Obesity and Metabolic Disease Impair the Anabolic Response to Protein Supplementation and Resistance Exercise: A Retrospective Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial with Implications for Aging, Sarcopenic Obesity, and Weight Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Anabolic resistance accelerates muscle loss in aging and obesity, thus predisposing to sarcopenic obesity. Methods: In this retrospective analysis of a randomized clinical trial, we examined baseline predictors of the adaptive response to three months of home-based resistance exercise, daily physical activity, and protein-based, multi-ingredient supplementation (MIS) in a cohort of free-living, older males (n = 32). Results: Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that obesity and a Global Risk Index for metabolic syndrome (MetS) were the strongest predictors of Δ% gains in lean mass (TLM and ASM), LM/body fat ratios (TLM/%BF, ASM/FM, and ASM/%BF), and allometric LM (ASMI, TLM/BW, TLM/BMI, ASM/BW), with moderately strong, negative correlations to the adaptive response to polytherapy r = −0.36 to −0.68 (p < 0.05). Kidney function, PA level, and chronological age were only weakly associated with treatment outcomes (p > 0.05). Next, we performed a subgroup analysis in overweight/obese participants with at least one other MetS risk factor and examined their adaptive response to polytherapy with two types of protein-based MIS (PLA; collagen peptides and safflower oil, n = 8, M5; whey/casein, creatine, calcium, vitamin D3, and fish oil, n = 12). The M5 group showed greater improvements in LM (ASM; +2% vs. −0.8%), LM/body fat ratios (ASM/FM; +3.8% vs. −5.1%), allometric LM (ASM/BMI; +1.2% vs. −2.5%), strength (leg press; +17% vs. −1.4%), and performance (4-Step-Stair-Climb time; −10.5% vs. +1.1%) vs. the PLA group (p < 0.05). Bone turnover markers, indicative of bone accretion, were increased pre-to-post intervention in the M5 group only (P1NP; p = 0.036, P1NP/CTX ratio; p = 0.088). The overall anabolic response, as indicated by ranking low-to-high responders for Δ% LM (p = 0.0079), strength (p = 0.097), and performance (p = 0.19), was therefore significantly higher in the M5 vs. PLA group (p = 0.013). Conclusions: Our findings confirm that obesity/MetS is a key driver of anabolic resistance in old age and that a high-quality, whey/casein-based MIS is more effective than a collagen-based alternative for maintaining musculoskeletal health in individuals at risk for sarcopenic obesity, even when total daily protein intake exceeds current treatment guidelines.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".