Association of sarcopenia and treatment tolerability in older adults with advanced cancer: Secondary analysis of a nationwide NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) randomized clinical trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
12038 Background: Sarcopenia (sarc) is defined by reduced muscle function paired with low muscle mass or quality. Sarc is common in older adults, but the relationship between sarc and treatment tolerability in older patients (pts) with cancer has not been established. This secondary analysis of our nationwide University of Rochester NCORP Research Base randomized trial examines whether pre-treatment sarc was associated with treatment toxicity and survival in older pts with advanced cancers. Methods: Pts aged 70 and older with incurable solid tumors and lymphoma initiating a new high-risk systemic treatment were enrolled in GAP70+ (NCT02054741). GAP70+ was a cluster randomized trial evaluating whether a geriatric assessment intervention can reduce cancer treatment toxicity. This secondary analysis included 161 pts with baseline computed tomography (CT) scans and physical function testing. Sarc was defined as low muscle strength (5-time Chair Stand Test > 16.7 seconds) with reduced muscle mass (BMI and sex-specific cutoffs, cm/m2) or low muscle quality (Hounsfield units [HU] average radiodensity thresholds) utilizing validated cross-sectional CT imaging metrics. Sarc was defined as severe in presence of reduced physical performance (Timed-Up-And-Go > 13.5 seconds). We evaluated if the proportion of pts experiencing any grade 3-5 toxicity in the first 3 months of treatment using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) V4.0 was higher in those with sarc than those without sarc. Multivariate logistic regression was used to further explore this relationship. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association of sarc and severe sarc with 1-year survival. Results: Mean age of the 161 participants included in this cohort was 76.6 years and 60.9% of were male; over half had gastrointestinal (34.8%) or lung cancer (23.6%). Sarc was found in 91 of 161 (56.5%) pts; 54 had severe sarc. Pts with sarc did not experience significantly more grade 3-5 toxicity compared to those without sarc (79.1% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.26). However, pts with sarc experienced more grade 3-5 non-hematologic toxicity (63.7% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.01) on univariate and multivariate analysis (OR 2.2, CI 1.1-4.5, p = 0.02). The association between sarc and worse survival at 1-year was not statistically significant (OR 1.5, CI 0.9-2.4, p = 0.13). Those with severe sarc did demonstrate significantly worse 1-year survival on multivariate analysis (HR 1.8, CI 1.1-2.9, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Older pts with cancer and sarc were more likely to suffer serious non-hematologic toxicity from cancer treatment. Furthermore, those with severe sarc had significantly worse survival. Evaluation for sarc before initiating treatment in older adults could help oncologists identify pts at higher risk of toxicity and poor survival. Clinical trial information: NCT02054741 .
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".