ライフサイエンスコーパス: lean mass

1 e to decreased fat mass, without a change in lean mass.

2 creased energy expenditure despite decreased lean mass.

3 tment for age, sex, race, comorbidities, and lean mass.

4 sibly attributable to decreased appendicular lean mass.

5 -I87N mice is due to a reduced proportion of lean mass.

6 total, visceral, or hepatic fat or preserve lean mass.

7 s not associated with offspring adiposity or lean mass.

8 l adipose mass (P = 0.0187) without altering lean mass.

9 one mineral density, body fat mass (FM), and lean mass.

10 T3 or AAT3 decreases adiposity and increases lean mass.

11 asurement of total and regional body fat and lean mass.

12 asurement of total and regional body fat and lean mass.

13 w-up (P < 0.001), but there was no effect on lean mass.

14 of BMI to differentiate between body fat and lean mass.

15 ystatin C, a measure that does not depend on lean mass.

16 e closely associated with fat mass than with lean mass.

17 d by obesity and relatively low appendicular lean mass.

18 related increases in height, maturation, and lean mass.

19 to REE after adjustment for regional fat and lean mass.

20 rcaloric feeding to reverse the depletion of lean mass.

21 beyond the expected reduction for a reduced lean mass.

22 eloped to attempt to more accurately reflect lean mass.

23 ts revealed increased fat mass and decreased lean mass.

24 F%, suggesting association with both fat and lean mass.

25 ntrations (THg) in relation to reductions in lean mass.

26 e as a result of their greater reductions in lean mass.

27 ergy expenditure while increasing peripheral lean mass.

28 n both groups, but only the RT+CR group lost lean mass.

29 PAEE was associated with higher appendicular lean mass.

30 fat mass, and the latter was associated with lean mass.

31 expressed in the offspring, which influences lean mass.

32 ue to a greater increase in fat mass than in lean mass (0.45 kg and 0.17 kg/birth year, respectively)

33 0.2 v -0.4 +/- 0.3 kg; P =.02/0.30); and leg lean mass (+0.5 +/- 0.1 v -0.2 +/- 0.1 kg; P =.01/0.11).

34 ody fat mass (-6.9 +/- 0.5 kg), appendicular lean mass (-0.7 +/- 0.1 kg), and appendicular fat mass (

35 011] SDS per allele; P = .009) and postnatal lean mass (1 year: beta [SE], 0.038 [0.014] SDS per alle

36 abdominal fat (25.8%), trunk fat (18%), and lean mass (1.8%) were apparent (P < .001 for changes wit

37 es mean +/- SE: -7.9 +/- 0.6 kg), whole-body lean mass (-1.0 +/- 0.2 kg), whole-body fat mass (-6.9 +

38 in which the knockout females showed reduced lean mass (-12%), reduced total oxygen consumption rate

39 Fat mass and lean mass accounted for 68% and 32% of the gain in total

40 ch indicated greater fat mass accretion than lean mass accretion (P < 0.001).

41 ols 1.83 cm, 0.8 to 2.8, p<0.0001), and less lean mass (adjusted difference vs community controls -24

42 ercentage extremity fat, and lower extremity lean mass (adjusted for weight) are related to the hypog

43 was associated with significant deficits in lean mass after adjustment for height, age, race, and Ta

44 ate based on REE exists to offset erosion of lean mass after burn.

45 Participants lost more fat than lean mass after consumption of all diets, with no differ

46 ght loss, fat mass loss, and preservation of lean mass after higher-protein energy-restriction diets

47 aintained muscle quality (peak torque/kg leg lean mass) after 14 d of bed-rest inactivity (CON compar

48 strongly associated with BMI, fat mass, and lean mass (all p-values<0.001) and with childhood asthma

49 evaluated the relation between appendicular lean mass (ALM) and relative leukocyte telomere length (

50 ietary pattern techniques) with appendicular lean mass (ALM), quadriceps strength (QS), and bone mine

51 ndex (BMI), total fat mass, and appendicular lean mass (aLM)] and C-reactive protein (CRP), interleuk

52 including lean body mass [LBM], appendicular lean mass [ALM], and fat mass); objective physical funct

53 ght loss was proportional to the decrease in lean mass alone or was greater than could be explained b

54 Appendicular lean mass also decreased in RDA compared with 2RDA (P =

55 to the previously observed association with lean mass, an even distribution of daily protein intake

56 blood lactate concentration (lactate time), lean mass, anaerobic and aerobic capacities) and IPAQ sc

57 change was due to an accelerated decrease in lean mass and an initial increase and a later decrease i

58 erform bivariate GWAS analyses of total body lean mass and bone mass density in children, and show ge

59 girls (P < 0.001) after correction for total lean mass and energy intake (which explained 5% of the v

60 ociations of tCys and tHcy with fat mass and lean mass and examined whether changes in these aminothi

61 ic metabolic capacity, and childhood height, lean mass and fat mass as independent indices of metabol

62 en weight loss or weight gain and changes in lean mass and fat mass in older adults.

63 m litters exposed to 0.8 ppm ozone had lower lean mass and fat mass than pooled control offspring.

64 te scans, the reliability of DXA measures of lean mass and fat mass was excellent in both scan modes.

65 Lean mass and fat mass were estimated from bioelectric i

66 Whole-body and appendicular bone-free lean mass and fat mass were measured by using dual-energ

67 Adjusting for height, lean mass and fat mass, the association of systolic BP a

68 d positively associated with each of height, lean mass and fat mass.

69 f PRT proved safe and effective in restoring lean mass and function in patients with RA.

70 GTx-026 significantly increased body weight, lean mass and grip strength by 60-80% over vehicle-treat

71 c3r-/- mice have increased fat mass, reduced lean mass and higher feed efficiency than wild-type litt

72 g, positively predicted percentage extremity lean mass and inversely predicted percentage trunk fat a

73 The participants had substantially greater lean mass and leg strength gains when PS and RET were us

74 fat) and skeletal muscle (low percentage of lean mass and low cardiorespiratory fitness) are likely

75 Our findings show LY treatment increases lean mass and might improve functional measures of muscl

76 In mdx mice SR8278 increased lean mass and muscle function, and decreased muscle fibr

77 timulated appetite and weight gain, improved lean mass and muscle function, reduced energy expenditur

78 hey gained less body weight, with sparing of lean mass and preferential reduction of body fat, consis

79 improved in response to GHRH, with increased lean mass and reduced truncal and visceral fat.

80 itiating ART with TDF/FTC, no differences in lean mass and regional fat were found with RAL when comp

81 Lean mass and resting energy expenditure (REE) decrease

82 tput, whole body weight and composition, leg lean mass and skeletal muscle fibre area all remained un

83 We found that leg lean mass and strength decreased in older but not younge

84 tation restored bed rest-induced deficits in lean mass and strength in older adults.

85 de increased facial and body hair, increased lean mass and strength, decreased fat mass, deepening of

86 owever, the difference between the change in lean mass and that in fat mass was more pronounced with

87 Lean mass and thigh-muscle area decreased in men receivi

88 training program improved body composition (lean mass and total body skeletal muscle mass), weight,

89 Current lean mass and weight-bearing physical activity were more

90 On the other hand, current lean mass and weight-bearing physical activity were posi

91 on is reported to increase adiposity, reduce lean mass and white adipose tissue inflammation, and inc

92 dy-mass index, waist circumference, fat, and lean mass), and cardiometabolic risk factors (blood pres

93 l data, and associations with BMI, fat mass, lean mass, and asthma were estimated.

94 eous phenotype reflecting the amount of fat, lean mass, and body build, several studies have provided

95 orticoid therapy leads to obesity, decreased lean mass, and distorted distributions of fat and lean.

96 th age, namely, to produce less fat and more lean mass, and enhances insulin sensitivity and energy e

97 ive interventions reduced total body weight, lean mass, and fat mass and increased daily urinary cort

98 ly blocked and reversed loss of body weight, lean mass, and fat mass in juvenile SIV-infected rhesus

99 emained significant when postmenarcheal age, lean mass, and fat mass were controlled.

100 ive mating for age, weight, body mass index, lean mass, and fat mass.

101 apacity, left ventricular ejection fraction, lean mass, and heart rate variability (all p < 0.05 vs.

102 epatic triglyceride content, preservation of lean mass, and improved insulin signal transduction via

103 e turnover, decreases body fat and increases lean mass, and is associated with a low incidence of sid

104 tHcy was not associated with lean mass, and it became significantly inversely associa

105 reduced body weight, body length, fat mass, lean mass, and leptin levels.

106 mone agonists decrease bone mineral density, lean mass, and muscle size and increase fat mass in men

107 orotic fractures in relation to body weight, lean mass, and other confounders.

108 S) for weight, length/height, BMI, fat mass, lean mass, and percentage of body fat at birth as well a

109 ht(2), percentage of fat mass, percentage of lean mass, and the lean mass:fat mass ratio.

110 r implantation prevents anorexia and loss of lean mass, and their inhibition after symptom onset reve

111 e independent contributions of adiposity and lean mass are not fully defined.

112 Monitoring and preservation of BMI and lean mass are vital, especially in those with the identi

113 weight losers and weight gainers, changes in lean mass as a percentage of initial lean mass were subs

114 n in adipose tissue weight with no change in lean mass, assessed by magnetic resonance imaging.

115 position, with increasing fat and decreasing lean mass associated with higher HAQ scores.

116 rate and movement monitoring), with fat and lean mass at ages 60-64 years in 1,162 British participa

117 It was not associated with lean mass at any of the ages studied.

118 The greater differences for lean mass at the hip may reflect the high physical mobil

119 with greater IAF (beta = 0.49) and less leg lean mass (beta = -0.35).

120 man plot showed that the differences in mean lean masses between the studied technique and the refere

121 bA1c, weight, waist circumference, fat mass, lean mass, blood pressure, and triglyceride levels, decr

122 (in kg/m(2))]) and body composition (fat and lean mass, body fat percentage) between predominantly br

123 an +/- SD percentage body fat, fat mass, and lean mass (bone-free) were 28 +/- 5%, 24 +/- 7 kg, and 5

124 Body composition, including fat mass, lean mass, bone mineral content, and bone mineral densit

125 gth, waist circumference, total tissue mass, lean mass, bone mineral content, or bone mineral density

126 of weight, the ability to separately examine lean mass, bone, and fat should shed light on the underl

127 iotropic effects on bone mineral density and lean mass.Bone mineral density and lean skeletal mass ar

128 0.3 kg (12.4%) fat and 2.1 +/- 0.3 kg (3.5%) lean mass (both P < 0.0001 compared with baseline values

129 h the more common James formulation for body lean mass breaks down and shows low SUL values in very o

130 flecting primarily a substantial decrease in lean mass but not fat mass.

131 g adults with CD had significant deficits in lean mass but preserved fat mass, which is consistent wi

132 both DEXA-derived lean and fat mass, greater lean mass, but not fat mass, was associated with low BNP

133 Weight loss reduces body fat and lean mass, but whether these changes are influenced by m

134 THg increased 0.4 ppm for each gram of lean mass catabolized in the higher dose birds.

135 accounted for by decreased fat mass but not lean mass, compared to sham-operated mice on the high fa

136 Lean mass decreased less in the combination and resistan

137 Appendicular fat and lean mass demonstrated the strongest association per kil

138 Formula-fed infants gained more lean mass (difference: 303 g; 95% CI: 137, 469 g) than b

139 Birds lost 6-16% of their lean mass during the fast, and THg increased an average

140 ith weight (EA: P = 0.008; AA: P = 0.05) and lean mass (EA: P= 0.003; AA: P = 0.03).

141 Regression models including age and lean mass explained the most variation in bone mineral d

142 in participants with normal lower-extremity lean mass (extensor strength, 30.1 lb-ft for those with

143 Measures of body composition (lean mass, fat mass) were estimated from bioelectric imp

144 A stepwise multiple regression found lean mass, fat mass, age, and sex to be the best predict

145 decreased food intake, leading to decreased lean mass, fat mass, and body weight.

146 Lean mass, fat mass, morbidity, and mortality were deter

147 amount of testosterone required to maintain lean mass, fat mass, strength, and sexual function varie

148 For women, a one-unit gain in lean mass:fat mass ratio reduced the report of limitatio

149 f fat mass, percentage of lean mass, and the lean mass:fat mass ratio.

150 ablished early in the disablement process by lean mass:fat mass ratio.

151 ipose tissue inflammation and have increased lean mass, femoral length, and bone volume.

152 ded body weight, body composition of fat and lean mass, food consumption, body length, and blood leve

153 Analyses were adjusted for age, log fat and lean mass, food preferences, and intake during a buffet

154 ge, advanced maturation for age, and greater lean mass for height (all P < 0.001).

155 ss-for-height was positively correlated with lean mass-for height (r = 0.41, P < 0.0001); this associ

156 The mean (+/-SD) lean mass-for-height and fat mass-for-height z scores in

157 Mean total lean mass-for-height was 0.43 SD (95% CI: 0.15, 0.72) hi

158 CI: 0.15, 0.72) higher and mean appendicular lean mass-for-total-lean-mass was lower (-0.39 SD; 95% C

159 mostly accounted for by an increase in trunk lean mass found in 2RDA (+1.39 +/- 1.09 kg, P < 0.001).

160 ials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy of PS for lean mass gain, strength gain, and physical mobility imp

161 At 6 months, lean mass had increased on average by 4.3% in the growth

162 We conclude that both fat and lean mass have independent influences on bone mass, but

163 lly significant relations were shown between lean mass/height(2) and risk of death in crude but not a

164 nce, waist-to-hip ratio, fat mass/height(2), lean mass/height(2), percentage of fat mass, percentage

165 d metabolism were concomitant with a loss of lean mass, hypermetabolism, hepatic steatosis, dyslipide

166 d white fat mass and adipocyte size, reduced lean mass, impaired hypoglycemia-induced glucagon secret

167 ted with severe burn and leads to erosion of lean mass, impaired wound healing, and delayed rehabilit

168 -ray absorptiometry measurements of neonatal lean mass in 102 Southampton Women's Survey (SWS) infant

169 Fat and lean mass in AN boys was 69% and 86% of that in control

170 in lower body weight and fat mass and higher lean mass in animals and adult humans.

171 scriptional response to exercise and reduced lean mass in OLD men.

172 The 96-week percentage changes in fat and lean mass in the 2 PI arms were not different, thus the

173 t and age leads to bigger body size and less lean mass in the elderly.

174 rol group, the CRC group also showed reduced lean mass in the legs and higher levels of the endotheli

175 Oxandrolone improves protein net balance and lean mass in the severely burned.

176 mass is regained to a greater degree than is lean mass in those who do experience some weight regain.

177 mass (in women only) and higher appendicular lean mass (in both sexes, after adjustment for fat mass)

178 Changes in body composition (fat and lean mass) in both groups were very similar (P = .85 and

179 out mice, Mc3r(TB/TB) mice displayed reduced lean mass, increased fat mass, and accelerated diet-indu

180 atchup growth of SGA infants was confined to lean mass, independently of nutrition.

181 Our goal was to determine the impact of lean mass index (LMI) and body fat (BF) on survival in p

182 gene-based genome-wide association study of lean mass index (LMI) in 1000 unrelated Caucasian subjec

183 The fat mass index (FMI) and lean mass index (LMI) were surrogates of adiposity and s

184 ht and expressed as fat mass index (FMI) and lean mass index (LMI), respectively.

185 No lean mass indicator was associated with risk of death.

186 l performance and overall functioning, while lean mass is less significant in absolute terms but is i

187 With a similar amount of total weight loss, lean mass is preserved, but there is not a preferential

188 Body weight, body fat and lean mass, liver steatosis, glucose tolerance and pancre

189 ual X-ray absorptiometry and examined as leg lean mass (LLM), ALM, and the ratio of ALM to body mass

190 lt translates into long-term preservation of lean mass (LM) in older adults remains unknown.

191 hn's disease (CD) is associated with growth, lean mass (LM), and fat mass (FM) deficits.

192 Changes in fat mass (FM), lean mass (LM), and percentage body fat between the inte

193 ad 2-5 annual measurements of fat mass (FM), lean mass (LM), and REE.

194 ch may contribute to the age-related loss of lean mass (LM).

195 Race- and sex-specific Z scores for lean mass (LM-ht-Z) and fat mass (FM-ht-Z) relative to h

196 body (4.8% and 4.1%) and total appendicular lean mass (LM; 3.0% and 2.1%) compared to AA genotype, w

197 position, particularly the amount of fat and lean mass located in the arms and legs, is strongly asso

198 teraction, P < 0.05), and reduced whole-body lean mass loss after 7 d (CON compared with LEU: -1.5 +/

199 ls, weight loss was strongly associated with lean mass loss in both men and women, especially in men

200 Lean mass, MPS, LPB and strength were not different but

201 Changes in lean mass, muscle size, and muscle strength were similar

202 drogen deficiency accounted for decreases in lean mass, muscle size, and strength; estrogen deficienc

203 tion recipients, exercise is able to improve lean mass, muscle strength, and, as a consequence, aerob

204 e (grams per day) and BMD, ALM, appendicular lean mass normalized for height (ALM/ht(2)), and QS (200

205 After adjustment for maturation and lean mass, obesity was associated with significantly gre

206 The increased lean mass of MPSI and MPSIIIB mice suggests a shift in a

207 Differences in trunk and limb lean mass of white and AA children may explain some of t

208 d causal RRs for the effects of fat mass and lean mass on asthma were 1.41 (95% CI 1.11-1.79) per 0.5

209 e examined the relative influence of fat and lean mass on bone mineral content (BMC) among 1600 early

210 stigate causal effects of BMI, fat mass, and lean mass on current asthma at age 7(1/2) y in the Avon

211 e joint associations of appendicular fat and lean mass on HAQ were additive without significant inter

212 ology led to elevated fat mass and decreased lean mass on low-fat diet (LFD), accompanied by leptin r

213 ever, appear to be associated with lower leg lean mass or strength.

214 s associated with higher measures of fat and lean mass (P < .001) after adjustment for alcohol consum

215 an others to have low BMI (P = .004) and low lean mass (P < .001) post-HSCT.

216 +/- 2.1 versus 1.9 +/- 0.3 g; P < 0.001) and lean mass (P < 0.001) than pair-fed mice at 22 degrees C

217 nts had higher body fat (P = .002) and lower lean mass (P = .013) z scores than male patients, and bl

218 The final regression model contained only lean mass (P = 0.01), which accounted for 76.3% of the v

219 g lower weight (P = 0.03) and a 0.85-g lower lean mass (P = 0.01).

220 runk adipose mass (P = 0.0422) and increased lean mass (P = 0.0432).

221 versus the highest quartile of appendicular lean mass (P<0.001).

222 was associated with disproportionate loss of lean mass, particularly among men.

223 ese results suggest that low fat mass or low lean mass, particularly at the extremes, may adversely a

224 R signaling was not sufficient to rescue the lean mass phenotype or the regulation of behaviors antic

225 These results suggest that trunk lean mass (presumably primarily organ tissue) is relativ

226 ther differences aligned with divergences in lean mass, protein turnover, insulin sensitivity and the

227 es were attributable to greater accretion of lean mass, rather than fat mass.

228 emale Tsc1 (tg) mice exhibit a higher fat to lean mass ratio at advanced ages than age-matched wild t

229 tayed within population norms, but those for lean mass remained below normal levels and diminished si

230 e/floxed littermates, with no differences in lean mass, skeletal muscle structure, fiber type, respir

231 an BMI >/=30 exhibited substantially greater lean mass (SMD: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.87) and leg streng

232 tent with muscle deconditioning, whereas leg lean mass, strength, and work done during maximal exerci

233 riable models modified the effect of BMI and lean mass, such that measures of body composition were n

234 a bivariate GWAS meta-analysis of total-body lean mass (TB-LM) and total-body less head bone mineral

235 The CR-only group lost relatively more lean mass than did either exercise group (P < 0.05).

236 m age to 6-mo corrected age (CA) gained more lean mass than did those fed term formula (TF).

237 With weight change, a greater proportion of lean mass than of fat mass was conserved, but, especiall

238 d NT-proBNP are more closely associated with lean mass than with fat mass.

239 For lean mass, the relation between carcass content and DXA

240 A higher lean mass-to-fat mass ratio, a relative measure of body

241 ait whereas genetic variants contributing to lean mass variation remain largely unknown.

242 and MBD3 genes was a novel locus underlying lean mass variation.

243 on BMI, but was confounded by differences in lean mass versus fat mass when modeled on weight.

244 Leg lean mass (via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; DXA) an

245 The odds ratio for lean mass was 0.4451 (95% confidence interval 0.2374-0.8

246 r of total and peripheral BMD, whereas total lean mass was a predictor of axial BMD.

247 Loss of appendicular lean mass was also greater with HF (-419.9 versus -318.2

248 Lean mass was also greater with longer duration of HAART

249 Adjusted appendicular lean mass was decreased among the lowest ALT deciles.

250 Lean mass was estimated by dual X-ray absorptiometry and

251 ihood of functional limitation, while higher lean mass was generally associated only with increased g

252 especially in older men, significantly more lean mass was lost with weight loss than was gained with

253 More fat than lean mass was lost with weight loss, which resulted in b

254 The association between tHcy and lean mass was not significant.

255 Wasting of fat but not of lean mass was predictive of adverse outcome, suggesting

256 er and mean appendicular lean mass-for-total-lean-mass was lower (-0.39 SD; 95% CI: -0.64, -0.14) in

257 sulted in abnormal substrate utilization and lean mass wasting.

258 n mode provided accurate measures of fat and lean mass, we derived specific correction factors to imp

259 The BMC differences per IQR of lean mass were 5-7% at the hip sites, 3% at the spine, a

260 omen with HF, loss of total and appendicular lean mass were also greater than in non-HF participants

261 Fat and lean mass were assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiome

262 Changes in LBM and regional lean mass were associated with changes in objective func

263 Weight, height, and lean mass were correlated with bone mineral measures at

264 at, extremity fat, trunk lean, and extremity lean mass were divided by height squared and used to cat

265 Percentage extremity fat and extremity lean mass were lower in boys with AN (P = 0.003 and 0.00

266 of intervention, whole-body and appendicular lean mass were measured by using dual-energy X-ray absor

267 Fat mass and lean mass were measured using dual-energy-x-ray absorpti

268 Peripheral and central fat depots and lean mass were measured using standardized and centrally

269 Fat and lean mass were not independently associated with vitamin

270 Trunk and extremity lean mass were not independently related to increased AL

271 Gains in lean mass were significantly greater in the ActRIIB.Fc g

272 s, the associations of BMC with fat mass and lean mass were similar in direction and comparable in ma

273 nges in lean mass as a percentage of initial lean mass were substantially smaller than changes in fat

274 Changes in the percentage of body fat and in lean mass were the primary outcomes.

275 Fat and lean masses were assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptio

276 Total-body BMC, BMD, and fat and lean masses were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptio

277 Body fat and lean masses were measured by using dual-energy X-ray abs

278 real bone mineral density (BMD), and fat and lean masses were measured.

279 0.2 kg) (P < 0.05), but increases in fat and lean masses were not significant.

280 body composition (percentage fat, total fat, lean mass) were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiom

281 d that activin A primarily triggered loss of lean mass, whereas IL6 was a major mediator of fat loss.

282 nificantly contributed to total-body BMC was lean mass, which demonstrated a protective effect of 0.5

283 Weight loss may contribute to the loss of lean mass with age.

284 The associations of measures of fat and lean mass with disability, measured with the Health Asse

285 of absolute and relative measures of fat and lean mass with physical performance and self-reported fu

286 e of post-HSCT BMI (P < .001) and of fat and lean mass z scores (both P < .001).