoli; Caterina Conte; Claudio Pedone; Elsa S Strotmeyer; Kamil E Barbour; Dennis M Black; Elizabeth J Samelson; Ann V Schwartz Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Mariana Murea; Leon Lenchik; Thomas C Register; Gregory B Russell; Jianzhao Xu; S Carrie Smith; Donald W Bowden; Jasmin Divers; Barry I Freedman Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: E Poggiogalle; C Lubrano; G Sergi; A Coin; L Gnessi; S Mariani; A Lenzi; L M Donini Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2016 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Laura Micheli; Emma Mitidieri; Carlotta Turnaturi; Domenico Vanacore; Clara Ciampi; Elena Lucarini; Giuseppe Cirino; Carla Ghelardini; Raffaella Sorrentino; Lorenzo Di Cesare Mannelli; Roberta d'Emmanuele di Villa Bianca Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Mary C Masters; Jingyan Yang; Jordan E Lake; Alison G Abraham; Lawrence Kingsley; Todd T Brown; Frank J Palella; Kristine M Erlandson Journal: AIDS Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 4.632
Authors: Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas; Javier Angulo; José A Carnicero; Mariam El Assar; Francisco J García-García; Alan J Sinclair Journal: Geroscience Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 7.581