4.0 Article

Phase angle is associated with muscle health and cardiorespiratory fitness in older breast cancer survivors

期刊

CLINICAL NUTRITION ESPEN
卷 55, 期 -, 页码 208-211

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2023.03.019

关键词

Breast cancer; Survivor; Body composition; Phase angle; Cardiorespiratory fitness; Muscle volume; Myosteatosis; Muscle health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between phase angle (PhA) obtained from bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and health-related physical fitness (including cardiorespiratory fitness, skeletal muscle volume, and myosteatosis) among older breast cancer survivors. The results showed that higher values of PhA were associated with better health-related physical fitness among this population.
Background & aim: Phase angle (PhA) obtained from bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is an indicator of cellular integrity and relates to several chronic conditions. The purpose of this secondary analysis was to evaluate the association of PhA with health-related physical fitness, namely, cardiorespiratory fitness, skeletal muscle volume, and myosteatosis (i.e. muscle health) in older breast cancer survivors. Methods: Twenty-two women >= 60 years with a body mass index (BMI) >= 25 kg/m2 and who completed chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer were included. BIA, cardiopulmonary exercise tests and magnetic resonance imaging scans were completed before and after eight weeks of time-restricted eating.Results: At baseline, PhA was associated with cardiorespiratory fitness (R2 = 0.54, p < 0.01) and skeletal muscle volume (R2 = 0.83, p < 0.01) and myosteatosis (R2 = 0.25, p = 0.02).Results were similar at follow-up.Conclusion: Findings from this pilot study suggest that higher values of PhA are associated with better health-related physical fitness among older breast cancer survivors.(c) 2023 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据