Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31464089›Full record

ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2020

Prognostic role of body composition parameters in gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer patients from the EXPAND trial.

Ulrich T Hacker, Dirk Hasenclever, Nicolas Linder, Gertraud Stocker, Hyun-Cheol Chung, Yoon-Koo Kang, Markus Moehler, Harald Busse, Florian Lordick

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Impact of body composition parameters, age, and tumor staging on gastric cancer prognosis.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Ulrich T Hacker1st Medical Department, University Cancer Center Leipzig (UCCL), University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3253-8206
Dirk HasencleverInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology (IMISE), Medical Faculty of the University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Nicolas LinderDepartment of Radiology, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Gertraud Stocker1st Medical Department, University Cancer Center Leipzig (UCCL), University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Hyun-Cheol ChungYonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Yoon-Koo KangDivision Oncology Department, Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Markus MoehlerFirst Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Harald BusseDepartment of Radiology, University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Florian Lordick1st Medical Department, University Cancer Center Leipzig (UCCL), University Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Leipzig University · DEUniversity Hospital Leipzig · DEJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DESeoul Medical Center · KRYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBody fat and/or muscle composition influences prognosis in several cancer types. For advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer, we investigated which body composition parameters carry prognostic information beyond well-established clinical parameters using robust model selection strategy such that parameters identified can be expected to generalize and to be reproducible beyond our particular data set. Then we modelled how differences in these parameters translate into survival outcomes.

methodsFat and muscle parameters were measured on baseline computed tomography scans in 761 patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer from the phase III EXPAND trial, undergoing first-line chemotherapy. Cox regression analysis for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) included body composition parameters and clinical prognostic factors. All continuous variables were entered linearly into the model as there was no evidence of non-linear prognostic impact. For transferability, the final model included only parameters that were picked by Bayesian information criterion model selection followed by bootstrap analysis to identify the most robust model.

resultsMuscle and fat parameters formed correlation clusters without relevant between-cluster correlation. Mean muscle attenuation (MA) clusters with the fat parameters. In multivariate analysis, MA was prognostic for OS (P < 0.0001) but not for PFS, while skeletal muscle index was prognostic for PFS (P = 0.02) but not for OS. Worse performance status Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG 1/0), younger age (on a linear scale), and the number of metastatic sites were strong negative clinical prognostic factors for both OS and PFS. MA remained in the model for OS (P = 0.0001) following Bayesian information criterion model selection in contrast to skeletal muscle index that remained prognostic for PFS (P = 0.009). Applying stricter criteria for transferability, MA represented the only prognostic body composition parameter for OS, selected in >80% of bootstrap replicates. Finally, Cox model-derived survival curves indicated that large differences in MA translate into only moderate differences in expected OS in this cohort.

conclusionsAmong body composition parameters, only MA has robust prognostic impact for OS. Data suggest that treatment approaches targeting muscle quality are unlikely to prolong OS noticeably on their own in advanced gastric cancer patients, indicating that multimodal approaches should be pursued in the future.

Indexed as

Body CompositionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProgression-Free SurvivalRetrospective StudiesStomach NeoplasmsSurvival AnalysisYoung AdultComputed tomographyGastric cancerGastroesophageal junction cancerMean muscle attenuationPrognosisSarcopeniaSmooth muscle index

Identifiers

PMID31464089
PMCPMC7015239
OpenAlexW2970686520

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.