Visceral Adiposity as a Significant Predictor of Sunitinib-Induced Dose-Limiting Toxicities and Survival in Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

Impact of BMI on the Survival of Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Targeted Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

It is unclear whether obese renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients treated with targeted therapy have better survival. We conducted this meta-analysis to assess the prognostic significance of body mass index (BMI) in RCC patients treated with targeted therapy. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science by November 17, 2021. We calculated effect outcomes using random-effects and fixed-effects models. Fifteen articles were identified. We found that RCC patients treated with targeted therapy with BMI over 25 obtained better overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58-0.82, I2 = 75.5%, p < 0.001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.71, 95%CI = 0.55-0.92, I2 = 69.7%, p = 0.006) than patients with BMI below 25. Obese (BMI over 30) patients had remarkably better OS (HR = 0.77, 95%CI = 0.70-0.85, I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.439) and PFS (HR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.77-0.97, I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.934) than patients with BMI below 25. Overweight (BMI over 25 but below 30) patients also had better OS (HR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.79-0.93, I2 = 17.7%, p = 0.295) and PFS (HR = 0.82, 95%CI = 0.74-0.90, I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.904) than patients with BMI below 25. When using BMI as continuous variable, patients with high BMI also obtained significantly better OS (HR = 0.92, 95%CI = 0.88-0.96, I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.806). Therefore, higher BMI was associated with greater OS and PFS in RCC patients treated with targeted therapy.

The role of sarcopenia in treatment-related outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

in recent years, more attention has been paid to the fuzzy relationship between skeletal muscle components and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study attempts to conduct a meta-analysis using all relevant research evidence to explore the impact of sarcopenia on the final survival and recurrence outcome of RCC patients and the change process of this impact after treatment.

METHODS

This systematic review and Meta-analysis study took "sarcopenia", "kidney" and "tumor" and their synonyms as the main search terms, and comprehensively searched all relevant literatures published in PubMed, web of science, SpringerLink, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Ovid (Lww oup), Wiley, ScienceDirect and Scopus databases since February 2, 2022. Multivariate hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS), and progression free survival (PFS), as well as rough data of Kaplan-Meier survival curve, were combined as the main analysis results. Subgroup analyses based on cohort characteristics (treatment, ethnicity, and BMI factors) for each study were used as secondary outcomes. The combined effect was estimated by random effect model or fixed effect model, and the heterogeneity was evaluated by I2 value. Because this study belongs to secondary literature, the medical ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University considers that ethical review is unnecessary.

RESULTS

Eighteen retrospective studies involving 3591 patients with RCC were analyzed, of which 71.5% were men and the median age of the cohort was 61.6. The prevalence of sarcopenia was 43% (38-48%). Sarcopenia is an independent predictor of OS (HR: 1.83, 95% CI = [1.41, 2.37]), and this prognostic value can also be reflected in Asian populations (HR: 2.59, 95% CI = [1.90, 3.54]) and drug treated patients (HR: 2.07, 95% CI = [1.07, 4.04]). Sarcopenia can also be used as an independent predictor of CSS (HR: 1.78, 95% CI = [1.34, 2.36]) and PFS (HR: 1.98, 95% CI = [1.34, 2.92]). The effect of low skeletal muscle mass on OS and CSS increased slowly from 1 to 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Sarcopenia can be used as a comprehensive prognostic factor in RCC population, but the detailed effects from ethnic characteristics and treatment mechanism need to be further studied.

Adiposity and cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The increasing availability of clinical imaging tests (especially CT and MRI) that directly quantify adipose tissue has led to a rapid increase in studies examining the relationship of visceral, subcutaneous, and overall adiposity to cancer survival. To summarize this emerging body of literature, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of imaging-measured as well as anthropometric proxies for adipose tissue distribution and cancer survival across a wide range of cancer types.

METHODS

Using keywords related to adiposity, cancer, and survival, we conducted a systematic search of the literature in PubMed and MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection databases from database inception to 30 June 2021. We used a random-effect method to calculate pooled hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) within each cancer type and tested for heterogeneity using Cochran's Q test and the I2 test.

RESULTS

We included 203 records for this review, of which 128 records were utilized for quantitative analysis among 10 cancer types: breast, colorectal, gastroesophageal, head and neck, hepatocellular carcinoma, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, and renal cancer. We found that imaging-measured visceral, subcutaneous, and total adiposity were not significantly associated with increased risk of overall mortality, death from primary cancer, or cancer progression among patients diagnosed with these 10 cancer types; however, we found significant or high heterogeneity for many cancer types. For example, heterogeneity was similarly high when the pooled HRs (95% CI) for overall mortality associated with visceral adiposity were essentially null as in 1.03 (0.55, 1.92; I2 = 58%) for breast, 0.99 (0.81, 1.21; I2 = 71%) for colorectal, versus when they demonstrated a potential increased risk 1.17 (0.85, 1.60; I2 = 78%) for hepatocellular carcinoma and 1.62 (0.90, 2.95; I2 = 84%) for renal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Greater adiposity at diagnosis (directly measured by imaging) is not associated with worse survival among cancer survivors. However, heterogeneity and other potential limitations were noted across studies, suggesting differences in study design and adiposity measurement approaches, making interpretation of meta-analyses challenging. Future work to standardize imaging measurements and data analyses will strengthen research on the role of adiposity in cancer survival.