| Title |
Can sarcopenia be a predictor of prognosis for patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Colorectal Disease, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00384-018-3128-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guangwei Sun, Yalun Li, Yangjie Peng, Dapeng Lu, Fuqiang Zhang, Xueyang Cui, Qingyue Zhang, Zhuang Li |
| Abstract |
We aimed to explore whether sarcopenia diagnosed with the third lumbar vertebra skeletal muscle index (L3 SMI) can be a predictor of prognosis for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science databases. All original comparative studies published in English that were related to sarcopenia versus non-sarcopenia in non-metastatic CRC patients based on postoperative and survival outcomes were included. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using Stata software. A total of 12 studies including 5337 patients were included in our meta-analysis. In our overall analyses of postoperative outcomes, we indicated that CRC patients with sarcopenia would have longer hospital stays, higher incidence of total postoperative morbidity (OR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.07-2.70, P < 0.01), mortality (OR = 3.45, 95% CI = 1.69-7.02, P < 0.01), and infection (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.50-3.25, P < 0.01) but not anastomosis leakage or intestinal obstruction when compared to non-sarcopenia patients. Regarding survival outcomes, our results showed that sarcopenia predicted a decreased overall survival (HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.24-2.14, P < 0.01), disease-free survival, and cancer-specific survival for non-metastatic CRC patients. Moreover, our subgroup analyses showed similar tendency with our overall analyzed results. Sarcopenia diagnosed with L3 SMI can be a negative predictor of postoperative and survival outcomes for non-metastatic CRC patients. Prospective studies with a uniform definition of sarcopenia are needed to update our findings. |
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 | 3 | 75% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 101 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 15% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 33 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 42% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 41 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 August 2018.
All research outputs
#12,811,447
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#833
of 1,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,907
of 326,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Colorectal Disease
#11
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,847 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 326,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.