ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Association between sarcopenia and survival in patients with gynecologic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Prognostic Value of Sarcopenia in Clinical Outcomes in Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025Pooled it
- Prognostic and clinicopathological significance of systemic inflammation response index in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Pooled it
- Multiparametric PET/CT Tensor Radiomics for Stability-Aware Machine Learning in Lung Cancer Survival Prediction.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Muscle size and muscle fat infiltration in patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a case-control study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Perioperative nutrition-oriented nursing for older women undergoing cancer surgery: frailty screening, enhanced recovery, and survivorship care.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Contributing effects of sarcopenia on cancer occurrence: novel evidence based on NHANES 1999-2020 and two-sample mendelian randomization study.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Integrative approach to decipher pharmacological mechanism of Cinnamomum zeylanicum essential oil in prostate cancer.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Article
- TRAF3IP3 Blocks Mitophagy to Exacerbate Myocardial Injury Induced by Ischemia-Reperfusion.Cardiovascular toxicology · 2024Article
- PAQR4 oncogene: a novel target for cancer therapy.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite prior attempts to evaluate the effects of sarcopenia on survival among patients with gynecologic cancer, the results of these studies have not been consistent. The present study evaluated the association between sarcopenia and survival among patients with gynecologic cancer by aggregating multiple studies. Methods: We performed a literature search using computerized databases and identified additional studies included in the bibliographies of retrieved articles. The quality of each study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and meta-analyses were performed to evaluate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We constructed a forest plot for each outcome and assessed publication bias using Begg's test. Heterogeneity was assessed using I Results: From the 5,933 initially identified articles, 16 studies describing 2,031 participants with a mean age of 60.34 years were included in the meta-analysis. We found that compared with patients with gynecologic cancer but without sarcopenia, patients with sarcopenia had worse OS, with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 2.61 (95% confidence interval [CI]:1.52-4.46), and worse PFS (HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.09-1.73). The quality of studies was generally good, and no publication bias was detected among studies for either OS or PFS. Although 4 of 12 studies were of fair quality, we conducted a sensitivity analysis excluding studies or fair quality and obtained similar results. Conclusions: These meta-analysis results suggest that sarcopenia is associated with worse OS and PFS among patients with gynecologic cancer. The use of different case definitions appeared to be a major source of heterogeneity among the studies. Further studies remain necessary to confirm our findings, especially those examining OS and PFS, because publication bias was identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.