Cigarette Smoking Is Associated With Lower Quadriceps Cross-sectional Area and Attenuation in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In addition to well-established links with cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, cigarette smoking may affect skeletal muscle; however, associations with quadriceps atrophy, density, and function are unknown. This study explored the associations of current and former smoking with quadriceps muscle area and attenuation as well as muscle force (assessed as knee extension peak torque) and rate of torque development-a measure of muscle power in older adults. METHODS: Data from 4469 older adults, aged 66-95 years at baseline in the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik Study with measurements of thigh computed tomography, isometric knee extension testing, self-reported smoking history, and potential covariates were analyzed. RESULTS: Sex differences were observed in these data; therefore, our final analyses are stratified by sex. In men, both former smokers and current smokers had lower muscle area (with β= -0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.17 to -0.03 and β = -0.19, 95% CI = -0.33 to -0.05, respectively) and lower muscle attenuation (ie, higher fat infiltration, β = -0.08, 95% CI = -0.16 to -0.01 and β = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.34 to -0.01, respectively) when compared with never smokers. Smoking status was not associated with male peak torque or rate of torque development. In women, current smoking was associated with lower muscle attenuation (β = -0.24, 95% CI = -0.34 to -0.13) compared to never smoking. Among female smokers (current and former), muscle attenuation and peak torque were lower with increasing pack-years. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that cigarette smoking is related to multiple muscle properties at older age and that these relationships may be different among men and women. IMPLICATIONS: This article presents novel data, as it examined for the first time the relationship between smoking and computed tomography-derived quadriceps muscle size (cross-sectional area) and attenuation. This study suggests that current cigarette smoking is related to higher muscle fat infiltration, which may have significant health implications for the older population, because of its known association with poor physical function, falls, and hip fractures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".