{"title":"Percent body fat misclassifies patients with sarcopenia as obese: support for fat mass index in obesity assessment.","authors":"Susan L Ziolkowski, David R Weber, Joshua F Baker","doi":"10.1210/jendso/bvag139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Percent body fat (%BF) is a common measurement reported on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to assess for obesity. %BF is calculated as fat mass divided by total body mass, and thereby increases with either higher fat mass or reduced muscle mass. In contrast, fat mass index (FMI; kg/m<sup>2</sup>) quantifies fat mass independent of muscle mass. It is unknown whether patients classified as obese by %BF have low muscle mass, and whether individuals with sarcopenia are labeled as obese by %BF vs FMI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized whole-body DXA data from 1999-2006 NHANES in adults ≥20 years of age (<i>N</i> = 14 850) to estimate the prevalence obesity by %BF, FMI, BMI, and waist circumference. We compared body composition across definitions and examined obesity prevalence among those with sarcopenia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>More patients met criteria for obesity when defined by %BF (76.8%) compared to BMI (33.9%), FMI (35.8%), and WC (51%). Participants classified as obese by %BF had lower lean (muscle) mass, FMI, and BMI compared to participants obese by FMI (all <i>P</i> < .001). Among patients with sarcopenia, 62.4% were classified as obese by %BF compared with 0.5% if BMI was used to define obesity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients who are classified as obese by %BF had the lowest muscle mass and fat mass compared to participants who met other definitions of obesity. The majority of patients with sarcopenia are labeled as obese by %BF. We believe these findings support the use of FMI, a measurement not confounded by muscle mass, for research and clinical assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":17334,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Endocrine Society","volume":"10 8","pages":"bvag139"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13366532/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Endocrine Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1210/jendso/bvag139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Percent body fat (%BF) is a common measurement reported on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to assess for obesity. %BF is calculated as fat mass divided by total body mass, and thereby increases with either higher fat mass or reduced muscle mass. In contrast, fat mass index (FMI; kg/m2) quantifies fat mass independent of muscle mass. It is unknown whether patients classified as obese by %BF have low muscle mass, and whether individuals with sarcopenia are labeled as obese by %BF vs FMI.
Methods: We utilized whole-body DXA data from 1999-2006 NHANES in adults ≥20 years of age (N = 14 850) to estimate the prevalence obesity by %BF, FMI, BMI, and waist circumference. We compared body composition across definitions and examined obesity prevalence among those with sarcopenia.
Results: More patients met criteria for obesity when defined by %BF (76.8%) compared to BMI (33.9%), FMI (35.8%), and WC (51%). Participants classified as obese by %BF had lower lean (muscle) mass, FMI, and BMI compared to participants obese by FMI (all P < .001). Among patients with sarcopenia, 62.4% were classified as obese by %BF compared with 0.5% if BMI was used to define obesity.
Conclusion: Patients who are classified as obese by %BF had the lowest muscle mass and fat mass compared to participants who met other definitions of obesity. The majority of patients with sarcopenia are labeled as obese by %BF. We believe these findings support the use of FMI, a measurement not confounded by muscle mass, for research and clinical assessment.