Amanika Kumar1, Michael R Moynagh2, Francesco Multinu1, William A Cliby1, Michaela E McGree3, Amy L Weaver3, Phillip M Young2, Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez1, Carrie L Langstraat1, Sean C Dowdy1, Aminah Jatoi4, Andrea Mariani5. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 2. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 3. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 4. Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States. Electronic address: mariani.andrea@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of muscle composition and sarcopenia on overall survival in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) after primary debulking surgery (PDS). METHODS: Women with stage IIIC/IV EOC who underwent PDS with curative intent between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2012 were included. Patient variables and vital status were abstracted. Body composition was evaluated in a semi-automated process using Slice-O-Matic software v4.3 (TomoVision). Skeletal muscle area and mean skeletal muscle attenuation were recorded. Associations with overall survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models and recursive partitioning. RESULTS: We identified 296 patients and 132 (44.6%) were classified as sarcopenic. The average mean skeletal muscle attenuation of the entire cohort was 33.4 Hounsfield units (HU). A multivariate model of overall risk of death included histology, residual disease, and mean skeletal attenuation. Among patients without residual disease, overall survival, but not progression free survival was significantly different between patients with low versus high mean skeletal attenuation (median survival, 2.8 vs. 3.3years). Among patients with residual disease, overall survival was significantly different between patients with low versus high mean skeletal attenuation ≥36.40 vs. <36.40 HU (median survival, 2.0 vs. 3.3years). CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia and low mean skeletal muscle attenuation are common in women undergoing PDS for advanced EOC. These factors are associated with poorer outcomes, and can be used in preoperative risk stratification and patient counseling. Further research into body composition and whether this risk factor can be altered via nutrition or fitness in this population is warranted.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of muscle composition and sarcopenia on overall survival in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) after primary debulking surgery (PDS). METHODS:Women with stage IIIC/IV EOC who underwent PDS with curative intent between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2012 were included. Patient variables and vital status were abstracted. Body composition was evaluated in a semi-automated process using Slice-O-Matic software v4.3 (TomoVision). Skeletal muscle area and mean skeletal muscle attenuation were recorded. Associations with overall survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models and recursive partitioning. RESULTS: We identified 296 patients and 132 (44.6%) were classified as sarcopenic. The average mean skeletal muscle attenuation of the entire cohort was 33.4 Hounsfield units (HU). A multivariate model of overall risk of death included histology, residual disease, and mean skeletal attenuation. Among patients without residual disease, overall survival, but not progression free survival was significantly different between patients with low versus high mean skeletal attenuation (median survival, 2.8 vs. 3.3years). Among patients with residual disease, overall survival was significantly different between patients with low versus high mean skeletal attenuation ≥36.40 vs. <36.40 HU (median survival, 2.0 vs. 3.3years). CONCLUSIONS:Sarcopenia and low mean skeletal muscle attenuation are common in women undergoing PDS for advanced EOC. These factors are associated with poorer outcomes, and can be used in preoperative risk stratification and patient counseling. Further research into body composition and whether this risk factor can be altered via nutrition or fitness in this population is warranted.
Authors: Grant R Williams; Allison M Deal; Hyman B Muss; Marc S Weinberg; Hanna K Sanoff; Emily J Guerard; Kirsten A Nyrop; Mackenzi Pergolotti; Shlomit Strulov Shachar Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Ryan Barnard; Josh Tan; Brandon Roller; Caroline Chiles; Ashley A Weaver; Robert D Boutin; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Leon Lenchik Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Anlan Cao; Brenda Cartmel; Fang-Yong Li; Linda T Gottlieb; Maura Harrigan; Jennifer A Ligibel; Radhika Gogoi; Peter E Schwartz; Melinda L Irwin; Leah M Ferrucci Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Ching-Di Chang; Jim S Wu; Jennifer Ni Mhuircheartaigh; Marry G Hochman; Edward K Rodriguez; Paul T Appleton; Colm J Mcmahon Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Carla M Prado; Sarah A Purcell; Carolyn Alish; Suzette L Pereira; Nicolaas E Deutz; Daren K Heyland; Bret H Goodpaster; Kelly A Tappenden; Steven B Heymsfield Journal: Ann Med Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 4.709