Stijn A Bos1,2, Corey M Gill1,3, Edgar L Martinez-Salazar1, Martin Torriani1, Miriam A Bredella4. 1. Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Yawkey 6E, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. 2. Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1468 Madison Ave, New York, NY, 10029, USA. 4. Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Yawkey 6E, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. mbredella@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of brown adipose tissue (BAT) in cancer activity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group comprised 142 patients (121 female, 21 male; mean age, 49 ± 16 years) who underwent F18-FDG PET/CT (PET/CT) for staging or surveillance of cancer and who were BAT-positive on PET/CT. BAT volume by PET/CT, abdominal (visceral and subcutaneous) fat and paraspinous muscle cross-sectional areas (CSA) were assessed. Groups with and without active cancer on PET/CT were compared using a two-sided paired t test. Linear regression analyses between BAT and body composition parameters were performed. RESULTS: There were 62 patients (54 female, eight male) who had active cancer on PET/CT and 80 patients (67 female, 13 male) without active cancer. Groups were similar in age and BMI (p ≥ 0.4), abdominal fat and muscle CSA, fasting glucose, and outside temperature at time of scan (p ≥ 0.2). Patients who had active cancer on PET/CT had higher BAT volume compared to patients without active cancer (p = 0.009). In patients without active cancer, BAT was positively associated with BMI and abdominal fat depots (r = 0.46 to r = 0.59, p < 0.0001) while there were no such associations in patients with active cancer (p ≥ 0.1). No associations between BAT and age or muscle CSA were found (p ≥ 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: BAT activity is greater in patients with active cancer compared to age-, sex-, and BMI-matched BAT-positive patients without active cancer, suggesting a possible role of BAT in cancer activity.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of brown adipose tissue (BAT) in cancer activity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group comprised 142 patients (121 female, 21 male; mean age, 49 ± 16 years) who underwent F18-FDG PET/CT (PET/CT) for staging or surveillance of cancer and who were BAT-positive on PET/CT. BAT volume by PET/CT, abdominal (visceral and subcutaneous) fat and paraspinous muscle cross-sectional areas (CSA) were assessed. Groups with and without active cancer on PET/CT were compared using a two-sided paired t test. Linear regression analyses between BAT and body composition parameters were performed. RESULTS: There were 62 patients (54 female, eight male) who had active cancer on PET/CT and 80 patients (67 female, 13 male) without active cancer. Groups were similar in age and BMI (p ≥ 0.4), abdominal fat and muscle CSA, fasting glucose, and outside temperature at time of scan (p ≥ 0.2). Patients who had active cancer on PET/CT had higher BAT volume compared to patients without active cancer (p = 0.009). In patients without active cancer, BAT was positively associated with BMI and abdominal fat depots (r = 0.46 to r = 0.59, p < 0.0001) while there were no such associations in patients with active cancer (p ≥ 0.1). No associations between BAT and age or muscle CSA were found (p ≥ 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: BAT activity is greater in patients with active cancer compared to age-, sex-, and BMI-matched BAT-positive patients without active cancer, suggesting a possible role of BAT in cancer activity.
Entities:
Keywords:
Body composition; Brown adipose tissue (BAT); Cancer activity; FDG-PET/CT
Authors: James A Timmons; Kristian Wennmalm; Ola Larsson; Tomas B Walden; Timo Lassmann; Natasa Petrovic; D Lee Hamilton; Ruth E Gimeno; Claes Wahlestedt; Keith Baar; Jan Nedergaard; Barbara Cannon Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-03-05 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Larry Barbaras; Ilan Tal; Matthew R Palmer; J Anthony Parker; Gerald M Kolodny Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: S R Smith; J C Lovejoy; F Greenway; D Ryan; L deJonge; J de la Bretonne; J Volafova; G A Bray Journal: Metabolism Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 8.694
Authors: Oscar Parysow; Ana M Mollerach; Victor Jager; Silvina Racioppi; Jose San Roman; Victor H Gerbaudo Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Joseph A Frankl; Yu An; Amber Sherwood; Guiyang Hao; Feng-Yun Huang; Pawan Thapa; Deborah J Clegg; Xiankai Sun; Philipp E Scherer; Orhan K Öz Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Zahraa Abdul Sater; Abhishek Jha; Ahmed Hamimi; Adel Mandl; Iris R Hartley; Sriram Gubbi; Mayank Patel; Melissa Gonzales; David Taïeb; Ali Cahid Civelek; Ahmed M Gharib; Sungyoung Auh; Alana E O'Mara; Karel Pacak; Aaron M Cypess Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Cornelia Brendle; Norbert Stefan; Eva Grams; Martin Soekler; Christian la Fougère; Christina Pfannenberg Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-12-11 Impact factor: 4.379