In 2010, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) published a sarcopenia definition that aimed to foster advances in identifying and caring for people with sarcopenia. In early 2018, the Working Group met again (EWGSOP2) to update the original definition in order to reflect scientific and clinical evidence that has built over the last decade. This paper presents our updated findings. to increase consistency of research design, clinical diagnoses and ultimately, care for people with sarcopenia. sarcopenia is a muscle disease (muscle failure) rooted in adverse muscle changes that accrue across a lifetime; sarcopenia is common among adults of older age but can also occur earlier in life. In this updated consensus paper on sarcopenia, EWGSOP2: (1) focuses on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarcopenia diagnosis, and identifies poor physical performance as indicative of severe sarcopenia; (2) updates the clinical algorithm that can be used for sarcopenia case-finding, diagnosis and confirmation, and severity determination and (3) provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarcopenia. EWGSOP2's updated recommendations aim to increase awareness of sarcopenia and its risk. With these new recommendations, EWGSOP2 calls for healthcare professionals who treat patients at risk for sarcopenia to take actions that will promote early detection and treatment. We also encourage more research in the field of sarcopenia in order to prevent or delay adverse health outcomes that incur a heavy burden for patients and healthcare systems.

The recent publication of the revised Consensus on definition and diagnosis of sarcopenia (EWGSOP2) and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria changed the approach to research on sarcopenia and malnutrition. Whilst sarcopenia is a nutrition-related disease, malnutrition and cachexia are nutritional disorders sharing the common feature of low fat-free mass. However, they have differential characteristics and etiologies, as well as specific therapeutic approaches. Applying the current definitions in clinical practice is still a challenge for health professionals and the potential for misdiagnosis is high. This is of special concern in the subgroup of older people with cancer, in which sarcopenia, malnutrition, and cancer cachexia are highly prevalent and can overlap or occur separately. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated overview of the latest research and consensus definitions of sarcopenia, malnutrition, and cachexia and to discuss their implications for clinical practice in older patients with cancer. The overall aim is to improve the quality of nutritional care in light of the latest findings.

This study aims to explore the association between malnutrition diagnosed according to both the Global Leadership Initiative of Malnutrition (GLIM) and the European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) criteria and the onset of sarcopenia/severe sarcopenia, diagnosed according to the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2) criterion, in the sarcopenia and physical impairment with advancing age (SarcoPhAge) cohort during a four-year follow-up. Adjusted Cox-regression and Kaplan-Meier curves were performed. Among the 534 community-dwelling participants recruited in the SarcoPhAge study, 510 were free from sarcopenia at baseline, of whom 336 had complete data (186 women and 150 men, mean age of 72.5 ± 5.8 years) to apply the GLIM and ESPEN criteria. A significantly higher risk of developing sarcopenia/severe sarcopenia during the four-year follow-up based on the GLIM [sarcopenia: Adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 3.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73–6.05); severe sarcopenia: Adjusted HR = 2.87 (95% CI 1.25–6.56)] and ESPEN [sarcopenia: Adjusted HR = 4.28 (95% CI 1.86–9.86); severe sarcopenia: Adjusted HR = 3.86 (95% CI 1.29–11.54)] criteria was observed. Kaplan-Meier curves confirmed this relationship (log rank p < 0.001 for all). These results highlighted the importance of malnutrition since it has been shown to be associated with an approximately fourfold higher risk of developing sarcopenia/severe sarcopenia during a four-year follow-up.

Background: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria have been recently launched by consensus of the major nutrition societies. GLIM criteria are partly constructed on the previous definition of malnutrition developed by the European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN). We aimed to assess malnutrition according to the ESPEN and GLIM criteria at baseline and to determine the corresponding risk of mortality during a 4‐year follow‐up in community‐dwelling older adults from the SarcoPhAge (Sarcopenia and Physical Impairment with advancing Age) study. The relationship between malnutrition and incidence of 4‐year adverse health consequences (institutionalization, hospitalization, falls, and fractures) was assessed.Methods: This prospective population‐based cohort was part of SarcoPhAge, which included 534 older adults in Belgium, followed up from 2013 to 2019. Community‐dwelling healthy volunteers ≥65 years old were recruited. Mortality and adverse health consequences were collected annually by interview or phone call. Baseline malnutrition was defined according to the GLIM and ESPEN criteria. Agreement between the two definitions was reported by Cohen's kappa coefficient. Adjusted Cox regression and Kaplan–Meier survival curves were performed for malnutrition. Logistic regression was used for the other outcomes.Results: From 534 subjects in SarcoPhAge, the records for 411 participants (73.2 ± 6.05 years old; 55.7% women) had all the variables needed to apply the GLIM criteria. Prevalence of baseline malnutrition was 23.4% for GLIM and 7% for ESPEN criteria (k = 0.30, low agreement). The adjusted Cox regression showed a significant increased mortality risk according to malnutrition status as defined by the GLIM [adjusted hazard ratio = 4.41 (95% confidence interval: 2.17–8.97)] and ESPEN [adjusted hazard ratio = 2.76 (95% confidence interval: 1.16–6.58)] criteria. Survival curves differed significantly between malnourished and non‐malnourished groups, regardless of the definition used (log rank P < 0.001 for both). No association was found between baseline malnutrition according to these two criteria and 4‐year risk of institutionalization, hospitalization, falls, or fractures (all P > 0.05).Conclusions: Malnutrition according to the GLIM criteria was associated with a 4.4‐fold higher mortality risk, double that of the ESPEN criteria, during a 4‐year follow‐up. No association was found between malnutrition according to these two criteria and incidence of other health adverse consequences. GLIM criteria anticipate mortality and might guide interventions, with important implications for clinical practice and research.

Purpose of review: To summarize the latest advances and caveats in defining sarcopenia and discuss the implications of the most recent worldwide initiatives which are trying to harmonize the definition. Recent findings: The evolution over time of the definitions of sarcopenia is discussed, with a focus on the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2) definition and the Sarcopenia Definitions and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC) conference. The EWGSOP2 and the SDOC agree on the overall concept of sarcopenia, which involves both impaired function (low muscle strength) and structural damage (low muscle mass/quality). However, physical performance is considered as a diagnostic criterion (EWGSOP), a severity grading assessment (EWGSOP2) or an outcome (SDOC) pending on the definition used. Muscle strength has been recognized as the best predictor of health outcomes. Muscle mass alone, as part of the definition of cachexia, sarcopenia and malnutrition, is a nondefining parameter. Furthermore, there is a lack of precision in measurement techniques and variability of the cut-off points in defining it. Summary: We discuss the relationship of sarcopenia with cachexia, malnutrition and frailty, and the areas that are hampering agreement. We summarize key scientific evidence, consider future study of this nutrition-related disease and raise concern about the need for a universal definition of sarcopenia.