{"title":"Comparison of Anthropometric Equations and Dual X-ray Absorptiometry to Determine Body Composition in Active Breast Cancer Survivors","authors":"R. Klika, Shelby Cox, Brooklyn E. Herbert","doi":"10.17140/semoj-7-182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective The purpose of this study was to 1) compare the body composition values of an active group of breast cancer survivors (BCS) determined by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and anthropometry, and 2) compare the bone mineral density of the upper thoracic region to assess the effect of tumor burden on bone health. Design and Methods Forty (n=40) breast cancer survivors from a local competitive Dragon Boat Team were measured as part of team assessments. ANOVA with Dunn’s post-hoc testing was used to compare results of DXA, body density, and body composition estimated from anthropometry. Bland-Altman testing and correlational analysis were calculated. Results Percentage of fat measure by DXA was significantly higher than values used to estimate body fat from skinfold measures or from body density equations (DXA 41.1±6.0% vs. 3-site skinfolds 28.8±4.9%, 4-site skinfolds, 22.1±4.1%, skinfold and body density, 31.8±9.4%, respectively, p<0.05). Post-hoc testing revealed that all values were significantly different and the strongest correlation with DXA was skinfolds at three sites was r=0.81. Regional (upper thoracic) bone mineral density was not significantly different based on tumor side diagnosis (breast cancer diagnosis side versus healthy, 0.971±0.198 vs. 0.988±0.190 gm*cc-1). Anthropometry and bilateral bone mineral density characteristics are presented to serve as a comparative sample of BCS for future studies. Conclusion As body composition is an important factor in long-term cancer survivorship, we found the use of skinfold measures inadequate to accurately determine percentage of fat in this group of active female BCS. As a result, recommendations aimed at achieving an ideal body composition based solely on anthropometry would have grossly underestimated fat mass, which may lead to overall clinically poorer outcomes.","PeriodicalId":286240,"journal":{"name":"Sports and Exercise Medicine – Open Journal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports and Exercise Medicine – Open Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17140/semoj-7-182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective The purpose of this study was to 1) compare the body composition values of an active group of breast cancer survivors (BCS) determined by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and anthropometry, and 2) compare the bone mineral density of the upper thoracic region to assess the effect of tumor burden on bone health. Design and Methods Forty (n=40) breast cancer survivors from a local competitive Dragon Boat Team were measured as part of team assessments. ANOVA with Dunn’s post-hoc testing was used to compare results of DXA, body density, and body composition estimated from anthropometry. Bland-Altman testing and correlational analysis were calculated. Results Percentage of fat measure by DXA was significantly higher than values used to estimate body fat from skinfold measures or from body density equations (DXA 41.1±6.0% vs. 3-site skinfolds 28.8±4.9%, 4-site skinfolds, 22.1±4.1%, skinfold and body density, 31.8±9.4%, respectively, p<0.05). Post-hoc testing revealed that all values were significantly different and the strongest correlation with DXA was skinfolds at three sites was r=0.81. Regional (upper thoracic) bone mineral density was not significantly different based on tumor side diagnosis (breast cancer diagnosis side versus healthy, 0.971±0.198 vs. 0.988±0.190 gm*cc-1). Anthropometry and bilateral bone mineral density characteristics are presented to serve as a comparative sample of BCS for future studies. Conclusion As body composition is an important factor in long-term cancer survivorship, we found the use of skinfold measures inadequate to accurately determine percentage of fat in this group of active female BCS. As a result, recommendations aimed at achieving an ideal body composition based solely on anthropometry would have grossly underestimated fat mass, which may lead to overall clinically poorer outcomes.
目的:比较双x线吸收仪(DXA)和人体测量法测定的活跃组乳腺癌幸存者(BCS)的体成分值;比较上胸区域的骨矿物质密度,以评估肿瘤负荷对骨骼健康的影响。设计与方法对40名乳腺癌幸存者(n=40)进行测量,作为团队评估的一部分。采用Dunn事后检验的方差分析来比较由人体测量估计的DXA、体密度和体成分的结果。进行Bland-Altman检验和相关分析。结果DXA测量的脂肪百分比显著高于皮褶测量或体密度方程估算的脂肪百分比(DXA为41.1±6.0%,3点皮褶为28.8±4.9%,4点皮褶为22.1±4.1%,皮褶和体密度分别为31.8±9.4%,p<0.05)。事后检验显示,所有值都有显著差异,三个部位的皮肤褶皱与DXA的相关性最强,r=0.81。肿瘤侧诊断的区域(上胸椎)骨密度差异无统计学意义(乳腺癌诊断侧与健康侧,0.971±0.198 vs 0.988±0.190 gm*cc-1)。人体测量和双侧骨密度特征被提出作为BCS的比较样本,为未来的研究。结论:由于身体成分是癌症长期生存的重要因素,我们发现使用皮褶测量不足以准确确定这组活跃女性BCS的脂肪百分比。因此,仅仅基于人体测量的理想身体组成的建议严重低估了脂肪量,这可能导致总体临床结果较差。