Endocrine Journal
Online ISSN : 1348-4540
Print ISSN : 0918-8959
ISSN-L : 0918-8959

この記事には本公開記事があります。本公開記事を参照してください。
引用する場合も本公開記事を引用してください。

Creatinine/(cystatin C × body weight) ratio is associated with skeletal muscle mass index
Kensuke NishidaYoshitaka HashimotoAyumi KajiTakuro OkamuraRyousuke SakaiNoriyuki KitagawaTakafumi OsakaMasahide HamaguchiMichiaki Fukui
著者情報
ジャーナル フリー 早期公開

論文ID: EJ19-0542

この記事には本公開記事があります。
詳細
抄録

We have previously reported that the creatinine (Cre) to cystatin C (CysC) ratio is associated with height-adjusted skeletal muscle mass index (SMI). However, weight-adjusted SMI is reported to be a more useful marker of insulin sensitivity than height-adjusted SMI. Thus, we hypothesized that the creatinine to (cystatin C × body weight [BW]) relationship (Cre/[CysC × BW]) might be associated with weight-adjusted SMI. In this cross-sectional study of 169 males and 132 females, a body composition analyzer was used and the weight-adjusted SMI was calculated as (absolute muscle mass [kg]/BW [kg]) × 100. The cut-off of low muscle mass was defined as weight-adjusted SMI <37.0% for males and <28.0% for females. The Cre/(CysC × BW) was correlated with weight-adjusted SMI in both males (r = 0.484, p < 0.001) and females (r = 0.538, p < 0.001). In addition, Cre/(CysC × BW) was associated with weight-adjusted SMI in both males (standardized β = 0.493, p < 0.001) and females (standardized β = 0.570, p < 0.001) after adjusting for covariates. According to the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the optimal cut-off point of Cre/(CysC × BW) for low muscle mass was 0.0145 (area under the ROC curve [AUC] 0.756 [95% confidence interval {95% CI} 0.644–0.842], sensitivity = 0.96, specificity = 0.47, p < 0.001) in males and 0.0090 (AUC 0.976 [95% CI 0.894–0.995], sensitivity = 1.00, specificity = 0.93, p < 0.001) in females. There is a correlation between Cre/(CysC × BW) and weight-adjusted SMI. The Cre/(CysC × BW) could be a practical screening marker for low muscle mass.

著者関連情報
© The Japan Endocrine Society
feedback
Top