CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 486Body Composition Measurement TechniquesObesity, Physical Activity, DietCancer Risks and Factors

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predicted lean body mass, fat mass, and all cause and cause specific mortality in men: prospective US cohort study

Open access
Lee, Dong Hoon, Keum, NaNa, Hu, Frank B, Orav, E John, Rimm, Eric B, Willett, Walter C, Giovannucci, Edward L·2018·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.k2575PMC PMC6028901
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association of predicted lean body mass, fat mass, and body mass index (BMI) with all cause and cause specific mortality in men. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Health professionals in the United States PARTICIPANTS: 38 006 men (aged 40-75 years) from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, followed up for death (1987-2012). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All cause and cause specific mortality. RESULTS: Using validated anthropometric prediction equations previously developed from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, lean body mass and fat mass were estimated for all participants. During a mean of 21.4 years of follow-up, 12 356 deaths were identified. A J shaped association was consistently observed between BMI and all cause mortality. Multivariable adjusted Cox models including predicted fat mass and lean body mass showed a strong positive monotonic association between predicted fat mass and all cause mortality. Compared with those in the lowest fifth of predicted fat mass, men in the highest fifth had a hazard ratio of 1.35 (95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.46) for mortality from all causes. In contrast, a U shaped association was found between predicted lean body mass and all cause mortality. Compared with those in the lowest fifth of predicted lean body mass, men in the second to fourth fifths had 8-10% lower risk of mortality from all causes. In the restricted cubic spline models, the risk of all cause mortality was relatively flat until 21 kg of predicted fat mass and increased rapidly afterwards, with a hazard ratio of 1.22 (1.18 to 1.26) per standard deviation. For predicted lean body mass, a large reduction of the risk was seen within the lower range until 56 kg, with a hazard ratio of 0.87 (0.82 to 0.92) per standard deviation, which increased thereafter (P for non-linearity <0.001). For cause specific mortality, men in the highest fifth of predicted fat mass had hazard ratios of 1.67 (1.47 to 1.89) for cardiovascular disease, 1.24 (1.09 to 1.43) for cancer, and 1.26 (0.97 to 1.64) for respiratory disease. On the other hand, a U shaped association was found between predicted lean body mass and mortality from cardiovascular disease and cancer. However, a strong inverse association existed between predicted lean body mass and mortality from respiratory disease (P for trend <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The shape of the association between BMI and mortality was determined by the relation between two body components (lean body mass and fat mass) and mortality. This finding suggests that the "obesity paradox" controversy may be largely explained by low lean body mass, rather than low fat mass, in the lower range of BMI.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.k2575

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig 1 Association of predicted body composition and body mass index (BMI)* with all cause mortality in men. A: Fat mass and all cause mortality. B: Lean body mass and all cause mortality. C: BMI and all cause mortality. Hazard ratios are indicated by solid lines and 95% CIs by shaded areas. Reference point is lowest value for each of fat mass and lean body mass and 25 for BMI, with knots placed at 5th, 35th, 50th, 65th, and 95th centiles of each fat mass, lean body mass, and BMI distribution. All models were adjusted for cofounders in table 2. For graphs A and B, predicted fat mass and predicted lean body mass were mutually adjusted. *Standard deviations: 5.7 kg for fat mass, 6.6 kg for lean body mass, and 3.1 for BMI; centiles (0, 2.5, 5, 10, 25, 50, 75, 90, and 100): 7, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21, 25, 29, and 66 kg for fat mass; 24, 48, 49, 51, 53, 56, 59, 63, and 103 kg for lean body mass; and 14.2, 20.5, 21.2, 22.0, 23.4, 25.1, 27.0, 29.3, and 62.0 for BMI
Fig 1 Association of predicted body composition and body mass index (BMI)* with all cause mortality in men. A: Fat mass and all cause mortality. B: Lean body mass and all cause mortality. C: BMI and all cause mortality. Hazard ratios are indicated by solid lines and 95% CIs by shaded areas. Reference point is lowest value for each of fat mass and lean body mass and 25 for BMI, with knots placed at 5th, 35th, 50th, 65th, and 95th centiles of each fat mass, lean body mass, and BMI distribution. All models were adjusted for cofounders in table 2. For graphs A and B, predicted fat mass and predicted lean body mass were mutually adjusted. *Standard deviations: 5.7 kg for fat mass, 6.6 kg for lean body mass, and 3.1 for BMI; centiles (0, 2.5, 5, 10, 25, 50, 75, 90, and 100): 7, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21, 25, 29, and 66 kg for fat mass; 24, 48, 49, 51, 53, 56, 59, 63, and 103 kg for lean body mass; and 14.2, 20.5, 21.2, 22.0, 23.4, 25.1, 27.0, 29.3, and 62.0 for BMICC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 486

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lee, D. H., Keum, N., Hu, F. B., Orav, E. J., Rimm, E. B., Willett, W. C., & Giovannucci, E. L.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Giovannucci, Edward L
ORCID
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2018-07-03
Volume
362
Pages
k2575
ISSN
  • 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
DOI
10.1136/bmj.k2575
PMC
PMC6028901
OpenAlex
W2810529814
Cited by
486
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 74 · 2024: 103 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6
FWCI
21.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Research Foundation
  • National Research Foundation of Korea (2018R1A4A1022589, NRF-2018R1A4A1022589)
  • Ministry of Science and ICT, South Korea (NRF-2018R1A4A1022589)
  • National Institutes of Health (UM1-CA167552, CA-167552)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL035464)
  • National Cancer Institute (R03CA223619, UM1CA167552)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
Keywords
fat mass, body mass index, all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cancer mortality, respiratory mortality, anthropometric equations, men, Health Professionals Follow-up Study, obesity paradox, body composition, nonlinear relationship, sex differences in mortality
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Body Composition, Follow-Up Studies, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Prospective Studies, United States, Body Mass Index

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