Britta A Larsen1, Christina L Wassel1, Stephen B Kritchevsky1, Elsa S Strotmeyer1, Michael H Criqui1, Alka M Kanaya1, Linda F Fried1, Ann V Schwartz1, Tamara B Harris1, Joachim H Ix1. 1. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health (B.A.L., M.H.C., I.X.), and Department of Medicine (J.H.I.), University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California 92093-0628; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (C.L.W.), College of Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont 05446; Wake Forest University and School of Medicine (S.B.K.), Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157; Graduate School of Public Health (E.S.S.), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219; Division of General Internal Medicine (A.M.K.), Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (A.V.S.), University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143; University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System (L.F.F.), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261; and National Institute on Aging (T.B.H.), Bethesda, Maryland 20892.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Skeletal muscle plays a key role in glucose regulation, yet the association between muscle quantity or quality and the risk of developing type 2 diabetes has not been explored. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to assess the association between muscle quantity and strength and incident diabetes and to explore whether this association differs by body mass index (BMI) category. DESIGN AND SETTING: Participants were 2166 older adults in the Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study who were free of diabetes at baseline (1997–1998). Computed tomography and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry were used to measure abdominal and thigh muscle area and total body lean mass, respectively. Strength was quantified by grip and knee extensions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incident diabetes, defined as fasting glucose of 126 mg/dL or greater, a physician's diagnosis, and/or the use of hypoglycemic medication were measured. RESULTS: After a median 11.3 years of follow-up, there were 265 incident diabetes cases (12.2%). In fully adjusted models, no association was found between muscle or strength measures and incident diabetes (for all, P > .05). For women, there was a significant interaction with BMI category for both abdominal and thigh muscle, such that greater muscle predicted lower risk of incident diabetes for normal-weight women (hazard ratio 0.37 [0.17–0.83] and 0.58 [0.27–1.27] per SD, respectively) and a greater risk for overweight and obese women (hazard ratio 1.23 [0.98–1.54] and 1.28 [1.00–1.64], respectively). No significant interactions by BMI category existed for strength measures or any measures for men (for all, P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Greater muscle area is associated with a lower risk of incident diabetes for older normal-weight women but not for men or overweight women.
CONTEXT: Skeletal muscle plays a key role in glucose regulation, yet the association between muscle quantity or quality and the risk of developing type 2 diabetes has not been explored. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to assess the association between muscle quantity and strength and incident diabetes and to explore whether this association differs by body mass index (BMI) category. DESIGN AND SETTING:Participants were 2166 older adults in the Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study who were free of diabetes at baseline (1997–1998). Computed tomography and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry were used to measure abdominal and thigh muscle area and total body lean mass, respectively. Strength was quantified by grip and knee extensions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incident diabetes, defined as fasting glucose of 126 mg/dL or greater, a physician's diagnosis, and/or the use of hypoglycemic medication were measured. RESULTS: After a median 11.3 years of follow-up, there were 265 incident diabetes cases (12.2%). In fully adjusted models, no association was found between muscle or strength measures and incident diabetes (for all, P > .05). For women, there was a significant interaction with BMI category for both abdominal and thigh muscle, such that greater muscle predicted lower risk of incident diabetes for normal-weight women (hazard ratio 0.37 [0.17–0.83] and 0.58 [0.27–1.27] per SD, respectively) and a greater risk for overweight and obesewomen (hazard ratio 1.23 [0.98–1.54] and 1.28 [1.00–1.64], respectively). No significant interactions by BMI category existed for strength measures or any measures for men (for all, P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Greater muscle area is associated with a lower risk of incident diabetes for older normal-weight women but not for men or overweight women.
Authors: B H Goodpaster; C L Carlson; M Visser; D E Kelley; A Scherzinger; T B Harris; E Stamm; A B Newman Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2001-06
Authors: Gabriel Q Shaibi; Martha L Cruz; Geoff D C Ball; Marc J Weigensberg; George J Salem; Noe C Crespo; Michael I Goran Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Anne B Newman; Varant Kupelian; Marjolein Visser; Eleanor M Simonsick; Bret H Goodpaster; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Frances A Tylavsky; Susan M Rubin; Tamara B Harris Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Carmen Castaneda; Jennifer E Layne; Leda Munoz-Orians; Patricia L Gordon; Joseph Walsmith; Mona Foldvari; Ronenn Roubenoff; Katherine L Tucker; Miriam E Nelson Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: William C Knowler; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Sarah E Fowler; Richard F Hamman; John M Lachin; Elizabeth A Walker; David M Nathan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-02-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bret H Goodpaster; Shanthi Krishnaswami; Helaine Resnick; David E Kelley; Catherine Haggerty; Tamara B Harris; Ann V Schwartz; Steven Kritchevsky; Anne B Newman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Britta Larsen; John Bellettiere; Matthew Allison; Robyn L McClelland; Iva Miljkovic; Chantal A Vella; Pamela Ouyang; Kimberly R De-Guzman; Michael Criqui; Jonathan Unkart Journal: Metabolism Date: 2020-07-23 Impact factor: 8.694
Authors: Andrea Granados; Achamyeleh Gebremariam; Samuel S Gidding; James G Terry; John Jeffrey Carr; Lyn M Steffen; David R Jacobs; Joyce M Lee Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2018-09-21 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Carrie A Karvonen-Gutierrez; Qing Peng; Mark Peterson; Kate Duchowny; Bin Nan; Sioban Harlow Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Joshua I Barzilay; Petra Buzkova; Michael G Shlipak; Mary F Lyles; Nisha Bansal; Pranav S Garimella; Joachim H Ix; Jorge R Kizer; Elsa S Strotmeyer; Luc Djousse; Mary L Biggs; David Siscovick; Kenneth J Mukamal Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-08-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: M N LeCroy; S Hua; R C Kaplan; D Sotres-Alvarez; Q Qi; B Thyagarajan; L C Gallo; A Pirzada; M L Daviglus; N Schneiderman; G A Talavera; C R Isasi Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 5.602
Authors: Rebecca S Gold; Jonathan T Unkart; Britta A Larsen; Candice A Price; Mallory Cless; Maria Rosario G Araneta; Matthew A Allison Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 8.128