Phase Angle but Not Psoas Muscle Predicts Nutritional Risk and Prognosis in Males with Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite those with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) being at increased risk of malnutrition, there is a notable absence of practical approaches for nutritional assessment in clinical practice. We investigated the usefulness of phase angle (PhA) and Total Psoas Area Index (TPAI) for indicating nutritional risk and HCC prognosis. Weight, height, body mass index (BMI), adductor pollicis muscle thickness (APMT), and handgrip strength (HGS) were assessed. The Nutritional Risk Index (NRI) was calculated. Body composition was assessed using bioimpedance spectroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging. The Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score and Barcelona-Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification determined the prognosis. Fifty-one males with HCC were enrolled (CTP C = 11.8%). PhA showed a moderate positive correlation with APMT (r = 0.450; p < 0.001) and HGS (r = 0.418; p = 0.002) and a weak positive correlation with TPAI (r = 0.332; p = 0.021). PhA had a strong positive correlation with NRI (r = 0.614; p < 0.001). Mean PhA values were significantly different according to disease severity (CTP C p = 0.001, and BCLC D p = 0.053). TPAI had no significant correlation with HGS, CTP, or BCLC. PhA was a superior approach for predicting nutritional risk and prognosis in HCC than TPAI. Lower PhA is associated with disease progression, lower muscle mass and function, greater severity of nutritional risk, and increased mortality in HCC.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".