This preprint reports a cross-sectional analysis testing whether risk of sarcopenia is associated with disproportionate postprandial glycemic excursions in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who have controlled fasting glucose. The exposure was sarcopenia risk measured by the SARC-F questionnaire; the outcome was glycemic excursion defined as postprandial blood sugar (PPBS) minus fasting blood sugar (FBS).
The authors note that many adults with T2DM in India exhibit a thin–fat phenotype characterized by relatively low skeletal muscle mass for body mass index. Because skeletal muscle is the principal site of insulin-mediated glucose disposal after a meal, fasting glucose largely reflects hepatic glucose output while postprandial glucose depends more on muscle uptake. The study tests the hypothesis that reduced muscle mass or higher sarcopenia risk would be associated with larger post-meal glucose rises despite controlled fasting glucose.
A cross-sectional design was applied to an outpatient dataset of 300 patients with T2DM. Inclusion criteria reported were age 50 years or older, FBS between 90 and 130 mg/dL, and a stable oral hypoglycemic regimen. Mean age for the cohort was reported as 67.6 ± 6.8 years. The analysis separated participants into high-risk and low-risk groups based on the SARC-F questionnaire.
Group comparisons used Welch’s t test. Relationships between SARC-F score and glycemic excursion were assessed using Pearson’s correlation. Multiple linear regression models adjusted for age, diabetes duration, FBS and oral drug regimen were used to estimate the independent association of SARC-F score with the magnitude of postprandial glucose rise.
In the dataset of 300 patients, 64 individuals (21.3%) had a high-risk SARC-F score. The high-risk group was approximately 6 years older than the low-risk group (specific group ages were reported but not reproduced here beyond the mean cohort age). Mean glycemic excursion (BG) was 119.4 ± 29.1 mg/dL in the high-risk SARC-F group versus 74.8 ± 22.8 mg/dL in the low-risk group. The absolute difference in mean BG between groups was 44.6 mg/dL (95% CI 36.8 to 52.5; p < 0.0001), indicating a substantially larger postprandial rise among participants at higher sarcopenia risk.
SARC-F score and BG demonstrated a strong positive correlation (Pearson r = 0.777, p < 0.0001). In multiple linear regression adjusting for age, diabetes duration, FBS and drug regimen, each 1-point higher SARC-F score was associated with a 10.2 mg/dL higher BG (95% CI 8.6 to 11.7). The authors report that age and diabetes duration accounted for part of the crude difference between high- and low-risk groups but that the association persisted after adjustment.
The analysis demonstrates that a simple sarcopenia risk screening score (SARC-F) was strongly associated with the magnitude of postprandial glucose rise in this outpatient cohort of older adults with T2DM and controlled fasting glucose. The authors propose that clinical treatment algorithms for older adults with T2DM should not focus solely on restoring insulin secretion but should also address the mechanical glucose sink provided by skeletal muscle — for example, through resistance training and consideration of age-appropriate pharmacologic adjustments. These suggestions are presented by the authors as implications of the observed association.
This report is a preprint and has not undergone peer review; the authors explicitly note that the findings should not be used to guide clinical practice. The source provides the dataset size, key summary statistics and modeling results; however, some operational details were not reported in the document excerpt available here — for example, the exact timing and nutritional content of the postprandial measurement, detailed baseline characteristics by group beyond age, or measures of muscle mass beyond the SARC-F screening score. Causal inference is limited by the cross-sectional design.
The authors report ethics approval from the Ethics Committee of R.G. Kar Medical College Kolkata and state that all relevant ethical guidelines and participant consent procedures were followed. They declare no competing interests. The preprint states that all data produced in the study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
Note: all results, numbers and interpretations above are taken directly from the preprint source. The article is a preprint (medRxiv doi: 10.64898/2026.10.05.26364797) and has not been peer reviewed.