Evidence Hub

Association of variability in body size with neuroimaging metrics of brain health: a population-based cohort study

Jing Sun, Na Zeng, Y. Hui, Jing Li, Wenjuan Liu, Xin-Yu Zhao, Peng-Fei Zhao, Shuo-Hua Chen et al.

The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific, 2024

1,114 participants · 35 citations

Abstract

Summary Background The relationship between the fluctuation in body size and brain health is poorly understood. This study aimed to examine the associations of long-term variability in body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) with neuroimaging metrics that approximate brain health. Methods This cohort study recruited 1114 participants aged 25–83 years from a multicenter, community-based cohort study in China. We modeled the BMI and WHR trajectories of participants during 2006–2018 and assessed the BMI and WHR variability (direction and speed of change) by calculating the slope. Generalized linear models were applied to investigate the associations of BMI and WHR variability with MRI markers of brain tissue volume, white matter microstructural integrity, white matter hyperintensity (WMH), and cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD). Findings Progressive weight gain during follow-up was associated with lower global fractional anisotropy (beta = −0.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.34 to −0.02), higher mean diffusivity (beta = 0.15, 95% CI 0.01–0.30) and radial diffusivity (beta = 0.17, 95% CI 0.02–0.32). Weight loss was also associated with a lower burden of periventricular WMH (beta = −0.26, 95% CI −0.48 to −0.03) and a lower risk of moderate-to-severe basal ganglia enlarged perivascular spaces (BG-EPVS, odds ratio [OR] = 0.41, 95% CI 0.20–0.83). Among overweight populations, weight loss was linked with smaller volumes of WMH (beta = −0.47, 95% CI −0.79 to −0.15),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,114 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free