Federica Rossi1, Francesca Valdora2, Emanuele Barabino2, Massimo Calabrese3, Alberto Stefano Tagliafico2,3. 1. Department of Health Sciences, DISSAL- University of Genova, Via Pastore, 1, 16138, Genoa, Italy. federossi0590@gmail.com. 2. Department of Health Sciences, DISSAL- University of Genova, Via Pastore, 1, 16138, Genoa, Italy. 3. Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the correlation between psoas muscle area (TPA) on CT images and pectoralis muscle area (PMA) on MRI in breast cancer patients. METHODS: This retrospective study was institutional review board approved and women involved gave written informed consent. Twenty six patients with both body CT and breast MRI available were evaluated. Two radiologists calculated TPA on 1.25-mm and 5-mm body CT images. Two radiologists measured PMA on axial T1-weighted images. Statistical analysis included inter- and intra-reader agreement and correlation between TPA on CT and PMA on MRI. RESULTS: The Pearson r correlation coefficient was 0.70 (95% CI 0.41-0.81) and the coefficient of determination was 0.49. The inter-reader agreement was k = 0.85 and k = 0.79 for axial 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. The intra-reader agreement of reader 1 was k = 0.98 and k = 0.94 for 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. The intra-reader agreement of reader 2 was k = 0.95 and k = 0.94 for 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. On axial T1-weighted images, the inter-reader agreement for radiologists evaluating the PMA was k = 0.61. Intra-observer agreement of reader 1 and reader 2 for PMA estimation was good (0.62 and 0.64), respectively. CONCLUSION: The correlation between TPA on CT images and PMA on MRI was very good. Pectoralis muscle area on breast MRI could be useful to estimate muscle mass in women with breast cancer. KEY POINTS: • Pectoralis muscle area can be estimated on breast MRI • Total psoas area on CT and pectoralis muscle area on MRI are strongly correlated • Pectoralis muscle area on breast MRI could estimate the skeletal muscle mass.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the correlation between psoas muscle area (TPA) on CT images and pectoralis muscle area (PMA) on MRI in breast cancerpatients. METHODS: This retrospective study was institutional review board approved and women involved gave written informed consent. Twenty six patients with both body CT and breast MRI available were evaluated. Two radiologists calculated TPA on 1.25-mm and 5-mm body CT images. Two radiologists measured PMA on axial T1-weighted images. Statistical analysis included inter- and intra-reader agreement and correlation between TPA on CT and PMA on MRI. RESULTS: The Pearson r correlation coefficient was 0.70 (95% CI 0.41-0.81) and the coefficient of determination was 0.49. The inter-reader agreement was k = 0.85 and k = 0.79 for axial 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. The intra-reader agreement of reader 1 was k = 0.98 and k = 0.94 for 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. The intra-reader agreement of reader 2 was k = 0.95 and k = 0.94 for 1.25-mm and 5-mm CT images, respectively. On axial T1-weighted images, the inter-reader agreement for radiologists evaluating the PMA was k = 0.61. Intra-observer agreement of reader 1 and reader 2 for PMA estimation was good (0.62 and 0.64), respectively. CONCLUSION: The correlation between TPA on CT images and PMA on MRI was very good. Pectoralis muscle area on breast MRI could be useful to estimate muscle mass in women with breast cancer. KEY POINTS: • Pectoralis muscle area can be estimated on breast MRI • Total psoas area on CT and pectoralis muscle area on MRI are strongly correlated • Pectoralis muscle area on breast MRI could estimate the skeletal muscle mass.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Magnetic resonance imaging; Muscle mass; Pectoralis muscle; Psoas muscle
Authors: Debbie Saslow; Carla Boetes; Wylie Burke; Steven Harms; Martin O Leach; Constance D Lehman; Elizabeth Morris; Etta Pisano; Mitchell Schnall; Stephen Sener; Robert A Smith; Ellen Warner; Martin Yaffe; Kimberly S Andrews; Christy A Russell Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Adriana Villaseñor; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Kathy Baumgartner; Richard Baumgartner; Leslie Bernstein; Anne McTiernan; Marian L Neuhouser Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Ellen Warner; Hans Messersmith; Petrina Causer; Andrea Eisen; Rene Shumak; Donald Plewes Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2008-05-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Carla M M Prado; Vickie E Baracos; Linda J McCargar; Tony Reiman; Marina Mourtzakis; Katia Tonkin; John R Mackey; Sheryl Koski; Edith Pituskin; Michael B Sawyer Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-04-07 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: M Muscaritoli; S D Anker; J Argilés; Z Aversa; J M Bauer; G Biolo; Y Boirie; I Bosaeus; T Cederholm; P Costelli; K C Fearon; A Laviano; M Maggio; F Rossi Fanelli; S M Schneider; A Schols; C C Sieber Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2010-01-08 Impact factor: 7.324