Carla M Prado1, M Cristina Gonzalez, Steven B Heymsfield. 1. aDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of AB, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada bPost Graduate Program in Health and Behavior, Catholic University of Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil cPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, Los Angeles, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The obesity paradox is a highly controversial concept that may be attributed to methodological limitations related to its identification. One of the primary concerns is the use of BMI to define obesity. This index does not differentiate lean versus adipose tissue compartments (i.e. body composition) confounding health consequences for morbidity and mortality, especially in clinical populations. This review will describe the past year's evidence on the obesity paradox phenomenon, primarily focusing on the role of abnormal body composition phenotypes in explaining the controversies observed in the literature. RECENT FINDINGS: In spite of the substantial number of articles investigating the obesity paradox phenomenon, less than 10% used a direct measure of body composition and when included, it was not fully explored (only adipose tissue compartment evaluated). When lean tissue or muscle mass is taken into account, the general finding is that a high BMI has no protective effect in the presence of low muscle mass and that it is the latter that associates with poor prognosis. SUMMARY: In view of the body composition variability of patients with identical BMI, it is unreasonable to rely solely on this index to identify obesity. The consequences of a potential insubstantial obesity paradox are mixed messages related to patient-related prognostication.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The obesity paradox is a highly controversial concept that may be attributed to methodological limitations related to its identification. One of the primary concerns is the use of BMI to define obesity. This index does not differentiate lean versus adipose tissue compartments (i.e. body composition) confounding health consequences for morbidity and mortality, especially in clinical populations. This review will describe the past year's evidence on the obesity paradox phenomenon, primarily focusing on the role of abnormal body composition phenotypes in explaining the controversies observed in the literature. RECENT FINDINGS: In spite of the substantial number of articles investigating the obesity paradox phenomenon, less than 10% used a direct measure of body composition and when included, it was not fully explored (only adipose tissue compartment evaluated). When lean tissue or muscle mass is taken into account, the general finding is that a high BMI has no protective effect in the presence of low muscle mass and that it is the latter that associates with poor prognosis. SUMMARY: In view of the body composition variability of patients with identical BMI, it is unreasonable to rely solely on this index to identify obesity. The consequences of a potential insubstantial obesity paradox are mixed messages related to patient-related prognostication.
Authors: Dorien M Zelle; Gerald Klaassen; Edwin van Adrichem; Stephan J L Bakker; Eva Corpeleijn; Gerjan Navis Journal: Nat Rev Nephrol Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 28.314
Authors: Elizabeth M Cespedes Feliciano; Candyce H Kroenke; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Carla M Prado; Patrick T Bradshaw; Andrew J Dannenberg; Marilyn L Kwan; Jingjie Xiao; Charles Quesenberry; Erin K Weltzien; Adrienne L Castillo; Bette J Caan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Trevor Williams; Brian C Gulack; Sunghee Kim; Felix G Fernandez; Mark K Ferguson Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Elizabeth M Cespedes Feliciano; Marilyn L Kwan; Lawrence H Kushi; Wendy Y Chen; Erin K Weltzien; Adrienne L Castillo; Carol Sweeney; Philip S Bernard; Bette J Caan Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Elizabeth M Cespedes Feliciano; Candyce H Kroenke; Patrick T Bradshaw; Wendy Y Chen; Carla M Prado; Erin K Weltzien; Adrienne L Castillo; Bette J Caan Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-08-26 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Maria Alice Franzoi; Daniel Eiger; Lieveke Ameye; Noam Ponde; Rafael Caparica; Claudia De Angelis; Mariana Brandão; Christine Desmedt; Serena Di Cosimo; Nuria Kotecki; Matteo Lambertini; Ahmad Awada; Martine Piccart; Evandro de Azambuja Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 13.506