MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408980703 · doi:10.21037/map-25-ab150

AB150. SOH25_AB_343. Osteosarcopenia as a prognostic indicator in advanced cancers with bony metastases: a systematic review

2025· review· en· W4408980703 on OpenAlexaff
Neil Wu, Tayler Ross, Abdulrahman Alnah, Emily Leong, Ahmed Ghani, Jake McDonnell, Frank Lyons, Joseph S. Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueMesentery and Peritoneum · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Osteosarcopenia, the concurrent loss of bone and muscle mass, significantly impacts cancer patients, particularly those with advanced disease. This condition exacerbates frailty, impairs treatment tolerance, and reduces survival outcomes. Despite its clinical importance, data on osteosarcopenia across cancer types, stages, and treatments remain fragmented. This study examines the association of osteosarcopenia with cancer staging, bone activity, performance status, interventions, survival outcomes, and multimodal imaging. Methods: A systematic review was completed using both Medline and Embase electronic databases. Studies that described osteosarcopenia and its relation to advanced cancers, survival, computed tomography (CT) imaging, and metastasis were included. Studies without CT imaging or survival outcomes were excluded. Primary and secondary outcomes included overall survival and response to either surgical or chemotherapeutic interventions. Results: Osteosarcopenia was often accompanied by hypoalbuminemia, elevated inflammatory markers, and reductions in functional biomarkers like grip strength which complemented CT imaging findings. Patients with a low skeletal muscle index at baseline were more likely to experience significant declines in muscle mass during treatment, worsening prognosis across cancer types. Muscle loss ≥5% during chemotherapy was strongly associated with reduced overall and progression-free survival. Overall, these patients had poorer outcomes than those with isolated sarcopenia or osteoporosis, suggesting a compounded negative effect. Conclusions: Osteosarcopenia is prevalent in advanced cancers, particularly with osteolytic activity, and correlates with poor survival. Through imaging and complementary biomarkers, osteosarcopenia was demonstrated to be a critical predictor of surgical and chemotherapeutic tolerance, survival, and recovery. This underscores the need for early intervention and tailored treatment approaches. For high-risk patients, incorporating nutritional and physical therapy strategies into cancer care pathways may mitigate muscle loss and improve overall outcomes.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMesentery and PeritoneumSame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207