4.6 Article

Sarcopenia as a Prognostic Biomarker of Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115895

关键词

-

资金

  1. Clinical Research Fund of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government [H260301002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives Sarcopenia, a novel concept reflecting the degenerative loss of skeletal muscle mass, is an objective indicator of cancer cachexia. We investigated its role as a prognostic biomarker in advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients. Methods This retrospective study consisted of 88 UC patients with cT4 and/or metastases to lymph nodes/distant organs. Skeletal muscle index (SMI), an indicator of whole-body muscle mass, was measured from computed tomography (CT) images at the diagnosis. Sarcopenia was defined as SMIs of <43 cm(2)/m(2) for males with body mass index (BMI) <25 cm(2)/m(2), <53 cm(2)/m(2) for males with BMI >= 25 cm(2)/m(2), and <41 cm(2)/m(2) for females. Predictors of overall survival (OS) were examined using Cox proportional hazard models. Results Sixty-seven patients (76%) died during the median follow-up of 13 months. The median OS rate was 13 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that SMI was a significant and independent predictor of shorter OS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, P < 0.001). In the present cohort, 53 (60%) were diagnosed with sarcopenia. The median OS rates were 11 and 31 months for sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients, respectively (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, sarcopenia was a significant and independent predictor of shorter OS (HR 3.36, P < 0.001), along with higher C-reactive protein (CRP) (P = 0.001), upper urinary tract cancer (P = 0.007), higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (P = 0.047), and higher alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (P = 0.048). Conclusion Sarcopenia, which is readily evaluated on routine CT scans, is a useful prognostic biomarker of advanced UC. Non-sarcopenic patients can expect long-term survival. Evaluating

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据