What led you to specialize in the field of aging?
It all started with my doctoral thesis. I was offered the opportunity to work on sarcopenia, a subject that was relatively unexplored in 2012. It was the very beginning: people were just starting to talk about this disease. I was immediately interested in the topic and quickly realized that research in this field was still in its infancy! I launched a cohort study of 530 patients over the age of 65 who were followed for about ten years. This data led to the publication of numerous studies. It was not until 2016 that sarcopenia was recognized as a distinct pathology. Until then, it was little known to the general public and health professionals. In addition, there were many different definitions of the disease, which added to the complexity. I joined an international group of experts, the GLIS (Global Leadership Initiative in Sarcopenia), which is currently working to establish a global, consensus-based definition of sarcopenia. We are finally moving towards a clear definition and greater awareness of the disease, particularly among doctors.
So how do we define sarcopenia?
Today, sarcopenia is defined as a progressive and generalized loss of muscle strength and mass with advancing age, beyond the physiological threshold. Everyone loses muscle as they age, but we have noticed that some people lose much more than others. We are seeking to understand this interindividual variability, which is influenced by many factors, including genetic and metabolic factors.
What percentage of people are affected?
This disease affects a huge number of elderly people. It is estimated that between 10 and 16% of people over 65 suffer from sarcopenia. This figure rises to 60% for people hospitalized in an oncology ward, for example.
Why does it deserve special attention?
In addition to its high prevalence, it has serious consequences: falls, fractures, hospitalizations, loss of independence, reduced quality of life and, very clearly, increased mortality. Numerous studies are also beginning to show the significant healthcare costs associated with sarcopenia. The impact of sarcopenia therefore extends beyond the individual; we can talk about a real societal impact!
Do you think it is an underestimated public health issue?
It certainly was a few years ago, but the situation is changing. Research is booming and the media is starting to take an interest. Politicians are also paying more and more attention to it, which is very positive. We all want to age well and preserve our physical abilities.
You have developed a specific tool, the SarQol. What is it?
SarQol is a quality of life questionnaire specific to sarcopenia, created ten years ago. The term "specific" is particularly apt, because previously generic tools were used to measure quality of life, which only partially measured its real impact. I have received a huge number of requests to use and translate this questionnaire. It has now been translated into more than forty languages! In view of this enthusiasm, I carried out a meta-analysis which unanimously showed a clear decline in the quality of life of patients with sarcopenia.
This tool is representative of a "patient-centered" approach. How does this approach work in practice?
Clinical research tends to involve the patient more in the care process. If the patient feels listened to and understood, this will influence their condition. SarQoL is part of this approach, as is the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) technique, which I am particularly interested in. This is a study of patient preferences in terms of treatment characteristics. To date, there is no drug treatment for sarcopenia. This type of study will therefore enable the pharmaceutical and agri-food industries to offer pharmacological treatments or nutritional supplements tailored to patient preferences. By taking these preferences into account, we can achieve better treatment adherence and, therefore, better results.
In addition to your role as a researcher, you are also an expert in methodology. What does that involve?
Discrete choice experiments (DCEs), like meta-analyses, are methods that can be applied to many areas of research. I am therefore regularly contacted by researchers and clinicians in the health sector, but not only, to apply these tools to their research topics in a practical way. I am very fond of this kind of collaboration, which feeds my scientific curiosity.
