A comparison of associations of body mass index and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry measured percentage fat and total fat with global serum metabolites in young women

7Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: Body mass index (BMI) does not directly measure adiposity, whereas dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provides valid direct estimates of adiposity. Therefore, this study evaluated usefulness of BMI as a measure of adiposity in serum metabolomics studies. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 202 women aged 25 to 29 years in the Dietary Intervention Study in Children Follow-Up Study. Heights and weights were measured, and body composition was quantified using clinical DXA protocols. Serum metabolomic profiling was performed by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Partial correlations of BMI, percentage fat (%FAT), and total fat (TOTFAT) with log transformed serum metabolites were calculated. Results: There was significant overlap in the 93 metabolites that correlated with BMI, %FAT, and/or TOTFAT; 9 differently correlated with BMI and %FAT, whereas 15 differently correlated with BMI and TOTFAT. Even for these metabolites, absolute differences were modest. Metabolite set enrichment analysis identified diacylglycerol and sphingolipid metabolism as overrepresented among metabolites significantly correlated with all three measures of adiposity. Conclusions: BMI can be a good proxy for DXA measured %FAT and TOTFAT in descriptive metabolomic studies of healthy, young White women. Larger studies in more diverse populations are needed to endorse more generalized conclusions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dorgan, J. F., Ryan, A. S., LeBlanc, E. S., Van Horn, L., Magder, L. S., Snetselaar, L. G., … Shepherd, J. A. (2023). A comparison of associations of body mass index and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry measured percentage fat and total fat with global serum metabolites in young women. Obesity, 31(2), 525–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.23619

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free