MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309840648 · doi:10.1002/jcsm.13126

The prognostic value of sarcopenia in oesophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2022· review· en· W4309840648 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWest China Hospital, Sichuan UniversitySichuan Province Science and Technology Support ProgramSichuan UniversityChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineSarcopeniaMeta-analysisCancerValue (mathematics)MEDLINEInternal medicineIntensive care medicineOncologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The loss of skeletal muscle mass and function is defined as sarcopenia, which might develop in elderly patients with cancers. It has been indicated as a potential negative factor in the survival of patients with malignant tumours. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to evaluate the associations between sarcopenia and survival outcomes or postoperative complications in patients with oesophageal cancer (EC). Web of Science, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases were searched until 10 May 2022, using keywords: sarcopenia, oesophageal cancer, and prognosis. Studies investigating the prognostic value of sarcopenia on EC survival were included. Forest plots and summary effect models were used to show the result of this meta‐analysis. The quality of included studies was evaluated with the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale (NOS). A total of 1436 studies were identified from the initial search of four databases, and 41 studies were included for the final quantitative analysis. This meta‐analysis revealed a significant association between sarcopenia and overall survival (OS) [hazard ratios (HR):1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.54–1.83, P = 0.004, I 2 = 41.7%] or disease‐free survival (DFS) 1.97 (HR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.44–2.69, P = 0.007, I 2 = 61.9%) of EC patients. Subgroup analysis showed that sarcopenia remained a consistent negative predictor of survival when stratified by different treatment methods, populations, or sarcopenia measurements. Sarcopenia was also a risk factor for postoperative complications with a pooled odds ratio of 1.47 (95% CI: 1.21–1.77, P = 0.094, I 2 = 32.7%). The NOS scores of all included studies were ≥6, and the quality of the evidence was relatively high. The results from the study suggested that sarcopenia was significantly associated with both survival outcomes and postoperative complications in EC patients. Sarcopenia should be appropriately diagnosed and treated for improving short‐term and long‐term outcomes of patients with EC.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.313 · 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