Dataset Information

Interaction of genetic and environmental factors for body fat mass control: observational study for lifestyle modification and genotyping.

ABSTRACT: Previous studies suggested that genetic, environmental factors and their interactions could affect body fat mass (BFM). However, studies describing these effects were performed at a single time point in a population. In this study, we investigated the interaction between genetic and environmental factors in affecting BFM and implicate the healthcare utilization of lifestyle modifications from a personalized and genomic perspective. We examined how nutritional intake or physical activity changes in the individuals affect BFM concerning the genetic composition. We conducted an observational study including 259 adult participants with single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping and longitudinal lifestyle monitoring, including food consumption and physical activities, by following lifestyle modification guidance. The participants' lifelog data on exercise and diet were collected through a wearable device for 3 months. Moreover, we measured anthropometric and serologic markers to monitor their potential changes through lifestyle modification. We examined the influence of genetic composition on body fat reduction induced by lifestyle changes using genetic risk scores (GRSs) of three phenotypes: GRS-carbohydrate (GRS-C), GRS-fat (GRS-F), and GRS-exercise (GRS-E). Our results showed that lifestyle modifications affected BFM more significantly in the high GRS class compared to the low GRS class, indicating the role of genetic factors affecting the efficiency of the lifestyle modification-induced BFM changes. Interestingly, the influence of exercise modification in the low GRS class with active lifestyle change was lower than that in the high GRS class with inactive lifestyle change (P = 0.022), suggesting the implication of genetic factors for efficient body fat control.

SUBMITTER: Kang JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8222320 | 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: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.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the association of changes in two body components, muscle and fat mass, with the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among young adults. We investigated the association of changes in predicted lean body mass index (LBMI), appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI), and body fat mass index (BFMI) with the development of CVD among young adults.MethodsThis nationwide, population-based cohort study included 3 727 738 young adults [2 406 046 (64.5%) men and 1 321 692 (35.5%) women] aged 20-39 years without a previous history of CVD who underwent two health screening examinations during 2009-2010 and 2011-2012. Using validated and robust prediction equations, we calculated the changes in predicted LBMI, ASMI, and BFMI from the first to the second examinations.ResultsThe mean (SD) age was 32.2 (4.9) years, and 2 406 046 (64.5%) of the participants were men. A total of 23 344 CVD events were detected during 22 257 632 person-years of follow-up. Each 1 kg/m2 increase in predicted LBMI and ASMI change was associated with a reduced risk of CVD among men [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.91; aHR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.82, respectively] and women (aHR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.95; aHR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.96). Each 1 kg/m2 increase in predicted BFMI change was associated with an increased risk of CVD among men (aHR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.10-1.22) and women (aHR: 1.32, 95% CI 1.06-1.65). In both sexes, decreases in predicted LBMI and ASMI were associated with greater CVD risk, and decreased predicted BFMI was associated with a reduced CVD risk. Those who maintained their BMI between -1 and +1 kg/m2 also had a decreased risk of CVD per 1 kg/m2 increase in predicted LBMI and ASMI change among men (aHR: 0.86, 95% CI 0.80-0.92; aHR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.95) and women (aHR: 0.62, 95% CI 0.47-0.83; aHR: 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.80) and had a greater risk of CVD per 1 kg/m2 increase in predicted BFMI change among men (aHR: 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.25) and women (aHR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.20-2.23). Regardless of changes in weight, such as from normal to obese or vice versa, these results were consistent.ConclusionsAmong young adults, increased predicted muscle mass or decreased predicted fat mass were associated with a reduced risk of development of CVD. Decreased predicted muscle mass or increased predicted fat mass were associated with an elevated risk of development of CVD.

Project description:Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) induce depletion of estrogen levels, causing bone loss and increased fracture risk in women with breast cancer. High-fat body mass (FBM) emerged as an independent factor associated with the prevalence of morphometric vertebral fractures (VFs) in patients undergoing AIs. We explored the role of lean body mass (LBM) and the interaction of LBM with FBM in predicting the occurrence of VFs in postmenopausal women who were either AI-naïve or AI-treated. A total of 684 consecutive breast cancer patients were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Each woman underwent a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan, measuring bone mineral density (BMD), LBM, and FBM; VFs were assessed using a quantitative morphometric analysis of DXA images. After propensity score matching, the study population was restricted to 480 women, 240 AI-naïve and 240 AI-treated. We used multivariable logistic regression models to explore the associations between baseline characteristics, VF prevalence and the interaction between LBM, FBM and AI therapy. No interaction between LBM and AI therapy on VF prevalence was shown. Conversely, we reported a significant interaction between LBM, FBM and AI therapy (p = .0311). Among AI-treated women having LBM below and FBM above or equal the median value, VF prevalence was numerically higher (15/31; 48.4%) than in other subgroups (VF prevalence: 35.7% in high-LBM and low-FBM group, 23.2% in high-LBM and high-FBM group, and 19.8% in low-LBM and low-FBM group). Among AI-naïve women, the greatest VF proportion was observed in the subgroup with LBM and FBM below median value (25/92; 27.2%). This study suggests a synergism between LBM and FBM in predicting the morphometric VF in women with early breast cancer undergoing AIs. This observation is new and deserves further investigation. The assessment of body composition by DXA might be useful when estimating fracture risk in this population. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Dataset Information

Interaction of genetic and environmental factors for body fat mass control: observational study for lifestyle modification and genotyping.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets