Federica Rossi1, Francesca Valdora2, Bianca Bignotti2, Lorenzo Torri2, Giulia Succio3, Alberto Stefano Tagliafico4. 1. Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genova, Italy. Electronic address: federossi0590@gmail.com. 2. Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genova, Italy. 3. IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy. 4. Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genoa, Genova, Italy; IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sarcopenia has been considered a poor prognostic factor in various malignant diseases. However, the studies that evaluated the association between CT-determined sarcopenia and outcome in breast cancer patients reported different results. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to perform a systematic review of the current literature on the evaluation of body CT-determined sarcopenia in breast cancer patients, focusing on the correlation with outcome values. METHODS: Two reviewers evaluated independently all studies dealing with CT-determined sarcopenia in breast cancer women from major medical libraries up to 24 April 2019. The keywords used for database searching were: "sarcopenia" or "muscles" or "muscle weight" or "body composition" and "breast neoplasms" or "breast cancer" and "computed tomography". Studies reporting clinical outcome values were finally compared. RESULTS: Of the n = 191 studies identified, a total of n = 15 articles were included in the systematic review. In all studies, sarcopenia was assessed at the level of the third lumbar vertebra (L3) on CT; n = 14/15 studies were retrospective. N = 13/15 studies evaluated the impact of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes. Among these studies, n = 8/13 studies concluded that sarcopenia is an important risk factor for poor prognosis in breast cancer and n = 5/13 studies concluded that body composition changes are not associated with poor prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies concluded that sarcopenia assessed on CT is an important prognostic risk factor in breast cancer patients. High-quality prospective studies to strongly confirm and assess the impact of sarcopenia evaluated on CT and breast cancer outcome are needed.
PURPOSE:Sarcopenia has been considered a poor prognostic factor in various malignant diseases. However, the studies that evaluated the association between CT-determined sarcopenia and outcome in breast cancerpatients reported different results. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to perform a systematic review of the current literature on the evaluation of body CT-determined sarcopenia in breast cancerpatients, focusing on the correlation with outcome values. METHODS: Two reviewers evaluated independently all studies dealing with CT-determined sarcopenia in breast cancerwomen from major medical libraries up to 24 April 2019. The keywords used for database searching were: "sarcopenia" or "muscles" or "muscle weight" or "body composition" and "breast neoplasms" or "breast cancer" and "computed tomography". Studies reporting clinical outcome values were finally compared. RESULTS: Of the n = 191 studies identified, a total of n = 15 articles were included in the systematic review. In all studies, sarcopenia was assessed at the level of the third lumbar vertebra (L3) on CT; n = 14/15 studies were retrospective. N = 13/15 studies evaluated the impact of sarcopenia on clinical outcomes. Among these studies, n = 8/13 studies concluded that sarcopenia is an important risk factor for poor prognosis in breast cancer and n = 5/13 studies concluded that body composition changes are not associated with poor prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies concluded that sarcopenia assessed on CT is an important prognostic risk factor in breast cancerpatients. High-quality prospective studies to strongly confirm and assess the impact of sarcopenia evaluated on CT and breast cancer outcome are needed.
Authors: Francesca Rigiroli; Dylan Zhang; Jeroen Molinger; Yingqi Wang; Andrew Chang; Paul E Wischmeyer; Brant A Inman; Rajan T Gupta Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 4.531
Authors: Ye Won Jeon; Hyung Soon Park; Yousun Ko; Yu Sub Sung; Byoung Yong Shim; Young Jin Suh; Hyun A Kim Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-07-20 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Mi-Ri Kwon; Eun Sook Ko; Min Su Park; Woo Kyoung Jeong; Na Young Hwang; Jae-Hun Kim; Jeong Eon Lee; Seok Won Kim; Jong Han Yu; Boo-Kyung Han; Eun Young Ko; Ji Soo Choi; Ko Woon Park Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 3.500
Authors: Tassia S R da Costa; Ursula Urias; Marcelo V Negrao; Camila P Jordão; Clévia S Passos; Igor L Gomes-Santos; Vera Maria C Salemi; Anamaria A Camargo; Patricia C Brum; Edilamar M Oliveira; Ludhmila A Hajjar; Roger Chammas; Roberto K Filho; Carlos E Negrao Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Chris Burtin; Jacques Bezuidenhout; Karin J C Sanders; Anne-Marie C Dingemans; Annemie M W J Schols; Stephanie T H Peeters; Martijn A Spruit; Dirk K M De Ruysscher Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 12.910