For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
21
views
34
references
 Top references
cited by
159
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      0
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Diagnostic Criteria for the Classification of Cancer-Associated Weight Loss

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Existing definitions of clinically important weight loss (WL) in patients with cancer are unclear and heterogeneous and do not consider current trends toward obesity.

          Methods

          Canadian and European patients with cancer (n = 8,160) formed a population-based data set. Body mass index (BMI) and percent WL (%WL) were recorded, and patients were observed prospectively until death. Data were entered into a multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, cancer site, stage, and performance status. Relationships for BMI and %WL to overall survival were examined to develop a grading system.

          Results

          Mean overall %WL was −9.7% ± 8.4% and BMI was 24.4 ± 5.1 kg/m 2, and both %WL and BMI independently predicted survival (P < .01). Differences in survival were observed across five categories of BMI (< 20.0, 20.0 to 21.9, 22.0 to 24.9, 25.0 to 27.9, and ≥ 28.0 kg/m 2; P < .001) and five categories of %WL (−2.5% to −5.9%, −6.0% to −10.9%, −11.0% to −14.9%, ≥ −15.0%, and weight stable (± 2.4%); P < .001). A 5 × 5 matrix representing the five %WL categories within each of the five BMI categories was graded based on median survival and prognostic significance. Weight-stable patients with BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m 2 (grade 0) had the longest survival (20.9 months; 95% CI, 17.9 to 23.9 months), and %WL values associated with lowered categories of BMI were related to shorter survival (P < .001), as follows: grade 1, 14.6 months (95% CI, 12.9 to 16.2 months); grade 2, 10.8 months (95% CI, 9.7 to 11.9 months); grade 3, 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 8.2 months); and grade 4, 4.3 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 4.6 months). Survival discrimination by grade was observed within specific cancers, stages, ages, and performance status and in an independent validation sample (n = 2,963).

          Conclusion

          A robust grading system incorporating the independent prognostic significance of both BMI and %WL was developed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

          FRANK E. HARRELL, KERRY L LEE, DANIEL B. MARK (1996)
          Multivariable regression models are powerful tools that are used frequently in studies of clinical outcomes. These models can use a mixture of categorical and continuous variables and can handle partially observed (censored) responses. However, uncritical application of modelling techniques can result in models that poorly fit the dataset at hand, or, even more likely, inaccurately predict outcomes on new subjects. One must know how to measure qualities of a model's fit in order to avoid poorly fitted or overfitted models. Measurement of predictive accuracy can be difficult for survival time data in the presence of censoring. We discuss an easily interpretable index of predictive discrimination as well as methods for assessing calibration of predicted survival probabilities. Both types of predictive accuracy should be unbiasedly validated using bootstrapping or cross-validation, before using predictions in a new data series. We discuss some of the hazards of poorly fitted and overfitted regression models and present one modelling strategy that avoids many of the problems discussed. The methods described are applicable to all regression models, but are particularly needed for binary, ordinal, and time-to-event outcomes. Methods are illustrated with a survival analysis in prostate cancer using Cox regression.
          Article 0 comments Cited 1357 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Definition and classification of cancer cachexia: an international consensus.

            Kenneth Fearon, Florian Strasser, Stefan D. Anker … (2011)
            To develop a framework for the definition and classification of cancer cachexia a panel of experts participated in a formal consensus process, including focus groups and two Delphi rounds. Cancer cachexia was defined as a multifactorial syndrome defined by an ongoing loss of skeletal muscle mass (with or without loss of fat mass) that cannot be fully reversed by conventional nutritional support and leads to progressive functional impairment. Its pathophysiology is characterised by a negative protein and energy balance driven by a variable combination of reduced food intake and abnormal metabolism. The agreed diagnostic criterion for cachexia was weight loss greater than 5%, or weight loss greater than 2% in individuals already showing depletion according to current bodyweight and height (body-mass index [BMI] <20 kg/m(2)) or skeletal muscle mass (sarcopenia). An agreement was made that the cachexia syndrome can develop progressively through various stages--precachexia to cachexia to refractory cachexia. Severity can be classified according to degree of depletion of energy stores and body protein (BMI) in combination with degree of ongoing weight loss. Assessment for classification and clinical management should include the following domains: anorexia or reduced food intake, catabolic drive, muscle mass and strength, functional and psychosocial impairment. Consensus exists on a framework for the definition and classification of cancer cachexia. After validation, this should aid clinical trial design, development of practice guidelines, and, eventually, routine clinical management. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Article 0 comments Cited 1065 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Association of all-cause mortality with overweight and obesity using standard body mass index categories: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

              Katherine Flegal, Brian Kit, Heather Orpana … (2013)
              Estimates of the relative mortality risks associated with normal weight, overweight, and obesity may help to inform decision making in the clinical setting. To perform a systematic review of reported hazard ratios (HRs) of all-cause mortality for overweight and obesity relative to normal weight in the general population. PubMed and EMBASE electronic databases were searched through September 30, 2012, without language restrictions. Articles that reported HRs for all-cause mortality using standard body mass index (BMI) categories from prospective studies of general populations of adults were selected by consensus among multiple reviewers. Studies were excluded that used nonstandard categories or that were limited to adolescents or to those with specific medical conditions or to those undergoing specific procedures. PubMed searches yielded 7034 articles, of which 141 (2.0%) were eligible. An EMBASE search yielded 2 additional articles. After eliminating overlap, 97 studies were retained for analysis, providing a combined sample size of more than 2.88 million individuals and more than 270,000 deaths. Data were extracted by 1 reviewer and then reviewed by 3 independent reviewers. We selected the most complex model available for the full sample and used a variety of sensitivity analyses to address issues of possible overadjustment (adjusted for factors in causal pathway) or underadjustment (not adjusted for at least age, sex, and smoking). Random-effects summary all-cause mortality HRs for overweight (BMI of 25-<30), obesity (BMI of ≥30), grade 1 obesity (BMI of 30-<35), and grades 2 and 3 obesity (BMI of ≥35) were calculated relative to normal weight (BMI of 18.5-<25). The summary HRs were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91-0.96) for overweight, 1.18 (95% CI, 1.12-1.25) for obesity (all grades combined), 0.95 (95% CI, 0.88-1.01) for grade 1 obesity, and 1.29 (95% CI, 1.18-1.41) for grades 2 and 3 obesity. These findings persisted when limited to studies with measured weight and height that were considered to be adequately adjusted. The HRs tended to be higher when weight and height were self-reported rather than measured. Relative to normal weight, both obesity (all grades) and grades 2 and 3 obesity were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality. Grade 1 obesity overall was not associated with higher mortality, and overweight was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality. The use of predefined standard BMI groupings can facilitate between-study comparisons.
              Article 0 comments Cited 613 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Title: Journal of Clinical Oncology
                Abbreviated Title: JCO
                Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
                ISSN (Print): 0732-183X
                ISSN (Electronic): 1527-7755
                Publication date Created: January 01 2015
                Publication date (Print): January 01 2015
                Volume: 33
                Issue: 1
                Pages: 90-99
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Lisa Martin and Vickie E. Baracos, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta; R. Thomas Jagoe, McGill Cancer Nutrition Rehabilitation Clinic, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec; Martin Chasen, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Pierre Senesse, Institut Régional du Cancer de Montpellier, Montpellier; Sami Antoun, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France; Ioannis Gioulbasanis, Larissa General Clinic, Larissa, Thessaly, Greece; Federico Bozzetti, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Chris...
                Article
                DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.56.1894
                PubMed ID: 25422490
                SO-VID: dc0bf4f0-316f-4019-bb4c-692cbf0e426b
                Copyright © © 2015
                History

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article