Didier Chalhoub1, Peggy M Cawthon2, Kristine E Ensrud3, Marcia L Stefanick4, Deborah M Kado5, Robert Boudreau1, Susan Greenspan1, Anne B Newman1, Joseph Zmuda1, Eric S Orwoll6, Jane A Cauley1. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, California. 3. Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesot aand Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 4. School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 5. University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California. 6. Oregon Health & Sciences University, Portland, Oregon.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that men and women with low bone mineral density (BMD) and sarcopenia have a higher risk of fracture than those with only one or neither conditions. DESIGN: The Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study and the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures in women are prospective observational studies with a mean follow up of 9 (2000-2012) and 8 years (1997-2009), respectively. SETTING: U.S. clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Men (n = 5,544; mean age 73.7) and women (n = 1,114; mean age 77.6) aged 65 and older, able to walk without assistance, and without bilateral hip replacement. MEASUREMENTS: Sarcopenia was defined as low appendicular lean mass plus slowness or weakness and low BMD according to the World Health Organization definition of a T-score less than -1.0. Participants were classified as having normal BMD and no sarcopenia (3,367 men, 308 women), sarcopenia only (79 men, 48 women), low BMD only (1,986 men, 626 women), and low BMD and sarcopenia (112 men, 132 women). RESULTS: Men with low BMD and sarcopenia (hazard ratio (HR)=3.79, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.65-5.41) and men with low BMD only (HR=1.67, 95% CI=1.45-1.93) but not men with sarcopenia only (HR=1.14, 95% CI=0.62-2.09) had greater risk of fracture than men with normal BMD and no sarcopenia. Women with low BMD and sarcopenia (HR=2.27, 95% CI=1.37-3.76) and women with low BMD alone (HR=2.62, 95% CI=1.74-3.95), but not women with only sarcopenia, had greater risk of fracture than women with normal BMD and no sarcopenia. CONCLUSION: Men with low BMD and sarcopenia are at especially high risk of fracture. Sarcopenia alone did not increase fracture risk in either group.
OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that men and women with low bone mineral density (BMD) and sarcopenia have a higher risk of fracture than those with only one or neither conditions. DESIGN: The Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study and the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures in women are prospective observational studies with a mean follow up of 9 (2000-2012) and 8 years (1997-2009), respectively. SETTING: U.S. clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Men (n = 5,544; mean age 73.7) and women (n = 1,114; mean age 77.6) aged 65 and older, able to walk without assistance, and without bilateral hip replacement. MEASUREMENTS: Sarcopenia was defined as low appendicular lean mass plus slowness or weakness and low BMD according to the World Health Organization definition of a T-score less than -1.0. Participants were classified as having normal BMD and no sarcopenia (3,367 men, 308 women), sarcopenia only (79 men, 48 women), low BMD only (1,986 men, 626 women), and low BMD and sarcopenia (112 men, 132 women). RESULTS:Men with low BMD and sarcopenia (hazard ratio (HR)=3.79, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.65-5.41) and men with low BMD only (HR=1.67, 95% CI=1.45-1.93) but not men with sarcopenia only (HR=1.14, 95% CI=0.62-2.09) had greater risk of fracture than men with normal BMD and no sarcopenia. Women with low BMD and sarcopenia (HR=2.27, 95% CI=1.37-3.76) and women with low BMD alone (HR=2.62, 95% CI=1.74-3.95), but not women with only sarcopenia, had greater risk of fracture than women with normal BMD and no sarcopenia. CONCLUSION:Men with low BMD and sarcopenia are at especially high risk of fracture. Sarcopenia alone did not increase fracture risk in either group.
Authors: Nathan K Lebrasseur; Sara J Achenbach; L Joseph Melton; Shreyasee Amin; Sundeep Khosla Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Eric Orwoll; Janet Babich Blank; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Jane Cauley; Steven Cummings; Kristine Ensrud; Cora Lewis; Peggy M Cawthon; Robert Marcus; Lynn M Marshall; Joan McGowan; Kathy Phipps; Sherry Sherman; Marcia L Stefanick; Katie Stone Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Cora E Lewis; Susan K Ewing; Brent C Taylor; James M Shikany; Howard A Fink; Kristine E Ensrud; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Steven R Cummings; Eric Orwoll Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Bret H Goodpaster; Seok Won Park; Tamara B Harris; Steven B Kritchevsky; Michael Nevitt; Ann V Schwartz; Eleanor M Simonsick; Frances A Tylavsky; Marjolein Visser; Anne B Newman Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Ricardo M Lima; Lídia M A Bezerra; Heloisa T Rabelo; Maria A F Silva; Antonio J R Silva; Martim Bottaro; Ricardo J de Oliveira Journal: J Clin Densitom Date: 2008-12-11 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: Yi Su; Freddy M H Lam; Jason Leung; Wing-Hoi Cheung; Suzanne C Ho; Timothy Kwok Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2020-05-30 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Didier Chalhoub; Elisa Marques; Osorio Meirelles; Richard D Semba; Luigi Ferrucci; Suzanne Satterfield; Michael Nevitt; Jane A Cauley; Tamara Harris Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-12-02 Impact factor: 5.562