ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Comparison between single-muscle evaluation and cross-sectional area muscle evaluation for predicting the prognosis in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The most effective method of assessing sarcopenia has yet to be determined, whether by single muscle or by whole muscle segmentation. The purpose of this study was to compare the prognostic value of these two methods using computed tomography (CT) images in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Materials and methods: Sex- and age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were employed for each parameter of sarcopenia related to overall survival, disease-free survival, and disease-specific survival. Harrell's concordance index was calculated for each model to assess discriminatory power. Results: In this study including 165 patients, a significant correlation was found between the CT-based assessment of individual muscles and their cross-sectional area. Single muscle assessments showed slightly higher discriminatory power in survival outcomes compared to whole muscle assessments, but the difference was not statistically significant, as indicated by overlapping confidence intervals for the C-index between assessments. To further validate our measurements, we classified patients into two groups based on intramuscular adipose tissue content (P-IMAC) of the spinous process muscle. Analysis showed that the higher the P-IMAC value, the poorer the survival outcome. Conclusion: Our findings indicate a slight advantage of single-muscle over whole-muscle assessment in prognostic evaluation, but the difference between the two methods is not conclusive. Both assessment methods provide valuable prognostic information for patients with OSCC, and further studies involving larger, independent cohorts are needed to clarify the potential advantage of one method over the other in the prognostic assessment of sarcopenia in OSCC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.