2019
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0590
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computed Tomography-Based Body Composition Is Not Consistently Associated with Outcome in Older Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Abstract: Background Current literature is inconsistent in the associations between computed tomography (CT)‐based body composition measures and adverse outcomes in older patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Moreover, the associations with consecutive treatment modalities have not been studied. This study compared the associations of CT‐based body composition measures with surgery‐ and chemotherapy‐related complications and survival in older patients with CRC. Materials and Methods A retrospective single‐center cohort… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
87
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(89 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
1
87
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By funnel plot, publication bias was detected for univariate analysis (Egger P = 0.004) ( Figure S2A) but not for multivariate analysis (Egger P = 0.125) ( Figure S2B). Studies that did not show significance in the forest plot [32][33][34] in Figure 2 were largely those with no clear cut-off or definition for myosteatosis and which scored very poorly in the QUIPS assessment. For example, in Looijaard et al, 33 muscle density measured in HU without any cut-off for myosteatosis was used for the HR calculation, which yielded an insignificant HR value.…”
Section: Myosteatosis and Overall Survival In Colorectal Cancermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…By funnel plot, publication bias was detected for univariate analysis (Egger P = 0.004) ( Figure S2A) but not for multivariate analysis (Egger P = 0.125) ( Figure S2B). Studies that did not show significance in the forest plot [32][33][34] in Figure 2 were largely those with no clear cut-off or definition for myosteatosis and which scored very poorly in the QUIPS assessment. For example, in Looijaard et al, 33 muscle density measured in HU without any cut-off for myosteatosis was used for the HR calculation, which yielded an insignificant HR value.…”
Section: Myosteatosis and Overall Survival In Colorectal Cancermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies were retrospective cohort studies from prospectively maintained databases, with well-defined collection period and detailed description of the patient populations. However, one study 32 did not provide sufficient baseline characteristics of the cohort, and four studies either did not provide clear definition of myosteatosis [32][33][34] or had very small proportion of the study CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; NA, not applicable. Figure 4 Meta-analysis of univariate results reporting impact of (A) sarcopenia and (B) myosteatosis by random effects model in studies that report both findings in the same study cohort.…”
Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations