Dataset Information

Body Composition with Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis in Breast Cancer Survivors.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Because obesity is an independent risk factor for breast cancer recurrence, assessment of body composition is crucial to guide weight management in breast cancer survivors (BCS). This study assessed whether dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) yield similar results for body composition in BCS. METHODS:Body fat percentage, lean body mass, and fat mass were estimated using DXA and BIA under fasting conditions in 89 BCS. BMI categories included normal (18-24.99 kg/m2 ; n = 28), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2 ; n = 21), obese (>30 kg/m2 ; n = 23), and severely obese BCS (>35 kg/m2 ; n = 17). Agreement between the devices was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS:There was no agreement between the 2 devices for body fat percentage (DXA: 44.2 ± 6.2% vs BIA: 40.4 ± 7.8%), lean body mass (DXA: 39.1 ± 7.6 kg vs BIA: 42.9 ± 5.9 kg), and fat mass (DXA: 32.4 ± 10.8 kg vs BIA: 30.6 ± 11.0 kg; P < .001). These findings were consistent in normal, overweight, and obese BCS. There was agreement between the 2 devices for fat mass (DXA: 48.7 ± 7.2 kg vs BIA: 47.9 ± 5.7 kg) in severely obese BCS (P = .102), possibly due to small sample size. CONCLUSIONS:BIA may underestimate body fat percentage and fat mass and overestimate lean body mass, compared with DXA. Future studies are warranted to assess the use of these 2 devices in a larger cohort of BCS within BMI categories.

SUBMITTER: Lee K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6433552 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Body Composition with Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis in Breast Cancer Survivors.

Lee Kyuwan K Sami Nathalie N Sweeney Frank C FC Dieli-Conwright Christina M CM

Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 20180925 3

<h4>Background</h4>Because obesity is an independent risk factor for breast cancer recurrence, assessment of body composition is crucial to guide weight management in breast cancer survivors (BCS). This study assessed whether dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) yield similar results for body composition in BCS.<h4>Methods</h4>Body fat percentage, lean body mass, and fat mass were estimated using DXA and BIA under fasting conditions in 89 BCS. BMI cat ...[more]

PMID: 30251390

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:The 4-component (4C) model is a criterion method for human body composition that separates the body into fat, water, mineral, and protein, but requires 4 measurements with significant cost and time requirements that preclude wide clinical use. A simplified model integrating only 2 measurements-dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-and 10 min of patient time has been proposed. Objective:We aimed to validate a rapid, simplified 4C DXA + BIA body composition model in a clinical population. Design:This was a cross-sectional observational study of 31 healthy adults. Participants underwent whole-body DXA, segmental BIA, air displacement plethysmography (ADP), and total body water (TBW) measurement by deuterium (D2O) dilution. 4C composition was calculated through the use of the Lohman model [DXA mineral mass, D2O TBW, ADP body volume (BV), scale weight] and the simplified model (DXA mineral mass and BV, BIA TBW, scale weight). Accuracy of percentage of fat (%Fat) and protein measurements was assessed via linear regression. Test-retest precision was calculated with the use of duplicate DXA and BIA measurements. Results:Of 31 participants, 23 were included in the analysis. TBWBIA showed good test-retest precision (%CV = 5.2 raw; 1.1 after outlier removal) and high accuracy to TBWD2O [TBWD2O = 0.956*TBWBIA, R2= 0.92, root mean squared error (RMSE) = 2.2 kg]. %Fat estimates from DXA, ADP, D2O, and BIA all showed high correlation with the Lohman model. However, only the 4C simplified model provides high accuracy for both %Fat (R2 = 0.96, RMSE = 2.33) and protein mass (R2= 0.76, RMSE = 1.8 kg). %Fat precision from 4C DXA + BIA was comparable with DXA (root mean square-SD = 0.8 and 0.6 percentage units, respectively). Conclusions:This work validates a simplified 4C method that measures fat, water, mineral, and protein in a 10-min clinic visit. This model has broad clinical application to monitor many conditions including over/dehydration, malnutrition, obesity, sarcopenia, and cachexia.

Project description:IntroductionMethods of body composition estimation such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), anthropometry, and bioimpedance (BIA) are used for the estimation of skeletal muscle mass (SMM) and lean body mass (LBM). No previous studies have examined whether these methods generate comparable results, or whether they are valid by using DXA as the reference. The aims of the present investigation were: (a) to assess the differences between DXA, anthropometry, and BIA in the estimation of SMM and LBM, taking into consideration the impact of sex and hydration status; and (b) to examine the agreement of anthropometry and BIA as compared to DXA for the estimation of SMM and LBM.MethodsA descriptive cross-sectional design was followed with 262 healthy young adults (159 males and 103 females). LBM and SMM were assessed by anthropometry with the formulas from Lee et al. and Kulkarni et al. for LBM; and Kerr (opt a), Kerr (opt b), Lee et al., Poortmans, Matiegka, Martin et al., Drinkwater and Ross, and Heymsfield et al. for SMM; by BIA with the formula reported by the TANITA MC-780-MA software for LBM and SMM; and DXA with the formula reported by the Hologic Horizon software for LBM, and the conversion by Kim et al. for SMM.ResultsSignificant differences were found for both SMM and LBM in kg, and percentages between most methods and formulas for the overall sample (p < 0.001-0.003) and divided by sex (p < 0.001-0.035). Hydration status did not have a significant effect on the differences between methods and formulas (p = 0.058-0.870). Lin's coefficient revealed limited agreement among the majority of formulas and methods (CCC = 0.007-0.880). The Bland-Altman analysis showed significant differences in most methods and formulas, both in the overall sample and divided by sex, when using SMM and LBM with DXA as the reference (p < 0.001-0.030).ConclusionThere is a lack of agreement between methods and formulas for assessing SMM and LBM. Sex was found to be a significant factor in this analysis. Furthermore, significant differences were observed between most formulas and methods as compared to DXA, except for the equations to estimate SMM with anthropometry by Poortmans.

Dataset Information

Body Composition with Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis in Breast Cancer Survivors.

Publications

Body Composition with Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis in Breast Cancer Survivors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets