4.7 Article

Inflammation Modifies the Paradoxical Association between Body Mass Index and Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY
卷 27, 期 5, 页码 1479-1486

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2015030252

关键词

-

资金

  1. Amgen (Europe)
  2. Amgen (GmbH, Zug, Switzerland)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High body mass index (BMI) is paradoxically associated with better outcome in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Persistent inflammation commonly features in clinical conditions where the obesity paradox is described. We examined the relationship between BMI and mortality in HD patients, accounting for inflammation, in a historic cohort study of 5904 incident HD patients enrolled in 2007-2009 (312 facilities; 15 European countries) with months of follow-up. Patients were classified by presence (n=3231) or absence (n=2673) of inflammation (C-reactive protein >= 10 mg/l and/or albumin <= 35 g/l). Patients were divided into quintiles by BMI (Q1-Q5: <21.5, 21.5-24.0, >24.0-26.4, >26.4-29.8, and >29.8 kg/m(2), respectively). Noninflamed patients in BMI 05 formed the reference group. During a median follow-up period of 36.7 months, 1929 deaths occurred (822 cardiovascular), with 655 patients censored for renal transplantation and 1183 for loss to follow-up. Greater mortality was observed in inflamed patients (P<0.001). In fully adjusted time-dependent analyses, the all-cause mortality risk in noninflamed patients was higher only in the lowest BMI quintile (hazard ratio [HR, 1.80; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.26 to 2.56). No protective effect was associated with higher BMI quintiles in noninflamed patients. Conversely, higher BMI associated with lower all-cause mortality risk in inflamed patients (HR [95% CI] for 01: 5.63 [4.25 to 7.46]; Q2: 3.88 [2.91 to 5.17]; Q3: 2.89 [2.16 to 3.89]; Q4: 2.14 [1.59 to 2.90]; and Q5: 1.77 [1.30 to 2.40]). Thus, whereas a protective effect of high BMI was observed in inflamed patients, this effect was mitigated in noninflamed patients.

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

4.7
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