MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117242439 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_101748

Temporalis muscle thickness as a biomarker for sarcopenia: correlation with appendicular skeletal muscle mass in healthy older adults

2025· article· en· W7117242439 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Huynh, Scott D. Wrigley, Belinda M. Brown, Sanka Amadoru, Qiongshi Lu, Ting Ye, Jeremiah J. Peiffer, Paul K. Crane, C. Rowe, Louise M. Burrell, Paul A Yates

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaBiomarkerCorrelationCohortSkeletal muscleMuscle mass

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Sarcopenia, an age‐related loss of skeletal muscle strength, mass and function, is linked with dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Current guideline‐recommended tools to diagnose sarcopenia, such as appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM), calculated as the sum of lean muscle mass in the arms and legs via dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), are not commonly done in AD studies. However, brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is regularly performed in AD studies, and temporalis muscle thickness (TMT) has been suggested as a potential sarcopenia biomarker. As a first step in evaluating whether TMT could be a useful sarcopenia diagnostic tool, we aimed to ascertain if TMT correlates with ASM in healthy older adults. Method We conducted a retrospective study of healthy cognitively‐unimpaired older adults in the Intense Physical Activity and Cognition study, in whom MRI and DXA had been performed on the same visit. TMT was measured on axial T1‐weighted MRIs bilaterally perpendicular to the long‐axis of the temporalis muscle using the orbital roof and Sylvian fissure as anatomical landmarks, and average TMT used for analysis. ASM was adjusted for body size (height 2 ). Sarcopenia was defined as ASM< 7.0 kg/m 2 for males and <5.5 kg/m 2 for females as per the 2019 European working group on sarcopenia in older people criteria. Pearson correlation assessed the relationship between TMT and ASM or age. Result There were 95 participants (mean±standard deviation [SD] age 69.1±5.2 years, 53% female, median Montreal Cognitive Assessment score 27 [Interquartile range 25 – 28],11% had sarcopenia). The mean±SD ASM was 7.0±1.2 kg/m 2 and TMT was 7.3±1.2 mm. TMT and ASM were moderately correlated ( r = 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.23 – 0.56). TMT did not correlate with age but differed significantly between those with (mean±SD 7.4±1.2) and without sarcopenia (mean±SD 6.2±0.8, p = 0.004). Conclusion Among a cohort of cognitively‐unimpaired older adults, TMT demonstrated moderate correlation with ASM. While futher studies are needed, these findings suggest that MRI‐based assessement of TMT could be a practical tool to diagnose sarcopenia in AD studies. Future studies in AD patients should explore the relationship between TMT and long‐term clinical and functional outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→