Dataset Information

Long-term status of predicted body fat percentage, body mass index and other anthropometric factors with risk of colorectal carcinoma: Two large prospective cohort studies in the US.

ABSTRACT: Anthropometric measurements, such as body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, and body fat percentage, have been used as indicators of obesity. Despite evidence that excess body fat is a risk factor for colorectal carcinoma (CRC), the magnitude of the association of BMI and other obesity indicators with the long-term risk of CRC remains unclear. Utilizing a Cox proportional hazards regression model, we examined differential associations between predicted body fat percentage and BMI with the risk of CRC (n = 2,017). The associations between CRC incidence and different adiposity measurements were also assessed. Predicted body fat percentage had a similar increased risk of CRC risk as BMI. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, the hazard ratio for CRC in the second to fifth quintiles (compared to the first quintile) of predicted body fat percentage were 1.32, 1.31, 1.53 and 2.09 for men (p_trend < 0.001) and 0.91, 0.90, 0.98 and 1.15 for women (p_trend = 0.03). Among various anthropometric measurements, predicted fat mass and waist circumference were slightly more strongly associated with CRC risk than BMI. In conclusion, the novel anthropometric prediction equations provided further evidence that a greater amount of body fat might contribute to CRC risk in both sexes. An innovative approach enabled us to estimate the susceptibilities of specific body composition with CRC risk, in an inexpensive and minimally invasive manner. Furthermore, the typically used measures of BMI and waist circumference are robust measures of adiposity to predict cancer risk in a relatively healthy population.

SUBMITTER: Hanyuda A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7282530 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAccurate obesity classification is important so that appropriate intervention can be instituted to modify metabolic risk factors. Commonly utilized body mass index (BMI) and percentage body fat (PBF) are influenced by lean mass whereas fat mass index (FMI) measures only body fat. This study compares the prevalence of obesity and metabolic risk factors with FMI, BMI and PBF using DXA (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry).Methods489 women randomly recruited from the electoral roll were stratified into 4 age groups; 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and 70-79 years from 2000 to 2001. Clinical data and DXA body composition were obtained. Statistical analyses were performed using Medcalc v15 (Ostend, Belgium) with significance level at p = 0.05 (two-tailed).ResultsThere was higher prevalence of obesity using PBF compared to BMI and FMI (p<0.001). This difference was greater from age 50-59 (p<0.05) which may be explained by age-related lean mass loss. PBF over-classified obesity in over 35% of normal and 95% of overweight categories compared to FMI and BMI. BMI has a sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 98.3% for obesity using FMI as the standard. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category by 14.9% compared to FMI. There was no difference in diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension and metabolic syndrome prevalence within the BMI-obesity and FMI-obesity categories (p>0.05).ConclusionPBF classified more obesity than BMI and FMI because of its low pre-determined threshold. The greater difference with PBF compared to BMI and FMI from the 50-59 decade onwards can be attributed to age-related lean mass loss. BMI had the lowest sensitivity for obesity diagnosis. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category compared to FMI due to its inability to differentiate lean mass. However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of metabolic risk factors between BMI and FMI-obesity categories indicating that fat location may influence metabolic dysregulation.

Project description:BackgroundThe conventional measurement of obesity utilises the body mass index (BMI) criterion. Although there are benefits to this method, there is concern that not all individuals at risk of obesity-associated medical conditions are being identified. Whole-body fat percentage (%FM), and specifically visceral adipose tissue (VAT) mass, are correlated with and potentially implicated in disease trajectories, but are not fully accounted for through BMI evaluation. The aims of this study were (a) to compare five anthropometric predictors of %FM and VAT mass, and (b) to explore new cut-points for the best of these predictors to improve the characterisation of obesity.MethodsBMI, waist circumference (WC), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) and waist/height0.5 (WHT.5R) were measured and calculated for 81 adults (40 women, 41 men; mean (SD) age: 38.4 (17.5) years; 94% Caucasian). Total body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry with Corescan (GE Lunar iDXA, Encore version 15.0) was also performed to quantify %FM and VAT mass. Linear regression analysis, stratified by sex, was applied to predict both %FM and VAT mass for each anthropometric variable. Within each sex, we used information theoretic methods (Akaike Information Criterion; AIC) to compare models. For the best anthropometric predictor, we derived tentative cut-points for classifying individuals as obese (>25% FM for men or >35% FM for women, or > highest tertile for VAT mass).ResultsThe best predictor of both %FM and VAT mass in men and women was WHtR. Derived cut-points for predicting whole body obesity were 0.53 in men and 0.54 in women. The cut-point for predicting visceral obesity was 0.59 in both sexes.ConclusionsIn the absence of more objective measures of central obesity and adiposity, WHtR is a suitable proxy measure in both women and men. The proposed DXA-%FM and VAT mass cut-offs require validation in larger studies, but offer potential for improvement of obesity characterisation and the identification of individuals who would most benefit from therapeutic intervention.

Project description:ObjectiveUsing meta-regression this paper sets out the minimum change in body mass index-SD score (BMI-SDS) required to improve adiposity as percentage body fat for children and adolescents with obesity.DesignMeta-regression.SettingStudies were identified as part of a large-scale systematic review of the following electronic databases: AMED, Embase, MEDLINE via OVID, Web of Science and CENTRAL via Cochrane library.ParticipantsIndividuals aged 4-19 years with a diagnosis of obesity according to defined BMI thresholds.InterventionsStudies of lifestyle treatment interventions that included dietary, physical activity and/or behavioural components with the objective of reducing obesity were included. Interventions of <2 weeks duration and those that involved surgical and/or pharmacological components (eg, bariatric surgery, drug therapy) were excluded.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTo be included in the review, studies had to report baseline and post-intervention BMI-SDS or change measurements (primary outcome measures) plus one or more of the following markers of metabolic health (secondary outcome measures): adiposity measures other than BMI; blood pressure; glucose; inflammation; insulin sensitivity/resistance; lipid profile; liver function. This paper focuses on adiposity measures only. Further papers in this series will report on other outcome measures.ResultsThis paper explores the potential impact of BMI-SDS reduction in terms of change in percentage body fat. Thirty-nine studies reporting change in mean percentage body fat were analysed. Meta-regression demonstrated that reduction of at least 0.6 in mean BMI-SDS ensured a mean reduction of percentage body fat mass, in the sense that the associated 95% prediction interval for change in mean percentage body fat was wholly negative.ConclusionsInterventions demonstrating reductions of 0.6 BMI-SDS might be termed successful in reducing adiposity, a key purpose of weight management interventions.Trial registration numberCRD42016025317.

Project description:ImportanceBody mass index (BMI) is used to diagnose obesity in adolescents worldwide, despite evidence that weight does not scale with height squared in adolescents. To account for this, health care providers diagnose obesity using BMI percentiles for each age (BMI z scores), but this does not ensure that BMI is accurate in adolescents.ObjectiveTo compare the accuracy of BMI vs other body fat indices of the form body mass divided by heightn in estimating body fat levels in adolescents.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional data from the 1999 to 2006 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were analyzed between September 2015 and December 2016.Main outcomes and measuresDual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and anthropometric data were used to determine changes in body fat levels, body proportions, and the scaling relationships among body mass, height, and percent body fat. To assess the merits of each adiposity index, 3 criteria were used: stability with age, accuracy in estimating percent body fat, and accuracy in classifying adolescents as overweight vs normal weight.ResultsParticipants included 2285 non-Hispanic white participants aged 8 to 29 years. Percent body fat varied with both age and height during adolescence, invalidating the standard weight-to-height regression as the way of finding the optimal body fat index. Because the correct regression model (percent body fat is proportional to mass divided by heightn) suggested that percent body fat scales to height with an exponent closer to 3, we therefore focused on the tri-ponderal mass index (TMI; mass divided by height cubed) as an alternative to BMI z scores. For ages 8 to 17 years, TMI yielded greater stability with age and estimated percent body fat better than BMI (R2?=?0.64 vs 0.38 in boys and R2?=?0.72 vs 0.66 in girls). Moreover, TMI misclassified adolescents as overweight vs normal weight less often than BMI z scores (TMI, 8.4%; 95% CI, 7.3%-9.5% vs BMI, 19.4%; 95% CI, 17.8%-20.0%; P?<?.001) and performed equally as well as updated BMI percentiles derived from the same data set (TMI, 8.4%; 95% CI, 7.3%-9.5% vs BMI, 8.0%; 95% CI, 6.9%-9.1%; P?=?.62).Conclusions and relevanceThe tri-ponderal mass index estimates body fat levels more accurately than BMI in non-Hispanic white adolescents aged 8 to 17 years. Moreover, TMI diagnoses adolescents as overweight more accurately than BMI z scores and equally as well as updated BMI percentiles but is much simpler to use than either because it does not involve complicated percentiles. Taken together, it is worth considering replacing BMI z scores with TMI to estimate body fat levels in adolescents.

Dataset Information

Long-term status of predicted body fat percentage, body mass index and other anthropometric factors with risk of colorectal carcinoma: Two large prospective cohort studies in the US.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets