The impact of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes in men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Sarcopenia is common in men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and has been largely assessed opportunistically through computed-tomography (CT) scans, excluding measures of muscle function. Therefore, the impact of a comprehensive assessment of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes in men with mCRPC is poorly understood. The objectives of this study were to comprehensively assess sarcopenia through CT scans and measures of muscle function and examine its impact on severe treatment toxicity, time to first emergency room (ER) visit, disease progression, and overall mortality in men initiating chemotherapy or androgen receptor-targeted axis (ARAT) therapy for mCRPC. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of men with mCRPC at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between July 2015-May 2021. Participants were classified as sarcopenic if they had CT-based low muscle mass or low muscle density, a grip strength and gait speed score of <35.5kg and <0.8m/s, respectively, prior to treatment initiation. The impact of sarcopenia on severe treatment toxicity was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to determine the impact of sarcopenia on risk of visiting the ER, prostate-specific antigen progression, radiographic progression, and overall mortality. RESULTS: A total of 110 men (mean age: 74.6) were included in the analysis. At baseline, 30 (27.3%) were classified as sarcopenic. Sarcopenia was a significant predictor of severe toxicity (aOR = 6.26, 95%CI = 1.17-33.58, P = 0.032) and ER visits (aHR = 4.41, 95%CI = 1.26-15.43, p = 0.020) in men initiating ARAT but not in men initiating chemotherapy. Sarcopenia was also a predictor of radiographic progression (aHR = 2.39, 95%CI = 1.06-5.36, p = 0.035) and overall mortality (aHR = 2.44, 95%CI = 1.17-5.08, p = 0.018) regardless of treatment type. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline sarcopenia predicts radiographic progression and overall mortality in men with mCRPC regardless of the type of treatment and may also predict severe treatment toxicity and ER visits in men initiating ARAT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".