Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Normative Data for Lean Mass Using FNIH Criteria in an Australian Setting

  • Case Reports
  • Published:
Calcified Tissue International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recommendations from the FNIH Sarcopenia Project are that appendicular lean mass (ALM, kg) adjusted for body mass index (BMI, kg/m2) be used for identifying low lean mass, with ALM/BMI cutpoints of < 0.789 m2 for men and < 0.512 m2 for women. We report normative ALM/BMI values for Australian adults, and compare the performance of cutpoints derived from reference values for this population with FNIH values for identifying low lean mass. Body composition was measured by DXA (Lunar) for 1411 men and 960 women, aged 20–93 years, from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, a population-based study in Australia. Sex-stratified means and standard deviations for DXA-derived ALM/BMI were generated for each age-decade, and cutpoints equivalent to T-scores of − 2.0 were derived using reference data for 374 men and 308 women aged 20–39 years. Mean ALM/BMI values were greater for men than women, and decreased with age in both sexes. Cutpoints for ALM/BMI corresponding to T-scores of − 2.0 were 0.827 m2 for men and 0.518 m2 for women. For individuals aged 65+ years, cross-classification of low lean mass according to FNIH criteria (ALM/BMI < 0.789 m2 men and < 0.512 m2 women) in comparison with our cutpoints for ALM/BMI showed overall agreement of 94.6% for men and 99.0% for women (κ 0.73 and 0.89, respectively). We report good agreement for low ALM indexed to BMI, particularly for women, between classifications based on recommendations from the FNIH Sarcopenia Project for identifying clinically significant weakness, with low values identified within our population distribution of ALM/BMI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Anker SD, Morley JE, von Haehling S (2016) Welcome to the ICD-10 code for sarcopenia. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 7:512–514

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F, Martin FC, Michel JP, Rolland Y, Schneider SM, Topinková E, Vandewoude M, Zamboni M (2010) Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in older people. Age Ageing 39:412–423

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Baumgartner RN, Koehler KM, Gallagher D, Romero L, Heymsfield SB, Ross RR, Garry PJ, Lindeman RD (1998) Epidemiology of sarcopenia among the elderly in New Mexico. Am J Epidemiol 147:755–763

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chien MY, Huang TY, Wu YT (2008) Prevalence of sarcopenia estimated using a bioelectrical impedance analysis prediction equation in community-dwelling elderly people in Taiwan. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:1710–1715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gould H, Brennan SL, Kotowicz MA, Nicholson GC, Pasco JA (2014) Total and appendicular lean mass reference ranges for Australian men and women: the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Calcif Tissue Int 94:363–372

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J, Boirie Y, Bruyere O, Cederholm T, Cooper C, Landi F, Rolland Y, Sayer AA, Schneider SM, Sieber CC, Topinkova E, Vandewoude M, Visser M, Zamboni M, Writing Group for the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2), and the Extended Group for EWGSOP2 (2018) Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afy169 (Epub ahead of print)

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Studenski SA, Peters KW, Alley DE, Cawthon PM, McLean RR, Harris TB, Ferrucci L, Guralnik JM, Fragala MS, Kenny AM, Kiel DP, Kritchevsky SB, Shardell MD, Dam TT, Vassileva MT (2014) The FNIH sarcopenia project: rationale, study description, conference recommendations, and final estimates. J Gerontol A 69:547–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cawthon PM, Peters KW, Shardell MD, McLean RR, Dam TT, Kenny AM, Fragala MS, Harris TB, Kiel DP, Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Kritchevsky SB, Vassileva MT, Studenski SA, Alley DE (2014) Cutpoints for low appendicular lean mass that identify older adults with clinically significant weakness. J Gerontol A 69:567–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pasco JA, Nicholson GC, Kotowicz MA (2012) Cohort profile: Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Int J Epidemiol 41:1565–1575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Henry MJ, Pasco JA, Korn S, Gibson JE, Kotowicz MA, Nicholson GC (2010) Bone mineral density reference ranges for Australian men: Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporos Int 21:909–917

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chiles Shaffer N, Ferrucci L, Shardell M, Simonsick EM, Studenski S (2017) Agreement and predictive validity using less-conservative Foundation for the National Institutes of Health Sarcopenia Project weakness cutpoints. J Am Geriatr Soc 65:574–579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Buchmann N, Spira D, Norman K, Demuth I, Eckardt R, Steinhagen-Thiessen E (2016) Sleep, muscle mass and muscle function in older people. Dtsch Arztebl Int 113:253–260

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheung CL, Lam KS, Cheung BM (2016) Evaluation of cutpoints for low lean mass and slow gait speed in predicting death in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2004. J Gerontol A 71:90–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Henry MJ, Pasco JA, Seeman E, Nicholson GC, Sanders KM, Kotowicz MA, Geelong Osteoporosis Study (2001) Assessment of fracture risk: value of random population-based samples—the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. J Clin Densitom 4:283–289

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pasco JA, Holloway KL, Dobbins AG, Kotowicz MA, Williams LJ, Brennan SL (2014) Body mass index and measures of body fat for defining obesity and underweight: a cross-sectional, population-based study. BMC Obes 1:9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the men and women who participated in the study.

Funding

The Geelong Osteoporosis Study (GOS) was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Australia (Projects 299831, 251638, 628582). The funding organisations played no role in the design or conduct of the study, in the collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data, nor in the preparation, review and approval of the manuscript. SXS, MCT and PGR were supported by Deakin Postgraduate Scholarships and KLH-K was supported by an Alfred Deakin Postdoctoral Research Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Deakin University, Geelong, Australia

    Julie A. Pasco, Kara L. Holloway-Kew, Monica C. Tembo, Sophia X. Sui, Kara B. Anderson, Pamela Rufus-Membere, Natalie K. Hyde, Lana J. Williams & Mark A. Kotowicz

  2. Department of Medicine – Western Health, The University of Melbourne, St Albans, Australia

    Julie A. Pasco & Mark A. Kotowicz

  3. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Julie A. Pasco

  4. Barwon Health, Geelong, Australia

    Julie A. Pasco & Mark A. Kotowicz

  5. Epi-Centre for Healthy Ageing, IMPACT Strategic Research Centre, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, 3220, Australia

    Julie A. Pasco

Authors
  1. Julie A. Pasco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kara L. Holloway-Kew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Monica C. Tembo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sophia X. Sui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kara B. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pamela Rufus-Membere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Natalie K. Hyde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lana J. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mark A. Kotowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie A. Pasco.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Julie A. Pasco, Kara L. Holloway-Kew, Monica C. Tembo, Sophia X. Sui, Kara B. Anderson, Pamela Rufus-Membere, Natalie K. Hyde, Lana J. Williams, Mark A. Kotowicz have declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical Approval

The study was approved by Barwon Health’s Human Research Ethics Committee.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pasco, J.A., Holloway-Kew, K.L., Tembo, M.C. et al. Normative Data for Lean Mass Using FNIH Criteria in an Australian Setting. Calcif Tissue Int 104, 475–479 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-018-0506-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-018-0506-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation