SARC-F is a screening tool for sarcopenia. We sought to compare the SARC-F scores of patients with different gastrointestinal diseases (n = 1282 (762 males): upper gastrointestinal disease (UGD, n = 326), lower gastrointestinal disease (LGD, n = 357), biliary and pancreatic disease (BPD, n = 416), and liver disease (LD, n = 183)). Factors associated with SARC-F ≥4 points (highly suspicious of sarcopenia) were also examined. The median age was 71 years. Patients with SARC-F ≥4 points were found in 197 (15.4%). Advanced cancer was found in 339 patients (26.4%). The proportion of SARC-F ≥4 points in groups of UGD, LGD, BPD, and LD were 17.5% (57/326) in UGD, 12.0% (43/357) in LGD, 17.3% (72/416) in BPD, and 13.7% (25/183) in LD, respectively (overall p = 0.1235). In patients with and without advanced cancer, similar tendencies were observed. In the multivariate analysis, age (p < 0.0001), gender (p = 0.0011), serum albumin (p < 0.0001), lymphocyte count (p = 0.0019), C reactive protein (p = 0.0197), and the presence of advanced cancer (p = 0.0424) were significant factors linked to SARC-F ≥4 points. In patients with advanced cancer, SARC-F scores correlated well with their Glasgow prognostic scores. In conclusion, sarcopenia in gastrointestinal diseases may be affected not by disease type (i.e., the primary origin of the disease) but by aging, nutritional condition, inflammatory condition, and cancer burden.
We sought to elucidate the prognostic impact of the SARC-F score among patients with gastrointestinal advanced malignancies (n = 421). A SARC-F score ≥ 4 was judged to have a strong suspicion for sarcopenia. In patients with ECOG-PS 4 (n = 43), 3 (n = 61), and 0–2 (n = 317), 42 (97.7%), 53 (86.9%) and 8 (2.5%) had the SARC-F score ≥ 4. During the follow-up period, 145 patients (34.4%) died. All deaths were cancer-related. The 1-year cumulative overall survival (OS) rate in patients with SARC-F ≥ 4 (n = 103) and SARC-F < 4 (n = 318) was 33.9% and 61.6% (p < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis for the OS, total lymphocyte count ≥ 1081/μL (p = 0.0014), the SARC-F score ≥ 4 (p = 0.0096), Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) 1 (p = 0.0147, GPS 0 as a standard), GPS 2 (p < 0.0001, GPS 0 as a standard), ECOG-PS 2 (p < 0.0001, ECOG-PS 0 as a standard), ECOG-PS 3 (p < 0.0001, ECOG-PS 0 as a standard), and ECOG-PS 4 (p < 0.0001, ECOG-PS 0 as a standard) were independent predictors. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis on the prognostic value of the SARC-F score, the sensitivity/specificity was 0.59/0.70, and best cutoff point of the SARC-F score was two. In conclusion, the SARC-F score is useful in patients with gastrointestinal advanced malignancies.
We sought to examine the relationship between the SARC-F score and the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score in patients with gastrointestinal diseases (GDs, n = 735, median age = 71 years, and 188 advanced cancer cases). The SARC-F score ≥ 4 (highly suspicious of sarcopenia) was found in 93 cases (12.7%). Mild malnutritional condition was seen in 310 cases (42.2%), moderate in 127 (17.3%) and severe in 27 (3.7%). The median SARC-F scores in categories of normal, mild, moderate and severe malnutritional condition were 0, 0, 1 and 1 (overall p < 0.0001). The percentage of SARC-F score ≥ 4 in categories of normal, mild, moderate and severe malnutritional condition were 4.4%, 12.9%, 26.8% and 25.9% (overall p < 0.0001). The SARC-F score was an independent factor for both the CONUT score ≥ 2 (mild, moderate or severe malnutrition) and ≥5 (moderate or severe malnutrition). In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the CONUT score ≥ 2, C reactive protein (CRP) had the highest area under the ROC (AUC = 0.70), followed by the SARC-F score (AUC = 0.60). In the ROC analysis for the CONUT score ≥ 5, CRP had the highest AUC (AUC = 0.79), followed by the SARC-F score (AUC = 0.63). In conclusion, the SARC-F score in patients with GDs can reflect malnutritional status.
We sought to elucidate factors contributing to the grip strength (GS) decline in patients with gastrointestinal diseases (Ga-Ds, n = 602, 379 males, median age = 72 years). The GS decline in males and females was defined as <28 kg and <18 kg, respectively, following the current Asian guidelines. The median GS (male) was 28.8 kg, and GS decline (male) was found in 169 patients (44.6%). The median GS (female) was 17.5 kg, and GS decline (female) was found in 122 patients (54.7%). Advanced cancer was identified in 145 patients (24.1%). In terms of the univariate analysis of parameters of the GS decline, age (p < 0.0001), gender (p = 0.0181), body mass index (BMI, p = 0.0002), ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001), SARC-F score (p < 0.0001), hemoglobin value (p < 0.0001), total lymphocyte count (p < 0.0001), serum albumin value (p < 0.0001), C reactive protein (CRP) value (p < 0.0001), and estimated glomerular filtration rate were statistically significant. In terms of the multivariate analysis, age (p < 0.0001), BMI (p = 0.0223), hemoglobin value (p = 0.0186), serum albumin value (p = 0.0284), the SARC-F score (p = 0.0003), and CRP value (p < 0.0001) were independent parameters. In conclusion, the GS decline in patients with Ga-Ds is closely associated with not only the primary factor (i.e., aging) but also secondary factors such as inflammatory factors and nutritional factors.
SARC-F is a well-accepted screening tool for sarcopenia. A SARC-F value of 1 point is reported to be more discriminating in identifying sarcopenia than 4 points (recommended cutoff point). The prognostic impact of the SARC-F score was investigated in patients with liver disease (LD, n = 269, median age = 71 years, 96 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases). Factors associated with SARC-F ≥ 4 points and SARC-F ≥ 1 point were also examined. In the multivariate analysis, age (p = 0.048), and Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) score (p = 0.0365) were significant factors linked to SARC-F ≥ 1 point. In our patients with LD, the SARC-F score is well correlated with the GNRI score. The 1-year cumulative overall survival ratio in patients with SARC-F ≥ 1 (n = 159) and SARC-F 0 (n = 110) was 78.3% and 90.1% (p = 0.0181). After excluding 96 HCC cases, similar tendencies were found (p = 0.0289). In the receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis based on the prognosis for the SARC-F score, the area under the ROC was 0.60. The sensitivity was 0.57, the specificity was 0.62, and the optimal cutoff point of the SARC-F score was 1. In conclusion, sarcopenia in LDs can be affected by nutritional conditions. A SARC-F score of ≥1 is more useful than a score of 4 in predicting the prognosis of patients with LD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.