ライフサイエンスコーパス: lean body mass

1 hip ratio to 1.37 [95% CI: 1.33 to 1.42] for lean body mass).

2 ted in published studies with an increase in lean body mass.

3 secondary to an effect on fat as opposed to lean body mass.

4 lin-like growth factor-1, and enhancement of lean body mass.

5 position by reducing fat mass and increasing lean body mass.

6 6), as measured at our institution and using lean body mass.

7 nsufficient in protein could lead to loss of lean body mass.

8 ose homeostasis, decreased fat and increased lean body mass.

9 ed rate of fatty acid, beta-oxidation, and a lean body mass.

10 no significant difference in percent fat and lean body mass.

11 ic cancer patients for effects on weight and lean body mass.

12 ntake, increased metabolic rate, and loss of lean body mass.

13 f negative energy balance but does not alter lean body mass.

14 re observed in change in lumbar spine BMD or lean body mass.

15 strength and physical skills, and increased lean body mass.

16 sult in low serum protein levels and loss of lean body mass.

17 c response, with protein wasting and loss of lean body mass.

18 ugh BMI does not distinguish between fat and lean body mass.

19 lts in increased fat mass without changes in lean body mass.

20 II) subjects is in excess of the increase in lean body mass.

21 ite and an increase in metabolism of fat and lean body mass.

22 dieting because the latter reduces maternal lean body mass.

23 biquitin-proteasome pathway leads to reduced lean body mass.

24 rences in liver volume and/or differences in lean body mass.

25 s when these measurements were corrected for lean body mass.

26 even of eight women gained body fat and lost lean body mass.

27 d with negative nitrogen balance and loss of lean body mass.

28 ciated with significant increases in BMC and lean body mass.

29 ar VCAN, ADAMTSL3, and IRS1 for appendicular lean body mass.

30 difference in both skeletal muscle mass and lean body mass.

31 se experience weight loss, including loss of lean body mass.

32 anthropometric measures after adjustment for lean body mass.

33 d triglycerides, and decreased proportion of lean body mass.

34 SNS activity, heart rate, blood pressure or lean body mass.

35 t-free mass (-0.6 kg and 2.0 kg; P = 0.036), lean body mass (0.0 kg and 1.9 kg; P = 0.041), and muscl

36 weight (0.8 +/- 2.4 and 0.7 +/- 2.4 kg) and lean body mass (0.3 +/- 1.4 and 0.3 +/- 1.5 kg) did not

37 .1 +/- 0.3 v +2.3 +/- 0.7 kg; P =.002/0.04); lean body mass (+0.8 +/- 0.2 v -0.4 +/- 0.3 kg; P =.02/0

38 CI -2.9 to -0.7, p = 0.0016), and increased lean body mass (1.5 kg, 95% CI 0.9-2.1, p < 0.001).

39 0.28 +/- 0.02 to 0.20 +/- 0.02 mmol FFA x kg lean body mass(-1) x h(-1); P < 0.002), as did the rate

40 overall lean body mass increased (change in lean body mass, 2.1 kg [CI, 1.3 to 2.9]) (P < 0.001), an

41 n body mass, 25 g glucose, 1 mmol glycine/kg lean body mass + 25 g glucose, or water only, given in r

42 iod after the ingestion of 1 mmol glycine/kg lean body mass, 25 g glucose, 1 mmol glycine/kg lean bod

43 ease +/- SD, 1.6 +/- 3.7 kg [P < 0.001]) and lean body mass (3.0 +/- 3.0 kg [P < 0.001]), accompanied

44 8 [13.6] vs 57.3 [7.2] g; p=0.0152) and less lean body mass (450.1 [9.6] vs 491.9 [11.7] g; p=0.0120)

45 the testosterone analog oxandrolone improves lean body mass accretion and bone mineral content and th

46 ntral fat, prevented bone loss, and improved lean body mass accretion.

47 For lean body mass-adjusted SUV(peak), the wCVs appeared sim

48 ed to test whether LY increases appendicular lean body mass (aLBM) and improves physical performance

49 r if the processes that adapt kidney mass to lean body mass also mediate renal hypertrophy following

50 s associated with breathing difficulties and lean body mass, although EDCs concentrations were low.

51 trophy subjects after routine adjustment for lean body mass and after adjustment for each organ-tissu

52 both patients with CF and control subjects, lean body mass and arm muscle area significantly correla

53 (P = 0.011 for body weight and P < 0.001 for lean body mass and body fat).

54 ng myostatin, can prevent or restore loss of lean body mass and body weight in simian immunodeficienc

55 Lean body mass and bone mineral content did not change.

56 Lean body mass and bone mineral density at the hip decre

57 h factor therapy had significantly increased lean body mass and decreased fat mass by 6 weeks, but th

58 The significant (P<.05) increases in lean body mass and decreases in fat mass were also not d

59 oxidation was significantly correlated with lean body mass and diet.

60 et-supplemented uremic mice, which lost both lean body mass and fat mass and had an increase in basal

61 Their lean body mass and fat mass were 39.4 +/- 2.7 kg and 16.

62 oducing national reference distributions for lean body mass and fat mass, however, is currently limit

63 , elderly and young participants matched for lean body mass and fat mass.

64 KE group compared to PF after adjustment for lean body mass and fat-mass ( P = 0.001 and 0.007, respe

65 nome-wide association studies for whole body lean body mass and find five novel genetic loci to be si

66 B11, VCAN, ADAMTSL3, IRS1, and FTO for total lean body mass and for three single-nucleotide polymorph

67 n of healthy body weight and preservation of lean body mass and functional ability with age.

68 eight gain or loss women were likely to lose lean body mass and gain fat mass during treatment for br

69 efficacy endpoints were the median change in lean body mass and handgrip strength over 12 weeks and w

70 ologic testosterone administration increases lean body mass and improves quality of life among androg

71 an anabolic steroid that attenuates loss of lean body mass and improves wound healing in burn patien

72 ) individuals from 33 cohorts for whole body lean body mass and in 45,090 (42,360 of European ancestr

73 The peri(-/-) animals have a greater lean body mass and increased metabolic rate but they als

74 are particularly susceptible to the loss of lean body mass and its attendant increased morbidity and

75 ines was found to have beneficial effects on lean body mass and leg power in elderly men.

76 body proteolysis suggesting that the loss of lean body mass and muscle wasting in insulinopenia is re

77 tion in whom preservation and restoration of lean body mass and neuromuscular function are crucial.

78 ange since 25 years of age, body mass index, lean body mass and percent body fat, and nonspine fractu

79 ptive glomerular changes driven by increased lean body mass and potential direct nephrotoxic effects

80 al energy expenditure, reductions in fat and lean body mass and prevention from diet-induced obesity.

81 els for the purposes of increasing strength, lean body mass and sexual performance.

82 , and was a composite of stable or increased lean body mass and stability or improvement in two of th

83 ome characterized by the progressive loss of lean body mass and systemic inflammation.

84 d increased serum levels of WISP2, increased lean body mass and whole body energy expenditure, hyperp

85 finding does not appear to be a function of lean body mass and, although modified by certain patient

86 astating effects of the loss of body weight, lean body mass, and adipose tissue were recognized as co

87 Weight, lean body mass, and body surface area in the denominator

88 ection and after normalizing to body weight, lean body mass, and body surface area, and simplified me

89 Weight; body fat, lean body mass, and bone mineral content (measured by du

90 ical impedance-derived measures of fat mass, lean body mass, and fat percentage.

91 Cellular mass, lean body mass, and fat were assessed "directly" by tota

92 ratory fitness, functional task performance, lean body mass, and fatigue, with inconsistent effects o

93 9%) increased food intake, body weight gain, lean body mass, and gastrocnemius muscle mass as compare

94 elated peptide, resist tumor-induced loss of lean body mass, and maintain normal circadian activity p

95 density (BMD), mental health score, fat and lean body mass, and safety outcomes, i.e., fractures, fa

96 t with growth hormone increases body weight, lean body mass, and treadmill work output and appears to

97 Low values of serum proteins and loss of lean body mass are commonly found in patients with chron

98 to the profound catabolic state and loss of lean body mass associated with the AIDS wasting syndrome

99 16/17 y; with percentage fat and percentage lean body mass at age 16/17 y; and with a metabolic synd

100 1)) after adjustment for age, sex, race, and lean body mass (beta=1.29; false discovery rate q=5.3x10

101 body fat mass without altering food intake, lean body mass, body temperature, or biochemical and hae

102 Oxandrolone improved lean body mass, bone mineral content and muscle strength

103 ere burn, oxandrolone significantly improves lean body mass, bone mineral content, and muscle strengt

104 Height, weight, lean body mass, bone mineral content, cardiac function,

105 GH treatment increased femur BMD and lean body mass but decreased the % fat measured by DXA i

106 improved if adjusted by body surface area or lean body mass but was improved if adjusted by height (r

107 n affected energy expenditure and storage of lean body mass, but not body fat storage.

108 Anamorelin significantly increased lean body mass, but not handgrip, strength in patients w

109 ith baseline, significant increases in total lean body mass by day 113 or end of study were noted in

110 Primary outcome was lean body mass by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry over

111 The lean body mass (by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) inc

112 ion, percentage body fat, visceral fat mass, lean body mass, cardiopulmonary fitness, physical activi

113 (TNF) and IL-1, induce anorexia and loss of lean body mass, common manifestations of acute and chron

114 enic compounds with undoubted effects on the lean body mass compartment.

115 fication of proteins which determine fat and lean body mass composition is critical to better underst

116 dations during energy deficit (ED) preserves lean body mass, concerns have been raised regarding the

117 n have greater clearance of ethanol per unit lean body mass, confirming previous oral alcohol adminis

118 Lean body mass, consisting mostly of skeletal muscle, is

119 methods including percentage change in SUVs, lean body mass-corrected (SUL) SULpeak, SULmax, and tota

120 Lean body mass correction of the SUVmax did not change a

121 ated with height, total or central body fat, lean body mass, current smoking, physical activity, or c

122 placebo, weight (increase, 0.1 +/- 3.1 kg), lean body mass (decrease, 0.1 +/- 2.0 kg), and body fat

123 s. males: -0.05+/-0.007%) and an increase in lean body mass (Delta females: 5+/-4% vs. Delta males: -

124 Lean body mass determined by DXA was highly correlated w

125 ice; however, the fat mass was decreased and lean body mass did not change.

126 yielded similar results, and adjustments for lean body mass did not substantially alter the findings.

127 Prior to and after bed rest, lean body mass (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) and qu

128 Conclusions: Higher lean body mass during childhood and adolescence is consi

129 es skeletal muscle hypertrophy and increases lean body mass, effects not previously reported with sma

130 morphisms were significantly associated with lean body mass either genome wide (p < 5 x 10(-8)) or su

131 Juvenile lean body mass, estimated using urinary creatinine excre

132 male Panx1(Deltaot) mice exhibited increased lean body mass, even though pannexin levels in skeletal

133 thermore, NBI-12i-treated uremic mice gained lean body mass, fat mass, and had a lower basal metaboli

134 The primary endpoint was change in total lean body mass from baseline, assessed by dual-energy x-

135 duced a microbiota-dependent augmentation of lean body mass gain, changed bone morphology, and altere

136 ry taxa in recipient animals correlated with lean body mass gain; liver, muscle, and brain metabolism

137 At 6 weeks, lean body mass had increased and total fat mass had decr

138 Although lean body mass has a high heritability, studies evaluati

139 Fat and lean body mass have important implications for health an

140 s were body mass index, body fat percentage, lean body mass, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, lo

141 ation remained substantial when adjusted for lean body mass (highest HR: 1.05 [95% CI: 1.01 to 1.10]

142 accumulate relatively more body fat and less lean body mass, ie, muscle and bone.

143 ood and skeletal muscle ammonia, increase in lean body mass, improved grip strength, higher skeletal

144 week, which will promote the maintenance of lean body mass, improvements in muscular strength and en

145 ely correlated to body weight, fat mass, and lean body mass in adolescent, perimenopausal, and elderl

146 n II (AngII) could contribute to the loss of lean body mass in chronic kidney disease, but the mechan

147 dy weight, muscle mass, muscle strength, and lean body mass in HIV-infected men with weight loss and

148 rotein supplement did not increase weight or lean body mass in HIV-positive subjects who were eating

149 nds, significantly increases strength and/or lean body mass in humans by increasing testosterone leve

150 ate with inflammation and predict changes in lean body mass in patients with CKD, and activation of t

151 body mass increased in the PRO group whereas lean body mass in the CON group remained stable during t

152 n greater relative increases in both fat and lean body mass in the undernourished rats when compared

153 -2.1 kg [95% CI, -2.8 to -1.35] and overall lean body mass increased (change in lean body mass, 2.1

154 (from 31.9% +/- 6.5% to 28.3% +/- 7.0%), and lean body mass increased (from 59.0 +/- 8.5 kg to 61.5 +

155 Lean body mass increased at a steeper rate in males (P<0

156 Average lean body mass increased by 2.3 kg (P = .004) and 2.6 kg

157 Over 12 weeks, lean body mass increased in 38 patients in the anamoreli

158 Lean body mass increased in growth hormone recipients co

159 Over 12 weeks, lean body mass increased in patients assigned to anamore

160 Lean body mass increased in the PRO group whereas lean b

161 Lean body mass increased significantly in patients given

162 The adjustment of PkVO2 to lean body mass increases the prognostic value of cardiop

163 Seven lean (body mass index < 25 kg/m(2)), young, sedentary IR

164 sk associated with SHBG rs6259 was found for lean (body mass index <23) postmenopausal minor allele c

165 Ten lean (body mass index, 19-25 kg/m(2)), healthy Caucasian

166 eference curves for fat mass index (FMI) and lean body mass index (LBMI) and evaluate the effects of

167 Higher lean body mass index trajectories were associated with h

168 ase in both sexes (e.g., boys in the highest lean body mass index trajectory had on average a 0.62 L

169 Methods: Sex-specific body mass index, lean body mass index, and fat mass index trajectories we

170 Both men and women were remarkably lean: body mass index = 21.3 (3.6) and 23.0 (5.2) kg/m2,

171 Lean body mass is an important predictor of survival and

172 Loss of lean body mass is common in patients with acute or chron

173 l anabolic strategies to reverse the loss of lean body mass is of critical importance to increase sur

174 dence suggests that growth hormone increases lean body mass, it may not improve strength; in addition

175 (body mass index, body fat (%), weight (kg), lean body mass (kg), and fat mass (kg)) were significant

176 % +/- 0.007 nmol/100 mL leg/min) and loss of lean body mass (LBM) (-4.1% +/- 1.9%); P < 0.05.

177 s for estimation of total body fat (TBF) and lean body mass (LBM) (n = 10,525) were followed for 13.6

178 stration to elderly individuals can increase lean body mass (LBM) and decrease fat, but interactive e

179 It is not clear how lean body mass (LBM) and fat mass (FM) compare in their

180 e associations of early nutrition with adult lean body mass (LBM) and muscle strength in a birth coho

181 ) was assessed by hyperinsulinemic clamp and lean body mass (LBM) and total body fat were assessed by

182 rolled RCT was powered on a 5% difference in lean body mass (LBM) at 1 month.

183 omputerized scheme that evaluates whole-body lean body mass (LBM) based on CT data from limited-whole

184 ined the effect of body mass index (BMI) and lean body mass (LBM) depletion on handgrip (HG) force an

185 rther aim was to estimate a patient-specific lean body mass (LBM) from these MR-AC data.

186 Lean body mass (LBM) is a complex trait for human health

187 Primary outcomes included change in lean body mass (LBM) measured by dual-energy x-ray absor

188 A profound loss of lean body mass (LBM) occurred in both groups during the

189 lness of creatinine excretion as an index of lean body mass (LBM) or muscle mass in healthy men and w

190 Repletion of lean body mass (LBM) that patients lose in human immunod

191 dependent contributions of fat mass (FM) and lean body mass (LBM) to body weight, which vary accordin

192 al status on serum ferritin, after change in lean body mass (LBM) was controlled for, were evaluated

193 ne-third of that of 18 AL (P < 0.001), while lean body mass (LBM) was unchanged.

194 +/- 2, 17 +/- 2, and 22 +/- 2 pmol x kg(-1) lean body mass (LBM) x min(-1) (P < 0.05, days 5 and 10

195 ion of EE by either total body mass (TBM) or lean body mass (LBM), 2) compared the independent contri

196 ine, p < 0.01); after adjustment for age and lean body mass (LBM), DES excretion in rapid decliners w

197 ptake lean body mass (SUL), calculated using lean body mass (LBM), is essential for the semiquantific

198 e during an energy deficit helps to preserve lean body mass (LBM), particularly when combined with ex

199 Lean body mass (LBM), skeletal muscle index (SMI), and f

200 Control patients lost 8 +/- 1% of their lean body mass (LBM), whereas oxandrolone-treated patien

201 take at the RDA or a high amount [1.1 g . kg lean body mass (LBM)-1 . d-1 or >2.1 g . kg LBM-1 . d-1,

202 ith HIV lipodystrophy [33.2 +/- 0.27 kcal/kg lean body mass (LBM)] than for both HIV-infected and hea

203 able content of the diet with the percentage lean body mass (%LBM) or change in %LBM in older subject

204 tandardized uptake value (SUV) normalized by lean body mass ([LBM] SUL) is becoming a popular metric

205 iometry-assessed body composition (including lean body mass [LBM], appendicular lean mass [ALM], and

206 ngs provide new insight into the genetics of lean body mass.Lean body mass is a highly heritable trai

207 severity score, lower body mass index, lower lean body mass, less participation in organized sports,

208 ate and contribute to disrupted homeostasis, lean body mass loss, and deteriorated performance in ind

209 in the tumor-bearing mice and reverse their lean body mass loss.

210 When indexed to lean body mass, LV growth in the II subjects was abolish

211 milligrams of glucose uptake per kilogram of lean body mass (M(lbm)) per minute).

212 mal glucose tolerance and 12 age-, sex-, and lean body mass-matched healthy control subjects underwen

213 Differences in bone density and trunk lean body mass may account for some of these measured di

214 In addition, greater lean body mass may be a cause.

215 Group 3 had the greatest changes in lean body mass (mean +/- SE, 3.2 +/- 0.59 kg; P < 0.001)

216 Fat and lean body mass measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiome

217 The use of <19 ml O2/kg of lean body mass/min as a cutoff in PkVO2 should be used f

218 owed that a nodal standardized uptake value (lean body mass) more than 1.8 had a positive predictive

219 Secondary clinical end points were weight, lean body mass, muscle mass, exercise functional capacit

220 onstrated progressive decreases in body fat, lean body mass, muscle power, and nitrogen balance and a

221 n = 38,292) and appendicular (arms and legs) lean body mass (n = 28,330) measured using dual energy X

222 [95% CI, 165-289 kcal/d]) and body protein (lean body mass) (normal protein diet: 2.87 kg [95% CI, 2

223 The highest correlation between Ki and lean body mass-normalized SUV was found for the interval

224 Consistent with the increased lean body mass of s/s animals, locomotor activity and ac

225 To determine whether the lean body mass of well-nourished women was mobilized to

226 ssed by the change in SUVpeak, normalized to lean body mass, of the most (18)F-FDG-avid lesion (PERCI

227 h the highest average SUL [SUV normalized to lean body mass]) of up to 5 lesions according to PERCIST

228 h as the "constant" hydration coefficient of lean body mass or the "constant" density of fat-free mas

229 ixel value in the numerator and with weight, lean body mass, or body surface area in the denominator.

230 Water, 25 g glucose, 1 mmol lysine/kg lean body mass, or lysine plus glucose was given on sepa

231 mble chronic inflammatory disease [decreased lean body mass, osteopenia, low-grade anemia, decreased

232 n excess of maternal nitrogen in the form of lean body mass over that deposited in the fetus and the

233 ificantly increased skeletal muscle mass and lean body mass over time.

234 o eat (P = 0.356; SED: 3.7), preservation of lean body mass (P = 0.334; SED: 0.2), and loss of percen

235 ic rate (PCR), transferrin, cholesterol, and lean body mass per height.

236 5.4 [SE 4.0] vs 60.6 [7.2] micromoles per kg lean body mass per min; p=0.023) owing to a reduction in

237 -SD] change, 1.5 +/- 2.1 mg of glucose/kg of lean body mass per minute vs. -0.4 +/- 1.6 mg/kg per min

238 2(+/-) and ROCK2(+/KD) mouse models showed a lean body mass phenotype during aging, associated with i

239 adjusted model (which included age, age(2), lean body mass, pulse rate, pulse pressure, hormone-repl

240 ), which was attenuated after adjustment for lean body mass (r = 0.25, P = 0.08).

241 tively correlated with the change in percent lean body mass (r = 0.32; P = .003) and the change in th

242 related closely with body size, particularly lean body mass (r=.69, P<.0001) and systolic (r=.35, P<.

243 eater antecedent weight loss and a lower fat/lean body mass ratio.

244 on can be explained solely by a reduction in lean body mass remains controversial.

245 = 0.60 for SUV normalized to body weight and lean body mass, respectively), most likely because of de

246 nintentional loss of body weight and loss of lean body mass (sarcopenia).

247 nt feeding and fat mass after adjustment for lean body mass, sex, birth weight, maternal obesity, rac

248 Lean body mass significantly increased in the GHRH group

249 Body weight, lean body mass, SIV titers, and somatometric measurement

250 SUV corrected for lean body mass (SUL and SULpeak) were obtained.

251 mum standardized uptake values corrected for lean body mass (SUL(max)) on (18)F-FDG PET predicted pat

252 gnificant decrease in SUV(max) corrected for lean body mass (SUL(max)) on images obtained after MSG a

253 SUV(max) normalized for lean body mass (SUL(max)) was measured at the primary tu

254 Maximum SUVs normalized for lean body mass (SUL(max)) were measured in all scans.

255 02) [standardized uptake value corrected for lean body mass (SUL) = 5.42 +/- 2.77, 8.04 +/-3.25 and 1

256 e value calculated on the basis of predicted lean body mass (SUL) on these images, and we calculated

257 ed uptake value (SUV) corrected by predicted lean body mass (SUL) was calculated and compared.

258 Standardized uptake values corrected for lean body mass (SUL) were determined for several normal

259 The standardized uptake lean body mass (SUL), calculated using lean body mass (L

260 RCIST5 (analyzing the peak SUV normalized by lean body mass [SUL(peak)] of 1 or up to 5 lesions), imP

261 mum standardized uptake values corrected for lean body mass (SULmax) on [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose pos

262 ts; SUV normalized to body weight (SUV(BW)), lean body mass (SUV(LBM)), whole blood (SUV(WB)), parent

263 ke, standardized uptake value normalized for lean body mass (SUV-lean) was measured 1 h after FDG inj

264 weight (SUVbw), ideal body weight (SUVibw), lean body mass (SUVlbm), and body surface area (SUVbsa)

265 The standard uptake value normalized for lean body mass (SUVlean) in tumors was measured 50-60 mi

266 The mean values for lean body mass, Tanner stage, height-for-age Z score and

267 d patients, leading to a progressive loss of lean body mass that was not prevented by nutritional sup

268 To further keep erosion of lean body mass to a minimum, administration of anabolic

269 ain further insight into the relation of the lean body mass to REE and to better understand differenc

270 SURs calculated with weight versus lean body mass versus body surface area in the denominat

271 t of the 9 measures left the association for lean body mass virtually unchanged (lowest HR: 1.33 [95%

272 SUVmax corrected for lean body mass was 0.4-12.1 (mean +/- SD, 2.1 +/- 2.0).

273 Lean body mass was 42% greater in men than in women.

274 stic was associated with BMD loss, but lower lean body mass was associated with greater BMD loss at b

275 were not affected; whereas no difference in lean body mass was detected in male mice.

276 However, after developing HF, loss of total lean body mass was disproportionate; men with HF lost 65

277 Change in lean body mass was greater in those treated with growth

278 Lean body mass was maintained in women who exclusively b

279 2) Erosion of lean body mass was not attenuated by increased caloric b

280 +/-0.6) and fat mass (FM: -2.3+/-1.5), while lean body mass was preserved (LBM: 0.0+/-0.7).

281 Lean body mass was preserved throughout lactation in wel

282 y) subjects from 25 cohorts for appendicular lean body mass was successful for five single-nucleotide

283 Lean body mass was the predominant anthropometric risk f

284 Chronic MFP dosing for 25 days increased lean body mass, weight gain, and bone mineral density si

285 nation rate and liver volume per kilogram of lean body mass were 33% and 38% higher in women than in

286 vity levels, energy expenditure (Vo(2)), and lean body mass were all better sustained with age in rat

287 Standardized uptake values using lean body mass were determined over areas of interest.

288 fferent between groups at year 2; weight and lean body mass were greater at years 4 and 6, and fat ma

289 By year 4, weight, BMI, and lean body mass were greater in the high-risk than in the

290 lute measures (total fat, abdominal fat, and lean body mass) were secondary outcomes.

291 eostatic responses allowing them to maintain lean body mass when dietary protein intake is restricted

292 compensatory mechanisms designed to conserve lean body mass when dietary protein intake is restricted

293 explanation for death after the depletion of lean body mass when some body fat is still available to

294 scle protein net balance and preservation of lean body mass, which are associated with shortened hosp

295 30 patients were assessable for change in lean body mass, which increased by a mean of 1.02 kg (SD

296 rexia, negative nitrogen balance and loss of lean body mass will ensue.

297 tion, the association between higher BMI and lean body mass with natriuretic peptides may be mediated

298 Change in total lean body mass within the placebo group (median 0.02 kg,

299 e of enobosarm might lead to improvements in lean body mass, without the toxic effects associated wit

300 stment of peak oxygen consumption (PkVO2) to lean body mass would yield a more accurate discriminator