MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2559584995 · doi:10.1016/j.euf.2016.11.009

Body Composition in Relation to Clinical Outcomes in Renal Cell Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2016· review· en· W2559584995 on OpenAlexaff
Alina Vrieling, Ellen Kampman, Nathalja C. Knijnenburg, Peter F.A. Mulders, J.P. Michiel Sedelaar, Vickie E. Baracos, Lambertus A. Kiemeney

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology Focus · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioSarcopeniaPerioperativeInternal medicineConfidence intervalAdipose capsule of kidneyRenal cell carcinomaMeta-analysisAdipose tissueCancerSurgeryOncologyKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Several studies suggest that body composition (ie, body proportions of muscle and fat defined by computed tomography) is associated with clinical outcomes of several cancer types, including renal cell cancer (RCC). Objective To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence on body composition in relation to clinical outcomes in RCC. Evidence acquisition Literature was reviewed through October 2016 using PubMed and Embase. We included studies investigating computed tomography-measured cross-sectional areas of visceral adipose tissue (VAT), perinephric fat, subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), skeletal muscle index (SMI), and skeletal muscle radiodensity (SMD) in relation to perioperative outcomes, treatment toxicity, and survival in RCC patients. Evidence synthesis We included 28 studies with a total of 6608 patients. Binary classification of body composition was used in most studies. In metastatic RCC (mRCC) patients treated with antiangiogenic drugs, dose-limiting toxicity was more frequent in patients with low versus high SMI (four studies, risk difference=16%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2–31%, p = 0.03, I 2 = 26%). Low versus high SMI (six studies, hazard ratio=1.48, 95% CI: 1.08–2.03, p = 0.02, I 2 = 28%) and SMD (four studies, HR=1.56, 95% CI: 1.20–2.03, p = 0.0008, I 2 = 0%) were associated with an increased risk of overall mortality in mRCC. Low versus high VAT and perinephric fat were not consistently associated with perioperative outcomes and survival. No associations for SAT were found. Conclusions Low SMI is associated with increased dose-limiting toxicity, and low SMI and SMD are associated with increased overall mortality in mRCC. The association of VAT, perinephric fat, and SAT with clinical outcomes needs further investigation, also in localized RCC. Patient summary We reviewed studies assessing the association of body composition with clinical outcomes in renal cell cancer. We demonstrated higher risk of dose-limiting toxicity and overall mortality for metastatic renal cell cancer patients with low versus high skeletal muscle index or skeletal muscle radiodensity, but observed inconsistent associations with visceral adipose tissue and perinephric fat.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.029
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations70
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Urology Focus→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→