Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27412391›Full record

ReviewThe oncologist2016

The Prevalence and Prognostic Value of Low Muscle Mass in Cancer Patients: A Review of the Literature.

Hánah N Rier, Agnes Jager, Stefan Sleijfer, Andrea B Maier, Mark-David Levin

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The oncologist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 109 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

109 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 222 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Protein intake and muscle mass maintenance in patients with cancer types with high prevalence of sarcopenia: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Electroacupuncture combined with nutritional intervention for gastrointestinal cancer-related sarcopenia: a randomized controlled trial using ultrasonographic indices.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

49 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Hánah N RierDepartment of Internal Medicine, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands rier@asz.nl.
Agnes JagerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Stefan SleijferDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Andrea B MaierDepartment of Medicine and Aged Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Mark-David LevinDepartment of Internal Medicine, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis · NLErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

: In several diseases, low muscle mass has been revealed as an unfavorable prognostic factor for outcome. Whether this holds true in patients with solid malignancies as well has increasingly been explored recently. However, this research field is severely hampered by a lack of consensus on how to determine muscle mass in cancer patients and on the definition of low muscle mass. Consequently, the prevalence of low muscle mass varies widely across several studies. Nevertheless, most studies show that, in patients with solid malignancies, low muscle mass is associated with a poor outcome. In the future, more research is needed to get better insight into the best method to determine muscle mass, the exact prognostic value of low muscle mass in diverse tumor types and stages, pathophysiology of low muscle mass in patients with cancer, and ways to intervene and improve muscle mass in patients. This review addresses the current literature on the importance of muscle mass in cancer patients and the methods of muscle measurement. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: An increasing number of studies underline the clinical value of low muscle mass as a prognostic factor for adverse outcomes in cancer patients. However, studies show large heterogeneity because of the lack of a standardized approach to measure muscle mass and the lack of reference populations. As a result, the interpretation of data and further progress are severely hampered, hindering the implementation of muscle measurement in oncological care. This review summarizes the methods of diagnosing low muscle mass in cancer patients, the difference between underlying syndromes such as sarcopenia and cachexia, and the association with clinical outcomes described so far.

Indexed as

CancerChemotherapyLow muscle massSarcopenia

Identifiers

PMID27412391
PMCPMC5189631
OpenAlexW2472346384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.