Chinese expert consensus on skeletal muscle aging biomarkers (2024): a protocol_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

LI Daiping ¹ , HUANG Ning ¹ , GE Meiling ¹ , LIU Xiaolei ¹ , ZHANG Yong ² , TIAN Xu ³ , YIN Pengbin ⁴ , LIU Yong ⁵ , YANG Zhongli ¹ ,  YUE Jirong ¹ , DONG Birong ¹

1. Department of Geriatrics and National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P. R. China;
2. State Key Laboratory for Complex, Severe, and Rare Diseases, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and School of Basic Medicine, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100005, P. R. China;
3. Guangzhou Bioland Laboratory, Guangzhou 510005, P. R. China;
4. Senior Department of Orthopedics, the Fourth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Orthopedics, Sports Medicine & Rehabilitation, Beijing 100048, P. R. China;
5. College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, P. R. China;

Corresponding?author：

YUE Jirong, Email: yuejirong11@hotmail.com

Keywords：

Skeletal muscle aging; Biomarkers; Expert consensus; Aging; Protocol

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202404140

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

With the continuous aging of the population in China, the aging of skeletal muscle in the elderly has seriously affected national health and poses a severe challenge to the public health system. Early detection of skeletal muscle aging, and early warning, prevention, and treatment are of great significance for achieving healthy aging. In order to select a series of clinically operable biomarkers for skeletal muscle aging, and to further standardize the early identification and precise diagnosis of skeletal muscle aging, a multidisciplinary team of experts has registered and written this protocol to provide a detailed introduction to the planning process for the development of the consensus.

Citation： LI Daiping, HUANG Ning, GE Meiling, LIU Xiaolei, ZHANG Yong, TIAN Xu, YIN Pengbin, LIU Yong, YANG Zhongli, YUE Jirong, DONG Birong. Chinese expert consensus on skeletal muscle aging biomarkers (2024): a protocol. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2024, 24(10): 1137-1140. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202404140 Copy

1.	Yang LJ, Wu GH, Yang YL, et al. Nutrition, physical exercise, and the prevalence of sarcopenia in elderly residents in nursing homes in China. Med Sci Monit, 2019, 25: 4390-4399.
2.	Jing Y, Zuo Y, Yu Y, et al. Single-nucleus profiling unveils a geroprotective role of the FOXO3 in primate skeletal muscle aging. Protein Cell, 2023, 14(7): 497-512.
3.	Ding H, Chen S, Pan X, et al. Transferrin receptor 1 ablation in satellite cells impedes skeletal muscle regeneration through activation of ferroptosis. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle, 2021, 12(3): 746-768.
4.	Aging Biomarker Consortium, Zhang L, Guo J, et al. A framework of biomarkers for vascular aging: a consensus statement by the Aging Biomarker Consortium. Life Med, 2023, 2(4): 3.
5.	Aging Biomarker Consortium, Zhang WW, Che Y, et al. A biomarker framework for cardiac aging: the Aging Biomarker Consortium consensus statement. Life Med, 2023, 2(5): 3.
6.	Aging Biomarker Consortium, Jia YJ, Wang J, et al. A framework of biomarkers for brain aging: a consensus statement by the Aging Biomarker Consortium. Life Med, 2023, 2(3): 5.
7.	Aging Biomarker Consortium, Suo JL, Gan YB, et al. A framework of biomarkers for skeletal aging: a consensus statement by the Aging Biomarker Consortium. Life Med, 2023, 2(6): 1.
8.	WHO. WHO handbook for guideline development, 2nd ed. Vienna: World Health Organization, 2014: 1-167.
9.	Schünemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I, 等. 指南2. 0: 為成功制訂指南而系統研發的全面清單. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2014, 14(9): 1135-1149.
10.	陳耀龍, 楊克虎, 王小欽, 等. 中國制訂/修訂臨床診療指南的指導原則(2022版). 中華醫學雜志, 2022, 102(10): 697-703.
11.	Sousa-Uva M, Head SJ, Thielmann M, et al. Methodology manual for European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) clinical guidelines. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2015, 48(6): 809-816.
12.	Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K, et al. The AGREE reporting checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ, 2016, 354: i4852.
13.	楊楠, 趙巍, 潘旸, 等. 針對臨床實踐指南科學性、透明性和適用性的評級工具研發. 中華醫學雜志, 2022, 102(30): 2329-2337.
14.	Chen Y, Yang K, Maru?ic A, et al. A reporting tool for practice guidelines in health care: the RIGHT statement. Ann Intern Med, 2017, 166(2): 128-132.
15.	陳耀龍, 馬艷芳, 周奇, 等. 誰應該參與臨床實踐指南的制訂. 協和醫學雜志, 2019, 10(5): 524-530.
16.	Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336(7650): 924-926.
17.	Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ, 2017, 358: j4008.
18.	Higgins JP, Altman DG, G?tzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 2011, 343: d5928.
19.	Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ, 2016, 355: i4919.
20.	Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med, 2011, 155(8): 529-536.
21.	Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010, 25(9): 603-605.
22.	Rostom A, Dubé C, Cranney A, et al. Appendix D. Quality assessment forms. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2004.

1. Yang LJ, Wu GH, Yang YL, et al. Nutrition, physical exercise, and the prevalence of sarcopenia in elderly residents in nursing homes in China. Med Sci Monit, 2019, 25: 4390-4399.
2. Jing Y, Zuo Y, Yu Y, et al. Single-nucleus profiling unveils a geroprotective role of the FOXO3 in primate skeletal muscle aging. Protein Cell, 2023, 14(7): 497-512.
3. Ding H, Chen S, Pan X, et al. Transferrin receptor 1 ablation in satellite cells impedes skeletal muscle regeneration through activation of ferroptosis. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle, 2021, 12(3): 746-768.
4. Aging Biomarker Consortium, Zhang L, Guo J, et al. A framework of biomarkers for vascular aging: a consensus statement by the Aging Biomarker Consortium. Life Med, 2023, 2(4): 3.
5. Aging Biomarker Consortium, Zhang WW, Che Y, et al. A biomarker framework for cardiac aging: the Aging Biomarker Consortium consensus statement. Life Med, 2023, 2(5): 3.
6. Aging Biomarker Consortium, Jia YJ, Wang J, et al. A framework of biomarkers for brain aging: a consensus statement by the Aging Biomarker Consortium. Life Med, 2023, 2(3): 5.
7. Aging Biomarker Consortium, Suo JL, Gan YB, et al. A framework of biomarkers for skeletal aging: a consensus statement by the Aging Biomarker Consortium. Life Med, 2023, 2(6): 1.
8. WHO. WHO handbook for guideline development, 2nd ed. Vienna: World Health Organization, 2014: 1-167.
9. Schünemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I, 等. 指南2. 0: 為成功制訂指南而系統研發的全面清單. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2014, 14(9): 1135-1149.
10. 陳耀龍, 楊克虎, 王小欽, 等. 中國制訂/修訂臨床診療指南的指導原則(2022版). 中華醫學雜志, 2022, 102(10): 697-703.
11. Sousa-Uva M, Head SJ, Thielmann M, et al. Methodology manual for European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) clinical guidelines. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2015, 48(6): 809-816.
12. Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K, et al. The AGREE reporting checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ, 2016, 354: i4852.
13. 楊楠, 趙巍, 潘旸, 等. 針對臨床實踐指南科學性、透明性和適用性的評級工具研發. 中華醫學雜志, 2022, 102(30): 2329-2337.
14. Chen Y, Yang K, Maru?ic A, et al. A reporting tool for practice guidelines in health care: the RIGHT statement. Ann Intern Med, 2017, 166(2): 128-132.
15. 陳耀龍, 馬艷芳, 周奇, 等. 誰應該參與臨床實踐指南的制訂. 協和醫學雜志, 2019, 10(5): 524-530.
16. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 2008, 336(7650): 924-926.
17. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ, 2017, 358: j4008.
18. Higgins JP, Altman DG, G?tzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 2011, 343: d5928.
19. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ, 2016, 355: i4919.
20. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med, 2011, 155(8): 529-536.
21. Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010, 25(9): 603-605.
22. Rostom A, Dubé C, Cranney A, et al. Appendix D. Quality assessment forms. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2004.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Chinese expert consensus on skeletal muscle aging biomarkers (2024): a protocol

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content