| Title |
Effect of cysteine-rich whey protein (Immunocal®) supplementation in combination with resistance training on muscle strength and lean body mass in non-frail elderly subjects: A randomized, double-blind controlled study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The journal of nutrition, health & aging, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12603-015-0442-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antony Karelis, V. Messier, C. Suppère, P. Briand, R. Rabasa-Lhoret |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the present study was to examine the effect of a cysteine-rich whey protein (Immunocal®) supplementation in combination with resistance training on muscle strength and lean body mass (LBM) in elderly individuals. We hypothesized that the cysteine-rich whey protein (Immunocal®) group would experience a greater increase in muscle strength and lean body mass versus the control group (casein). Randomized double-blind controlled intervention study. Institut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal in Montreal, Canada. Ninety-nine non-frail elderly subjects were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned into two groups. The experimental group received a cysteine-rich whey protein isolate (Immunocal®) (20 g/day) and the control group received casein (20 g/day) during a 135-day period. In addition, both groups performed the same resistance training program (3 times per week). Body composition (DXA) and muscle strength (leg press) were measured. Of the 99 recruited participants, 84 completed the 135-day study period. Of these, 67 subjects (33 in the casein group and 34 in the Immunocal® group) complied and used at least 80 % of the study product and completed at least 80 % of their training sessions. Results in this selected group show an increase in all three muscle strength variables (absolute, normalized by BW and by LBM) by 31.0 %, 30.9 % and 30.0 %, respectively in the casein group as well as 39.3 %, 39.9 % and 43.3 %, respectively in the Immunocal® group after the intervention (p < 0.05). The increases in muscle strength favored Immunocal® versus casein by approximately 10 % when expressed in kg per kg BW and in kg per kg LBM (p < 0.05). No significant changes were found between pre-and-post intervention in both groups for total LBM. Our findings showed increases in muscle strength in both groups after resistance training, however, significant additional increases were observed in muscle strength with the addition of a cysteine-rich whey protein (Immunocal®) versus casein. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 40% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 185 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 39 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 8% |
| Researcher | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 37 | 20% |
| Unknown | 55 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 13% |
| Sports and Recreations | 23 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 63 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,955,946
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#240
of 2,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,056
of 279,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#4
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,690 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.