| Title |
Long-Term Outcomes of Gastric Cancer Patients with Preoperative Sarcopenia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-018-6452-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Taiichi Kawamura, Rie Makuuchi, Masanori Tokunaga, Yutaka Tanizawa, Etsuro Bando, Hiroshi Yasui, Takashi Aoyama, Toshimi Inano, Masanori Terashima |
| Abstract |
There are few reports of long-term outcomes of gastric cancer patients with sarcopenia. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of sarcopenia on long-term outcomes in gastric cancer patients who underwent curative resection. A total of 951 patients aged 65 years or older who underwent R0 resection for gastric cancer were investigated. Sarcopenia was defined as a decreased arm muscle area < 38.05 cm2 in men and < 27.87 cm2 in women combined with a decline in grip strength to < 26 kgf in men and < 18 kgf in women. Of 951 patients, 111 (11.7%) were diagnosed with sarcopenia. Reduced surgery was performed significantly more frequently in patients with sarcopenia (p = 0.006). The incidence of eligible patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly lower in patients with sarcopenia than in those without sarcopenia (p = 0.030). Mortality due to gastric cancer and aging-associated multiple organ failure rates without obvious diseases were higher in patients with sarcopenia (p = 0.036 and p < 0.001, respectively). Overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS) were significantly worse in patients with sarcopenia (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). Multivariate analysis for OS and CSS revealed that sarcopenia was an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer patients (p < 0.001 and p = 0.043, respectively). Sarcopenia is related to poor survival in gastric cancer patients and appears to be a significant negative prognostic factor in patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative resection. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 27 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 32 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 May 2018.
All research outputs
#13,659,944
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#3,862
of 6,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,985
of 330,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#81
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,632 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.