MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Sarcopenia and Adipopenia Are Independent Prognostic Factors in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2015· article· en· W2554066639 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nobuhiko Nakamura, Yuhei Shibata, Takuro Matsumoto, Hiroshi Nakamura, Junichi Kitagawa, Soranobu Ninomiya, Yasuhito Nannya, Masahito Shimizu, Takeshi Hara, Hisashi Tsurumi

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicineAdipose tissueMyeloid leukemiaInternal medicineSkeletal muscleHounsfield scaleChemotherapyGastroenterologySurgeryComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The response to treatment and overall survival of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are heterogeneous. A number of prognostic factors related to patient and tumor characteristics have been described for AML, including age, performance status, and karyotype. The depletion of skeletal muscle (sarcopenia) and adipose tissue (adipopenia) are known to be associated with unfavorable prognosis in patients with some malignant diseases including lymphoma. Here, we studied the impact of sarcopenia and adipopenia on clinical outcomes of adult AML. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 70 patients with adult AML (age ≥ 18 years) who received chemotherapy at Gifu University Hospital between December 2004 and September 2014. Skeletal muscle and adipose tissue were measured by the analysis of CT images at the L3 level before treatment. CT images were analyzed using SliceOMatic version 4.3 software (TomoVision, Montreal, QB, Canada), which enables specific tissue demarcation using previously reported Hounsfield unit (HU) thresholds. The CT HU thresholds were -29 to 150 for skeletal muscles and -190 to -30 and -50 to -150 for subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue, respectively. These values were normalized for stature in order to calculate skeletal muscle index (SMI, cm2/m2) and adipose tissue index (ATI, cm2/m2). Results: Median age at diagnosis was 57 years (18-84 years), with 37 males and 33 females. SMI was significantly higher in male than female patients (P < 0.001). ATI was significantly higher in patients aged 60 years and over than in those under 60 years (P < 0.05). The sex-specific cut-offs for the SMI and ATI were determined by ROC curve analysis. Thirty-five (50%) and 31 (44%) patients were defined as sarcopenia and adipopenia, respectively. Sarcopenia and adipopenia did not significantly differ among various FAB subtypes or cytogenetic risk profiles. The rate of patients with poor performance status (ECOG ≥ 2) was significantly higher in the sarcopenic group (80% vs 45%, P < 0.05), whereas not in the adipopenic group (40% vs 47%). With a median follow-up of 33.5 months, the 3-year overall survival (OS) in the sarcopeniac group was 34% compared with 74% in the non-sarcopenic group (P < 0.001, Figure 1A) and 32% in the adipopenic group compared with 72% in the non-adipopenic group (P < 0.005, Figure 1B). In a multivariate analysis, sarcopenia (HR = 2.84, CI = 1.08-8.08, P < 0.05) and adipopenia (HR = 2.85, CI = 1.19-7.24, P < 0.05) remained predictive of OS. Conclusion: Sarcopenia and adipopenia are independent prognostic factors in patients with AML. Evaluation of skeletal muscle and adipose tissue depletion by CT imaging is a useful objective tool to predict patient outcomes, but a larger prospective study is needed to confirm this effect. Figure 1. Overall survival according to sarcopenic (A) and adipopenic (B) status. Figure 1. Overall survival according to sarcopenic (A) and adipopenic (B) status. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→