Sarcopenic obesity and overall mortality: results from the application of novel models of body composition phenotypes to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2004
Open accessAbstract
Background/objectives There is no consensus on the definition of sarcopenic obesity (SO), resulting in inconsistent associations of SO with mortality risk. We aim to evaluate association of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) SO models with mortality risk in a US adult population (≥50 years).Subjects/methods The study population consisted of 3577 participants aged 50 years and older from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey with mortality follow-up data through December 31, 2011. Difference in survival time in people with and without SO defined by three body composition DXA models (Model 1: body composition phenotype model; Model 2: Truncal Fat Mass (TrFM)/Appendicular Skeletal Muscle Mass (ASM) ratio model; Model 3: Fat Mass (FM)/Fat Free Mass (FFM) ratio). The differences between the models were assessed by the acceleration failure time model, and expressed as time ratios (TR).Results Participants age 50-70 years with SO had a significantly decreased survival time, according to the body composition phenotype model (TR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87-0.97), and TrFM/ASM ratio model (TR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.81-0.95). The FM/FFM ratio model did not detect significant differences in survival time. Participants with SO aged 70 years and older did not have a significantly decreased survival time, according to all three models.Conclusions A SO phenotype increases mortality risk in people of age 50-70 years, but not in people aged 70 years and older. The application of the body composition phenotype and the TrFM/ASM ratio models may represent useful diagnostic approaches to improve the prediction of disease and mortality risk.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Studies by Siervo et al. showed that the ratio of visceral fat mass to appendicular skeletal muscle index is a better predictor of mortality and diabetes risk than the simple fat mass to fat-free mass ratio.
“Among available examples, studies conducted by Siervo et al [6,108] have shown that the ratio of visceral FM/ASMI is a better predictor of mortality and diabetes risk compared to the more simple FM/FFM ratio.”
From Critical appraisal of definitions and diagnostic criteria for sarcopenic obesity based on a systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as [108]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 56
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Franca NAG, Peters BSE, Lima MMS, Santos EA, Santos PC, Martini LA. Muscle mass as the main component of body composition associated with bone mineral density. Osteoporos Int 2017;28:S210e1.
- Authors
- Van Aller, C., Lara, J., Stephan, B. C. M., Donini, L. M., Heymsfield, S., Katzmarzyk, P. T., Wells, J. C. K., Prado, C. M., & Siervo, M.
- Affiliations
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
- University College London (GB)
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Siervo, Mario
- ORCID
- Venue
- Clinical Nutrition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-02
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 264-270
- ISSN
- 0261-5614 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2789291111
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 4.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Funders
- Medical Research Council (MR/N007921/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Keywords
- sarcopenic obesity, all-cause mortality, body composition phenotypes, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, fat mass to fat-free mass ratio, sarcopenia, older adults, mortality prediction
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Body Composition, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, Obesity, Phenotype, Risk Factors, United States, Absorptiometry, Photon, Comorbidity, Sarcopenia
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review