| Literature DB >> 35155538 |
Zhenzhen Liu1, Siyi Lu1, Yuxia Wang2, Xinyi Lin1, Peng Ran2, Xin Zhou1, Wei Fu1, Hao Wang2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To explore the impact of body composition before neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (pre-NCRT) and after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (post-NCRT) on complications, survival, and tumor response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).Entities:
Keywords: body composition; complications; prognosis; rectal cancer; tumor response
Year: 2022 PMID: 35155538 PMCID: PMC8830534 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.796601
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Figure 1Flow chart of the study.
Figure 2Change of skeletal muscle area (A), muscle density (B), visceral fat area (C), total abdominal fat area (D), subcutaneous fat area (E) during NCRT. Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 have represented the highest quartile, 50–75%, 25–50%, and lowest quartile, respectively.
Figure 3Correlation among hemoglobin and pre-NCRT skeletal muscle area (SMA) (A), post-NCRT SMA (B), pre-NCRT visceral fat area (VFA) (C), subcutaneous fat area (SFA) loss (D). The *symbol indicates p < 0.05 and **symbol indicates p < 0.01.
Correlation of body composition and short- and long-term complications.
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||||||
| Low SMA | 0.758 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.419 | 0.430 | 1.000 | 0.537 | 1.000 | 0.607 | 1.000 |
| Low MD | 0.755 |
| 0.750 | 1.000 | 0.975 | 0.425 | 0.409 | 0.781 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| High VFA | 0.474 | 1.000 | 0.750 | 0.178 | 0.975 | 0.462 | 0.368 | 0.315 | 0.386 | 1.000 |
| High TAFA | 0.840 | 0.376 | 0.698 | 0.774 | 0.975 | 0.462 | 0.368 | 0.315 | 0.344 | 1.000 |
| High SFA | 0.755 | 0.880 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.975 | 0.975 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.949 | 0.949 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Low SMA | 0.360 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.926 | 0.511 | 0.465 | 1.000 | 0.800 | 1.000 |
| Low MD | 0.928 | 0.659 | 0.808 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.511 | 1.000 | 0.618 | 0.371 | 1.000 |
| High VFA | 0.840 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.462 | 0.625 | 1.000 | 0.307 | 0.949 |
| High TAFA | 0.840 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.439 | 0.462 | 0.462 | 1.000 | 0.963 | 0.307 | 0.949 |
| High SFA | 0.064 | 0.559 | 0.698 | 1.000 | 0.975 | 0.462 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.386 | 1.000 |
|
| ||||||||||
| SMA loss | 0.680 | 0.659 | 0.255 | 0.845 | 1.000 | 0.159 | 0.683 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.720 |
| MD loss | 0.409 | 1.000 | 0.274 | 0.774 | 0.975 | 0.462 | 0.138 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| VFA loss | 0.474 | 0.880 | 0.750 | 0.178 | 0.425 | 0.118 | 0.845 | 1.000 | 0.949 | 1.000 |
| TAFA loss | 0.474 | 1.000 | 0.750 | 0.178 | 0.425 |
| 1.000 | 0.700 | 0.872 | 0.872 |
| SFA loss | 0.219 | 1.000 | 0.306 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.611 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
SSI, surgical site infection; CD, Clavien-Dindo classification; SMA, skeletal muscle area; MD, muscle density; VFA, visceral fat area; TAFA, total abdominal fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area.
Chi-square test.
Fisher's exact test.
Figure 4Comparison of DFS and CSS between the different status of body composition in LARC patients. (A) Kaplan–Meier analysis for DFS rate between normal and pre-NCRT low SMA groups in LARC patients (p = 0.029). (B) Kaplan–Meier analysis for the CSS rate between normal and pre-NCRT low SMA groups in LARC patients (p = 0.028). (C) Kaplan–Meier analysis for CSS rate between normal and pre-NCRT low MD groups in LARC patients (p = 0.048). (D) Kaplan–Meier analysis for the CSS rate between normal and post-NCRT low MD in LARC patients (p = 0.016).
Cox proportion independent predictors of DFS and CCS in LARC patients.
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Gender (male vs. female) | 0.600 (0.222–1.623) | 0.314 | - | - | 0.324 (0.071–1.486) | 0.147 | - | - |
| Age, years | 1.008 (0.976–1.042) | 0.617 | - | - | 1.022 (0.976–1.070) | 0.358 | - | - |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.945 (0.831–1.074) | 0.387 | - | - | 0.884 (0.774–1.052) | 0.165 | - | - |
| Tumor size (>4 vs. ≤4 cm) | 2.915 (0.865–9.826) | 0.084 | - | - | 4.844 (0.628–37.383) | 0.130 | - | - |
| Surgery procedure | - | 0.592 | - | - | - | 0.270 | - | - |
| Miles vs. hartmann | 0.574 (0.168–1.962) | - | - | 0.588 (0.140–2.474) | 0.469 | - | - | |
| Dixon vs. hartmann | 0.567 (0.183–1.758) | - | - | 0.310 (0.073–1.323) | 0.114 | - | - | |
| Tumor location | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Low vs. mid-high | 0.774 (0.305–1.965) | 0.589 | - | - | 0.737 (0.203–2.681) | 0.643 | - | - |
| cT (cT4 vs. cT2-3) | 3.066 (1.291–7.283) |
| 2.811 (1.165–6.780) |
| 2.966 (0.956–9.197) | 0.060 | 2.944 (0.940–9.226) | 0.064 |
| cN (negative vs. positive) | 4.539 (1.062–19.400) |
| 3.820 (0.888–16.437) | 0.072 | 34.598 (0.217–5513.741) | 0.171 | - | - |
| ypTNM (0 vs. I–III) | 0.457 (0.107–1.956) | 0.291 | - | - | 0.431 (0.56–3.349) | 0.421 | - | - |
| CEA (>5 vs. ≤5 ng/L) | 2.404 (0.947–6.105) | 0.065 | - | - | 2.488 (0.755–8.204) | 0.134 | - | - |
| Pre-NCRT low SMA vs. normal | 2.429 (1.063–5.549) |
| 2.611 (1.129–6.040) |
| 3.200 (1.072–9.558) |
| 3.124 (1.030–9.472) |
|
| Pre-NCRT low MD vs. normal | 2.070 (0.895–4.789) | 0.089 | - | - | 2.880 (0.963–8.619) | 0.059 | - | - |
| Post-NCRT low MD vs. normal | - | - | - | - | 3.532 (1.181–10.557) |
| 3.006 (1.003–9.008) |
|
HR, hazard ratio; CI, cofidence interval; cT, clinical T stage; cN, clinical N status; ypTNM, post neoadjuvant pathological TNM stage; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; SMA, skeletal muscle area; MD, muscle density. The bold values represent P < 0.05.
Figure 5Forrest plot of unadjusted logistic regression to assess the discrimination ability of body composition for tumor TRG and downstaging.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis for TRG in LARC patients.
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
|
| |||
| cT | cT2-3 | 98 | 1 (-) | - |
| cT4 | 24 | 3.801 (1.413–10.224) |
| |
| Tumor location | Mid-High | 83 | 1 (-) | - |
| Low | 39 | 2.666 (1.153–6.163) |
| |
| Post-High SFA | Low | 92 | 1 (-) | - |
| High | 30 | 3.425 (1.392–8.427) |
|
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; cT, clinical T stage; SFA, subcutaneous fat area. The bold values represent P < 0.05.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis for downstaged LARC patients.
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
|
| |||
| cT | cT2-3 | 98 | 1 (-) | - |
| cT4 | 24 | 5.003 (1.765–14.188) |
| |
| Tumor size | ≤4 cm | 33 | 1 (-) | - |
| >4 cm | 89 | 0.205 (0.112–1.600) | 0.205 | |
| SFA change | Normal | 92 | 1 (-) | - |
| Loss | 30 | 3.358 (1.214–9.289) |
|
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; cT, clinical T stage; SFA, subcutaneous fat area. The bold values represent P < 0.05.