Skip to main content

Table 3 Associations of risk of developing NAFLD with fibrosis with FM/FFM by sex and obesity status

From: Fat mass to fat-free mass ratio and the risk of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and fibrosis in non-obese and obese individuals

  Quartile 1 Quartile 2 Quartile 3 Quartile 4 p for trend Per 1 SD increment p value
Men (n = 1017)
 Non-obesity (n = 612)
  NAFLD with NFS ≥  − 1.455
   Model 1 Reference 1.12 (0.46–2.73) 1.34 (0.57–3.15) 2.42 (1.10–5.30) 0.018 1.36 (1.04–1.78) 0.024
   Model 2 1.13 (0.45–2.82) 1.22 (0.50–3.01) 2.68 (1.19–6.03) 0.013 1.42 (1.07–1.89) 0.016
   Model 3 0.76 (0.29–2.00) 0.91 (0.36–2.33) 1.60 (0.67–3.84) 0.170 1.20 (0.88–1.64) 0.257
  NAFLD with FIB-4 ≥ 1.3
   Model 1 Reference 1.32 (0.58–3.01) 1.52 (0.68–3.39) 2.42 (1.14–5.13) 0.017 1.39 (1.08–1.79) 0.010
   Model 2 1.49 (0.64–3.43) 1.45 (0.63–3.35) 2.78 (1.28–6.06) 0.011 1.47 (1.13–1.92) 0.004
   Model 3 1.09 (0.46–2.60) 1.10 (0.46–2.61) 1.72 (0.75–3.96) 0.181 1.25 (0.94–1.67) 0.130
 Obesity (n = 405)
  NAFLD with NFS ≥  − 1.455
   Model 1 Reference 1.20 (0.61–2.39) 1.33 (0.68–2.61) 2.09 (1.09–4.01) 0.024 1.35 (1.08–1.69) 0.009
   Model 2 1.42 (0.70–2.87) 1.48 (0.73–2.99) 2.59 (1.30–5.16) 0.008 1.41 (1.12–1.78) 0.003
   Model 3 1.42 (0.68–2.98) 1.41 (0.66–2.98) 2.69 (1.28–5.65) 0.011 1.40 (1.08–1.80) 0.010
  NAFLD with FIB-4 ≥ 1.3
   Model 1 Reference 1.40 (0.72–2.72) 1.46 (0.76–2.81) 1.97 (1.03–3.74) 0.045 1.25 (1.00–1.55) 0.046
   Model 2 1.71 (0.86–3.39) 1.62 (0.81–3.22) 2.53 (1.28–5.03) 0.013 1.32 (1.06–1.66) 0.016
   Model 3 1.66 (0.81–3.41) 1.47 (0.71–3.04) 2.46 (1.19–5.09) 0.029 1.28 (1.00–1.64) 0.053
Women (n = 2402)
 Non-obesity (n = 1569)
  NAFLD with NFS ≥  − 1.455
   Model 1 Reference 1.42 (0.76–2.64) 1.97 (1.09–3.55) 2.76 (1.57–4.86)  < 0.001 1.37 (1.15–1.63) < 0.001
   Model 2 1.59 (0.83–3.04) 2.28 (1.22–4.23) 3.07 (1.68–5.62)  < 0.001 1.37 (1.15–1.63) < 0.001
   Model 3 1.38 (0.72–2.68) 1.91 (1.01–3.61) 2.40 (1.27–4.51) 0.003 1.26 (1.06–1.51) 0.009
  NAFLD with FIB-4 ≥ 1.3
   Model 1 Reference 1.50 (0.88–2.58) 1.98 (1.18–3.32) 2.88 (1.76–4.72)  < 0.001 1.39 (1.19–1.63) < 0.001
   Model 2 1.63 (0.93–2.84) 2.21 (1.29–3.78) 3.14 (1.87–5.28)  < 0.001 1.39 (1.19–1.63) < 0.001
   Model 3 1.38 (0.79–2.44) 1.77 (1.02–3.07) 2.27 (1.32–3.92) 0.002 1.25 (1.06–1.47) 0.008
 Obesity (n = 833)
  NAFLD with NFS ≥  − 1.455
   Model 1 Reference 1.20 (0.74–1.96) 1.34 (0.83–2.17) 1.87 (1.18–2.98) 0.007 1.22 (1.05–1.43) 0.012
   Model 2 1.38 (0.83–2.29) 1.52 (0.92–2.52) 2.25 (1.39–3.66) 0.001 1.29 (1.10–1.51) 0.002
   Model 3 1.36 (0.81–2.28) 1.40 (0.83–2.35) 2.03 (1.23–3.35) 0.007 1.25 (1.06–1.47) 0.001
  NAFLD with FIB-4 ≥ 1.3
   Model 1 Reference 1.03 (0.64–1.66) 1.02 (0.64–1.65) 1.72 (1.10–2.69) 0.021 1.20 (1.03–1.40) 0.023
   Model 2 1.18 (0.72–1.93) 1.15 (0.70–1.90) 2.06 (1.29–3.29) 0.003 1.27 (1.08–1.49) 0.004
   Model 3 1.13 (0.68–1.88) 1.03 (0.61–1.73) 1.89 (1.16–3.07) 0.017 1.23 (1.04–1.45) 0.015
  1. Data are odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI)
  2. P values were calculated from the logistic regression models. Model 1 was crude model. Model 2 adjusted for age, current smoking, current drinking, active physical activity, and education level. Model 3 further adjusted for fasting glucose, HOMA-IR, triglycerides, LDL-C, HDL-C, white blood cells based on model 2
  3. FM/FFM fat-to-fat free mass ratio, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, SD standard deviation, BMI body mass index, HOMA-IR homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, HDL-C high density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-C low density lipoprotein cholesterol
\