MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406154201 · doi:10.1186/s12885-025-13430-7

Low L3 skeletal muscle index and endometrial cancer: a statistic pooling analysis

2025· review· en· W4406154201 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Na Aru, Congyu Yang, Yahong Chen, Jiaming Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Cancer · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKey Research and Development Program of Sichuan ProvinceNational Outstanding Youth Science Fund Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineSarcopeniaInternal medicineMeta-analysisSurgical oncologyOdds ratioEndometrial cancerOncologyHazard ratioMEDLINECancerConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia, a condition characterized by the gradual decline of muscle mass, strength, and function, is a key indicator of malnutrition in cancer patients and has been linked to poor prognoses in oncology. Sarcopenia is commonly assessed by measuring the skeletal muscle index (SMI) of the third lumbar spine (L3) using computed tomography (CT). This meta-analysis aimed to explore the relationship between low SMI and clinicopathological features, as well as prognosis, in individuals with endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: Data from various databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Medline, and Web of Science were searched up until October 20th, 2024. Studies that investigated the association of low SMI and EC survival or clinicopathological characteristics were included. Pooled effect sizes were reported as hazards ratio (HR), odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean difference (WMD). The quality and risk of bias in the studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS), and the study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024509949) before commencing the search. RESULTS: A total of 218 studies were identified across all five databases, with 11 studies meeting the criteria for qualitative and quantitative analysis, involving 1588 patients. The findings of our meta-analysis demonstrated a significant link between low SMI and progression-free survival [P = 0.002; HR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.20-2.17]. Low SMI was also associated with a BMI < 25 (P < 0.00001; OR: 4.55, 95% CI: 3.01-6.87), FIGO stage (P = 0.04; OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.01-1.75), pathology grades (P = 0.001; OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.26-2.49), and the endometrioid pathological type (P = 0.01; OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.92). However, no significant correlation was found between low SMI and 5-year overall survival, serous pathological type, recurrence, length of hospital stay, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications. All the included studies scored ≥ 7 on the NOS, indicating relatively high-quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis highlighted the association between low SMI and unfavorable clinical features and outcomes in EC patients, emphasizing the importance of early diagnosis and appropriate management of sarcopenia assessed by low SMI to enhance prognoses in EC patients.

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.069
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC CancerSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207